Patrick McEvov-Halston

ENG 5733HF

ProfessorRedekop

21 August 2006

The GoodFight, in GeorgeWalker's Love andAnger

GeorgeWalker's Love andAnger is a play which celebratesthe virhresof a goodfight, of

a goodwar, andthe rewardsit offers its participants. Thoughfights area kind of embrace,they

cannotbe engagedbetweentrue lovers-they require"good guys" and 'bad guys," who hateone

another.Walker understandsthis, andcommunicatesthis understandingprimarily by cuing us to

appreciatethat all the ostensiblygoodcharactersinvolved in the play's cosmicbattlebetween

goodand evil havesimilar seeming,ostensiblyevil counterparts.That is, he cuesus to see

the same. So if war is being praised,

everyoneinvolved in the fray as somewhatinterchangeable,

if construingthe world asvice frlled and someof its denizensasevil, is madeto seema
'
necessary"step" towardsadvancingonealong own spiritual/emotionaljoumey, is thereanything
' - l
^PY)
or anyonein the play subjectedto unmitigatedcritique? Yes, someoneis-and it is tempting,
oyd ,. .
- -\r'\f
(but not accurate)to saythat it is the satiric voice itself which is undersatiric attack,f., it if/V$.

Eleanor-the voice of (humourless)judgrnent-who is the foremostsubjectof criticism in the

play.

I understandthat many will reador seethe play andjudge it onewhich makesa satiric
sP
attackon vices suchaspower lust andgreed. They will seeitpne which clearly establishestwo
I
characters-SeanHarris andJohnConnor-as thosemost athactedto theseparticularvices. Yet

muchwould haveto be igrroredin orderto construethe play in this way. Onewould haveto

ignoremuch of how the play begins,for instance,for the play beginswith both of thesevices

beingindulgedin by the play's ostensibleforemostgoodand enlightenedcharacter-Peter

Maxwell. Maxwell believesthat thoughhe oncewasasvice proneas any other,thoughhe

 2

agreeswith Harris when Harris arguesthat "fortwenty years [he was] t. . .] one of the greediest

and one of the biggest" "greedy prick[s]" (7}),that he has beenreborn,that he is pure. Evidence

for him, in part, comesfrom the fact that he gave up a very lucrative, empoweredposition as

headof a prominent Toronto law firm to deal with society's downtown' downtrodden. It also

comesfrom his giving away of all of his possessions.Connor is willing to believe Sarahwhen

shesuggests,as part of an effon to manipulatehim, that Maxwell might be "env[ious]" (50) of

him; but though he is right to suspectthat Maxwell may in his new position be indulging in

certainvices, the one vice he wouldn't be inclined to indulge in likely would be envy, for the

play begins by showingjust how much he gained, acquired,in his descent.

What has he acquired? New clientele--of a particularly attractive kind to a man in his

but
position. Yes: Maxwell wantsus to imaginethem asconsistingnotjust of the disadvantaged

of the "quasi-exotic,"the "pathetic,"the "dregs" (30-l). Harris deemsMaxwell's new clientele

reasonto pity him, to not draw the law uponhim, but the only client of his we actuallyencounter

actuallyoffers him somethinghe likely did not possesswith any suretywith his previous

clientele--namely,clearevidenceof his power over them. That is, thoughMaxwell saysthat

't
with his previousclientelehe usedto "piss on their ingrainedintelligence"(19), in orderto

afford his services,his previousclientelewould havehadto havecountedamongstthe very ricd , ^

/\"
andvery empoweredin orderto havebeenableto a.ffordhis services.They would havebeenflre
i 'r{ I
sortto know that Maxwell was their lawyer, the|rservant,thatthey werepaying him; andthorigh .U
t. t\
. I t, o.1
theywould haverespectedMaxwell's reputationandgenius,they most surely would haveteeir $

demanding,expectant-difficult. Indeed,though the play concernsMaxwell's life after his

iN,
having left his old law frrm, it still reminds us of whatprevious clientele' contactcould have

beenlike for him by showing us how Haris's new client-Connor-reacts when he believes
 J

Harris is not adequatelyservinghim. When confusedand confoundedby Sarah'sbehavior

towards him, Connor reactsby turning to Harris and exclaiming: "Look, you're my lawyer and I

want some answersfrom you right now!" (51).

