Pau Almagro Corral Teatre Contemporani en Anglès Monday 29th of April, 2019

Written Assignment I: The Construction of Women in The Homecoming

A common topic of debate in the post-war period is the question of family, sexuality, and

gender roles. As an example of this debate, Harold Pinter’s ambiguous and cryptic play

The Homecoming problematises the patriarchal family model; the play reflects about the

status of the characters of Ruth and Jessie –the only female characters in the play– and

showcases the “constructed quality of woman’s role in patriarchal society as assigned by

men in the family” (Sarbin, 1989: 41). That being the case, the patriarchal composition

of The Homecoming can be studied through the two main elements of the play: the

characters and their language. This essay is going to explore and analyse in which ways

the patriarchal nature of the play is exposed through gender roles: the themes of the

exchange of women and male homosocial desire, as well as the constructed nature of

language used by the male characters in the play.

First of all, the fundamentals of the play are reflected on the relationship between

the men within the patriarchal system. An underlying theme in The Homecoming is the

male homosocial desire, a theory developed by Eve Sedgwick, who defines it as: “The

whole spectrum of bonds between men, including friendship, mentorship, rivalry […]

within which the various forms of the traffic in women take place” (Sedgwick, 1984: 227).

The play revolves around the bond between the male characters and women are used as

objects to be traded with. Gayle Rubin continues arguing about the status of women in

the patriarchal society, defining the woman as “being a conduit of a relationship rather

than a partner to it”. (Rubin, 1975: 174-5). However, Ruth resists the role of a passive

“conduit”: she refuses to be exchanged and becomes a powerful subject rather than a mere

object of transaction. This is exemplified in the play when Ruth decides she wants to stay

with Teddy’s family instead of coming back to the States and demands all kinds of

conveniences: “I would naturally want to draw up an inventory of everything I would

1
Pau Almagro Corral Teatre Contemporani en Anglès Monday 29th of April, 2019

need” (77). After this scene, some critics argue that “[Ruth] is placed in a position of

dominance at the centre of power” (Osherow, 1974: 423) among the men of the family.

However, the power she achieves by the end of the play is confined entirely by the limits

of the patriarchal system. As Aragay discusses: “she both subversively demonstrates the

constructedness of the dominant sexual and gender relations and of the language which

inscribes those relations and she is bounded by the patriarchal symbolic order, thus

remaining an object in the men’s homosocial traffic, ‘inside’ rather than ‘outside’”.

(Aragay, 2001: 251). All in all, although Ruth decides to sell her body and give in to

prostitution, she is in possession of some kind of freedom by the end of the play, even if

it is within the limits of the patriarchal system.

Secondly, the play continues to remark the constructed quality of women’s role in

patriarchal society through the mother and whore dichotomy: a way of fixing women’s

identity and objectifying them. A clear example of this dichotomy can be observed in the

construction of the identity of Jessie, the passed mother of the family who is only present

in language. Towards the beginning of act two, Max portrays Jessie as a great mother:

Jessie was “the backbone of this family” (46). However, Max does not hesitate to call her

a “slutbitch of a wife” (47) moments after. Sarbin argues that “The figure of Jessie

becomes whatever suits Max's context” (Sarbin, 1989: 36), meaning that Jessie’s identity

is constructed and arbitrary: first Max tries to picture an ideal family to impress Ruth, but

soon after he voices his resentment. However, as Sarbin concludes: “Such rapid

juxtaposition of both poles in describing the same women can disrupt the validity of each”.

(Sarbin, 1989: 36)

Last but not least, The Homecoming concentrates in the constructed nature of

language. As a radical play, the main elements of defamiliarization are pauses and

silences, also referred to as the “Pinter Pause”. When talking about the pauses in speech,

2
Pau Almagro Corral Teatre Contemporani en Anglès Monday 29th of April, 2019

Pinter himself claims that: “we communicate in our silence, in what is unsaid.” (Pinter,

2008). An example of this is observed in the play when Lenny offers to take Ruth’s glass

of water: “And now perhaps I’ll relieve you of your glass” (33). As Taylor-Batty

discusses: “The short exchange contains six pauses, all of which precede Lenny's lines,

indicating a space for thought in which he contemplates his response.” Lenny seems to

be improvising, showing hesitation in the power struggle between the two characters.

However, “Ruth makes no such hesitations. She is clear, unambiguous and assertive.”

(Taylor-Batty, 2014: 89) As a further matter, the construction of language by the male

characters is as important. As Aragay discusses: “Ruth’s subversiveness lies in her

capacity to expose the constructed nature of language as used by the male characters in

the play and consequently the arbitrariness of the gender roles inscribed in it.” (Aragay

on Sarbin, 1994: 16) Ruth is able to deconstruct and therefore subvert the nature of

language in a key scene of the play, just as Lenny is trying to assert dominance over her

by telling radically violent stories. In this scene, Lenny tells Ruth about how he nearly

beat a woman to death who was “falling apart with the pox” (30) under a bridge.

Consequently, Ruth confronts Lenny by asking him: “How did you know she was

diseased?” (31), which “forces him to acknowledge the constructedness of the whole story”

(Aragay: 1994: 16): “I decided she was” (31).

All things considered, The Homecoming successfully points out the constructed

nature of the women’s role in patriarchal society as it is exemplified by the characters of

Jessie and Ruth and brings to the surface the power relations that structure the family,

sexuality and gender roles. Moreover, the male homosocial desire and exchange of

women are made visible through the use of character and ultimately challenged by Ruth.

Finally, the construction of the male language in The Homecoming plays a big role and it

is repeatedly exposed and subverted by Ruth.

3
Pau Almagro Corral Teatre Contemporani en Anglès Monday 29th of April, 2019

Works cited:

Aragay, M. (1994). Exploring Gender Roles in the 60s: Ann Jellicoe’s The Knack

and Harold Pinter’s The Homecoming. Atlantis 16.1-2, p. 5-19.

Aragay, M. (2001). Pinter, Politics and Postmodernism (2), The Cambridge Companion

to Harold Pinter. Ed. Peter Raby. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, p. 251.

Osherow, Anita R. (1974). Mother and Whore: The Role of Woman in The

Homecoming. Modern Drama. 17,4: 423-32.

Pinter, Harold (1964). The Homecoming. London: Faber.

Pinter, H. (2008, December 31). Playwright Harold Pinter describes what drove his work.

Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2008/dec/31/harold-pinter-early-

essay-writing

Rubin, Gayle (1975). The Traffic in Women: Notes on the ‘Political Economy’ of Sex.

Toward an Anthropology of Women. Ed. Rayna Reiter. New York: Monthly Review

Press, p. 177.

Sarbin, Deborah A. (1989). ‘I Decided She Was’: Representation of Women in The

Homecoming. The Pinter Review: Annual Essays, p. 41.

Sedgwick, Eve K (1984). Sexualism and the Citizen of the World: Wycherley, Stern, and

Male Homosocial Desire. Critical Inquiry 11, p. 227.

Taylor-Batty, M. (2014). Robert Gordon Harold Pinter: The Theatre of of Harold Pinter.

Bloomsbury Methuen Drama, 89.