Abstract:
From the time of horses and carriages, the ideal of moving freely and autonomously across the land has influenced U.S. society, particularly through its automobile culture, its advertising, and its fictions. In the decades following the end of World War II, fantasies of mobility became especially pronounced for men: popular male figures and archetypes such as the Marlboro Man, John Wayne, the outdoorsman, and the road rebel collectively incarnated the fantasy of moving without (or despite) physical, social, and legal boundaries. While this fantasy was exciting to witness on television and billboards, it was almost impossible to act out in real life, particularly for post-war men who were expected to raise nuclear families, settle in the suburbs, and commute to work. This clash between ideals of male mobility and the reality of post-war social responsibilities engendered many double-binds, such as choosing between breadwinning and hedonism, between wartime and post-war movement, between economic mobility and self-expression, and between destructive autonomy and constructive conformity. In this thesis, I examine John Cheever’s “The Swimmer” and “The Housebreaker of Shady Hill,” Sloan Wilson’s The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit, Richard Yates’s Revolutionary Road, Hubert Selby’s The Demon, Jack Kerouac’s On the Road, John Updike’s Rabbit, Run, Ida Lupino’s The Hitch-Hiker, Nicholas Ray’s Rebel Without a Cause, and Steven Spielberg’s Duel. I contend that the fictional transport technologies in these texts can be read as a metaphor for the double-binds faced by mid-century men—a metaphor that undercuts the assumption that automobiles, roads, suburbs, and other forms of post-war expansion are unproblematic and result in increased personal fulfilment.