Activity: Lost in the Funhouse

1. Most of the stories we’ve read this semester have only one narrative filter, whether it is a major character in the story, a minor character in the story, or an omniscient third-person narrator. “Lost in the Funhouse,” however, seems to switch between several different narrative filters. Work with your group members to catalog each of the filters that you notice. How are these filters different from one another? How are they related? Does the reader gain anything from considering how they reflect on one another?

2. Throughout the story, the central image of the funhouse recurs again and again. How is navigating the funhouse like reading literature? What about writing it? What, then, is the role of the funhouse’s designer in each of these analogies?

3. Another central theme of the story is Ambrose’s sexual awakening. Why is this theme important to a story that, upon first reading at least, seems to be more about the reading and writing of fiction?

4. An important feature of this story is the meta-critical remarks that are scattered throughout. Some of these remarks seem helpful, while others clearly aim to misdirect the reader. Examine a few of these remarks closely, along with their context. How do they reflect on the action of the story’s more traditional narrative? What might Barth have been getting at with these remarks?

Extra Credit Assignment

The extra credit assignment, should you elect to do it, has two components:

1. You will write a blog post on the assigned reading for the class period you are assigned. This should be along the same lines as your previous blog posts, and you may use the same prompt / instructions as the previous blog post assignments.

Post your blog post by midnight the night before class, just as you did with your previous blog posts.

2. You will also write two discussion questions for the story on which you wrote your blog post. Your model for these should be the questions I pose to you in in-class activities, i.e. they should ask the readers to consider some central theme, technique, or “point” of the story. They should not be simple yes or no questions; in fact, they should be the types of questions that identify a potentially irresolvable debate or tension in the story. They should also ask the reader to consider very specific aspects of the text (specific passages, patterns, or techniques) in order to press readers to go deeper, considering issues they might not have noticed on their first or even second readings.

Please email your discussion questions to dlupton@email.unc.edu by midnight the night before the class meeting you are assigned.

You work on this assignment will be scored on a 1-5 scale. The points you receive on this assignment will be added to your final, curved score for the semester. Thus, a 5 on this assignment will raise your grade for the semester by one half-letter.

Morand the Murderer

            In the story “The Idol of the Cyclades” two archeologists Somoza and Morand both become obsessed with a woman named Teresa and an idol that they found in Greece. This obsession drives the men apart and eventually leads to the death of Somoza at the hands of Morand.

            While the statuette is literally an idol, Teresa is also pictured as a type of idol. The two men both love the idols, and they struggle for possession for them. At first glance Morand seems like the winner in the situation because he is married to Teresa, but really both men have something the other wants.

            Morand and Somoza both are extremely passionate for Teresa. When it becomes well known that Somoza is falling in love with Teresa she cuts off contact from him. Although they once had a comfortable relationship, she begins to avoid him as much as possible. This ultimately drives Somoza crazy. He is jealous of Morand and wants desperately for Teresa to choose him.  However, Morand also covets what Somoza has. Although both men found the statuette in Greece, Somoza takes possession of it and becomes completely obsessed with it. Towards the end of the story Morand tries to gain possession of the idol but Somoza declares that he will never give it to him which deeply upsets Morand.

            Finally when Somoza goes to attack Morand with a hatchet, Morand kills him in what he calls self-defense. Although Morand would say he only killed Somoza out of fear for his own life, I would argue that he wanted to kill him. Somoza was obviously insane, but his insanity effected Morand as well. The way Morand handles the death of Somoza is evidence enough that the murder was not purely self-defense. Instead of calling the police to handle the situation properly, Morand moves the dead body around, strips naked, and calmly waits for his wife to come meet him.