Gail, Maxwell's new client, showssomedismaywith her lawyer-Maxwell-too, but is

muchmore readily madequiescent,for sheis vastly more dependenton her lawyerthan Connor

is on his. Connorcanalwayshire a different lawyer, an option not availableto the relatively

irnpoverishedSarah.Nor is thereany chancethat evenif shecould find someotherhelp that this

help could counthim/herselfasonethe country's bestlawyerly minds-something, we aretold,

Maxwell oncewas andmay yet still be. Her dependencyuponMaxwell, we note,is madeclear

both to her andto us at the beginningofthe play's first scene.Maxwell seemsto havetaken

advantageofthe fact that he knowsGail really hasno one elseto tum to, by speakingin ways to

her he likely wouldn't darewith a lesspliant andvulnerableclient-with someonewho really

could afford to tum down his services.He hastalked to her, or, more accurately,ar her for a half

an hour, concemingt}ings which clearly interesthim but areof little interestto Gail. When Gail

complainsabouthis apparentlack of interestin her concems,Maxwell respondsby first

remindingher that sheis "marginal" (Maxwell tells her, "You're marginal. Your causeis

marginal. Outsidethe corridor, soto speak"[13]), then of how lucky sheis to havefound him

(Maxwell tells her, "I believe you when obviously no one elsedoes" [4]), andmovesher to

understandthat her desireto seeher husbandandherselfat somepoint enjoying"a shiny new

future" (15) will dependon her "allowing" him to behaveexactlyashe wishesto behave

(Maxwell tells her, "you'll haveto allow me to proceedin my own way'' [4]). That is, in
'-
,'' \ ./ .'\
rcsponse
to herassertiveness,
Maxwellmasterfrrlly
manages
herinto a moreclftrpla{Wse. > 'f
\_-,'
 Gail will not b"t#paying Maxwell in cash-there is somethingelsehe wantsfrom her.

This "something"isn't sex,but the play guidesus to appreciatethat if he had beena slightly

different man,this is what he might have expectedfrom her as a forrn of payment. For with Gail

the play presentsus with a childish-with her ball capandjeans-young womanwhose

readinessto be servileis suggestedin that sheis therein his office in responseto the middle aged

Maxwell'sbeckoning(i.e.,his "call" [a]). Shehasa husband;but his retumto herseemsto rest

entirely with hermanagingto getthis middle agedmanto agreeto takeon her cause.This he

agreesto, but only if sheagreesto "trust" (15) him, and submitto his unusualbehaviorand

rcquests. He hints that the thing shemost hasto offer is "love," a willingnessandan ability to

servicethe needsof all thosein "need [ofl love" (15). Sheshowsthis willingness,but also some

fear: shesuspectshe might be "crooked." In surn,thoughI think-e speciallywith his moveto

assuageher fears,to get her to trust him, andhis assurance

that if shedoesso her rewardwill be
t,
"a shiny new future"-there is morethan a hint in the natureof their relationship,especially* U
A /t
is introducedto us at the beginningofthe play, ofthe stereotypicalpedophilic"relationship" T W ,/

young women: that is, someonewho is undergoinga midlife crisis.

It should be difficult to not strongly considerunderstandingMaxwell as someonewho is

undergoinga midlife crisis. He is in his early fifties, and has beenremindedof his mortality by

just having suffereda stroke. His mind is clearly on death: when he surveyshis life, he

imaginesit one where "Death was surrounding [him] t. . .l like a demon inevitability" (17). He

suddenly understandsthe way he had been living as unfulfilling-the standardassessment

someonewho is undergoingamidlife crisis makesof his/her life. We should note that his
complaintaboutlife no longerbeingfulfilling is alsoairedby his formerpartner,Harris. And

whenHarrisvisits them,we areofferednumerouscuesto imaginethemboth as still beingin

the samegoal.
someway conjoined,asstill, in theirnew directions,pursuingessentially

With Harris and Maxwell we have two men of about the sameage (specifically, Maxwell

is "50" and Harris is in his "early 50s" U2]), who pursuedthe samecareerpath-law, and who

both seekrejuvenation: Maxwell seeks"rebirth" (31); Harris seeks"new challenges"(27).

