MovieChat Forums > Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (1966) Discussion > The Case for 'Who's Afraid of Virginia W...

The Case for 'Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?'


***After reading several discussions posted on IMDB, and the web in general dissing, i.e. speak in a disrespectful way toward, "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?". I decided to write an article that makes the case for "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?". Discuss.***


While, I understand that this movie will always have its detractors who will never be able to understand and fully embrace this film as incredibly "artistic", or "creative", or even "good", by a large segment of the population of any generation, in any country, at any point in time in the overall history of people. But, that's okay.

However, like myself, there will always be a significant portion of the population that will be enthralled and hypnotized during their cinematic journey into the The Theater of the Absurd performed by great actors that's amped up with stunning black & white photography by a director who knows how to convert material that's originally created for the stage into a uniquely intense cinematic experience. I'm one of those enthralled hypnotized people.

So, with nothing but peace and love in my heart for all of humanity, I'll attempt to explain to all the "Who's Afraid of Virginia Wolf?" dislikers and misunderstanders (are those even words?) what's up with all the "Who's Afraid of Virginia Wolf?" lovers, and how we can even stand to watch this movie. In what's probably a failed attempt to create at least a better understanding between one another, and thus why the movie adaptation that is so admired and celebrated by people who must be closet masochists with severe personality disorders, or something.

OK, first of all, I think it's important to remind everyone that there actually was an early 19th century female intellectual literary giant named Virginia Woolf, and like Ayn Rand, devoted her life to living without false illusions until she committed suicide in 1941. In her last note to her husband she wrote:

Dearest, I feel certain that I am going mad again. I feel we can't go through another of those terrible times. And I shan't recover this time. I begin to hear voices, and I can't concentrate. So I am doing what seems the best thing to do. You have given me the greatest possible happiness. You have been in every way all that anyone could be. I don't think two people could have been happier 'til this terrible disease came. I can't fight any longer. I know that I am spoiling your life, that without me you could work. And you will I know. You see I can't even write this properly. I can't read. What I want to say is I owe all the happiness of my life to you. You have been entirely patient with me and incredibly good. I want to say that everybody knows it. If anybody could have saved me it would have been you. Everything has gone from me but the certainty of your goodness. I can't go on spoiling your life any longer. I don't think two people could have been happier than we have been.


While Virginia Woolf's suicide note may have provided us with some insight into at least an aspect of Virginia Woolf's personal struggles, and how it affected her marriage. However, as difficult as their marriage may have been at times, of course it doesn't necessarily mean that it was anything close to George and Martha's, match made in hell, as depicted in 'Who's Afraid of Virginia Wolf?'.

So, for a little more insight into the characters of George and Martha, we now turn our attention toward the original author of the play by Edward Albee who was expelled by a lot of Academies and Universities before continuing his formal education at Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut, where he was also expelled in 1947. In response to his expulsion, Albee's play 'Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?' is believed to be based on his college experiences.

And, the title of his semi-autobiographical play, according to an interview in the "Paris Review", Albee said,
He first found the question "Who's Afraid of Virginia Wolf?" scrawled in soap on the bathroom of a New York bar.
When he later began writing the play he recalled the rather typical, university intellectual joke, that he had seen written on the bathroom wall in NY ten years earlier. But what does the title mean, and why should I care? Glad you asked.

While we may never know what the person who likes using soap to graffiti NY bathrooms with non-sequiturs involving literary legends who commit suicide meant by the question. However, if you’re like me, and have a never ending altruistic pursuit of gaining knowledge through acquiring as much information as you can before you die, no matter how trivial it might be? Then you’ll find the answer to the question (what was the question again?) about what the play means, and thus why the movie adaptation that is so admired and celebrated by people who must be closet masochists with severe personality disorders, or something.

The movie is about Illusion vs Reality that asks every audience member, “Who is afraid of facing reality?”, and, “Do I create false illusions of my own?” by its conclusion. Well, do you? Be honest now.

Unfortunately, for a lot of people, they have to come to the plays resolution by following the drunken tumultuous lives of George and Martha who are lost in their everyday illusions. And, because misery loves company, George and Martha have a need to share their drunken tumultuous illusionary lives on young unsuspecting dinner guests. So if George and Martha ever invite you over for dinner? Don’t expect any food, but the alcohol will be plentiful, and the conversation will be really interesting, in a very surreal kind of way.