The Funhouse is Ambrose's Life in Fiction

      Evidence that the author John Barth intended the unnamed implied author to be Ambrose himself is apparent in the metaphor of the funhouse throughout the story, and also from textual analysis. While reading through the framework of this conventional story full of metafictional interruptions in "Lost in the Funhouse", the sentence that immediately caught my attention among the difficult-to-trace train of ideas was, "Now and then [Ambrose] fell into his habit of rehearsing the unadventurous story of his life, narrated from the third-person point of view...", and so many confusions that arose while reading became clear. If the implied author of this entire story was Ambrose himself, his struggle to release "one of Western Culture's truly great imaginations" in his seemingly dull and unambitious life of a thirteen year old is vented (satisfactorily or not) in this narration of his own life.
      The allusion to the funhouse appears everywhere in the story: In the title, the beginning, the end, and even prematurely in the story before it is physically reached by the characters of the story, when "we haven't even reached Ocean city yet: we will never get out of the funhouse". In fact, the implied author toys with the idea that the main character of the story, Ambrose, never gets out of the funhouse, and "he died of starvation telling himself stories in the dark" while his brother and Magda makes it out to the exit crying out "in joyful alarm at what next beset them". The funhouse seems to not only be the source of curiosity and endless imagination in the young boy's mind, but also something that he seems to not be able to get out of. The same feeling of being stuck in the funhouse seems to run also in the implied author, heavily supporting the argument that the implied author is actually Ambrose himself. Just as the character Ambrose attempts to release his imagination and possibilities in the funhouse but fails to do so and only wistfully thinks that "he would rather be among the lovers for whom funhouses are designed", the implied author Ambrose also attempts to narrate his life in an imagination-sparking, fictional, and adventurous  manner, but ends up becoming jumbled and confusing in the constant interruptions and revisions to improve it's literary status.
      The countless number of interruptions and revisions that fill this narrative first seemed to serve no other purpose than to distract the reader from the conventional story of a young boy and even possibly leave the reader doubting whether this story was meant to be ready to be read with all these essayistic passages, but once the possibility that the implied author may be Ambrose himself enters the thought process of readers, even these literary rambles start to make sense. The implied author Ambrose consistently interrupts the narration of the story with notes that seem to be meant for his eyes only as the author, including ideas of improvement such as "description of physical appearance and mannerisms is one of several standard methods of characterization used by writers of fiction". He even mentions the Freitag's Triangle as a method of presenting the conventions of a dramatic narrative and includes a diagram in the text, however to the readers these notes seem to only serve to contrast the lacking story itself to how a dramatic conventional story may run. This coincides with Ambrose's feeling of being stuck in the funhouse, and of being unable to escape or truly enjoy the world of fiction even though he desired release and satisfaction in it in the first place.

Sacrificing Self-Control

In "The Idol of Cyclades", Julio Cortazar writes about Somoza and Morand's regression to an uncivilized way of life through an obsession with Teresa and a statue. The materialistic and historical object that was suppose to bring them happiness and prosperity ultimately results in their demise of life and normal, cognitive abilities.
The reader first gets an insight into Somoza's obsession with the statue when it reads, "Somoza confided to him his senseless hope that someday he would be able to approach that statue by ways other than the hands and the eyes of science." (p. 341) He desired a closer relationship with the idol and wanted to be connected with it as the people from its time were. Over time he became consumed with the idea of it so much that he disregarded any previous feelings for Teresa and distanced himself away from her and Morand. In doing this, Somoza is able to focus on learning about the statue's culture and history while building replicas of it. He idolizes the statue as the most important thing in his life and even refuses to share it with Morand when he states, "I'll never give her to you". (p.343) This shows that not only has Somoza become greedy and possesive over the statue but he has also personified it by calling it a "her", giving it connection to human life making his obsession more distorted.
Towards the end of the story the reader is given insight to the statue's true power over Somoza as he begins caressing the idol and referring to it's sacrificial rituals, all of which disturb Morand but he continues to try and comprehend his partner's madness. Somoza's intentions are finally shown when he attempts to kill Morand as a sacrifice after screaming that it was all because of Theresa, saying, "But what good's it going to do you, she never loved you and she'll never love you." (p.344) Somoza is saying that Theresa was so important in his life that when he couldn't have her his obsession with the statue dominated his life and contorted his view of reality. After surviving Somoza's attack, Morand lets Somoza's words about Theresa sink in and lets the statue take over as well as he prepared to kill Theresa.
Through their obsession with needing to be possessive and wanting attention, Somoza and Morand gave their life away to a statue. They lost touch with one another and their friendship deteriorated into dripping blood along with their love for Theresa. Through this the author shows that we shouldn't let material objects or even people have a huge hold on us because not everything is always as great as it seems.
-Amber

Is the Funhouse Actually Fun?

