How do the first few paragraphs of The Day of the Locust point to seemingly pathological desires developed throughout the novel?
6 thoughts on “The Day of the Locust”
Abigail Jameson
Layla makes a great point that Tod views himself as a “prophet-like figure.” After depicting the chaos of the Hollywood sets, the narrator describes Tod’s walk from the streetcar and his “examination” of the evening crowd. Not only is Tod a harsh social critic, but as Janka and Danielle point out, he makes these criticisms purely through observation and without ever interacting with the individuals he criticizes. Along his walk, he notes the disparity between people’s outward appearances and their actual occupations – their “masquerades” – and compares these individuals to those who loiter in badly cut clothing who had “come to California to die.” His reaction is to paint “The Burning of Los Angeles,” in which he destroys the city of its artificial nature. Tod’s social criticism and distanced observation continues throughout the novel. Although he befriends Homer, he pities him and criticizes him for his desire for Faye, harshly reminding Homer that “She’s a whore!” even though Tod himself desires her. But his judgment never extends to Faye herself, even as he consistently observes her in her questionable interactions with other men.
The story begins with actors dressed in elaborate cavalrymen costumes. The disorderly scene describes these men on foot and horseback as mob-like and running from defeat. There is an aggression and panic in the opening paragraphs that is carried out throughout the rest of story. These qualities are reproduced in Tod’s painting of “The Burning of Los Angeles”. There is a chaos that Tod envisions and desires. He establishes himself as a prophet-like figure and his painting depicts the only way of purging Los Angeles of its elaborate ‘masquerade’. His angry desire to rid Los Angeles of its artificiality is later mirrored in his growing desire to ‘destroy’ Faye. Although Tod initially tries to present himself as an detached and almost omnipotent observer, the audience learns that he is a set-designer and therefore actively participates in creating the Hollywood illusion and in the commodification of beauty. This also indicates that Tod is living with his own delusions; he has a desire to be a ‘real’ artist and frequently relies on his idea of “The Burning of Los Angeles” to perpetuate this vision of himself.
Layla makes an excellent point about Tod’s desires. Her comment about Tod as a set designer struck me because Tod is briefly mentioned in the first couple of paragraphs and then I completely forgot that his job was set designer for the rest of the novel. His pathological tendencies are also seen in the quote, “At this time Tod knew very little about them except that they had come to California to die. He was determined to learn much more. They were the people he felt he must paint” (60). Tod is observing these people running outside of his window, but never actually interacts with them. He is like the stereotypical stalker/serial killer who watches his target for days and learns their routines and habits without ever actually getting to know them. These tendencies then emerge as Tod does not get to know his friends, especially Faye. As Layla pointed out, Tod eventually displays aggression and a desire to rape Faye because he cannot get close to her or know her at the level that he intends.
As a painter of the scene “The Burning of Los Angeles” he must stare at his muse and that eventually can lead to obsessive tendencies. Just like we had to stare and become encompassed by an object in our rooms, Tod stares at the people around them so frequently and with such intensity that by the end of the novel he has lost his mind and “imitate[s] the siren as loud as he could” (185) in the back of the police car.
I really liked Janka’s point that Tod is observing the people running outside, but does not interact with him. This seems to be true for all of Tod’s relationships throughout the novel. He observes the actions of the other characters but rarely joins in. For example, when eating dinner at the campsite with Miguel, Earle, and Faye, Tod watches as all of the events occur. He just watches while Miguel and Faye dance. He just watches when Earle hits Miguel in the head. He also just watches while Faye runs away and Earle tries to catch her. A similar thing happens later in Homer’s house. While most of the men dance with Faye or flirt with her, Tod chooses to simply observe the other–particularly Homer. I think this falls in line with how Tod feels his desires for Faye. He observes her and goes as far as to imagine raping her, but never actually does it. He feels comfortable observing and imagining, but will never take act his thoughts out.
William DiGravio
I agree with Danielle that this is a really great observation. In our podcast, we talked a lot about how Tod’s relationship with Faye is analogous to his art. There is, of course, a direct connection between Tod’s art and the city of Los Angeles, since the latter is the subject of the former. Not that it justifies his actions, but it seems as though all of Tod’s interactions and his worldview are informed by the fact that he is an artist. He is observing because he is an artist trying to capture and understand in detail the world in front of him. Everything is in service of his painting. I think this also ties back to Layla’s point. The mob it seems to me is sort of an analogy for the creation of art. I think is idea is reinforced not only by the fact that Tod’s art depicts a mob, but also by the mob at the end of the novel. The cause of the mob is misunderstood by those in it, they think they’ve just seen Gary Cooper and everyone is mobbing after the stars, when in actuality they are mobbing after Homer. It is clear that Tod sees the good and the bad in Hollywood as one messy city, and that finds its way into his art.
Meghan Daly
I agree with this point about Tod being depicted as an observer. For much of the novel, Tod feels like a sad man who things (and people) happen to. He is bullied by Abe into renting an apartment at San Bernardino Arms; he only goes to the party at Claude’s because he promised he would. He is most interested in Mid-westerners like Homer Simpson, who he believes come to California to die. He makes them the subjects of his painting. Of course, this passivity is complicated by the moment when Tod and Faye are at the campsite, and he chases her around with the intension of raping her. We learn that he is actually a rather violent character (a violent consumer rather than a passive consumer). As Layla articulates, the fact that Tod is a set designer is also crucial to our understanding of the story. The depictions of “reality” in the book are all off to varying degrees, making us interrogate the concept of “reality” itself. At first we may feel: “it’s an absurd world and Tod’s just living in it”, but later we feel that Tod is actively constructing it. It kind of reminded me of that Charlie Kaufman movie “Synecdoche, New York”.
