Initially I assumed that given the title and the events that were unfolding, Machinal was just your standard, done to death (well, maybe not in 1928) story of life falling into place and doing things because you have to, and not because you want to, much like a machine. But Helen killing her husband really came off as cliche. All she wanted to do was escape from life, but kept trudging on with it.
Granted, this could all be foreshadowed by her mother, and the monotonous office scene in the beginning, but after that I felt like I was just skimming the pages until the final realization, to which for Helen there was none. Her name would be read in the paper by another couple or other people, and get passed up like everything else. The wheels of the cog move on, so to speak.
Yes, I am a bit biased since I've seen this theme played out a good bit, but like I said, the play was dragging. The dialogue just felt forced and filled in places. I know not every single word has to be important, but the pacing was just very slow. This could be a reflection of Helen, however, since it took her so long before she snapped, and it's kind of ironic how on page 58, after talking about drowning and prisoners and dead husbands:
Helen: Any Prisoners?
Husband: No.
Helen: All free?
Husband: All Free.
But the irony is that it didn't help, she still felt trapped up until death, not knowing if that was the final solution for her.
eh, it was okay I guess, but as stated, maybe it's just modern convention affecting my opinion. Given the original context arounf the Great Depression, I'm sure many people felt like this, just a part of somethign that is a never-ending cycle of loathing and unwanting.
Posted by at March 2, 2005 07:00 PM | TrackBack