Home: A Question of Reality

HOME: A Question of Reality
Home is an ever changing landscape that is becoming consistently harder to define as a specific idea. The idea of home has seen tremendous change, specifically, in the last fifty years. Much of this change can be seen through the consistent effort to make home a place where the realities of life’s duties are forgotten. The Stepford Wives and The Crying Lot of 49 show us different, if not, eerily contrasting views of home as an alternate reality. In addition, home is being re-defined by groups such as Habitat for Humanity which has worked since 1976 to build affordable homes for those in need. Home is for some a place of sanctuary away from the day’s work and duties; for others a never distinct place of unrest. To better understand this changing view of home, it is important to assess the change of home in the last fifty years.

In the wake of WWII, the rural and urban home experience was giving way to a new monster, suburbia. This is important in setting up the experiences represented in The Stepford Wives. Returning from WWII, suburban paradises began growing rapidly. Many remain today as a reminder of this former abundance and the process has continued with more and more neighborhoods being built. The idea is simple; build a neighborhood with no vast differences in the appearance of the homes and let families live there apart from the city and countryside in happiness and security. Homes were no longer places of living; they were being built with the intent of creating happiness after a tragic war. Suburban neighborhoods were surely capable of healing any resemblance of the former tough times. In The Crying Lot of 49 we get introduced to a character that no doubt was affected by this transition.

Oedipa Maas of The Crying Lot of 49 is made executor of her former relational interest’s estate. Along with her pursuit of carrying out the estate affairs she is left with, we learn little of her traditional home life. She is married to a disc jockey with no children and no traditional responsibilities to tend to at home. Rather, Oedipa’s pursuit of home takes her on a quest for the security and happiness she hopes to find with men. This becomes a major plotline in addition to her confusion with reality and alternate realities. She becomes curious about certain symbols and acronyms which point to a mystery she believes to be unfolding. Her frustrating journey is referenced by a portion in which Pynchon says “So began, for Oedipa, the languid, sinister blooming of the Tristero.” (54) It goes onto explain that she, Oepdipa, is up late (on the specific night in which it is referenced) with no apparent home obligation. Oedipa represents an unperceived reality. Her home takes on many forms. One of which is her relationship with Dr. Hilarius. She confides in him for information and help. This falls apart in a crucial scene in which Oedipa’s reality is once again challenged; “She could not, having no idea what Hilarius had done before showing up at Kinneret.” Then she says, “Do me a favor?” “Don’t shoot at the cops, they’re on your side.” Hilarius then says that Jews could take on any uniform. Dr. Hilarius himself lives in a paranoid state of mind that makes him yet another unstable sense of happiness or security for Oedipa. Her solitude (or home) in Dr. Hilarius was now ruined by his personal alternate realities (135). It is hard to define the real concept of home in Oedipa’s life because for reasons seemingly beyond her control the failed state of her relationships leaves her arguably homeless. Tristero, Metzger, LSD, Mucho, Rapunzel, and Pierce Invararity have all failed her in some way leaving her alone in the pursuit of a proposed cover-up.

Historically, The Crying Lot of 49 brings up LSD as an experimental drug that represents a period of great experimentation. Rightfully so, the main character is affected by this through the use of this drug by others. This mid-60’s exploration relates common themes of music (The Paranoids) and psychiatric evaluation as a parallel to the mood of the times. The book explores home as a product of mutual experiences. Her relationship with Pierce had fallen apart before we pick up in the story. Mucho’s increased use of experimental drugs throughout the development of the novel is deteriorating her relationship with him. Her affair with Metzger leaves her no resolve or happiness. Oedipa is a destitute character, plagued with poor relationships, though not without sexual offers such as when Miles (of The Paranoids) says “Do you want to know what I think you want?” and continues later to say “I have a smooth young body………I thought you older chicks went for that.” Oedipa makes her answer very clear by declaring “You are a paranoid (28)[.]” One of many different definitions of “home” regards it as “an environment offering security and happiness.” Oedipa spends most of her time pursuing this security and happiness, never finding it with men nor the mystery she seeks to solve. This contrasts with the very explicit concept of home introduced to us in The Stepford Wives.