Layla makes a great point that Tod views himself as a “prophet-like figure.” After depicting the chaos of the Hollywood sets, the narrator describes Tod’s walk from the streetcar and his “examination” of the evening crowd. Not only is Tod a harsh social critic, but as Janka and Danielle point out, he makes these criticisms purely through observation and without ever interacting with the individuals he criticizes. Along his walk, he notes the disparity between people’s outward appearances and their actual occupations – their “masquerades” – and compares these individuals to those who loiter in badly cut clothing who had “come to California to die.” His reaction is to paint “The Burning of Los Angeles,” in which he destroys the city of its artificial nature. Tod’s social criticism and distanced observation continues throughout the novel. Although he befriends Homer, he pities him and criticizes him for his desire for Faye, harshly reminding Homer that “She’s a whore!” even though Tod himself desires her. But his judgment never extends to Faye herself, even as he consistently observes her in her questionable interactions with other men.
The story begins with actors dressed in elaborate cavalrymen costumes. The disorderly scene describes these men on foot and horseback as mob-like and running from defeat. There is an aggression and panic in the opening paragraphs that is carried out throughout the rest of story. These qualities are reproduced in Tod’s painting of “The Burning of Los Angeles”. There is a chaos that Tod envisions and desires. He establishes himself as a prophet-like figure and his painting depicts the only way of purging Los Angeles of its elaborate ‘masquerade’. His angry desire to rid Los Angeles of its artificiality is later mirrored in his growing desire to ‘destroy’ Faye. Although Tod initially tries to present himself as an detached and almost omnipotent observer, the audience learns that he is a set-designer and therefore actively participates in creating the Hollywood illusion and in the commodification of beauty. This also indicates that Tod is living with his own delusions; he has a desire to be a ‘real’ artist and frequently relies on his idea of “The Burning of Los Angeles” to perpetuate this vision of himself.
Layla makes an excellent point about Tod’s desires. Her comment about Tod as a set designer struck me because Tod is briefly mentioned in the first couple of paragraphs and then I completely forgot that his job was set designer for the rest of the novel. His pathological tendencies are also seen in the quote, “At this time Tod knew very little about them except that they had come to California to die. He was determined to learn much more. They were the people he felt he must paint” (60). Tod is observing these people running outside of his window, but never actually interacts with them. He is like the stereotypical stalker/serial killer who watches his target for days and learns their routines and habits without ever actually getting to know them. These tendencies then emerge as Tod does not get to know his friends, especially Faye. As Layla pointed out, Tod eventually displays aggression and a desire to rape Faye because he cannot get close to her or know her at the level that he intends.
As a painter of the scene “The Burning of Los Angeles” he must stare at his muse and that eventually can lead to obsessive tendencies. Just like we had to stare and become encompassed by an object in our rooms, Tod stares at the people around them so frequently and with such intensity that by the end of the novel he has lost his mind and “imitate[s] the siren as loud as he could” (185) in the back of the police car.
I really liked Janka’s point that Tod is observing the people running outside, but does not interact with him. This seems to be true for all of Tod’s relationships throughout the novel. He observes the actions of the other characters but rarely joins in. For example, when eating dinner at the campsite with Miguel, Earle, and Faye, Tod watches as all of the events occur. He just watches while Miguel and Faye dance. He just watches when Earle hits Miguel in the head. He also just watches while Faye runs away and Earle tries to catch her. A similar thing happens later in Homer’s house. While most of the men dance with Faye or flirt with her, Tod chooses to simply observe the other–particularly Homer. I think this falls in line with how Tod feels his desires for Faye. He observes her and goes as far as to imagine raping her, but never actually does it. He feels comfortable observing and imagining, but will never take act his thoughts out.
I agree with Danielle that this is a really great observation. In our podcast, we talked a lot about how Tod’s relationship with Faye is analogous to his art. There is, of course, a direct connection between Tod’s art and the city of Los Angeles, since the latter is the subject of the former. Not that it justifies his actions, but it seems as though all of Tod’s interactions and his worldview are informed by the fact that he is an artist. He is observing because he is an artist trying to capture and understand in detail the world in front of him. Everything is in service of his painting. I think this also ties back to Layla’s point. The mob it seems to me is sort of an analogy for the creation of art. I think is idea is reinforced not only by the fact that Tod’s art depicts a mob, but also by the mob at the end of the novel. The cause of the mob is misunderstood by those in it, they think they’ve just seen Gary Cooper and everyone is mobbing after the stars, when in actuality they are mobbing after Homer. It is clear that Tod sees the good and the bad in Hollywood as one messy city, and that finds its way into his art.
I agree with this point about Tod being depicted as an observer. For much of the novel, Tod feels like a sad man who things (and people) happen to. He is bullied by Abe into renting an apartment at San Bernardino Arms; he only goes to the party at Claude’s because he promised he would. He is most interested in Mid-westerners like Homer Simpson, who he believes come to California to die. He makes them the subjects of his painting. Of course, this passivity is complicated by the moment when Tod and Faye are at the campsite, and he chases her around with the intension of raping her. We learn that he is actually a rather violent character (a violent consumer rather than a passive consumer). As Layla articulates, the fact that Tod is a set designer is also crucial to our understanding of the story. The depictions of “reality” in the book are all off to varying degrees, making us interrogate the concept of “reality” itself. At first we may feel: “it’s an absurd world and Tod’s just living in it”, but later we feel that Tod is actively constructing it. It kind of reminded me of that Charlie Kaufman movie “Synecdoche, New York”.