Maxwell prefersto understandhimself assomeonewho hastakena fundamentallydifferent tum

thanthe one Harris hastaken. And they might indeedseemfar more oppositethan they do

similar to one another. Maxwell hasstrippedhimself of his earthlygoods;Harris' new pursuit is

built on all that he had accumulated:he will usethe friends andreputationhe gameredfrom

being an establishedlawyer to launcha careerasa politician. Maxwell locateshimself in the

"gutters" and associateswith the destitute;Harris seeks"new mountain" (tops)andtakeson

increasinglyaffluent andpowerfirl clients (i.e., Connor). But unlesswe aredeterminedto see

them asopposites,they could very easilybe understoodastwo who havechosenpathswhich

both work equallywell to help satisfuthe very sameneedsandassuagethe exactsamefears.

The (stereo)tlpicalmidlife fear is fear of death. Both pathsMaxwell andHarris areon would

help alleviatethesefears. ObviouslyMaxwell believesthat in with his new life he hasin some
N
\JI
sensebecomea child again. He prefersnow to be called"Petie" becauseit bettersuitswho he r
, p,r
hasbecome: namely,"[y]ounger," "more unfinished" (30). He believeshe hasbecomethe qrg"
' A \
\f >'^f
personheoncewasbeforelawschoolcom.rptedhim-theyoungMaxwellwhooncehad"Y/f

principles,who followed his parents'codeof honor. Ratherthan someonewho will soonface

{-i
, ,f
< \./ y/
death,he believeshis miraculousre-inventionof himself amountsto a re-birth, to startingagain, (
Jt
oncemore from the beginning. He will help createa "new er4" onehe imagineshe will help
 6

shepherdalong: Phasetwo will amount to "[t]he anazing rebirth of Petie Maxwell and the new

era to which he is dedicated"(3 I ). But though Maxwell will be reborn, Harris's new path will in

a sensemean he will never die: for though no matter how successfula lawyer becomes,it is only

the lawyer who moves on to becominga politician who has any chanceof becominga

historically relevantfigure, i.e., of becoming immortalized. The politician can becomean epic

figure, someonewho might potentially be seenas superhuman-beyond the merely mortal, who

is looked to satisff needsno one personcould possibly satisfy.

ln short, the play offers us very good reasonsfor believing that Maxwell and Ha:ris are

not as different as they would prefer to imagine themselvesto be. Maxwell evidently believes 4.uJ
that Ha:ris used him. He wants Harris to believe Harris'theft of his wife and kids made him feel

like one of "God's lowest creatures"(32). But we should not be so quick to believe him in this,

for the play hints that Harris' theft may well have been an especially fortuitous development for

Maxwell. In pursuit of a new life path, Maxwell seeksto shorn himself of all that ties him to a

former one he associateswith death. He gleefully gives away all that he had acquired during his

twenty years as a lawyer; but had he had to distancehimself from his wife and kids as well, he

might not have been able to do so without feeling guilty for having done so. Middle agedmen

who in their mid-life crisis act childishly and hang out with young women, often experiencea

crippling hangover: they must deal with the anger and disappointmentthey inevitably receive

from wives and children they've abandonedand humiliated. Thanksto Harris' "theft" (for

though Maxwell chidesHarris for thinking of his wife as a possession,it seemsclear that

Maxwell thinks of her as one as well: He exclaims,"You'd been screwing mywife" 132;

emphasisadded]),Maxwell can more easily imagine his rebirth as righteous.

 7

If Hanis' own path wasn't predicatedon accumulation rather than on abandonment,

Maxwell might actually "owe him one" for taking his wife (a wife, we note, he thought a'Jerk"

t3 1l) and kids off his hands. The play, by having Maxwell assessthat his humiliation could be

completedeither by Hanis allowing him to bend down and kiss his assor by Harris bending

down and kissing Maxwell's, strongly suggeststhat who exactly is using whom may not be so

clear. More than this, with satisfactionbeing made to seemachievableregardlessof who does

the bending down and who standserect,it encouragesus to assessMaxwell's actual descentand

Harris' would-be ascentas amounting to the very samething-as interchangeable.