In The Stepford Wives, the reader is introduced to Joanna, Walter and their two kids. They fit the nuclear family model that by the 1970’s was now a common idea. They come to the suburban paradise of Stepford. This is a place where the women admire their husbands and tend to their housework expertly. Eager for a fresh start, Stepford is a beautiful community that looks to be perfect for their family. Hence, this is an alternate reality that will surely better suit their family when compared with the business of New York City. Almost from the very beginning, Joanna is suspect of this version of happiness and security, specifically with the presence of The Men’s Association. She notices that the women of Stepford tend to their work before they come over and drink coffee. This perfection is too perfect to be real. In an important conversation between Joanna and Charmaine after Charmaine has returned from a getaway with her husband and Charmaine is speaking about turning the tennis court into a putting green at her husband’s request. Charmaine says “I’m not joking………..Ed’s a pretty wonderful guy, and I’ve been lazy and selfish.” Joanna is shocked to hear this, not that she doesn’t find it admirable at first. Joanna, suspect of this change later asks, “What did he do to you?”( 80-81) If we think of this central character’s commitment to her husband as a pursuit of security and happiness in the relationship, we find it to be considerably admirable. However, a concluding observation of the novel finds us asking whether or not this version of home is truly ever possible but by the robotic replacement of women in this suburban setting. Or, more appropriately, whether or not this alternative reality could ever be successful but by an altering of humans, not homes.

The Stepford Wives falls historically in a time period of rapid growth in the second wave feminism movement. This movement has greatly affected Walter and Joanna, of whom we know to have been somehow, involved in the movement. Upon arriving in Stepford, Joanna is suspect of The Men’s Association and confides in Walter for support, support that he seemingly gives. Humorously, Walter notes that if he can’t change the Association to include women, he will march with her holding signs saying “Sex, not Sexism [.]” Walter and Joanna are seemingly content with each other from the first observations of them in the novel. They fulfill one another sexually and relationally. They seem happy and secure. But, upon arriving in Stepford in pursuit of this suburban paradise, things begin to change for them. These changes conflict with the original promise of happiness in Stepford. Similarly,Habitat for Humanity has sought to improve the lives of under privileged families through the renovation and building of descent, affordable homes (generally in suburban neighborhoods). This approach has yielded important observations about the true effect of creating alternate realities.

A recent community service day in partnership with Habitat for Humanity unfortunately showed the limits of creating happiness and security through the renovation and building of homes. Many of the Habitat homes that were worked on showed no signs of maintenance since the last visit by a volunteer group. While unfortunate, this finding bitterly shows us what can happen when a home is given to a family that, itself, does not or cannot maintain it. It doesn’t reduce the effort or value of “eliminating poverty housing” across the world. Rather, it shows us that through the creating and renovation of housing there is a strong argument that this does not inspire those that live in them to continue the maintenance necessary to make their homes secure or their lives happy. That is, if it is believed that these homes are purposed for security and happiness. Is the failed personal maintenance representative of a failed sense of security and happiness? In short, no; there is nothing that says that those that live in these homes are not happy or secure. However, the intention of creating happiness and security is failed by the fact that the creation and renovation of these homes could never really meet these demands. Rather, the creation and renovation of these homes is arguably similar to the home experiences in Oedipa’s and Joanna’s lives.

Home is very well defined to be a place of security and happiness. However, home is not the same for all and therefore homes cannot be created for all. The example of suburbia is chiefly one of alternate reality and parallel universe. These neighborhood communities could never be expected to allow the people in them to be completely content but by their own will. Many will, as Oedipa did, search for a real home and find none. Rather, there waiting will be the homes created for them. Homes with everything prepared for them, with houses built and uniform. None however, will satisfy all but through the belief that they ever could, in an alternate reality.

