Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Would you rather be rich or sexy?
Beauty and wealth are the keys to this fictional world. Beauty is its own "virtue" in a way — the ticket that seems to free people from common morality and toil — but it's also the most surefire means to wealth and success. (Talent and knowledge — or even kindness — have their place but we've seen that they're not crucial to success). Mrs. Stone and Paolo have both relied on their looks to secure entry into the world of wealth and privilege. It seems like wealth is the point. Wealth is true freedom. But once wealth is obtained, it's found lacking, and then beauty once again seems the great object. Wealth is not an end in itself, but mainly a means of ensuring that beauty remains in one's life. That's really tangled, I know. I guess I'm asking what your take is on Williams' notion of how these two things interact.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hmm - I like that description of beauty being used to obtain wealth, then wealth being found wanting and used in an effort to hold on to beauty. I may be combining two threads here - I know the discussion turned to the differences between Rome and the U.S. on another conversation - but I found it interesting how, in their last conversation, the youthful Paolo says to the older Mrs. Stone that she's too "puffed up" with her glory, wealth, etc. - "But this is a very old city. Rome is three thousand years old, and how old are you? Fifty?" Is he accusing her of trying to "buy" the beauty of Rome with U.S. money? Just a thought...
ReplyDeleteYes, Shanxi! I think he's telling her that she has nothing but her money to recommend her and that even that will take her only so far. She will never succeed in owning anything worth having. She'll always be a renter.
ReplyDeleteHe seems to be an expert at wounding her where's she most vulnerable.
Isn't it interesting how the Italians don't even make a pretense of respecting or liking her? Paolo never makes her feel loved or admired. He never acts taken with her. He doesn't bother to BS her with charm or flattery. One has to wonder whether, his beauty aside, he's even an attentive lover. He'll allow his personal splendor to be rented, but not bought, nor even compromised with any notion of reciprocated affection.
There is a scene, too, where the contessa tells Paolo that Mrs. Stone cannot be a great lady because her country is too young. The message seems to be, she has money and we should take advantage of that, but we don't need to respect her or anything.
ReplyDeleteYes, good call! I had forgotten that scene. (This book is too full of good stuff. Hehe)
ReplyDeleteWhat did you make of the scene where the contessa "tips" Mrs. Stone off that Paolo is "by way of being a little marchetta?" And her assertion that "The true Roman qualities are lacking in Paolo." And also the scene where the contessa punches him in the crotch?
There is a grand tradition of stories about American new money encountering no longer so wealthy European aristocracy. Williams has added interesting complications by shifting the focus from the status of old titles to beauty.
ReplyDeleteI think the contessa’s comment is to help draw our attention to how similar Mrs. Stone and Paolo are in both rising on their beauty while being cruel in their self-centered calculation. But if you consider the implied falseness of each, there is an interesting disconnect. Stone pretended to be a great actor and covered over her deficiencies with beauty and manipulation. But there really are great actors and we know what it takes to be one. Paolo is certainly false as a lover, but lacking “true Roman qualities”? Isn’t this just a romantic conceit? Unlike Stone, Paolo is playing at something that doesn’t objectively exist.