After finally summoning the courage to relate a story my mum had sworn me to secrecy over (check out an earlier post about an axe-murdering father) I find this Pandora's Box of confidential tales too difficult to close again.
At the risk of making my dear friend cross with me, I must share what I feel is one of the most perfectly comic morality tales of all time. Move over Aristotle . . . there's a new flawed individual in town.
My friend C is an actor. The type that, unlike myself, works constantly. He works hard at his craft, and is very deserving of all his success. But the glaring light of celebrity can become hot--too hot for some.
You will no doubt see where this Aristotelean tragedy is headed early on in my re-telling. For the English scholars in the audience today, I will break my retelling of this tragic tale into sections under appropriate headings to illustrate the building storm.
Tragic Heroes are:
BORN INTO NOBILITY:
C is named after a great Persian King.
RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR OWN FATE
C was cast in the CanStage Canadian Premiere production of "Take Me Out", which some folks may know is the story of a gay baseball player that contains several scenes of full frontal nudity played out in a shower.
That's right--this ain't your mother's "Punch & Judy" show.
He took the job.
DOOMED TO MAKE A SERIOUS ERROR IN JUDGEMENT
Knowing that the job called for him and not his trousers, as well as dealing with issues of homosexuality, C decided to discourage his parents from attending a performance. In pleading his case, C told his parents they would likely find the issues dealt with in the play uncomforatble; he did NOT tell them about the Free Willy aspect of the show.
ENDOWED WITH A TRAGIC FLAW
The production came and went--another success for C! And seemingly the perfect crime; his parents had not wised-up to the fact that he had been showering in front of packed houses at the Bluma, swinging around his inheritance, leaving an indelible mark on Canadian theatre history. C thought that indelible mark was the "Canadian Premiere", which is surely a remarkable accomplishment; however, it is not the indelible mark I will forever associate with the production.
The indelible mark to which I refer, was left on one fan's blog. The title subject for this man's blog entry: A Review of Penis Sizes in "Take Me Out".
Eventually, Tragic Heroes:
FALL FROM GREAT HEIGHTS OR HIGH ESTEEM
One night C's father and brother were out on the town having a few pints, talking about C's great success, and C's father, F, got nostalgic; a misty-eyed nostalgia that only drunk men experience, where all the love and emotion they bury so deep inside comes bubbling up to the surface. F decided to go and Google his beloved son's name. The first hit of his search was related to C's most recent show, "Take Me Out", and was entitled--yes--"A Review of Penis Sizes in 'Take Me Out'".
The following is what F read:
"C: Low-hanging balls with a nice tuft of public hair; cut; the most well-endowed of the entire cast; easily 4-5 inches flaccid."
Ba-zing!
REALIZE THEY HAVE MADE AN IRREVERSIBLE MISTAKE
That night, C noticed a message on his cell phone.
After his password was entered, and he hit 1 to listen to the 'New Message', he heard a familar voice.
It was F.
A rough transcript follows:
"C. It's F. [it should be noted that F used not "Dad", but his Christian name as an introduction] I think you might want to google your name and see what the gay men of Toronto are writing about you. If your relatives read this and find out that all you are is eye-candy for the faggots of Toronto, it will kill your mother."
End of message. To erase it, press 7; to save it, press 9.
FACES AND ACCEPTS DEATH WITH HONOR
Even though F's voiced sounded eerily placcid, the message was clear: I know what you did this winter, you dirty, dirty boy.
The message may have also revealed that C has a bigger slong than F; although, in the conversation that followed, the subject of penis size was not discussed.
If C knew about the penis size disparity, he would be guilty of hubris, which is another trademark characteristic of tragic heroes.
MEET A TRAGIC DEATH
C did not die--here we part ways with the Aristotelean structure of tragedy.
Unless, in an art film kind of way, his innocence died in the eyes of F.
FOR ALL TRAGIC HEROES THE AUDIENCE IS AFFECTED BY PITY and/or FEAR
That, I leave to you, Gentle Reader, and the comments function active on this blog.
I know that I, for one, will forevermore live by the following Golden Rule:
WHEN IN DOUBT, WHIP IT OUT. . .BUT DON'T FORGET TO GIVE DAD A SHOUT.
2 comments:
Dear B.,
A winking, fun, and almost enjoyably pedantic account. But I must make bones with some of your scholarship: first on a comparative level, then on a factual level.
"Trouble Rode In on a HUGE Ugly Horse" is closer akin to a medieval mystery structure than to Aristolean tragedy. No male, especially one obsessed with measuring and probably gay like Aristotle, would ever view having a big one as a "tragic flaw". If cervixes could talk, maybe, but what happened in "T.R.I.O.-A.-H.U.H." was not the result of a flawed character but of a single flawed action: the sin unaware. C. was a sinner who wouldn't acknowledge his sin, working "as eye candy for the fags of Toronto". He entered the mystery in the false paradise of gainful employment and was spat out the other end, devils (friends) cackling, purged in the flames of paternal disapproval and hurt, and, in true medieval style, feeling like dying.
And, as I've said before, the Aristotelean hero had to be nobility or of noble character. C. was neither: just a dick-dangling actor/whore who wanted a paycheck.
A few more things:
The show was a week from closing when the call came.
The quote was "Where will you be, when some big mouth friend or relative calls your mother and tells her you're making your living as eye candy for the fags of Toronto. Will you be there for the emotional breakdown? Will you be there for the physical sickness that'll follow? Or will you be too busy?" With that he hung up.
C.
Dear B.,
A winking, fun, and almost enjoyably pedantic account. But I must make bones with some of your scholarship: first on a comparative level, then on a factual level.
"Trouble Rode In on a HUGE Ugly Horse" is closer akin to a medieval mystery structure than to Aristolean tragedy. No male, especially one obsessed with measuring and probably gay like Aristotle, would ever view having a big one as a "tragic flaw". If cervixes could talk, maybe, but what happened in "T.R.I.O.-A.-H.U.H." was not the result of a flawed character but of a single flawed action: the sin unaware. C. was a sinner who wouldn't acknowledge his sin, working "as eye candy for the fags of Toronto". He entered the mystery in the false paradise of gainful employment and was spat out the other end, devils (friends) cackling, purged in the flames of paternal disapproval and hurt, and, in true medieval style, feeling like dying.
And, as I've said before, the Aristotelean hero had to be nobility or of noble character. C. was neither: just a dick-dangling actor/whore who wanted a paycheck.
A few more things:
The show was a week from closing when the call came.
The quote was "Where will you be, when some big mouth friend or relative calls your mother and tells her you're making your living as eye candy for the fags of Toronto. Will you be there for the emotional breakdown? Will you be there for the physical sickness that'll follow? Or will you be too busy?" With that he hung up.
C.
Post a Comment