Home: A Question of Reality

HOME: A Question of Reality

Home is an ever changing landscape that is becoming consistently harder to define as a specific idea. The idea of home has seen tremendous change in the last 50 years. Much of this change can be seen through the consistent effort to make home a place where the realities of life’s duties are forgotten. The Stepford Wives and The Crying Lot of 49 show us different, if not, eerily contrasting views of home as an alternate reality. In addition, home is being re-defined by groups such as Habitat for Humanity which has worked since 1976 to build affordable homes for those in need. Home is for some a place of sanctuary away from the day’s work and duties; for others a never distinct place of unrest. To better understand this changing view of home, it is important to assess the change of home in the last fifty years.

In the wake of WWII, the rural and urban home experience was giving way to a new monster, suburbia. This is important in setting up the experiences represented in The Stepford Wives. Returning from WWII, suburban paradises began growing rapidly. Many remain today as a reminder of this former abundance and the process has continued with more and more neighborhoods being built. The idea is simple; build a neighborhood with no vast differences in the appearance of the homes and let families live there apart from the city and countryside in happiness and security. Homes were no longer places of living; they were being built with the intent of creating happiness after a tragic war. Suburban neighborhoods were surely capable of healing any resemblance of the former tough times. In The Crying Lot of 49 we get introduced to a character that no doubt was affected by this transition.

Oedipa Maas of The Crying Lot of 49 is made executor of her former relational interest’s estate. Along with her pursuit of carrying out the estate affairs she is left with, we learn little of her traditional home life. She is married to a disc jockey with no children and no traditional responsibilities to tend to at home. Rather, Oedipa’s pursuit of home takes her on a quest for the security and happiness she hopes to find with men. This becomes a major plotline in addition to her confusion with reality and alternate realities. She becomes curious about certain symbols and acronyms which point to a mystery she believes to be unfolding. Her frustrating journey is referenced by a portion in which Pynchon says “So began, for Oedipa, the languid, sinister blooming of the Tristero.” (54) It goes onto explain that she, Oepdipa, is up late (on the specific night in which it is referenced) with no apparent home obligation. Oedipa represents an unperceived reality. Her home takes on many forms. One of which is her relationship with Dr. Hilarius. She confides in him for information and help. This falls apart in a crucial scene in which Oedipa’s reality is once again challenged; “She could not, having no idea what Hilarius had done before showing up at Kinneret.” Then she says, “Do me a favor?” “Don’t shoot at the cops, they’re on your side.” Hilarius then says that Jews could take on any uniform. Dr. Hilarius himself lives in a paranoid state of mind that makes him yet another unstable sense of happiness or security for Oedipa. Her solitude (or home) in Dr. Hilarius was now ruined by his alternate realities (135). It is hard to define the real concept of home in Oedipa’s life because for reasons seemingly beyond her control the failed state of her relationships leaves her arguably homeless. Tristero, Metzger, LSD, Mucho, Rapunzel, and Pierce Invararity have all failed her in some way leaving her alone in the pursuit of a proposed cover-up.

Historically, The Crying Lot of 49 brings up LSD as an experimental drug that represents a period of great experimentation. Rightfully so, the main character is affected by this through the use of this drug by others. This mid-60’s exploration relates common themes of music (The Paranoids) and psychiatric evaluation as a parallel to the mood of the times. The book explores home as a product of mutual experiences. Her relationship with Pierce had fallen apart before we pick up in the story. Mucho’s increased use of experimental drugs throughout the development of the novel is deteriorating her relationship with him. Her affair with Metzger leaves her no resolve or happiness. Oedipa is a destitute character, plagued with poor relationships, though not without sexual offers such as when Miles (of The Paranoids) says “Do you want to know what I think you want?” and continues later to say “I have a smooth young body………I thought you older chicks went for that.” Oedipa makes her answer very clear by declaring “You are a paranoid (28)[.]” One of many different definitions of “home” regards it as “an environment offering security and happiness.” Oedipa spends most of her time pursuing this security and happiness, never finding it with men nor the mystery she seeks to solve. This contrasts with the very explicit concept of home introduced to us in The Stepford Wives.

