Marthe and O-90, among other things
Did anyone else notice the similarity between descriptions of Marthe at times in Invitation to a Beheading and descriptions of O-90 in Zamyatin’s We? In class we talked about O-90 as a very round character – her mouth especially is characterized as circular, reminiscent of her naming letter. Her eyes, too are round, blue pools, in sharp contrast to I-330′s angular eyes. In Marthe’s last visit to Cincinnatus, Nabokov describes her eyes as round. At this point I started to think about comparing the characters. In some ways they are entirely different individuals: O-90 seems beholden to her lovers (D and R), while Marthe exercises a great deal of freedom over her sexuality, with multitudes of lovers even while she is living with Cincinnatus. Marthe also has children, which on its face differs from O-90. However, Marthe’s children have health problems, so both O-90 and Marthe are excluded from ‘normal’ motherhood. Still, Marthe does not express particular emotion towards her state while O-90 longs for children, but she is constrained. While both (as I understand the One State) are free to pursue many lovers, O-90 choses not to, while Marthe seems to derive her only power from that freedom. O-90 is presented as mostly powerless and incapable of doing much on her own, running back to D even after he has been with I-330 [and D barely describes O-90 in sexual terms as opposed to his immediately sexual descriptions of I-330]. Marthe holds the opposite power over Cincinnatus, who still loves her in his own way [and the narrator’s descriptions of Marthe are distinctly sexual]. Despite these differences, Marthe and O-90 are both characterized in similarly childlike ways, even if one is a mother and one longs to (and eventually becomes?) a mother.
However, family structure remains relevant in Invitation to a Beheading while it is completely superseded by the One State, supposedly, in We. Cincinnatus has a mother and a father, and Marthe’s parents come to the appointment in the fortress/jail. In this way, thinking about desires of motherhood is difficult to do in a comparative context since the societal structures, however specified or ill-specified, are so different. This is something that has plagued me as I think about the works we have read thus far – can we really compare two characters in vastly different societies? In the cases of main characters, when the individual’s personality is well fleshed-out, perhaps (I would venture) we can compare them. However, when thinking about supplementary characters, especially those whose character is not fully described or delved into, I worry about trying to stretch comparisons when they can’t exist. I am interested in looking at comparing societal structures (within our novels) that are very different, but I think I may have to limit my analysis to more central characters and shy away from the periphery.
This is a really interesting comparison, and makes me wonder whether Nabokov doesn’t give Marthe hazel eyes just to keep the characters from being too physically similar. Of course, O is guiltless (her only crime is being kind of boring), whereas Marthe is hatefully unsuited to Cincinnatus, just a creature of animal desires – fruit, sex – and a sign of his remaining “manly” limitations. As he recalls their kisses in the shade of the Tamara Gardens, it’s clear that his attraction to her was sexual. (And the Tamara Garders are tellingly named: Tamara is the heroine of Lermontov’s long poem “The Demon” – she’s some kind of beauty in the Caucasus; a demon flies over and sees her, falls in love with her, comes in her window to talk her into loving him. Once the demon persuades her a bit, they kiss and the force of the kiss kills her, and her guardian angel disapprovingly takes her away, leaving the Demon sad and lonely, flying over the devastated world. But this may have nothing to do with the Gardens: Julian Connoly, a specialist on Nabokov, points out the word “tam” hiding in “Tamara,” and meaning “there” – so the Tamara Gardens represent blessed distance.)
The point about family structure versus not is well taken: Marthe was brought up at home by the parents and grandparents we see visit, but Cincinnatus was not: no one knows his father’s name (- shades of an immaculate conception???), and he was raised in that orphanage, as illegitimate children often were. But I think you can always learn things by comparing the characters, even if it doesn’t solve the mystery. Nabokov is referring to so many other things in this work that you can’t pin it down: it’s a hall of mirrors.
As I read Invitation to a Beheading, I had the sense that all of the characters besides Cincinnatus fit into their world (I know we talked about this a bit in our group conversation). In other words, I took the universe of Invitation to a Beheading to be real – different from our own – but real and moreover rather constant in its absurdity. The characters, therefore, make sense in the context of this world (and Cincinnatus is the one who does not fit in – he belongs much more to our world).
Given this assumption, I think Marthe is a perfect citizen of this absurd universe. She is utterly inconsistent – and this is what the standards of this world call for. By her societal norms, then, she is quite guiltless, despite what we (as citizens of another world) feel about her lack fidelity and general callousness to Cincinnatus.
On the other hand, I disagree with your statement about O-90, Professor. In the context of her society, she is not the perfect citizen; she does not fit in, and she is therefore far guiltier of disobeying norms than Marthe is. For example, as Olivia pointed out, O chooses not to pursue many lovers even though that is not a typical choice, and she longs for a child even when it is (for unknown reasons) not an appropriate desire for her. And in the end, of course, she becomes involved with MEPHI and seeks refuge among them.
So very different conclusions can be drawn about Marthe and O-90 while contrasting and comparing them if you take their respective cultures into account…
Olivia, you asked the question, “Can we really compare two characters in vastly different societies?” I think another relevant question is how can we do so when both characters’ societies are vastly different from our own? If we aim to draw conclusions about these characters, do we base our opinions on our own societal values or on the ones created by the authors for these fictional universes? When you want to compare two characters from different stories, there is an additional layer that must be considered on top of whether the characters’ personalities are fleshed out, and that is whether you are going to take the stories’ own societal values into account for this comparison or not.
A very good point about 0-90, Melissa! I was thinking of her character in the beginning, but she changes as much as D-503 does – even if she’s changing partly because she didn’t want to change (lose him and his love), and if the change is forced on her rather than chosen. One could say that D-503′s changes are forced on him as well: he only goes after I-330 once she tempts him and messes with his routine. It’s worth thinking about O-90′s name as ZERO as well as the letter O, which gives her a role in those fractions D-503 uses in trying to explain how happiness can be ensured for the greatest number of people.