Brett Challenges our Views on Monogamy
Brett is a particularily interesting character in The Sun Also Rises because of the way that she challenges our existing assumptions and gut reactions to non-monogamy.
Most of us were raised to limit "good" relationships to monogomous (undoubtedly linked to religious values in America). This is not too surprising in itself - relationships that are not monogomous are often tied to cheating, dishonesty, unhappy marriages, etc. But here we have Brett, a character very comfortable, content, and open with her relationship preferences. As we see in her and Jakes conversations, she has no problem acknowledging that she has close relationships with men other than Jake and her fiance, and her fiance seems to have no problem with it either. He is shown to be just as comfortable with her behavior when he lightheartedly acknowledges a hat another man gave to Brett. He, like Brett, appears to also have unconventional standards and needs in a relationship, but as they are both informed and consenting of the situation, this should not pose a problem to any readers, regardless our own values and preferences.
Her form of non-monogamy involves no cheating, lying, or intentional heartbreak - neither her marriage nor her flings and flirty behavior are a secret. We see Jake as an exception to the rest of her relationships: despite also being informed of her needs and behavior in relationships, he is jealous, resentful, and sad when confronted with the reality of their situation over and over again.
This has definitely tainted Bretts image for some readers, saying that she leads men on and plays with their emotions. This begs the question of why. Why do we see monogamy as the only type of acceptable and moral relationship, which becomes a character flaw when Brett strays from it? Why do we prioritize Jake's emotional needs over Bretts? Each are entitled to their own preferred form of sexual and romantic relationships, and, as long as there is no lying involved, each is responsible for their own satisfaction within their relationships. Brett appears to be quite capable of taking care of that: she devotes some parts of her relationships for financial support, from her fiance, some for sexual, and some, such as Jake, for romantic connections.
Jake, on the other hand, is completely dissatisfied with his relationships and does not seem capable of limiting himself to be involved in relationships that will make him happy. Now, does this in itself make him a bad guy? Am I the emotion police here telling him to drop Brett imediately? Of course not - after all, attraction and relationships are more complex than a set of checklists to be filled, and he's completely entitled to involve himself with her and get emotionally attached to her, as long as she is informed that that's the way he sees her (which she is).
However, his hurt feelings coming out of it are not Brett's fault or resonsibility - to say that would be to say that she herself should limit the lifestyle she prefers to make him happy. I believe that Brett is entitled to have as many flings and relationships as she likes, as long as every party is completely informed, and that we should stop viewing her treatment of men as an inherent flaw - they, just like her, chose to be part of the non-monogomous relationship.
I've heart classmates say things summing up their views on Brett such as "She's a cool character, but I just don't like how she leads men on...". I don't think it's quite fair to penalize her for "leading men on". Leading on would generally mean that someone in the situation is lying, withholding, or manipulating - such as indicating romantic feelings when there are actually none. That is, however, not at all what Brett does, and the takeaway here, in my opinion, is to respect both her choices and the other parties' feelings, as neither are quite at fault here. Jake does not try to force marriage or a relationship on Brett, only asks for it and tries to convince her. She, similarily, does not force her love on him and does not force him to be attracted to her. While the situation is unfortunate and I certainly feel quite bad for Jake - in a situation he can't fix, so close to something that would make him happy but at the same time it's so unreachable - but that does not make me place the blame on Brett, as that would place Jake's feelings and preferences over hers.
You make some really good points in this, and I think it's really interesting how you weave in the impact of religion on American ideals and culture. I definitely agree that Brett shouldn't be judged for her relationships, and that we need to be clear that showing affection to Jake isn't "leading him on". Another thing to think about is how Brett's character would have been viewed when this book came out almost 100 years ago - if we're struggling to respect and grasp Brett now, imagine how ground-breaking and controversial she was in the '20s.
ReplyDeleteI agree that though Jake and Brett's situation is unfortunate, neither is really at fault since they're in an ambiguous "agreement" of some sort, where neither is really forcing anything on the other. I do think Hemingway was trying to make a statement through Brett's character and how she handles relationships, however, as we've talked about in our class that when the book was published the general reaction to characters of Brett and Jake was "oh man, kids these days..." I definitely think that through scenes like the one where we see Brett show up drunk at Jake's at 4:30 in the morning, Hemingway is depicting the instability and carelessness of the youth of their time. I also think the non-monogamous nature of Brett was meant to contribute to this image.
ReplyDeleteI don't know, I generally just do not like her as a person. I feel like my problem with her is that she seems like she is only ever looking our for her own self interest. I don't have a problem with her having multiple partners but it seems like she is using her partners for her own gain.
ReplyDeleteI don't think that Brett "should limit the lifestyle she prefers". However, I don't like the way acts around Jake. Obviously, she has feelings for him, just as he does for her, but if she truly cannot have a fulfilling relationship without sex, her relationship with Jake is kind of problematic. While I don't necessarily think she is intentionally "leading him on," the fact that she keeps coming back to him and leaning on him for emotional support as if he were her lover seems selfish of her because it seems to give Jake false hope that they can be together. Jake is in love with her and, as long as she keeps coming to him and giving him false hope, he will unable to get over her and move on. As long as he is still hung up on Brett, he will be unable find someone who he can actually have a fulfilling relationship with.
ReplyDeleteIt feels pretty weird to read about a character like Brett in a book written so long ago, especially since non-monogamous relationships are controversial even today. And I don't think her coming back to Jake and leaning on him for emotional support is selfish or problematic. It shouldn't be her responsibility to make sure Jake's feelings don't get hurt, since she specifies that she can't have a relationship with just him. If he feels like he can't handle that he should be the one responsible for getting our of their relationship. And of course that's more complicated than just leaving Brett, since he does have real feelings for her, but even so we shouldn't blame Brett for his bad decisions.
ReplyDeleteI agree that it is interesting to read about a character like this. In a way this is helping normalize different kinds of relationships. But she kind of seems like she only cares about her self, which is still giving non-monogamy a negative connotation. I also like how you mention that monogamy being the only way to have a good relationship is linked back to religion.
ReplyDeleteThere is certainly a gendered aspect to any discussion of Brett's promiscuity: she is taking on what had traditionally been seen as a male prerogative, where the same behavior in women would be stigmatized. So Cohn can "get rid of Frances" (following Jake's advice) and have his fling with Brett (which she completely initiates and controls, using him as her "mistress"), but no one criticizes him for his "promiscuity." This is one more way that we see Brett defying gender norms, openly embracing this masculine prerogative of sexual promiscuity. In past years, the discussions in class around the morality of Brett's behavior have been even more contentious. She's the kind of character no one feels neutral about.
ReplyDelete