Shoemaker 1 Film Analysis Paper Dr.

Monahan-Lang 5/7/2013 Katy Shoemaker Sociological concepts can be seen in a variety of different settings and circumstances. The film, Revolutionary Road, depicts concepts of gender in the social setting, material and nonmaterial culture and of families of the 1950s. This film is about a couple living in the years 1949 until about 1956 or so. It focuses on the struggles that couples of this time period go through such as work, family life and generally being able to cope with everyday problems. From a sociological standpoint, feminists and functionalists would have their own discrepancies with this film as well as applaud these characters for some of their actions. By viewing, Revolutionary Road, one can better understand the perspectives of everyday life from a sociological standpoint. Social Construction of Gender During the 1950s, the gender construction was much defined. Women were expected to act in a certain way, and men in the opposite manner. The term gender refers to what it may mean to be a man or a woman during a particular time frame and perhaps a certain place such as in a society construct (Coltrane and Adams, 8). The main female character, April Wheeler, is a prime example of a woman doing femininity. A great example of this is when April performs badly at her play and she resorts back into her traditional feminine role. She returns to her home to do daily tasks such as cooking and laundry. In addition to this, she presents herself in a more feminine manner than the night before. Her hair is combed, her make-up is on and she is dressed in an outfit that promotes the housewife mentality. By behaving and presenting herself this way,

Shoemaker 2 April is conforming to the social norm of being a housewife in the 1950s rather than being an actress because it is frowned upon during this time that women are leaving their sphere of the household realm. In the opposite direction, Frank Wheeler, Aprils husband, is caught multiple times doing masculinity. The masculine role of the 1950s was meant to be the provider or the breadwinner of the family. Frank absolutely hates his job and he openly admits this several times throughout the film. Oftentimes, especially in American culture, people are exposed to very burdening cultural images that help to shape the way that men should act or how women should feel and this all plays a role in how people actually act and feel in real life situations (Coltrane and Adams, 10). Frank for instance, is constantly being reminded of how he should act and feel. At his job, he is surrounded by men and when he is near a woman, he is basically pressured to watch over her and make sure that she is doing what she is told to do. This is male dominance playing a role in how society shows a man how to act or a masculine gender construct. Positive and negative sanctions are always present in this film. There are numerous examples of this occurring especially more towards Frank than April. When Frank and April tell their neighbors that they want to move to Paris and that April is going to support her family rather than Frank, Shep then comments to Frank that he should not let the woman take care of his family. This is a negative sanction on Franks masculinity and Aprils femininity. As a woman, April should not want to go out and join the workforce. She should want to stay home and take care of the children and her home. As far as Franks masculinity is expressed, as a man he should want to work to provide financial support for his family. He should not want to tap into his feelings in order to find himself and discover what he really wants in life. Being that the

Shoemaker 3 sanctions came from the neighbors, it is evident that the societal norms for gender are rigid and the Wheelers are playing against that notion. Material Culture and Nonmaterial Culture The era of the 1950s was a time of mass consumption. After leaving the Great Depression with a sense of optimism, people began to buy more things which began an exciting and new time in those peoples lives (Monahan Lang, 2/21/2013). This is all a time of needing and perhaps wanting a great amount of material goods. All of these items are considered material culture. Material culture is seen as all of the raw goods that humans create with in their culture (McIntyre, 96). April and Frank have material culture present throughout all aspects of their lives. The traditional 1950s attire they wear, the stage that April performs on, their car, their cigarettes, Franks hat, their old photographs and even their bottles of alcohol can be considered their material culture. April and Frank as a couple are most definitely considered part of this material culture of the 1950s. They went shopping for and bought a house which is typical of a family during this time. There was joy and excitement in buying these things, and April showed this joy when going to look at their future home. As with any society, there are various norms that Frank and April follow. Most of the time, both do follow the norms but sometimes there is a disruption in their family life and those norms are broken. It is very evident that there are norms present in Franks workplace known as Knox. There is a scene where Frank is called into the boss office. He is being scolded at by his boss because he did not perform his job efficiently. Through this scene, the norm to be efficient in the workplace is established. The act of Franks boss verbally reprimanding him was the negative sanction. If Frank cannot be efficient in the workplace then he will be fired and Frank openly acknowledged this to himself.

