Themes in American Dreams
1. American capitalist spreading
Firstly, the capitalist conception starts in the young narrative voice´s mind. To some extent, this young boy rejects their own town; as a symbol of underdevelopment, tradition and isolation. Therefore, they begin to conceive the American society as the chosen one and the role model to follow. Giving as a result the birth of the capitalist conception.
Besides, the father´s voice takes back to the pre-capitalist status. Similarly, the father´s memories may provide a subversive view, with respect to the young son.
In addition to this pre-capitalist memories, it is vital to highlight the lineal and meticulous description about the town before the American values arrive.
For this reason, it is highly important to illustrate how the son mistreatments to the town; as this quotation shows
The commercial travellers who buy fish and chips at George the Greek´s care for us than we do, because we all have dreams of the big city, of wealth, of modern houses, of big motor cars: American dreams (1997: 152).
Gradually, the son is `infected´ by the American capitalism, making him reject his roots and his origin. This connection with his origins is progressively replaced by other ethics and idealized cultural conceptions, giving a sensation of cultural emptiness.
The young son is absorbed in a way by an unreal idealisation about American way of living and consequently this wrong conception makes a rupture between generations. To be exact, the father´s figure may be the symbol of the pre-capitalistic way of living and behaving and consequently, the son is the embodiment of new false and overemphasized values- based on another foreign culture.
Another aspect related to the capitalism in the town is the bicycle, it is a well-described mean of transport. It may be considered a minor aspect but, it may be seemed as psychological and perceptive transgression in the son, that is, the young narrative voice is more focused on the materialistic product than any other emotional or abstract aspect of the town.
Therefore, there is a change of son´s mind from the emotional or spiritual human conception to the material adherence. Moreover, the narrative voice provides the reader with this capitalistic conception of his reality through this quotation “we all rode bicycles because we didn´t have the money for anything better” (1997:152). Again the issue of money as the fundamental instrument to improve his way of living which is considered by the narrative voice and this is a key point and a crystal clear example of the capitalistic establishment. However, this is not the only aspect to take into account, the Chinese workers´ labour, they represent how the workforce is used in order to get a huge profit, in this case, the big wall.
Furthermore, the narrative voice tends to associate the term of modernisation with the financial prosperity during the whole narration as another instance of this capitalist introduction.
Equally important is the narrative voice´s changes conception about Mr. Gleason, he discovers the built of the town and suddenly, he realises the beautiful of his own town; and consequently; he begins to be proud of it.
Leading to another inversion of roles, that is, the young narrative voice evokes the pure essence of his town and replaces `the idealisation of the American dream´ to the beauty of his ‘underestimated’ town. Whereas, the minister of tourism posts himself in the American capitalist and materialistic side. As it is quoted “[…] and bring wallets bulging with dollars. American dollars” (1997:159).
As soon as Americans arrive, the narrative voice changes his idealised expectations and he realises what the American Dream is a mass capital in order to survive. As it is gathered in this quotation;
American pay one dollar for the right to take our photography. Having paid the money they are worried about being cheated. They spend their time being disappointed and I spend my time feeling guilty, that I have somehow let them down growing older and sadder (1997: 162)
2. Individualism vs. collectivism
On the one hand, dealing with the topic of individualism, it is necessary to emphasize that it is found from the beginning onwards. In other words, the butcher is isolated by the action of citizens due to his look and behaviors. Therefore, in order to fit in this town it is necessary to follow an established pattern of behavior. On the other hand, the citizens are another face of the same coin, that is, the union, the group of people with a normalized and established pattern. They are a thought group and they go in the same direction; considering Mr. Gleason as a mad person. However actually we could interpret him as a visionary, because he could somehow foresee what was going to happen to his town, and so he created a model in order to make them see all the good in the buildings and their people.
Dealing with this collectivist exclusion or isolation, it is essential to take into account this following quotation “we ignored him” (p.151). Thus, this clear statement shows Mr. Gleason excluded by the population and not by himself, the person who is diverse is immediately excluded and ignored, as it is mentioned by the narrative voice. To be exact, it seems that Mr
Gleason is the guilty of this isolation and this idea is supported by the narrative voice who comments the following “who once lived among us” (1997: 151). As a result, the butcher is the responsible of being isolated and nothing else may be assigned to it.
The aspect of self-responsibility is reinforced and the individual is the guider of his or her own life. In this case, Mr. Gleason is being responsible of his own destiny and his personal circumstances.
