“Tiny, Smiling Daddy” is a very emotionally-charged, semi-ambiguous story about the relationship between a father and his lesbian daughter. The reader understands the father’s disdain and outright anger toward his daughter for her rebellious teenage years and sexuality. Gaitskill waits until the end of the story, however, to tell the reader what the father actually says to his daughter: “You’re a lesbian? Fine… You mean nothing to me.” Throughout the story, the father has flashbacks and memories of his daughter. This creates the problem of only one point of view. We never get to hear Kitty’s side of the story to know if the father’s point of view is an accurate depiction of what happens. Kitty seems disrespectful and rebellious throughout the story, referring to her loving mother as a stupid bitch and not even having a relationship with her father. However, the reader does not know if she is acting out due to the father’s disgust toward his daughter. Gaitskill throws a wrench into the equation later in the story when the reader finds out the father’s words to his daughter. Finally, the reader can relate to and sympathize with Kitty. However, is it too late to change the opinion of the reader this far into the story? I did not like any of the characters, except maybe the mother. She was a nice, loving wife, always trying to make everybody happy. The father, in my opinion, was a prick (sorry, for lack of a better word). He hit his daughter and basically disowned her. He yelled at his wife for defending her daughter. He yells at Marsha again at the end of the story for being away all day. Perhaps she doesn’t want to be around his miserable butt all day? I think the dad is going through a mid-life crisis depression, with no reason for his life. I did not enjoy the third person limited point of view. I would have much rather known the thoughts of someone more appealing.
You don't think any sympathy was set up for Kitty early on? You are right, though, that the final revelation about what he'd said about spitting in her face is the most revelatory of his very flawed character...making us definitely sympathize with her.
ReplyDeleteAs I see it, since we're following Stew and his memories through the story, we can't get the info. about what he said until the end. Because up until then, he's in denial, in a dreamworld: he's the good parent and she was the problem. At the end, in my interpretation, he finally seems to own his responsibility in the relationship break. Prior to that, he was in denial and so wouldn't think about how he hurt her.
Regarding writing more generally, you're getting at something important: characters must be flawed in order to be real and interesting, but readers have to have something make them want to read about characters. Often, it's that there's something likable about characters--even if they're not perfect, they are sympathetic and you understand their problems or where they come from. But there are plenty of great unlikeable characters--Humbert Humbert in Vladimir Nabokov's Lolita, for instance, which you need to read if you haven't already. The trick is that the despicable character has to be interesting.