John Barth’s “Lost in the Funhouse” isn’t your typical short story. Unlike most stories, Barth adds his own thoughts into the mix of the actual story. These thoughts are sporadically thrown into the mix, leaving readers slightly confused about the text they are reading.

            In the beginning, “Lost in the Funhouse” seems as though it’s just going to be traditional story about a family who goes to Ocean City for Memorial Day. The first few pages, have the sole purpose to just “introduce the principle characters, establish their initial relationships, set the scene for the main action, [and] expose the background of the situation if necessary (326). This setting and background provides a little “fluff” for readers, but is not what the story is actually about. On the surface level, the story is a careless and fun trip to the beach, but in reality it is not, especially not for Ambrose. Instead the story is focused on his first sexual encounters and his thoughts of sex. Peter and Ambrose are both clearly attracted to Magda, the “pretty girl and exquisite young lady” who accompanied their family on the trip to Ocean City (323). Once they finally reach their destination Peter’s first thought is to do the funhouse. But Ambrose resists because he has never done it before so they opted for the beach. Being at “that awkward age” Ambrose was stuck between a kid and a teenager. He “wanted to converse with Magda” but “could think of nothing to say” when he made any attempts (329).

          At this point they still have not gone into the funhouse, which from the title seemed to be the sole purpose of the trip. Barth even comments that “there’s no point in going any farther” in the story (330). But this is exactly where the story begins to change; this is the point where Ambrose experiences sexual desires for probably the first time. I am not sure if he and Magda actually had any encounters or if it is just Ambrose’s fantasy, but either way this marks the point where Ambrose realizes the true purpose of the funhouse. The whole point he realized, had to do with the girl’s dresses that everyone, their boyfriends and others around, could up (334). When Ambrose looked around he “noticed that almost all the people…were paired off into couples except the small children” (334). This is why Ambrose who was “only thirteen, athletically and socially incept” got lost in the funhouse. Literally yes he was lost, but metaphorically he was lost in life. At such an awkward age was helpless when it came to his sexual desires. The funhouse was “a place of fear and confusion” for Ambrose, which is the message that Barth is trying to get across to readers, through both the actual story and his own comments that interrupt the story (323).

