AWA: Academic Writing at Auckland

Brick Pollitt, once a darling athlete in his adolescence, is now an apathetic alcoholic in adulthood. Throughout Tennessee Williams’ play Cat on a Hot Tin Roof (Cat) [1], it becomes understood that Brick’s disinterest towards living results from the death of his best friend, Skipper. Williams launches from the subtext of this explanation to raise the question of whether Brick is homosexual – which is famously never conclusively determined. Although the authorial intent in withholding an answer may not be scrutable, it is certainly possible to examine how it affects the interpretation of the text. Had a straightforward answer been given about Brick’s sexual orientation the focus would remain, as conventionally expected, on the narrative. However, through foregrounding the uncertainty which surrounds Brick’s sexual identity, Williams’ text pulls back to instead explore the very construction of identity itself. Attention is specifically drawn to the use of labels, which act as a conduit for normative values to define the individual. Cat is a raw presentation of the interplay between these societally-sourced values and a sense of self in generating identity; the conflict of which creates an insecurity that Brick shirks resolving with the assistance of alcohol. By steadfastly situating Brick’s sexuality in the grey area, Williams challenges the reader to reflect upon what it is exactly that informs our identity.

Of course, Cat was not written in a social vacuum. Any meaningful discussion of the text must give regard to the contextualisation imposed by the backdrop of 1950’s America. Williams writes in a post-war era of hyper-conformity, in which any meaningful departure from heteronormative standards would have been readily suppressed.[2] To be a known homosexual would guarantee a societal reaction of disgust and ostracisation[3], a fact which did not escape the author nor his characters. Consequently, homosexuality was only spoken of in hushed tones. For a conservative time in which the “witch-hunts of artists were daily fare”[4], William’s overt engagement of the subject matter in Cat was an exceptionally bold move in the literary world.

Although it is never established whether Brick is truly a homosexual or not, his sexual compulsion is clearly resolute towards heterosexuality. Brick proves to be by far the most homophobic character in Cat. Acerbic slurs such as “ducking sissies”[5] are used by him to describe Straw and Ochello, the homosexual couple with whom him and Skipper are compared. The use of such labels are laden with normative judgements about the undesirability of homosexuality, being a “dirty thing”[6] and morally reprehensible. In terms of the other characters, each has a degree of tolerance for homosexuality. Perhaps the most significant acceptance is that of the ultra-masculine Big Daddy. In comforting Brick, Big Daddy is comfortable enough to allude to having “knocked about in [his] time”[7] with other men. None of the other characters within Cat so totally deny homosexuality but Brick, who can be seen to have internalised the repressive values of the society of the time.

Despite being convinced of the pureness of his friendship with Skipper, “the one great good true thing in his life”[8], Brick’s psyche falls victim to gossip. The close homosocial bond that the two share as college football teammates is given a more intimate description by grapevine whisperings, and these sotto voce labels challenge Brick’s conception of self.  As a handsome athlete, and subsequently, a popular sports announcer – Brick’s identity has always comfortably resided within the mainstream. To have aspersions cast upon his sexual orientation  is horrifying for Brick, who now has the immensely negative label of ‘homosexual’ applied to him. Having always been celebrated by society, Brick is particularly vulnerable to the perceived backlash of being branded as Skipper’s lover. In an emotionally charged confrontation with Big Daddy, the protest rises:

“Why can’t exceptional friendship, real, real, deep, deep friendship! Between two men be respected as something clean and decent without being thought of as – Fairies…”[9]

Here Brick faces the conflict between what is said about his sexual orientation, and what he believes of himself. Although Brick had never thought his relationship with Skipper to be romantic in nature, he is evidently affected by the labels applied by others: which imposes upon him an identity which disagrees with his own values. By leaving the ultimate answer uncertain, Williams is able to expose the influence of others’ perspectives in the construction of identity.

Brick’s alcoholism is merely the expression of his inability to define his own sexual identity. Now that doubts about his heterosexuality have been expressed by others, Brick cannot continue blissfully unaware as before. However, Brick’s deep-seated homophobia renders him unable to press the issue, afraid of  risking the discovery that he is indeed the very thing he loathes. Brick is trapped in a state of limbo, in a “moral paralysis”[10] from which he cannot move on. Wary that Skipper’s death in Cat is a direct result of unsuccessful heterosexual sex, and Brick continually rejects Maggie’s advances to escape any similar confrontation of his sexuality. Instead, Brick prefers to abstain entirely from sex: choosing ignorance over  participation in the act, afraid of arousing any queer feelings. Through drinking, Brick is able to further render himself incapable of any meaningful actions that may lead to a realisation of his sexuality. This wasteful state of detachment carries with it a clear warning against buying into any identity that is not self-generated.

Maggie makes a trenchant observation in opining that "silence about a thing just magnifies it…".[11] This statement neatly explains Brick’s predicament; as well as perhaps why Williams was savaged by his contemporaries for leaving Brick’s sexual orientation fraught with ambiguity. It was received as somewhat dishonest to have so stridently brought up the topic of homosexuality, only stop short of taking it to fruition within Cat.[12] However, Williams has achieved far more by leaving the question mark firmly in place. Sure, for Brick to have been either definitively heterosexual or homosexual would have resolved the poor character’s psychological paralysis within the narrative: for better or worse. However, by omitting to do so Cat is afforded far more life as a text which provokes thought about the sources of identity, and their validity. Brick Pollitt endures as a character who reminds readers and audiences alike about the perils of having one’s identity defined by others, and being fundamentally without a sense of self.  What Williams achieves is far more than a commentary on sexuality.

Word count: 1247

Works Cited

Arrell, Douglas. "Homosexual Panic in Cat on a Hot Tin Roof." Modern Drama 51, no. 1 (2008): 60-72.

Bak, John S. "Sneakin' and Spyin' " from Broadway to the Beltway: Cold War

Masculinity, Brick, and Homosexual Existentialism." Theatre Journal 56, no. 2 (May 2004 2004): 225-49.

Williams, Tennessee. Cat on a Hot Tin Roof.  London: Penguin Group, 2009.

[1] Tennessee Williams, Cat on a Hot Tin Roof  (London: Penguin Group, 2009). 62.

[2] John S. Bak, "sneakin' and spyin' " from Broadway to the Beltway: Cold War

Masculinity, Brick, and Homosexual Existentialism," Theatre Journal 56, no. 2 (2004).

[3] Douglas Arrell, "Homosexual Panic in Cat on a Hot Tin Roof," Modern Drama 51, no. 1 (2008).

[4] Bak, "sneakin' and spyin' " from Broadway to the Beltway: Cold War

Masculinity, Brick, and Homosexual Existentialism," 226-27.

[5] Williams, Cat on a Hot Tin Roof: 63.

[6]Ibid., 62.

[7] Ibid., 61.

[8] Ibid., 27.

[9] Ibid., 64.

[10] Arrell, "Homosexual Panic in Cat on a Hot Tin Roof," 68-70.

[11] Williams, Cat on a Hot Tin Roof: 11.

[12] Bak, "sneakin' and spyin' " from Broadway to the Beltway: Cold War

Masculinity, Brick, and Homosexual Existentialism," 225.