In both texts, the theme of escape is primarily explored through the absent fathers of the texts and the effects their absence has on the lives of their family. Tom’s father leaving the Wingfields sets a precedent for Tom’s escape by presenting the illusion of a successful escape, but Tom later learns that escape is not as simple as he once imagined. In his father’s absence, Tom is forced into the role of breadwinner for the family but grows dissatisfied with his life and decides to escape. He confesses: “I’m like my father. The bastard son of a bastard”. This therefore shows that Tom’s father’s escape has had a considerable influence on Tom and has caused him to long for escape in the same way that his father had escaped. Tom recognises the influence his father’s actions have had on him, as Tom by his own admission is a “bastard” in the same way that his father is a “bastard”. Tom first tries emotional methods of escape by going to the movies which allows him a temporary break from the mundane and monotonous nature of his home life and his job at the warehouse. Tom admits “I go to the movies because – I like adventure” and he has an “instinct” for adventure but “none of those instincts are given much play at the warehouse”. Despite his attempts to free himself emotionally Tom is still “boiling” to escape his life and thus opts for a physical means of escape through abandoning his family. Here, Williams implies that there is a never ending cycle of sons following in their father’s footsteps, there is thus the sense that history will repeat itself. This therefore shows that Tom’s father could escape “without removing a nail” as it has lead to Tom feeling dissatisfied with his life. Here the character of Tom could be said to be similar to the itinerant workers of 1930’s America, such as the Merchant Marines that Tom wishes to join. These workers were known for escaping from one place to another, in the pursuit of the ever elusive American Dream. This is a socio-historical factor that is perhaps likely to have influenced Williams’ writing.
Similarly, in The Final Passage there is a cycle of fathers abandoning their families. Phillips writes that the island is full of “too many proud father on this island with invisible baby”. This is perhaps a social commentary on the idea that there are a high proportion of fathers who choose to abandon their families in Afro-Caribbean society. Phillips has subscribed to the sociological theory that asserts that due to the African slave trade, men were separated from their families which created a fatherless society amongst the African slaves taken to the Caribbean. This has sparked a cycle of fathers choosing to abandon their families and escape their responsibilities. In this post-colonial interpretation of the text, there is an implication that Afro-Caribbean men have been conditioned to desire escape from their familial responsibilities as a result of the absence of a father in their own lives. Here it evident that the Caribbean fathers cannot escape “without removing a nail” because it has created a negative cycle of absent fathers and broken families.
On a different note, Amanda could be described as emotionally free as she uses escapism to avoid feelings of entrapment, she ‘frantically clings to another time and place’ in order to escape mentally. Amanda reminisces about her former southern-belle glory days, filled with pleasant walks and gentleman callers and clings to the values and ideals of her former lifestyle. This is notably absurd because there is a powerful juxtaposition between the social prestige of her former lifestyle as a southern-belle and her present lifestyle. This self-reflection by Amanda on her former social status allows her to draw an increased sense of importance from her former glory, allowing her to momentarily escape from harshness of her present reality which is bitter in comparison to the fairytale-like serenity of ‘Blue Mountain’. This escapism is used as Amanda’s escape from the ‘enslaved section of American society…burning with the slow implacable fires of human desperation’. Amanda’s means of escape to the past is used by Williams to highlight that escape has an emotional aspect to it.
Despite Amanda physically being in a place of ‘human desperation’ she is able to become emotionally free through her escapism. Amanda seemingly has no desire for physical escape and finds her freedom solely in her mental escape to the past. Although, it could be said that Amanda’s attempt to escape emotionally does not truly free her from the bitter realities of her life as she still advises her son Tom that it takes “Spartan endurance” to cope with her problems and by her own admission “life’s not easy”. This self-acknowledgement of the harshness of her reality by Amanda is not consistent with the idea of her being emotionally free, as it is evident that Amanda feels burdened by her problems. Here Amanda is similar to Leila’s mother in that they both have an ability to endure their problems. Leila’s mother has “found the strength” to face her problems with her “head held high” just as Amanda endures her problems. Although, Amanda is perhaps not altogether realistic in dealing with her problems, this is shown primarily through her fanciful stories that may not have even happened. Williams implies that Amanda’s story may not be the truth as he uses fairytale-like imagery such its location in “Blue Mountain”, and of course fairytales are works of fiction and likening Amanda’s stories to fairy-tales would imply that they are false. In depicting Amanda’s stories also he refers to it as a “legend” which has introduces further connotations of her stories being untrue. However, Amanda does show some evidence of her stories being true as shows she has the ability of entertaining gentleman as entertains Jim who “is altogether won over” by Amanda’s “social charm”. However if Amanda’s stories are not true it could be said that Amanda is not free, not even in an emotional sense, but simply deludes herself into feeling an imitation of freedom through the use of made up stories.