Moreover, the narrative voice does not present himself as the causer, he is just a mere spectator or teller of Mr Gleason´s behaviour and the main reasons why he was ignored by the citizens. However, there is a specific detail that gives a more positive impression of the butcher, which is the love for the town. As the narrative voice points out “that he loved the town more than any of us” (p.151).
Although in the process of narration, there is a turning point, which is the construction of the big wall, the big wall may be considered as a symbol of inner isolation and a process of inner individualism. What it´s more, Mr. Gleason himself decides to isolate from the rest of the inhabitants, the following quotation supports this idea “the walls themselves were ten feet high and topped with a broken glass and barbed wire” (p.155); the wall may be interpreted as his own bubble in order to isolate himself from the rest.
Nevertheless, Mr. Gleason is not the only one who isolates himself, his wife is forced to be detached from the inhabitants due to her marital condition. To be more concreted, at the first sight she seems to be subjugated to the man´s power and consequently she ‘accepts’ this detachment full of fear. Furthermore, the narrative voice reinforces this idea of woman pity with this quotation “they knew she wasn´t responsible for the wall and they felt sorry for her, having to bear the burden of the pram and her husband´s madness” (p.155).For this reason, the reader feels empathy for the wife and starts to be leaded by the narrative voice and gradually, the reader starts to be part of this collectivist Mr. Gleason´s exclusion.
When this confinement takes place, the rest of population begins to be frustrated. Then, one interpretation may be that the towners do not control this Mr. Gleason´s isolation. Instead of deciding whether the butcher should be isolated or not, the butcher himself tales control of his inner isolation and inverts the dominant collective role. One quotation that sustains this idea is “thus we expressed our frustration at this inexplicable thing” (p.154).
Finally, dealing with the evolution of the story, the narrative voice is gradually conscious of the actual personality of Mr. Gleason and his aims, and simultaneously the reader acquires the same information and as a result, they both start to reconsider the crucial actions he did for the town taken only after his death.
3. Nature and the urban-rural conflict
From an ecocritical perspective, there are many aspects that can be commented on in the short story. To begin with, some citizens like the narrator’s father reflected about how people had mistreated the land they lived in, and how it deserved better than that, even if he also had big dreams; they just stayed in the same place and did nothing but harm. This can exemplify the egoism that lead human beings to only get profit and not be aware of the consequences of our acts.
For years we have watched the films at the Roxy and dreamed, if not of America, then at least of our capital city. For our own town, my father says, we have nothing but contempt. We have treated it badly, like a whore. We have cut down the giant shady trees in the main street to make doors for the school house and seats for the football pavilion. We have left big holes all over the countryside from which we have taken brown coal and given back nothing. (1997: 151)
Here the destruction of the nature could imply the eradication of their tradition and old values as a town such as respecting the land, its trees, living for and from the natural sources and taking care of it after having made use of it. But because the new wave of thinking and the idea of modernization, people were guided only to get the best of an item and then get rid of it. The passage that better illustrates this could be the one about cracked painting in the buildings:
We became very keen on modernization. When coloured paints became available the whole town went berserk and brightly coloured houses blossomed overnight. But the paints were not of good quality and quickly faded and peeled, so that the town looked like a garden of dead flowers. (1997: 156)
There is another reference to nature in the metaphor of dead flowers. It evokes the feeling of sadness as the modern ways of living ends with traditional, eco-friendly values.
Mr. Gleason could be understood then as the most caring person towards nature and its control, because he lived surrounded by gardens and flowers. But, not only did he embody this ecological perspective, also the tradition in that in every moment he tried to preserve the tradition of the town, and show to his neighbours the beauty of it with the model as it was, simple, ecological and small, free of the influence of capitalism and strong urban elements.
As another theme to consider, we can find a craving for changing, living abroad and having an expensive, great life in a capital city. Nevertheless, the sense of community existing in the story creates a unique current of thought, based on tradition and lack of development. This issue is actually more present in rural areas than in urban environments as those living on the countryside tend to idealize the “big life” in cities: from this we have the conflict between urban culture against the rural one.
The commercial travellers who buy fish and chips at George the Greek’s care for us more than we do, because we all have dreams of the big city, of wealth, of modern houses, of big motor cars: American dreams, my father has called them. (1997: 152)
As a final idea, there is also a direct critique to the excessive price of cars (capitalism which has been explained above) and how they are too much of a load for the people in the town; cycling was cheaper and less complicated than using and taking care of an automobile. “We all rode bicycles because we didn’t have the money for anything better”. (p. 152) and not only that, cars are more pollutant than bikes so cycling would help somehow keeping their natural environment.
