Philosophical Question about Kiss of the Spider Woman (Possible spoilers!)- Page 2

[gumbo2]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 1:21am

I haven't seen the musical and it sounds like it ends quite differently than the movie, but I know the movie quite well, and I think considering that Molina shows such kindness and friendship towards Valentin basically throughout, Valentin at least appreciates that Molina is the only person helping him. By the end they grow very close and I don't think it's out of the question that there are genuine feelings there.

[BkCollector]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 8:11am

:They would talk about how "straight" they are, but who are they really trying to convince? I believe the term is overcompensation.
Re-read jasonf's posts on this thread, heh.:

Orangeskittles, I didn't want to actually say, but you did a good job reading between the lines :)

[hubee]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 8:44am

Ive never seen the movie or previous productions so I'm not sure, but I have a feeling that Signature production plays up Valentin's emotional connection and his willing to reciprocate more than usual, thus probably why it feels like theres a discussion on two different interpretations/plays.

Because from what I saw, Valentin might not be gay or anything but he definitely and honestly felt something real with Molina by the end, again, blurring that line that defies labels.

[husk_charmer]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 8:57am

I gotta side with jasonf on this one. I think Valentin respects Molina, and views him, maybe not as a friend, but someone who is something a little more than an acquaintance. Granted, I'm basing this off the script/cast recording. I haven't seen it live.

[morosco]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 9:13am

Now I'm starting to think about the orchestral underscoring when Molina and Valentin finally touch (and we assume, have sex). The music becomes very tender, delicate, and bare. No hint of any deception from Valentin in the music under that moment.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 9:26am

I agree with jason. I've said it before but it bears repeating. The story is told from Molina's point of view.

The show is called "Kiss of the Spiderwoman". But the Spiderwoman never appears to Valentin, only to Molina. She is a fantasy from Molina's imagination. The show is all in Molina's mind.

Therefore, we only see Valentin through Molina's thinking. Molina may think Valentin is in love with him, but that's not necessarily the way it is.

[BkCollector]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 9:32am

"The story is told from Molina's point of view."

Except that's wrong. The story, even the original novel, is told completely through dialogue. There is no omniscient or personal point of view.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 10:11am

"Except that's wrong. The story, even the original novel, is told completely through dialogue. There is no omniscient or personal point of view."

The personal point of view comes through the title. Valentin has no connection to the Spiderwoman. If it were a more balanced portrayal, the story would be called "Molina & Valentin: Jail Cell Romance".

Updated On: 4/17/08 at 10:11 AM

[BkCollector]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 10:13am

Gotham, Just because the title of the book is Kiss of the Spiderwoman does not dictate the point of view of the narration. That's nonsense.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 10:24am

The musical is a bit different from the source material. The Spiderwoman has been given a bigger role. I still maintain that the musical is told from Molina's viewpoint.

[BkCollector]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 10:26am

Maintain all you want, but the fact remains that the source material for the musical has no point of view. So that anything they glean from it is not subjective.

[husk_charmer]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 10:30am

BK-
The source material may be objective, but this adaptation does seem to be subjective.

Your argument that since the source doesn't have a specific POV, that the musical doesn't is not a very good one. The stage version of Chicago isn't told from anyone's POV in particular, but the film seems to basically take place according to Roxie's POV.

[BkCollector]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 10:37am

Husker, but any variation of the POV doesnt change the fact the info they disseminate is from the original source material, which is objective.

The film medium uses personal POV's much more than written work and film. And since we're not talking about the film, I don't see how that matters.

[husk_charmer]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 10:43am

We are, however, discussing the musical, which does use the POV. Over half the musical numbers feature Aurora and they burst forth from Molina's imagination.

And, while the source material may be objective, this piece (at least how the cast recording and script render it) is not.

[BkCollector]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 10:48am

Ah, but Husk Charmer, you're ignoring the Magical Realism element. Magical Realism does not attach the magic event to the mind of the beholder. And therefore, no POV attached.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 10:54am

"Ah, but Husk Charmer, you're ignoring the Magical Realism element."

I don't think that's a factor for American audiences.

Let me give an example. The show "Ugly Betty" is different for American audiences because the Magical Realism element is different for Latin American audiences.

Musicals can take on different meanings for different people. For example, Evita in Great Britain was different than Evita in the US, and the tone of the movie was very different than the stage versions.

[husk_charmer]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 10:55am

I'd go so far as to say that it's not magical realism. Typically, in theatrical productions, the other people in the scene will react, even when it's logical. It's part of their environment. Seemingly, Valentin does not react. He ignores what's going on around him, which gives the impression that it's all in Molina's head.

I can't argue for the book or original film, I haven't seen either.

And, while you may think I am wrong, it's an opinion about a piece of art. Art is subjective. Opinions on subjective things can not be right or wrong, only similar and dissimilar.

[BkCollector]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 11:07am

Except, Husk, that what you describe

'Typically, in theatrical productions, the other people in the scene will react, even when it's logical. It's part of their environment. Seemingly, Valentin does not react. He ignores what's going on around him,'

is basically the definition of Magical Realism.

"Characters accept rather than question the logic of the magical element"
"The characters' reactions to the 'inexplicable' is key to the definition of Magic-Realism: inexplicable phenomona occur in extremely mundane circumstances and the character(s) tend to not respond adequately (or at all) to the supernatural or magic nature of the event. On the contrary, they often treat the magical event as an annoyance, a setback, or an unwanted obligation."

You can't say something isn't Magical Realism because of X, when X is the definition of such.

and yes, interpretation of art is subjective, but not interpretation of structures used within it. This is definitely a Magical Realism story, as it is very common in Latin American fiction and is the crux of the story and it's title. Updated On: 4/17/08 at 11:07 AM

[Tesse]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 1:52pm

I wouldn't say that the novel (or any of its adaptations) represents traditional Magic Realism. There is a very clear delineation between fantasy and reality in all versions of the story-- fantasy is escape, reality is a prison, both metaphorically and literally.