Since Harris is Maxwell's old partner,and since Connor is made to seemas much Harris'

new partner as he is his new client (they are likened to a team throughout), we are guided to

compareMaxwell and Connor as if they were old and newpartners of Harris'. And indeed,in

how they both differ from Harris, and despiteMaxwell's attemptto delineateConnor as nothing

other than a Nazi, they can actually seemquite similar to one another. Maxwell acknowledges

that Harris is charming. His charm and easeare the product of his affluent and assuredfamily

background. He is polished,good looking, superior-the sort of personpeople feel almost

obligatedto promote to societies'highestpositions,regardlessof whetherthey've done anything

to do deservesuch elevation. Both Maxwell and Connor have also made good-but despitethe

odds,through their ingenuity (genius)and boldness. Connor makesclear that he more-or-less

emergedfrom nothing-that is, from a working classbackground. The sgmeseemstrue for

^ly'
Maxwell as well, for he characterizesthe backgroundhe was raisedinfine which promoted
ll
valuesusually associatedwith lower middle classbackgrounds: namely, humility and honour.

Both, too, are hotheads. Connor is explosive and quick to anger;and even though Maxwell can

be tender,he can rage as loudly and as emphaticallyas Connor can. (Harris accuseshim of
 8

having spread"outrageous,bullheaded,unsupportable,inflaming crap" about Connor, and given

what we seeof Maxwell" we do not doubt that Harris's characterizationof Maxwell's efforts are

on the nose.)

Maxwell and Connor also seem similar in that both are making claim to the very same

territory-both are ostensiblyabout "serving" the needsof the lower classes:Maxwell would be

their legal and moral crusader;Connor would be their guide to all they need know of the world

they live in. In fact, at the beginning of scenethree, when Sarahis telling her story of an

invasion to Eleanorand Gail, given all we had by then heardof Connor and Maxwell, as we hear

her story and think of its protagonistswe might be thinking as much of Maxwell as we are

Connor. Her story is about invasive men who are "looking for a place to take over," that are

"fl]ooking for adventure"(33). Thesemen have "sold" (33) all their goods,have "prostitute[d]"

"their wives," and have set up for themselvesa "headquarters"in this alien tenitory Q3-4).

They believe themselves"indestructible," areintent on being o'freeto be themselves,"have

voices inside them "talking to them," and have a proprietary,expansivedesireto get their 'oword

t. . .l out" (34). Maxwell is looking for adventure(he will identiff his activities as an

"adventure" 142]),has given away all his goods, has a wife who is now sleepingwith another

man, believeshe is "immune" (32) to persecution,has enteredan unfamiliar part of town and

up headquartersthere, has arguedthat his turn to the "dark side" in law school resulted from a
h/
u
force taking him over, believeshimself finally "back" (26) to being the man he once was, and

has made the whole city aware of his opinion of Connor and has his mind on the "reorganization

of an entire culture" (29). So even though Sarah's story is about white crusaderswho hate those

who aren't white, and even though Maxwell and others repeatedlycall Connor a Nazi, it is a
storywhich hintsthat its main protagonistsaremorereadilycomparableto Maxwell thanthey

areto Connor.

So given that the play would have us questionjust how different villains actually are

from heroes,it might seemthis play is a satireon the supposedvirtues of would-be progressive

crusaders.Though I have focusedon the play's first act, the play's ending could evenmore

readily be looked to for evidenceto buttresssuch a thesis. Most particularly, the trial which

terminatesthe play evidencesan outrageously greedy and unfair Maxwell. Though he

acknowledgesthat you can repentjust by "say[ing] to yourself 'I repent"' (70), he won't allow

that Harris can do the sameto exoneratehimself from damnation. "Me!Me! [, Maxwell

exclaims]. The demigod. The former greedyprick. The man with a hole in his brain. The

angry man. The reborn man. The avenger!" (71), is the only one who getsto repent. One

cannot but sensehere that to Maxwell, Harris amountsto meansby which to satisfu his own

enorrnousneed to feel pu{poseful and grandiose. The trial also evidencesa greedy and unfair

Sarahas the presidingjudge. Sarahbelievessheis a fair not a prejudicial judge (79), but shetoo

is shown to be interestedin using the trial to satisff her need to humiliate Connor and Harris-

the sameneed she satisfiedearlier in the play when shepretendedto be Maxwell's lawyer ("Well

that just showshow stupid you are. I'm a mental patient. You've beentricked by a personwith

a shatteredmind" [51]). Her verdict that Harris and Connor are to be brutally humiliated and

killed (drowned in washroomtoilets) is a verdict evidently influencedby whim, not evidence.