In The Stepford Wives, the reader is introduced to Joanna, Walter and their two kids. They fit the nuclear family model that by the 1970’s was now a common idea. They come to the suburban paradise of Stepford. This is a place where the women admire their husbands and tend to their housework expertly. Eager for a fresh start, Stepford is a beautiful community that looks to be perfect for their family. Hence, this is an alternate reality that will surely better suit their family when compared with the business of New York City. Almost from the very beginning, Joanna is suspect of this version of happiness and security, specifically with the presence of The Men’s Association. She notices that the women of Stepford tend to their work before they come over and drink coffee. This perfection is too perfect to be real. In an important conversation between Joanna and Charmaine after Charmaine has returned from a getaway with her husband and Charmaine is speaking about turning the tennis court into a putting green at her husband’s request. Charmaine says “I’m not joking………..Ed’s a pretty wonderful guy, and I’ve been lazy and selfish.” Joanna is shocked to hear this, not that she doesn’t find it admirable at first. Joanna, suspect of this change later asks, “What did he do to you?”( 80-81) If we think of this central character’s commitment to her husband as a pursuit of security and happiness in the relationship, we find it to be considerably admirable. However, a concluding observation of the novel finds us asking whether or not this version of home is truly ever possible but by the robotic replacement of women in this suburban setting. Or, more appropriately, whether or not this alternative reality could ever be successful but by an altering of humans, not homes.

The Stepford Wives falls historically in a time period of rapid growth in the second wave feminism movement. This movement has greatly affected Walter and Joanna, of whom we know to have been somehow, involved in the movement. Upon arriving in Stepford, Joanna is suspect of The Men’s Association and confides in Walter for support, support that he seemingly gives. Humorously, Walter notes that if he can’t change the Association to include women, he will march with her holding signs saying “Sex, not Sexism [.]” Walter and Joanna are seemingly content with each other from the first observations of them in the novel. They fulfill one another sexually and relationally. They seem happy and secure. But, upon arriving in Stepford in pursuit of this suburban paradise, things begin to change for them. These changes conflict with the original promise of happiness in Stepford. Habitat for Humanity has sought to improve the lives of under privileged families through the renovation and building of descent, affordable homes. This approach has yielded important observations about the true effect of creating alternate realities.

A recent community service day in partnership with Habitat for Humanity unfortunately showed the limits of creating happiness and security through the renovation and building of homes. Many of the Habitat homes that were worked on showed no signs of maintenance since the last visit by a volunteer group. While unfortunate, this finding bitterly shows us what can happen when a home is given to a family that, itself, does not or cannot maintain it. It doesn’t reduce the effort or value of “eliminating poverty housing” across the world. Rather, it shows us that through the creating and renovation of housing there is a strong argument that this does not inspire those that live in them to continue the maintenance necessary to make their homes secure or their lives happy. That is, if we believe these homes to be purposed for security and happiness, then is the failed maintenance representative of a failed sense of security and happiness? In short, no; there is nothing that says that those that live in these homes are not happy or secure. However, the intention of creating happiness and security is failed by the fact that the creation and renovation of these homes could never really meet these demands. Rather, the creation and renovation of these homes is an alternate reality similar to those in Oedipa’s and Joanna’s lives.

Home is very well defined to be a place of security and happiness. However, home is not the same for all and therefore homes cannot be created for all. The example of suburbia is chiefly one of alternate reality and parallel universe. These neighborhood communities could never be expected to allow the people in them to be completely content but by their own will. Many will, as Oedipa did, search for a real home and find none. Rather, there waiting will be the homes created for them. Homes with everything prepared for them, with houses built and uniform. None however, will satisfy all but through the belief that they ever could, in an alternate reality.