Teresa is the Idol

The Idol is Teresa
   
    “The Idol of Cyclades” focuses on a reversion of two archaeologists into primitive thought leading to an association that causes blurred lines of reality and eventually death.
     The narrative takes place in Somoza’s apartment who has kept a statuette that he, Morand, and Morand’s wife, Teresa, found in Greece. Morand is half-listening to Somoza crazy rantings as he flashes back to the origins of the idol.  When Somoza  found the idol, he “held the statuette up and caressed it so as to end by stripping it of it false clothes, time and oblivion” he then wishes that he could see the statuette “by ways other than the hands and the eyes of science”.  (341)
    This is the beginning of Somoza’s reversion into primitive thought association. He begins to want the idol like he wants Teresa. He wants to see Teresa outside of an archaeological and academic manner and connect with her. Morand seems to notice this behavior, but makes no verbal objection or comment.
    It is then revealed that Morand and Teresa believe that Somoza is falling in love with Teresa and they seek to end the journey as quickly as possible. Neither Teresa or Morand discuss this with Somoza, which is symbolized by a dirty rag Morand spots  Somoza’s apartment floor “which was like all they had not said to one another and which perhaps they should have said.” (342) Somoza is incredibly obsessed with the idol months later and barely leaves the house, spending most of his time constructing replicas of the statue. He called Morand to the apartment that day in order to tell him that he had fully connected with the idol over the last 48 hours, but Morand can make no sense of his ancient gibberish stating “Somoza’s voice rose again in that impersonal tone typical of these explanations which, the next moment, went beyond all intelligibility.” (340) It seems Morand does not grasp Somoza’s reality issues and makes no attempt to listen or understand the concepts Somoza is vocalizing.
    Morand’s association then begins to reveal itself. He realizes that he had absolutely no reason to call Teresa to the apartment that night, but for some reason he had. It seems he cannot even remember what he said over the phone. This part plays an important part in the story’s climax and is the first revelation of Morand’s primeval thoughts.
    The mood in the apartment rapidly changes as Somoza begins to speak of a sacrifice, and picks up a hatchet and removing his clothes. Morand quickly backs away, but eventually runs into the rag. He feels he can go no farther. Somoza moves to strike, but Morand disarms him and kills him. He then uncharacteristically takes off his clothes and hides behind the door, waiting for Teresa.
    Somoza’s primitive thought is evident throughout the entire narrative, beginning with the caressing of the statue. For some reason, which the author never fully explains, Samoza is entangled in an ancient world he can no longer separate from reality, associating Teresa with the idol and believing Morand is the appropriate blood sacrifice to activate her. Morand proves quite reasonable throughout most of the narrative, but falls victim to the primitive thought at the end, even experiencing an ancient flashback during his encounter with Samoza. (345) While Morand struggles with reason, he is eventually plunged into an ancient world, leading to his final actions.
    When engaged in the primitive mindset, Morand waits to kill his wife in the end because he believes has been coveted. He has fully reverted into primeval thought, and sees that Samoza has lusted, caressed and possessed his wife. Though she has not committed any act of adultery, her value has been diminished in his eyes.
    Both Morand and Samoza are guilty of reverting themselves into making a primitive association that has led to their inability to distinguish reality from fantasy. Cortazár demonstrates the differences in ancient and modern society that the love and lust after a woman can cause. While in modern times, nothing would be spoken of and the issue would be ignored, Morand and Samoza revert into a primitive and deadly mindset.

No Fun for Ambrose

Barth uses self-reflecting, meta-fictional devices to keep the reader from getting too absorbed in the story, which represents a fiction, a metaphor to Ambrose’s first sexual experience, rather than reality. Barth’s key meta-fictional device, indicating that the story is in fact just a metaphor, is when he reflects on his use of “blanks” in place of proper names. He states “it is an illusion that is being enhanced” (pg. 323) indicating that the reality of the story is in fact just an illusion.

Barth explains that a “fine metaphor…. may cast further and subtler lights upon the things it describes, 

sometimes ironically qualifying the more evident sense of comparison,” (pg. 324) and this is exactly what his metaphor does. Throughout his story, Barth includes details that can be directly compared to Ambrose’s sexual encounter with Magda, and the funhouse itself serves to represent Ambrose’s interpretation of his sexual event. 

The metaphor begins with the first lines of the story. “For whom is the funhouse fun? Perhaps for lovers. For Ambrose it is a place of fear and confusion” (pg. 323).  Ambrose tries to convince himself that his sexual experience was fun.  He sees the couples, “lovers,” around him enjoying the funhouse, and couples continue to enjoy Ocean City, showing that these couples continue to have sex and enjoy it.  He event realized that the whole point of the funhouse and Ocean City was a place for couples’ “preparation and intermission” (pg. 334). However, Ambrose just ends up lost in the funhouse, afraid and confused about his sexual life.

Ambrose’s recollection of his experience in the woodshed describes Magda: “ there she knelt sweating… pleadingly embraced his knees, and while bees droned in the lattice as if on an ordinary summer afternoon, purchased clemency at a surprising price set by herself” (pg. 326). Throughout the trip to Ocean City, Ambrose picks up on details that directly relate back to this woodshed experience. Magda is obviously Ambrose’s primarily focus, despite the exciting environment that surrounds him. In the car ride to ocean city, Ambrose notes how close Magda’s hand lies to his knee. Her hands are mentioned several other times, perhaps in reference to when she “pleadingly embraced his knees” in the woodshed. There are also several references to sweat and perspiration, both by Magda and Ambrose, which was also a detail included in their sexual experience- “she knelt sweating.” Barth’s carefully placed descriptions hint to the reader the symbolism behind the trip.