And sincethis verdict follows a long seriesof humiliations (which include brutal physical assault

and extensivename calling) inflicted upon the two (on Connor, especially),it is no surprisethat

many reviewersof the play assessit indulgent, ineffective.

 10

Mel Gussow,in a review for the New York Times,arguesthat the play is "self-

defeating[,]" for "[a]s the lawyer [Maxwell] [. . .] sinks deeperinto misanthropyand into

sermonizing,he becomesincreasinglytiresome"(New York Times,9 December1990). Of

course,if the play was construeda satireon the vices of progressivereformersratherthan those

of the rich and powerful, the particularnatureof Gussow's reactionto Maxwell should

encourageus to seeit as a rathereffective satire. Indeed,thosewho reactto the play as Gussow

did and who are familiar with the history of satire,might seethe play as akin to Apuleius'

sort of critique againstinterchangeability/intenelatedness:

T\e Metamorphosesshowsthat in a narrativesatirefictions operatethroughthe

of characters:not only the relationshipbetweentwo people,a fool and a

interrelatedness

knave,but betweenrich andpoor fools, [. . .] and so on. They areheld closeto a theme (,

like a cheese >(

or a vice, but they alsoproject a visualizableworld of total intenelatedness, Nt
r! /,/ ',,'
completelyinfiltrated by maggotst. . .l [.] As it is unrolled,ilris world is monotonously\f r/
rf rJ
similar in all its details,andfrnally static;but a world neverthelessin which Lucius ",
,f
tA
of theMetamorphoses]ishimself deeplyimplicated. 57
[principle character

Or perhapsthey would seethe play asakin to picaresquesatires,to thosesatiresPaulsonbelieves

featureQuixote (heroic) figuresakin to Maxwell in that thoughthey aim to be honourablethey

"easily become[. . .] selfrshegoist[s]who tr[y] to make over tle world in [their] [. . .] own

image"(101). But thoughin somanywaysZoveandAnger mightseema play which observes

 1l

andcritiqueswould-beheroes,its intentionis ultimatelynot to showtheir foolishness.Nor is it a

i.e.,the badguys. For theplay is

play whoseprimaryintentis to critiquestheir counterparts,

actually one which would have us attend to the real wisdom not the follv of those who would

enrnusEsucallyinvolve
enthusiastically in brutal,
themselves
lnvolve rnemselves
1n dangerous
behavior.
orural,oangerous
oenavlor. yl"./
\lrJN
\l/
The plays makesthis point primarily throughwhat happensto Sarahassheengageswith* Y / , '

thoseshedeemsevil andbeyondredemption.Like Maxwell, the play drawsus to understand

w/
\.r'
,fX
Sarahas akin to severalother charactersfrequently found in the masseswhich inevitably

developsin the play's various melees. Shebelievesthat both sheand Connor have mean spirited

voices intheirheads which speakto them and control them, ffid she servesas Maxwell's new

partner-and thereby draws us to compareher to his former partner, Harris. And she,too, is

someonewho seeksrcvitalization and freedom. And though, while pretending to be his new law

partner,she is the one who voices a loud critique of simple and brutal solutions-she gets

Connor to admit that killing the poor might be a solution to downtown problems,she actually

demonstrateswhy brutality may indeed serveto provide solutionsto long troubling problems.

After Sarahdoes the admirable and amazingin persuadinga veteran lawyer and a canny

businessmanthat sheis in fact a competentlawyer and holds meansby which Maxwell might be

managed,she,Gail, Harris, and Connor enterinto a wild melee. Stageinstructionstell us that

this melee is followed by a blackout and an intermission: the audienceis encouragedto wonder

what might have happenedto those involved-to wonder what might have happenedto the two

women who took on at least one opponentwho "wanted to kill" (53) them. When the play

resumes,the audienceis seeminglyoffered very good reasonsfor suspectingthings turned out

poorly, for "[t]he office is a mess,""Gail is sitting on the floor againstthe desk [,] [. . .] and

Sarahis lying face down nearthe door" (53). But though Sarahsaysshe likely has a broken
 L2

bo

"satisffing"-rhe thoroughly enjoyed getting "in a few really good whacks" (53). She guesses

that she'd have beenbetter off if she'd "startedhitting earlier in [. . .] life" (53)-and shemay

well be right; for hiuing has lead not just to elation but to an ability "to make sense"(54), to

sanity, and to a willingness to admit shedoesnot in fact believe herself black-a step,perhaps,

to not needingto lie to herself in order to better cope with life.