And I forget who referenced the TV show Oz earlier in the thread, but I'd agree that the relationship between Molina and Valentin does, at times, resemble that between Beecher and Keller-- simultaneously emotional and manipulative.

[Weez]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 2:01pm

The personal point of view comes through the title. Valentin has no connection to the Spiderwoman. If it were a more balanced portrayal, the story would be called "Molina & Valentin: Jail Cell Romance".

Read the novel, or even just the straight play. Molina is the Spider Woman. It's a name Valentin coins for him based on the idea of the panther woman. In fact, I have the playscript right here, bear with me:

MOLINA: I'm curious... Did the idea of kissing me disgust you?
VALENTIN: Ummm... Maybe I was afraid you'd turn into a panther.
MOLINA: I'm not the panther-woman.
VALENTIN: I know.
MOLINA: It's not fun to be a panther-woman, no one can kiss you. Or anything else.
VALENTIN: You're the spider woman who traps men in her web.
MOLINA: [flattered] How sweet! I like that!

They talk a little more, then they kiss, and let me tell you, when Rupert Evans is your Valentin, it's the HOTTEST thing you'll EVER see on stage. *_*

So the Spider Woman as she appears in the musical isn't a construct of Molina's so much as she is a construct of Kander, Ebb, and McNally's. I guess they thought "two men doing dialogue for a whole show will be dull, let's expand on this! Also it's musical theatre, we should have some women, let's make a Spider Woman!". :P

Ergo, I'm disinclined to use the interpretation of the show as being solely through Molina's eyes, with any affection shown to him by Valentin being solely wishful thinking on Molina's part. Purely because the Spider Woman as seen in the musical comes *well* after the original relationship of the novel, play, and film.

[BkCollector]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 2:03pm

Weez, way to go! Excellent analysis.

[jasonf]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 2:24pm

First, EXTREMELY immature posts to turn anything back on ME when I'm commenting on a play. I'm not arguing about my sexuality in the least. Sad line of argument when you need to rely on personal attacks. Says more about those posters than me, by far, and their apparent inability to form a cogent argument.

Second, this opens another whole dialogue -- when we're watching a musical interpretation of something else, should we even be considering the source material? My argument is no. The source material is irrelevant -- we should ONLY be dealing with what we see before us, just as when we see a movie based on a novel the novel itself should be irrelevant in critiquing the movie.

That said, we are ONLY talking about the musical's POV - which is Molina's. Remind me, since I haven't seen the show in a long time - during The Day After That and My First Woman, Valentin's two big forays into the past, do we actually SEE anything being enacted the way we do when we see Gabriel or Molina's mother or the Spiderwoman? I know we see Marta, but how much is seen from Valentin's perspective?

I would also defend my view on the sexuality of the characters -- Valenitn had NEVER shown any homosexual leaning throughout the play. Maybe you can read into him as protesting too much, but doesn't it seem AWFULLY convenient that he would suddenly "turn" at the moment when it most suited him?? Molina may want there to be something there (and maybe many homosexual audience members would also), but it's WAY too much of a stretch for me to think that he would develop actualy homosexual FEELINGS for Molina at that time. Might he have gone so far as to have sex with him? Yes. I don't argue that. But I simply do not buy that he has actual feelings for him, that, for example, were they suddenly put out of the jail cell, would even in the slightest make him consider a relationship with Molina at all. Valentin USES Molina for his goal, and when he sees that the person he thought wasn't even really a person at all has done this incredible thing for him, there's a respect that develops that wasn't there before.

[BkCollector]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 2:26pm

Jason, I am totally shocked that your profile says you are a teacher.

It's called being reflexive, and while I'm not saying that you are gay, because sexuality is about self-identification, I'm saying that maybe you deal with people thinking so since you are a straight man into musical theatre, I'm sure you've come across the supposition more than once. Maybe you're projecting that onto your reading of this piece?

I certainly hope you are not an English Teacher, because your narrow minded views on sexuality and drama, not to mention literature, are astonishing.
Updated On: 4/17/08 at 02:26 PM

[Tesse]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 2:28pm

Excellent call, Weez! Thank you!!

The Panther Woman Molina refers to in that scene is from the '40s horror movie "Cat People," which was translated into Spanish as "El Beso de la Mujer Pantera"-- "Kiss of the Panther Woman."

So that explains the title...

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 2:53pm

but it's WAY too much of a stretch for me to think that he would develop actualy[sic] homosexual FEELINGS for Molina at that time.

There wasn't any romantic or sexual feelings suggested until the last few scenes, but there was definitely intimacy and affection shown between them through the majority of the show. Valentin wouldn't have opened up to Molina about Marta, his first time, his childhood, etc. if he was solely manipulating Molina for his "cause". That all came long before he realized he could "use" Molina.


Ergo, I'm disinclined to use the interpretation of the show as being solely through Molina's eyes, with any affection shown to him by Valentin being solely wishful thinking on Molina's part.

I agree, but for different reasons, as I'm not familiar with the source material. If his point of view is that biased to the point where we can't trust any of it as accurate, how do you explain the portrayal of Gabriel? When he talked up Gabriel in the one scene while in prison, he made it seem as though they were an exclusive couple. When he gets out and actually sees him, Gabriel shoots him down, says he's not that into him and while Molina is oblivious, we as an audience can see the real truth of the situation. That scene is evidence against Molina as an unreliable narrator; there is more truth than bias in his viewpoint of the "real world". The scenes with the Spiderwoman and the hallucination on morphine are clearly portrayed as Molina's fantasy and separate from the narrative of the rest of the story.