Home: A Question of Reality

HOME: A Question of Reality

Home is an ever changing landscape that is becoming consistently harder to define as a specific idea. The idea of home has seen tremendous change in the last 50 years. Much of this change can be seen through the consistent effort to make home a place where the realities of life’s duties are forgotten. The Stepford Wives and The Crying Lot of 49 show us different, if not, eerily contrasting views of home as an alternate reality. In addition, home is being re-defined by groups such as Habitat for Humanity which has worked since 1976 to build affordable homes for those in need. Home is for some a place of sanctuary away from the day’s work and duties; for others a never distinct place of unrest. To better understand this changing view of home, it is important to assess the change of home in the last fifty years.
In the wake of WWII, the rural and urban home experience was giving way to a new monster, suburbia. This is important in setting up the experiences represented in The Stepford Wives. Returning from WWII, suburban paradises began growing rapidly. Many remain today as a reminder of this former abundance and the process has continued with more and more neighborhoods being built. The idea is simple; build a neighborhood with no vast differences in the appearance of the homes and let families live there apart from the city and countryside in happiness and security. Homes were no longer places of living; they were being built with the intent of creating happiness after a tragic war. Suburban neighborhoods were surely capable of healing any resemblance of the former tough times. In The Crying Lot of 49 we get introduced to a character that no doubt was affected by this transition.
Oedipa Maas of The Crying Lot of 49 is made executor of her former relational interest’s estate. Along with her pursuit of carrying out the estate affairs she is left with, we learn little of her traditional home life. She is married to a disc jockey with no children and no traditional responsibilities to tend to at home. Rather, Oedipa’s pursuit of home takes her on a quest for the security and happiness she hopes to find with men. This becomes a major plotline in addition to her confusion with reality and alternate realities. She becomes curious about certain symbols and acronyms which point to a mystery she believes to be unfolding. Her frustrating journey is referenced by a portion in which Pynchon says “So began, for Oedipa, the languid, sinister blooming of the Tristero.” (54) It goes onto explain that she, Oepdipa, is up late (on the specific night in which it is referenced) with no apparent home obligation. Oedipa represents an unperceived reality. Her home takes on many forms. One of which is her relationship with Dr. Hilarius. She confides in him for information and help. This falls apart in a crucial scene in which Oedipa’s reality is once again challenged; “She could not, having no idea what Hilarius had done before showing up at Kinneret.” Then she says, “Do me a favor?” “Don’t shoot at the cops, they’re on your side.” Hilarius then says that Jews could take on any uniform. Dr. Hilarius himself lives in a paranoid state of mind that makes him yet another unstable sense of happiness or security for Oedipa. Her solitude (or home) in Dr. Hilarius was now ruined by his alternate realities (135). It is hard to define the real concept of home in Oedipa’s life because for reasons seemingly beyond her control the failed state of her relationships leaves her arguably homeless. Tristero, Metzger, LSD, Mucho, Rapunzel, and Pierce Invararity have all failed her in some way leaving her alone in the pursuit of a proposed cover-up.
Historically, The Crying Lot of 49 brings up LSD as an experimental drug that represents a period of great experimentation. Rightfully so, the main character is affected by this through the use of this drug by others. This mid-60’s exploration relates common themes of music (The Paranoids) and psychiatric evaluation as a parallel to the mood of the times. The book explores home as a product of mutual experiences. Her relationship with Pierce had fallen apart before we pick up in the story. Mucho’s increased use of experimental drugs throughout the development of the novel is deteriorating her relationship with him. Her affair with Metzger leaves her no resolve or happiness. Oedipa is a destitute character, plagued with poor relationships, though not without sexual offers such as when Miles (of The Paranoids) says “Do you want to know what I think you want?” and continues later to say “I have a smooth young body………I thought you older chicks went for that.” Oedipa makes her answer very clear by declaring “You are a paranoid (28)[.]” One of many different definitions of “home” regards it as “an environment offering security and happiness.” Oedipa spends most of her time pursuing this security and happiness, never finding it with men nor the mystery she seeks to solve. This contrasts with the very explicit concept of home introduced to us in The Stepford Wives.