At the very least, the battle proved therapeutic-and in the loving and supportive

sisterhoodit helped engenderbetweenGail and Sarah,it seemsto promise even more. And we

note that after the fight, neither of them seemto hate those they fought with. There is indeed

little hate in evidence. Instead,there is only love and reflection. Gail exploreswhy her

perception of how the rich ostensibly operatecould drive her to hate them, and admits that the

rich might not be the villains she sometimesfeels they are. Sarahadmits that sheimagines

herself black becauseit helps her "feel brave" (5a)-an admissionwhich might soon lead her to

understandthat shepreferredto conceiveof her foes asNazis (or vampires)becauseit gave her

reasonto feel brave, to act heroically. There is real reasonfor believing so, for previously Sarah

admittedthat though she "doesn't take messages"from ordinary people, shewould rise to action

if such calls came from "fp]eople threateningPetie" (35).

Though her therapistlikely wouldn't let Sarahpunch him up in order to help her feel

sane,her doctors-though they seemto do little more than drug her up-might well appreciate

that what Sarahreally needsis to be around those who inspire fear and hatred. For we are told

that they believe Sarah"has to have away, even in her state,to manifesther couraget. . .] t--]

[t]hat her courageis still the most important thing to her" (35). It is Eleanor who relatesthis

information, and it is Eleanorwho clearly doesnot believe it to be true: for her responseto
 l3

Sarah'smanifestationof tremendouscourageis to berateher for it. Sheseesthe resultsofthe

meleeand gaugesit the result of Sarah'simpulsive decisionto attackGai1. Shegoesirate, and

tells her sisterto stop"scaringther] [. . .] to death'(56). EleanorwouldhaveSarahremain

pacified, sedatedthroughdrugs,becausean activeand alert Sarahis someonewho might do

things which would causeEleanorconsiderabledistress. We note that Eleanorwould have

wishedMaxwell hadbeeninhibited from moving to "the slums" for the sameselfishreason.For

evenwith Maxwell sufferingfrom anotherstroke,shecan't help but beratehim (somethingthe

now saneSarahnoticesandcommentson) abouthow the movehasendedup makingher 'lvery

uneasy"andunableto "function" (56). Maxwell, however,wantsEleanorto join in with his

group,to join in with his movement. It is a requesthe makesseveraltimes, andwe note her

typical responseto it is the one sheoffers to his initial request: "Don't involve me in whateverit

is you're up to thesedays. I haveproblemsofmy own" (16). Neartheplay's c1ose,

however,

shesaysshewould be "gratefi " (61) to be included-but this may actuallybe causefor

Maxwell to curseratherthan celebrate,for, arguably,nowherein the text is thereevidencethat

her involvementwould be anlthing but a badthing for Maxwell andhis gang.

,/
Eleanor,from the play's beginningto its end,is portrayedassomeonewho doeso. n"ry/ 11y'

easilycould spoil all the fun othersareup to. Sheis a bummer. Even after shehassaidshe
7t\P"
/
would "honestly" be very gratefulto be includedin Maxwell's plans,just her presencecauses

Sarahto loseconfidencein her perfonnanceasthe trial's judge (we notice her ascentfrom

cowering"patient" to competentlawyer to compellingjudge), andpromptsher to startto cry.

prayer,
Her activepart in the trial provesto be her slappingof Connor'sfacefor his blasphemous

an action which servesto makeher seemeverybit the samepersonshewas at the begbning of

the play, when sherespondeddefensivelyto Maxwell's lambastingof religion. (A battle follows

 t4

her slappingConnor, but we note that somehoweveryonebut Eleanor endsup "form[ing] [the] [.