Perhaps more significant is Ambrose’s reflection on his sex with Magda, which he demonstrates through his reflection on the funhouse. Magda made it through the funhouse, along with Peter, and several other couples. She moved on from the sexual experience, Ambrose even considering that she forgot about the experience altogether. However, Ambrose is still lost inside the funhouse and is unable to “forget the least detail of his life” (pg. 326). He contemplates on his exit. Will he die in the funhouse, telling stories to himself in the dark, or will he find his way out with another lost person who turns out to be a “blind Negro girl?” Ambrose worries he will remain lost and confused, forever stuck in the details of his past. However, a more hopeful outcome would be finding Magda, his “blind Negro girl” (pg. 338) who was just as lost in the backyard when it was her turn to be slave and his turn to be Master. Ambrose implies in his final thoughts of the story that he wishes he had never entered the funhouse, indicating that he wishes he had never had sex with Magda in the first place. Instead of an untroubled future just like the other lovers in Ocean City who happily make it through the funhouse, Ambrose will end up operating his own funhouse, forever lost inside its fearful and confusing maze.

“Lost in the Funhouse” -- A New Perspective

.           This short story was one that I found exceedingly fascinating, yet vastly difficult to comprehend. Immediately I tried to rack my brain for a way to follow the strange nature of the story’s narrative style. The irrelevant, sporadic, seemingly disconnected thoughts made no sense to me at first glace. Eventually, I decided that I needed something to help me obtain a better outlook as to where the narrator was getting his ideas. Although the interpretations mentioned in Reading Narrative Fiction suggest that the author has employed such strange narration as a means of testing the boundaries of the importance of literary continuity, I initially interpreted the intent to be much different. My initial understanding of the bazaar narrative styling led me to diagnose the narrator of “Lost in the Funhouse” as a schizophrenic. From such a diagnosis, the narrative took a very interesting turn of interpretive meaning.  

            One symptom of schizophrenia is a type of jumbled, ill filtered, and illogical means of verbalization known as “word salad.” For people experiencing “word salad,” it is impossible to control which thoughts appear only in the mind and which thoughts get projected out into the world. Many possible exemplars of “word salad” are found in the narrative styling found in “Lost in the Funhouse.” For example, the sporadic inclusion of various literary rules and patterns such as the explanation of the proper usage of italics; the phenomena of dashing out proper nouns; or the pyramid of plot progression. While most authors would most definitely consider such ideas, they would likely keep such commentary under wraps, perhaps making notes in the margins of a rough draft and scrapping the annotations prefacing publication. The narrator of “Lost in the Funhouse” however, does not scrap such annotations. He appears to be critiquing his own work as he goes along, a schizophrenic experiencing “word salad” would most likely do the same. In one video documenting the life of a schizophrenic it can be observed that as a man well consumed by his schizophrenia attempts to recount an event from his life, he simultaneously critiques his own grammar, causing his tale to be disorderly and nearly impossible to comprehend from an outsiders point of view.

            Beyond the inclusion of unfiltered, seemingly irrelevant literary decorum, many other schizophrenic tendencies also appear in “Lost in the Funhouse.” The narrator has this obscure idea of this “funhouse” that is not so easily understood by the reader, yet seems to make perfect sense to the narrator himself. The funhouse could almost be interpreted as a sort of hallucination, only in the mind of the narrator. The narrator also includes many thoughts that come across as incomplete, such as the mentioning of how he would help lost children get out of the funhouse if he were the operator, and the abrupt dropping of the subject as soon as the method is about to be revealed to the reader. The narrator cannot slow his mind enough to focus completely on one particular aspect of the world that he is describing. Lastly, and perhaps most prominently, the narrator’s thoughts appear relatively obsessive and compulsive (obsession being yet another symptom associated with schizophrenia). The narrator cannot help himself from fixating on obscure detail, such as the image found on the cigarette case, or from stressing over literary fact and accepted configuration of plot exposition.

Viewing “Lost in the Funhouse” as though it is told from the perspective of a schizophrenic adds a new level of depth to the short story. From such a perspective the intent of the novel’s sporadic narration is no longer purely for the sake of pushing the boundaries of literary form, but also for the sake of revealing a key component of the narrator’s persona that could not have been seen from a merely physical/visual standpoint.