Shoemaker 4 Another very prevalent norm for the 1950s society would be fidelity. Men and women that are married should be faithful to one another. This norm is broken numerous times in the film. The first instance is when Frank takes his secretary out to eat, he gets her drunk and goes back to her apartment and has sex with her. During this time, he is still married to April and he even goes home to her after having sex with another woman. April is not all that innocent either, she too cheats on Frank. When Frank and April go dancing with their neighbors, Frank takes Sheps wife home because she is sick and April stays with Shep. They then have sex in Sheps car. In total, that is three people breaking the norm of fidelity. The sanction for this norm was not prevalent in this film. When Frank told April about having an affair, she did not care out loud but the audience could feel the sense that emotionally April was torn. That was just another disruption in their failing marriage and Aprils unhappiness. In connection with societal norms, a society also upholds a certain set of values that people tend to live by. According to McIntyre, values are general or abstract ideas about what is good and desirable as opposed to what is bad and undesirable, in a society (99). Within this 1950s couple, the values tend to be on the lines of happiness in the workplace, being together, upholding dreams and having manners. Over and over, April reminds Frank that his dream is to move to Paris and find himself. Frank is constantly reminded day in and day out that he hates his job and feels that there is no meaning in what he does. For April, her soul is practically crushed when she finds out that she is pregnant with their third child and that along with the baby coming, her dreams of Paris are going. She values fulfilling her dreams so much, that it leads to her ultimate unhappiness. The values that people uphold oftentimes leads to their own belief systems. People tend to uphold these statements of beliefs not always because of their own personal values and norms,

Shoemaker 5 but also for the values and norms that society imposes on them. All through the film, Frank and April are constantly daunted by what society thinks is right for them. For society in general, there is a belief during this era that men are the sole providers for the family and the women are the sole care takers of the family. This is the breadwinner/homemaker mentality. Even though this might be true for most families of the 1950s, Frank and Aprils dream of moving to Paris alters this view significantly. Franks coworkers even negatively sanctioned him for wanting to take time off work to find himself and for letting April step in as the sole provider. Another statement of belief that both Frank and April believe in is entertaining guests and neighbors is important to social cohesion. In multiple scenes of the film, April is preparing her home for guests to arrive by putting out food and snacks for people to consume. From an overall perspective, April takes pride in this act. Families of the 1950s This film could be a direct representation of what a 1950s family might have been like. When thinking back to the 1950s era, people tend to think that it was always a happy time. This happiness is mistaken for a sense of optimism that surrounded the era which was somewhat of a renewal of order of the Great Depression and World War II (Monahan Lang, 2/21/2013). There were various reasons as to why people were happy during this time. There were more jobs that were available and their pay was better and enough to support a family, benefits were increasing, and people did not need as much education if any at all to get a good paying job according to the standards of that time (Monahan Lang, 2/21/2013). Throughout the film, many of these aspects are shown. The family dynamic at the start of the film seems fairly normal. The couple was fighting in the first scene of the film but shortly after, the audience finds out that April is a mother of two

Shoemaker 6 and Frank is a hardworking salesman. They own a nice home and car and money does not really seems to be an issue. The 1950s was a time of dreaming, and this is shown frequently with the Paris notion. These are all examples of how the optimism swept the 1950s. Even though there appeared to be a sense of happiness, the audience can see from Aprils situation that happy is not the only emotion running through a 1950s womans head. On the opposite side of the fence from optimism lies unhappiness. Despite the fact that April had everything a woman could need, a husband, children, a home and a stable financial life, she was struggling with all of this in more ways than one. The negatives of the 1950s were that women did not really have a voice. Their job was to be the housewife, a domestic woman per say. There really were not many options for women outside of the household and being married. Coontz states that, A lack of options outside of marriage led some women to remain in desperately unhappy unions that were often not in the best interests of the children or themselves (44). Women tended to feel trapped by the pressures of their families and by society so they remained in these marriages that were limiting them. April does this exact notion. She has so many dreams and aspirations and she is trapped by this family life that she is constantly debating that she actually wants. This is especially shown in the scene where Frank asks her if she wants to keep the baby. April is actually planning on aborting the baby and this creates a huge uproar between herself and Frank. April is trapped in a family life that is extremely unfulfilling and characteristic of some 1950s women. The marriage dynamic between Frank and April is very characteristic of a companionate marriage. This marriage has aspects such as the breadwinner/homemaker mentality, the husband is the authority figure and there is an emphasis on friendship and affection (Monahan Lang, 3/7/2013). April and Frank are very conscious of the fact that they are in love. They love each

