Angels in America (2003)
Analyzing Love
Film Analysis
Written by DJ Hadoken Exlamparaaghis
In this post we will use Erich Fromm’s views on love, specifically from his “The Theory of Love” essay (which can be found in chapter 2 of his 1956 book The Art of Loving), to analyze the portrayal of love in the movie Angels in America.
Fromm defines immature love as a symbiotic union between two people and separates this relationship into the categories of passive, active, and biological. In Angels in America, we see Harper as an example of the passive form through her relationship with Joe.
Harper claims that she cannot escape the situation she has fallen into, that she still loves her husband. She seeks him even after they separate, as if she thrives upon the pain from their relationship. Her priorities are muddled, she does not want to be in control, yet she desires to escape.
She resembles Fromm’s definition of a masochist: a person who seeks to be controlled. Joe must check in with her to make sure she has taken the right amount of pills, and after her fallout with him, she is rescued and guided by Mother Pitt. Even in her own hallucinations she is at the mercy of Mr. Lies.
Mother Pitt, as her name would denote, is Angels in America’s interpretation of the biological category of a symbiotic union. In addition, she demonstrates the aspect of care as a criterion for mature love. “I don’t have pity, it’s just not something I have,” she says to Prior as he compels her to stay in the hospital room with him.
Despite her outwardly cold personality, Mother Pitt is indeed selfless and continually makes sacrifices. She sells her home in Salt Lake City to find her wayward son. She refuses to allow Harper to leave her apartment without giving Harper her own coat as she walks outside.
And in a truly Kantian fashion, though hesitant at first, she helps Prior when he collapses in the Mormon Visitor’s Center and subsequently stays by his bedside at the hospital because it was simply the right thing to do. Mother Pitt asks for nothing in return; Prior recognizes this, and by the end of the film, he reciprocates by offering his friendship to her.
Aside from Mother Pitt, Fromm would likely not agree with most of the other characters’ motives for giving.
Joe, for example, in a last desperate attempt for Louis’s love, sheds his undergarment, or “skin”, believing that this sacrifice will keep Louis from leaving him. Joe causes himself pain, hoping to achieve a result. Fromm does not accept this sort of sacrifice as an example of mature love. To him, people like Joe “feel that just because it is painful to give, one should give... it is better to suffer deprivation than to experience joy”.
An interesting point that Fromm presents is that “love is a power which produces love; impotence is the inability to produce love”. He continues on to quote Karl Marx, stating that a person who gives love, but does not receive love in return, is impotent.
When analyzing Angels in America, one may dare say that all of the central characters are impotent in their own ways. Harper and Joe may remain the most impotent of all; by the end of the film, neither of them have received the love which they were seeking. Harper ultimately concedes to walking out, and Joe is rejected by both her and Louis and is left to cope with his misery.
Mother Pitt, despite being one of the most kind-hearted characters, in Fromm’s view, would still be considered impotent. This is because she gives love to her son and to Harper, but she is underappreciated by the both of them. Harper eventually disappears from the Mormon Visitor’s Center without a word to Mother Pitt, and Joe speaks little to his mother and does not even make an effort to pick her up from the airport. In regard to her relationship with Prior, her demonstration of care is only that of the care of a mother for a son, and thus remains in the realm of immature love.
Perhaps Joe and Harper are impotent simply because they do not know each other. Knowledge is Fromm’s fourth criterion for mature love. Knowledge for Fromm is “possible only when I can transcend the concern for myself and see the other person in his own terms”. This essentially means being able to see through someone’s overt actions or emotions, and being able to understand their deeper motivations and feelings.
advertisement
-
now back to the blog...
-
now back to the blog...
In terms of denial, Harper deals with her separation from Joe by secluding herself, sinking away into the shell of her mind. She demonstrates Fromm’s view that love is the longing to achieve union with another person. Even after she has pulled away from him, she comments to Mr. Lies that her body still desires Joe; it still seeks that union of the “male and female poles”.
In a subsequent comment, she departs from Fromm’s views and into a way of thinking more in line with the teachings of Plato or Freud in that her willpower is attempting to control her appetites. She knows that to return to him would mean pain, and that she must ignore her physical urges. She demonstrates courage for only a short time, however; she ultimately succumbs and sleeps with Joe again. We do not see her reason take control until she finally makes the decision to walk out on him permanently.
Finally, in his essay, Fromm presents a poem by the Muslim poet, Rumi. The poem stresses harmony and is in sharp contrast with the overall theme of conflict in Angels in America. “When the lightning of love has shot into this heart, know that there is love in that heart”.
In the film, we only witness characters breaking away from one another, stuck in states of Fromm’s immature love. We do not see Fromm’s interpretation of mature love truly displayed until the end of the film, this being primarily between Prior and Louis, though their reasoning is more that of forgiveness than Fromm’s care, responsibility, respect and knowledge.
Where Fromm’s theory may reflect a theme of harmony, we see love attained in Angels in America through a series of conflicts ending in forgiveness.
In terms of my own opinion, I would not move as far as Fromm does and agree completely that a person who gives love and does not receive it in return is impotent. Fromm (at least in “The Theory of Love”), does not acknowledge the existence of timing nor the concept that not every human being is prepared to receive or give love at all hours.
Personality flaws also play a role, as some people may be shyer than others and some may not quite “get it” when it comes to the appropriate time to show love for someone. Simply because a person gives love without receiving it does not establish a solid foundation for concluding that they are impotent, as Fromm seems to do.
Any number of other reasons may have influence upon this person’s situation: their so-called friends may be selfish people who care little for returning any amount of kindness shown to them, or this person may simply need to work on their timing a bit; they may be trying to be caring for someone who only wants to be left alone.
Prior and Louis are an example of this, each of them gives their love to the other when the other does not care for it. Prior reaches out to Louis as he is abandoned by him, and Louis seeks forgiveness after Prior has suffered immeasurably. However, neither of them is impotent, as they do reconcile with one another; eventually the timing becomes “right” for both of them and they are healed.
In my own experiences, I have been through extended periods of time where I have felt as if my friends were not returning much of the care or concern I showed for them, but I never concluded that I was impotent because of this; I knew that it may just be that during those periods my friends were under pressure from other influences.
Though some prior knowledge might be required in the case of friends, the same principle applies for relationships with strangers. Even if I show kindness to one hundred strangers, and none of these strangers display any appreciation of my kindness nor show any in return, I cannot conclude, nor can anyone else, that I am impotent.
I may simply be in a place where these sorts of responses are natural for people, such as in a notoriously dangerous city, where people are usually taught (or quickly catch on), that strangers showing kindness are suspicious and not to be trusted.
Works Cited
Fromm, Erich. The Art of Loving. Harper & Brothers, 1956.
Nichols, Mike (Director). Kushner, Tony (Writer). (2003).
Angels in America [Film]. HBO Films.
advertisement
-
-
=^..^= =^..^= =^..^= =^..^= =^..^=
Blog
YouTube
Website
Buy Me a Coffee
.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.