. .] massof [tangled] bodies" that end up on the couch-a developmentwhich may in part make

it seemas this melee is a combinedeffort by everyoneinvolved to excludeEleanor.) Sheis the

one who would call in either the police or the hospital in responseto any dangerous

development. And we note that if she had called an ambulanceafter Maxwell suffered his

stroke,he would have beendeniedthe opportunity to die honorably and redemptivelyin battle.

(Harris and other charactersalso at times threaten to call the police, but they always pull back,

find reasonsfor not doing so-indeed, their threatsto call the police seemakin to thosemadeby

kids who make the threat with no real intention of following through.)

We also note that in sceneone, Maxwell's suddenneedto beratepeople on the street,to

insist that they "[h]ave a little self-respect"(19), follows his being schooledby Eleanoron the

proper way to treat people. That is, Eleanorseemsto make Maxwell, the would-be crusaderof

the downtrodden,to sound,in his demandthat the streetpeople "[g]et out of the garbage"(19),

like her-who is first shown "[c]arrying a bag of cleaningsupplies" (16), and who is identified

by her sisteras being "brilliant" at"tidy[ing] up" (61). The real threat to Maxwell and Sarah's

rejuvenation,we are told, is clearly not Harris and Connor-who, though they begin by mocking

the trial, not only actively participate in it, but end up showing admirable enthusiasm,emotion,

and belief in its legitimacy (they danceand cheer when they believe the trial has proved their

innocenceand virtue)-but rather, Eleanor. And we note that after she shows some capacity to

unsettleMaxwell and Sarah.to make them seemless assured.that Eleanorbecomesthe victim of

somesort of violence.

Connor disturbsEleanorwhen he handlesand moves her because"[s]he was in [his] I. . .]

way" (20); and in this particular instanceviolence is setup as praiseworthy,not becauseit can
 15

make people feel good, but can make them feel quite tenible. Maxwell gaugesConnor's
1
behavior odious: he essentializesConnor as a "bully" (20), as sugg"rtr thut it ugg.ttt thut h.

might have beatenhis own secretaryso badly that she neededto be sent to the hospital (21). But

the play guidesus to questionjust how offendedMaxwell is by Connor's violence towards

Eleanor, to wonder if at some level y{Co*ror-in attacking Eleanor--essentially servedas

+ /h
Maxwell's proxy. The principle way in which it doesthis is to suggestthat Maxwell t -rf
U
Eleanoras his mother, and that he-not Connor-is actually the personwith pressingOedipal

(or, rather, inversedOedipal-as he is would welcome violence to his mother not his father)

issues. Connor's assaulton Eleanorfollows a contestbetweenMaxwell and Eleanor.which is

very much made to seemone between child and mother. While interacting with Gail, he takes

out and plays with a string of colouredpaper clips. Eleanor,wishing him to behaveless

childishly, takes them from him-an action he follow up by rebelliously taking anotherpaper

clip out from his pocket. But sincethe contestthey have betweenone anotherconcludeswith

her successfullyshamingMaxwell into temporarily terminating his unorthodox and childish

behavior and becomean advocateof orthodox and "adult" virtues (cleanliness,self-respect),it is

a contestwhich is ultimately won by Eleanor. But then she is bullied by Connor, and we note

that Maxwell makes an effort to construethe assaultone made by a child upon a mother. He

asksConnor, "What's wrong. Sometrouble with mwnmy?" (2A). But the play ultimately makes

it very clear that it is Maxwell, not Connor,who is prone to think of Eleanor as his mother: for

his near last words are, "Eleanor, you look like my mother" (83).

Unlike Maxwell, Sarahwants Eleanorto understandthat she(i.e., Eleanor) is not to liken

herselfto a (specifically, her) mother. And we note that in the way Sarahcharacterizesmothers,

doesnot assessthem in the standardFreudianway: that is, sheunderstandsmothersas

_,hul"3h"
 t6

Freudconceivesfathers----as
formidablebeingswho would bully and dominatetheir children. ,I I
^tJ r'
SheportraysSarahasrespondingto Eleanor'smotheringin the sameFreudargueschildren were q ,-tf
'"ry
want f^raa^'
u'onf to reactt^thpirfarhar'c
to their father's,tho+ic by finding neans by which to safely "air" their desireto
that is, hr,fin;t;ndmA'nchvu'hi.Ut^"'a.t-*"r']rU"r'r..,'.-*-- VS'
v/
retaliate,for revenge,without arousingthe attentionof the censuringsuper-ego. She encourages

