34 pages • 1 hour read
Neil SimonBarefoot In The Park
Fiction | Play | Adult | Published in 1963A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Themes
Finding Balance Between Extremes
Simon sets up a series of juxtapositions in the play: self-control vs. impulse, reason vs. feeling, and logic vs. fun. The four main characters begin the play on extreme poles and move toward a productive balance as the conflict resolves in Act Three. Paul and Ethel exhibit control, reason, and logic, while Corie and Victor represent impulse, feeling, and fun.
In Act One, Paul’s negative attitude toward the apartment, his refusal to walk barefoot in the park, and his intense work focus demonstrate his proclivities for self-control, reason, and logic. He typically explains his attitude and behavior through logical means. It was too “ice-cold” (18) to walk barefoot. His ambitions require he work long hours. The apartment has legitimate shortcomings, such as no heat in December and a hole in the skylight. Paul also considers Ethel and Victor’s blind date through a logical lens. The two have nothing in common hence the date and any potential relationship between them are doomed from the start. When Corie wants to argue and demands a divorce at the end of Act Two, Paul wants to sleep. He obeys his body’s needs even in the midst of emotional turmoil, which Corie cannot do.
While Paul’s logical approach provides stability, it veers into extremes when he refuses to adapt his behavior to the situation at hand. He insists on eating knichi in his own way, against specific instructions, and pokes disdainfully at his food at the Armenian restaurant. Regarding Ethel and Victor’s blind date, he does not account for the fact that their differences mirror Paul and Corie’s. He also fails to consider that Ethel and Victor, despite being different, may find common ground by balancing their different approaches, as they do at the end of the play.
What Paul sees as problems with the apartment, Corie romanticizes as adventures. In some cases, this enables her to persevere and problem-solve: the hole in the skylight is small; they will keep each other warm; and the tiny kitchen is big enough to make “spaghetti and things” (24). At the same time, some of her decisions are poorly thought out and lead to problems that could have been avoided. This is especially evident with the date Corie sets up between Victor and Ethel. Corie tells her mother that they are having dinner with Paul’s parents and only discloses the real purpose of the dinner after her mother arrives. The unexpected turn of events causes Ethel anxiety, which she with copes by drinking too much and becoming ill. Corie’s impulsiveness lead her to demand a divorce and kick Paul out of their apartment, a decision she regrets almost immediately.
Inflexibility as a Source of Relationship Conflict
Throughout the play, Paul is portrayed as the more rigid half of his and Corie’s marriage. He becomes flustered when his standards are not met. This is evidenced in Act One when the lack of a bathtub distresses him as much as the absence of heat during a cold New York winter. When he realizes the skylight has a hole and snow is expected, he panics. Corie is more relaxed, and quips in reference to weather reports: “They’re wrong as often as they’re right” (18). In response to Paul’s assertion that he’s “going to be shoveling snow in [his] own living room” (18), Corie notes that “it’s a little hole” (19). Corie’s calm confuses Paul. He wants her to “[g]o to pieces” (19), as he is. Instead, she soothes him with endearments and promises of keeping him warm.
His inflexibility leads, in Act Two, to conflict that is more difficult to resolve when Corie realizes how differently they approach life. Paul’s negativity toward Corie’s blind date set-up for Ethel and Victor, his refusal to engage in the evening’s activities except as a reluctant bystander, and his anger at Corie for not seeing her mother’s discomfort result in a confrontation whose severity Paul fails to appreciate. Where he sees an argument, Corie sees clashing lifestyles that cannot be reconciled: “You’re a watcher […] becausethere isn’t the least bit of adventure in you” (61). She, on the other hand, is a “Do-er” (61). In this sense, she may appear to be the more flexible character because she is spontaneous and adventurous. However, Corie is also inflexible, albeit in a different way. She believes that her and Paul’s differences signal the end of their marriage. She fails to account for how much she relies on Paul’s positive qualities, such as his steadiness and his reliability. It is only when he adopts her behavior that she sees how much she depends on him to provide stability.
Ethel begins the play as a lonely widow who spends more time thinking about her daughter’s life than sorting out her own. By the end of Act Three, she leaves Corie with advice but is able to walk away, to go on her date, and to allow Corie to resolve her marital problems on her own. This growth becomes possible because Ethel agreed not only to go on the blind date with Victor but also engage in adventurous activities that took her outside her comfort zone. She discovered it was too much for her and calls it a night, turning down Corie and Victor’s flaming brandies. However, in the process of trying—of being flexible—she gained the admiration of Victor. Victor’s change is motivated by an external factor, namely his doctors’ instructions to change his lifestyle. Yet the outcome is similar: Victor learns to become more flexible about how he lives his life. In his case, this will mean being more responsible and practical.
Related Titles
By Neil Simon