Shoemaker 7 other but still aim to fulfill the roles that they are assigned as a family. The only issue is that that they both are struggling to find the meaning in each of the roles that they were assigned by society. Nonetheless, they both fill the breadwinner and homemaker of their family. Functionalist Perspective The era of the 1950s is a great time period to look at from the perspective of a functionalist. The functionalist perspective is one that tries to determine the uses or the main ways a society is structured (Cherlin, 28). A functionalist likes to look at a group of people and determine how their groups are put together and what makes them work the way that they do. The typical functionalist likes to look at the family as an institution. Within this, a functionalist will look at how a family is structured with in a society and then they will assess how strong or weak that family is and if that family is performing its functions such as creating new members, socializing those same new members and connecting with people and its new members emotionally (Monahan Lang, 2/7/2013). This functionalist perspective is vital to consider when viewing the dynamic of the Wheeler family. The focus of a functionalist with in this film would be the Wheeler familys structure. The Wheeler family seems to be a bit more unconventional than the typical 1950s family. April is the type of woman that is very free spirited and it is not her true want in life to be a mother and homemaker. Her children are only seen about one or two times in the film actually interacting with herself and Frank. A functionalist would cringe at this notion. They would be happy that April did her duty and reproduced two new members to society but she is failing at socializing them into society. Since the children are not present for most of the film, they are not an active role in the parents lives. The children are mentioned once or twice and the audience finds out at the end of the film that the children are staying elsewhere because of Aprils emotional issues. A

Shoemaker 8 functionalist would understand that April is unable to provide the emotional connection but they would frown upon sending the children away. Among the lack of April and Franks current children, arises the new baby. April finds out that she is pregnant with their third child. The couple in many scenes talks about abortion. The functionalist would have a major problem with this. The role of the mother is to create new members and bring them into the society, not destroy them. Frank does not want to abort the baby. In his mind, he wants more family because he thinks that in the end it will make April happy. A functionalist would like Franks reaction but would still be skeptical of the functionality of the family dynamic. Overall, the functionalist would have a problematic time with the Wheeler family. Even though they show that they love each other and their children, they are still not performing the roles that the family needs to be functioning members of society. The family is not performing its functions. April made a conscious choice to want to abort the baby and discontinue her family. This is breaking one of the first assessments to determine how weak or strong a family is. The functionist would determine that the Wheeler family is very weak. The Conflict Perspective Another perspective that could gain insight from the era of the 1950s is the conflict perspective. The conflict perspective is the opposite of the functionalist perspective. According to Cherlin, The conflict theory focuses on inequality, power and social change. Conflict theorists study how individuals or groups of individuals dominate others and the circumstances under which those who are dominated are able to reduce or eliminate the disadvantages they face (Cherlin, 29).

Shoemaker 9 This can be seen in a variety of different ways. When looking at the family, conflict theorists tend to see the woman at the disadvantage with the men being more powerful and dominant which creates an inequality (Cherlin, 29). Revolutionary Road would give conflict theorists much work to study. Frank is no doubt a dominant force in Aprils life. He makes the decision about not going to Paris and about April keeping the baby. As a woman, April should have had that choice but because he is the authority figure, he had the last say. In one scene, April even apologizes for getting pregnant in the first place as if it is her fault only that she conceived. A conflict theorist would see Frank as dominating April. It would be more problematic if April was dominating Frank. A conflict theorist would not be surprised to hear that Frank used a form of physical violence towards April. When the couple was arguing about keeping the baby and their relationship as a whole, April told Frank that she hated him. His response to this was to start throwing things and breaking glass items in the house. A conflict theorist would look at this scene and state that this is Frank showing his male dominance over April and that there is great inequality in their relationship. Their relationship as a couple and as a family unit holds much conflict. The film ends with April dying from all of the issues in the Wheelers relationship and family dynamic. A conflict theorist would not be surprised by this, they would probably think that this is typical in a conflict situation. The relationship between Frank and April was more male dominance than anything. If it was not, April would not have felt the need to be unhappy with her life and the constant need to flee her current situation. Overall, a conflict theorist would not find anything problematic in their theory of the relationship, just the relationship as a whole as unhealthy.

Shoemaker 10 Revolutionary Road is a film of indifference and vulnerability. It shows the real story of some families during the 1950s era. Not all times are reminisced as being good for everyone of this time period. For April and Frank, societal norms, values and beliefs put pressure on their relationship and their defiance in sticking to these norms ended Aprils life. Their family did not function as well as it should have and there was much conflict between the couple. Overall though, it is a story of what is more like real life than just the movies. It is a story of a couple who fails to live their dreams and ultimately does not make it.

Shoemaker 11 References Coltrane, S. and Adams, M. (2008). Gender and Families. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press Cherlin. (2003). Public and Private Families. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill McIntyre, L. (2011). The Practical Skeptic: Core Concepts in Sociology. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Monahan Lang, M. Marriage and Family, Lecture, Spring 2013.