Eleanorto take pills sheknows will leaveher in a death-likecomatosestate. When Eleanor is

espiedin this state,shejokes/hintsthat Eleanormight be dead: "Besides,there's no waking her

anyway. Shetook a couple of my pills. Thesethings are lethal" (63). There are other hints in

the play that suggestthat Maxwell implicitly wishesfor Eleanorto incur harm. We note, for

instance,thatdespiteMaxwell's outrageat Connor for his having physically moved Eleanor,that

at one point Maxwell himself tries to do the same: We are told that "He tries to push her out the

door" (42). We also note that the play commenceswith his making clear he would war with

institutions suchas religion, an institution Eleanorfinds o'comforting"(17); and that Maxwell

aims to include Eleanor,who is shown resistinghim, in his project when it reachesthe

"dangerouspart" (42).

Eleanor is not hurt or slain by play's end, and if we construethe play as holding the same

conceptionof mothersas many of those living in the twentieth-century'sother extendedperiod

of Darwinian capitalism-the 1920s-did, this developmentwould in fact have beentoo much to

ask. At one point in the play, Maxwell calls God a "she" (42), suggestingthat ratherthan a man

and a father, the most powerful entity anywhere is in fact a woman and a mother. Ann Douglas

writes that 1920sNew Yorkers essentiallybelievedthe samething: that the most powerful

negativeinfluence over their lives was the lasting influence of the Victorian Titaness.

Specifically, shewrites in Terrible HonesQ that for its cultural emergence,modernNew York

(believedthat it) dependedupon a collective and ruthlesseffort to distinguish itself from a

 t7

Victorian,matriarchalpast. ShewritesthatmodernNew Yorkersbelievedtheirpredecessors

weremerepuppetsof leadingmatriarchswhoseinfluencesuffocatedandsmotheredthem,ffid,

in order to avoid their fate, she writes that they worked to make their era, their city, one which

could easily be imagined as readily opposedand hostile to empoweredmother-figures

attendance.For just like writers (and theoristssuch as Freud, who downplayedthe mother's

influence in pursuit of erecting the conception of the father as so very brutal but also so very
-r*.*-/

empowered)in the 20s helped effect the idea of the brutal but very empoweredfather-figure

male in their works, Love and Anger leavesone with the sensethat the featuredbully of

mothers-Connor-will continue to rule the Toronto environs. It endswith him, most

especially,feeling rejuvenated,righteous,and determinedto "keep the momentum going" (81).

And though it is easyto imagine playgoersbeing disappointedthat he wasn't defeated,it also

easyto imagine the affluent amongstthem, thosewho were enjoying the spoils Darwinian

capitalismoffered them (which likely includesthe bulk of them: left leaning professionals

amongstthosewho havebenefitedmostin thenew economy),might at

shouldcountthemselves

thattheplay Oia(ri:,;{4"retell
somelevelbe reassured theterminationof currenteconomic
\{ar
trendsand/orthe rise of successfuland empoweredpopulist campaignsagainstluxurious living
 18

future. Sincesatiresarenornally construedasaimingto notjust

andthe rich, in theforeseeable

critiquebut helpbringto anenda vice riddenage,theymight be fairly imaginedasbeingglad

thatthe play-which in variousways seemsto be a satire-may actuallymoreaccuratelybe

deemed,anti-satiric.
 WorksCited

Douglas,Ann. TenibleHonesty:MongrelManhattanin the 1920s.NewYork:

Farrar,StrausandGiroux,1995.

Gussow,Mel. 'tsehiniltheScenes
Villainy at Corxt" TheNd YorkTimes.g December
1990.

Attp:llthatrr2.nytimes.com/merr/theater/teview.htnl?res=9C0CE1DEl53DF93AA357

51c1A96695826F.

Paulson,R:or:rrld.TheFictionsof Satire. Baltimore:JohnHopkinsPress,1967.

Walker,George.LoveandAnger. Toronto:CoachHousehess, 1990.