In addition, Amanda’s method of escape renders her unable to escape ‘without removing a nail’ because her constant story-telling affects her relationship with her son Tom, who becomes extremely agitated when talking to her “you’ll go up, up on a broomstick over Blue Mountain with seventeen gentleman-callers! You babbling old-witch” this makes it clear to the audience that Tom is negatively affected by Amanda’s attempt to escape. The use of the word “babbling” implies that it is Amanda’s constant story-telling that is of particular annoyance to Tom and he also shows he is annoyed with a “groan”. Laura on the other hand ostensibly seems content to “let her tell” the stories that allow her mother Amanda to feel free, but an alternative reading of the text is that it actually has an adverse effect on Laura as it reminds her of her inability to live up to her mother’s prowess in attracting men because she is “terribly shy” and becomes emotionally crippled during social interaction. As Laura does not have the social prowess necessary to attract a man to provide for her and she is “not cut out for a business career” this means that there is nothing “left but dependency” for Laura. It becomes clear that for Laura emotional escape is a prerequisite for physical escape. It is also evident that Amanda’s attempt to emotionally escape has had a negative effect on her family meaning that she cannot escape “without removing a nail”.
Tom is also a character who cannot escape “without removing a nail” because as discussed earlier, emotional escape alone does not allow him to feel free. Therefore the only way he will feel free is to escape physically as well. However his family will not be able to provide for themselves as the financial “security of…all” the family is contingent upon Tom’s provision. This shows that if Tom were to abandon his family it would have an adverse effect on them as they need him in order to survive. This is largely due to the context in which Williams was writing, where women relied on men for financial support because they had not yet achieved the emancipation from men that came with the second-wave feminist movement that helped to remove gender inequality by challenging laws and paradigms that were entrenched into western society. Tom escapes physically at the end of the play but is unable to escape emotionally as he cannot escape the guilt of leaving Laura; she is perpetually in his thoughts. Tom admits that he has “tried to leave [Laura] behind…but [he] is more faithful than [he] intended to be” which shows that he is unable to emotionally escape from Laura because he has an emotional attachment to her. Thus Tom does not have true freedom because whilst he is physically free he is emotionally bound. The fact that Tom is the narrator in the play also indicates that he remains bound to the events of the play and thus is not free. Conversely, Michael in The Final Passage is able to escape emotionally as well as physically. Evidence of Michael’s freedom is that he “had told [Leila]...many times” that “Where [he] was and what he might be doing did not concern her” as well as referring to his son Calvin as an “it” or “thing”. This clearly shows that Michael has no emotional connection with his family as he depersonalises and even dehumanises his son by referring to him as if referring to an inanimate object and like Tom he is physically free because he has essentially told Leila that he will live his life as he pleases without restriction because how he lives “does not concern her”. Both Michael and Tom are in pursuit of a better life for themselves as they define it. Tom is in pursuit of “adventure” and Michael is in pursuit of “opportunity” but in both texts these pursuits, or manifestations of freedom, are of detriment to their respective families.
To conclude both writers show escape as a multi-faceted concept, with it being necessary to achieve emotional escape as well simply physical escape to achieve true freedom. In the Glass Menagerie, Tom and Amanda cannot achieve freedom “without removing a nail”. Tom is physically but it has come at the cost leaving his family financially unstable and Amanda is arguably emotionally free but this emotional freedom comes at the expense of hurting Laura and irritating Tom. In The Final Passage it could be argued that all those who remain on the island as are not free because there is an implication by Philips that those on the island are “a people without history…not redeemed from time” and are thus bound within the seemingly unchanging nature of their society. However, as Leila, Michael and Calvin have left the island and have come to England, which is a culture with “history” in a Eurocentric perception, they are thus free from the “timeless” island. So at least now they have the potential to become free if they should so choose but if one rejects the assumption that the islanders are bound within time then perhaps all those on the island were free all along.