In The Stepford Wives, the reader is introduced to Joanna, Walter and their two kids. They fit the nuclear family model that by the 1970’s was now a common idea. They come to the suburban paradise of Stepford. This is a place where the women admire their husbands and tend to their housework expertly. Eager for a fresh start, Stepford is a beautiful community that looks to be perfect for their family. Hence, this is an alternate reality that will surely better suit their family when compared with the business of New York City. Almost from the very beginning, Joanna is suspect of this version of happiness and security, specifically with the presence of The Men’s Association. She notices that the women of Stepford tend to their work before they come over and drink coffee. This perfection is too perfect to be real. In an important conversation between Joanna and Charmaine after Charmaine has returned from a getaway with her husband and Charmaine is speaking about turning the tennis court into a putting green at her husband’s request. Charmaine says “I’m not joking………..Ed’s a pretty wonderful guy, and I’ve been lazy and selfish.” Joanna is shocked to hear this, not that she doesn’t find it admirable at first. Joanna, suspect of this change later asks, “What did he do to you?”( 80-81) If we think of this central character’s commitment to her husband as a pursuit of security and happiness in the relationship, we find it to be considerably admirable. However, a concluding observation of the novel finds us asking whether or not this version of home is truly ever possible but by the robotic replacement of women in this suburban setting. Or, more appropriately, whether or not this alternative reality could ever be successful but by an altering of humans, not homes.
The Stepford Wives falls historically in a time period of rapid growth in the second wave feminism movement. This movement has greatly affected Walter and Joanna, of whom we know to have been somehow, involved in the movement. Upon arriving in Stepford, Joanna is suspect of The Men’s Association and confides in Walter for support, support that he seemingly gives. Humorously, Walter notes that if he can’t change the Association to include women, he will march with her holding signs saying “Sex, not Sexism [.]” Walter and Joanna are seemingly content with each other from the first observations of them in the novel. They fulfill one another sexually and relationally. They seem happy and secure. But, upon arriving in Stepford in pursuit of this suburban paradise, things begin to change for them. These changes conflict with the original promise of happiness in Stepford. Habitat for Humanity has sought to improve the lives of under privileged families through the renovation and building of descent, affordable homes. This approach has yielded important observations about the true effect of creating alternate realities.
A recent community service day in partnership with Habitat for Humanity unfortunately showed the limits of creating happiness and security through the renovation and building of homes. Many of the Habitat homes that were worked on showed no signs of maintenance since the last visit by a volunteer group. While unfortunate, this finding bitterly shows us what can happen when a home is given to a family that, itself, does not or cannot maintain it. It doesn’t reduce the effort or value of “eliminating poverty housing” across the world. Rather, it shows us that through the creating and renovation of housing there is a strong argument that this does not inspire those that live in them to continue the maintenance necessary to make their homes secure or their lives happy. That is, if we believe these homes to be purposed for security and happiness, then is the failed maintenance representative of a failed sense of security and happiness? In short, no; there is nothing that says that those that live in these homes are not happy or secure. However, the intention of creating happiness and security is failed by the fact that the creation and renovation of these homes could never really meet these demands. Rather, the creation and renovation of these homes is an alternate reality similar to those in Oedipa’s and Joanna’s lives.
Home is very well defined to be a place of security and happiness. However, home is not the same for all and therefore homes cannot be created for all. The example of suburbia is chiefly one of alternate reality and parallel universe. These neighborhood communities could never be expected to allow the people in them to be completely content but by their own will. Many will, as Oedipa did, search for a real home and find none. Rather, there waiting will be the homes created for them. Homes with everything prepared for them, with houses built and uniform. None however, will satisfy all but through the belief that they ever could, in an alternate reality.