After George and Martha's finish messing with the heads and lives of their dinner guests they're left to themselves, a quiet, calm moment befalls the main characters. In Albee's stage directions, he instructs that the final scene is played very softly, very slowly. Martha reflectively asks if George had to extinguish the dream of their son. George believes it was time, and that now the marriage will be better without games and illusions.

The final conversation is a bit hopeful. Yet, when George asks if Martha is all right, she replies, Yes. No. This implies that there is a mixture of agony and resolution. Perhaps she does not believe that they can be happy together, but she accepts the fact that they can continue their lives together, for whatever it is worth.

In the final line, George actually becomes affectionate. He softly sings, "Who's afraid of Virginia Woolf?", while she leans against him. She confesses her fear of Virginia Woolf, her fear of living a life facing reality. It is perhaps the first time she reveals her weakness, and perhaps George is finally unveiling his strength with his willingness to dismantle their illusions.

Reality vs Illusions? Not being afraid of facing the Truth, or living a life of manufactured lies and fantasies? What's it going to be?

Now, can we all just get along?

Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Albee
http://plays.about.com/od/plays/a/virginiawoolf_2.htm
http://bobtaylorrocks.blogspot.com/2011/01/whos-afraid-of-virginia-woolf.html

reply

thanks. Nice info about Woolf, Albee and the movie title, and also a great presentation of the film's resumé. :)

reply

I spent a lot of time researching this movie before writing this article. So I present you with a.....shameless bump.

reply

Thanks for taking the time to write this. I agree with your conclusions. My own feeling is that George realized he no longer needed the illusion in order to be happy in his marriage to Martha--that the evening with Nick and Honey actually helped him grow to that final point where he could let go. Martha seems less sure that she can do the same, hence her response of "I am" when he sings "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" to her. It's really a beautiful and tragic story. And you have to appreciate Taylor's performance at this point in the movie, going from shock to sadness, to acceptance and back to doubt and fear as she tries to make sense of it all.

reply

Thanks for taking the time to write this. I agree with your conclusions. My own feeling is that George realized he no longer needed the illusion in order to be happy in his marriage to Martha--that the evening with Nick and Honey actually helped him grow to that final point where he could let go. Martha seems less sure that she can do the same, hence her response of "I am" when he sings "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" to her. It's really a beautiful and tragic story. And you have to appreciate Taylor's performance at this point in the movie, going from shock to sadness, to acceptance and back to doubt and fear as she tries to make sense of it all.


I got the impression that George never needed or even wanted the fantasy life with the non-existent child, he simply tolerated it over the years for Martha's sake. It finally dawned on him that living that fantasy just made Martha even more unstable than she was without it.

reply

and thus why the movie adaptation that is so admired and celebrated by people who must be closet masochists with severe personality disorders, or something.

Haha, even though I loved my first viewing of this film, I can already tell I'll feel like a masochist if I try to watch it a second time. I probably will watch it again. Thanks for the article!

I had to force myself to watch this film. I previously saw small bits and pieces of it and it looked like an acid trip on film. When I finally began watching it I said, "I'll give it ten minutes." During the first five minutes I was already so incredibly amused with the interaction between George and Martha that I knew I'd want to see it all the way through. At the same time I was nervous about how the writer(s) had characters constantly repeating themselves, not because I didn't enjoy it in this film, but because it reminded me of lazy (I rarely use that word) writers of comedies who use a similar style of writing over and over to the point that it's insulting (and making me consider a lucrative career in comedy writing -- since apparently it's easy to repeat the same writing techniques over and over and be praised as a brilliant writer).

To sum it up, the quality of writing for this film is consistently intriguing from beginning to end and I'm glad it wasn't what I imagined.



reply

Thanks for your reply, it was well worth the time it took to research and write this article if others like yourself feel like they got something of value from it, after taking the time to read my rather long article by IMDB standards. Thanks.

reply

@brtndr-Thank you.

    

reply

Surely no one could deny this film is almost perfectly directed, lighted, acted and paced.
A person could not be blamed for feeling overwhelmed or even assaulted by the general plot and story progression. It's not a easy film to watch.
But I think it's a highly rewarding one.

It still amazes me that this is what could result from a directors first try at film. Nichols supposedly didn't even know to shout "action" when scenes started.


reply

Thanks so much for writing up the background of the Virginia Woolf reference. Now I feel like I understand what I just saw!

George's final act of cruelty toward Martha might ultimately become one of kindness if it helps her come to grips with living a life of truth rather than soul crushing fantasy.

reply