ENL 10C: Manliness and Repetition in “The Blue Hotel”

Jolene Patricia Brown

Dr. M. Stratton

ENL 10C

30 April 2010

Manliness and Repetition in “The Blue Hotel”

In Stephen Crane’s short story “The Blue Hotel” there is a depiction of the relationships between men that calls into the question the sincerity of connections between men in times of stress. The story itself is simple: a man running a hotel brings three patrons from the train station to spend the night during an intense snow storm, and the consequences of their brief interaction. The outcome is far from simple and, in fact, illustrates an inherent mistrust between men who struggle for control, which is amplified when placed in unfamiliar surroundings. The story is a criticism of modern hospitality between men represented by the show of the hotel owner for the sake of reputation, and the misunderstandings that occur when communication is avoided for the sake of manliness. By using repetition, Crane makes a statement of the circularity, and futility, of over-exerted manliness in situations where survival is the most important goal: much like the repetition of certain phrases in the story, the society of men repeats their own follies of misguided assertions of power and control thereby bringing tragedy on themselves, and others, that otherwise could have been avoided.

The Palace Hotel is an actor on the stage of Fort Romper, Nebraska. The hotel “then, was always screaming an howling in a way that made the dazzling winter landscape…seem only a gray swampish hush” (376) which prompted the passengers, as a chance audience, to be “overcome at the sight” to which they “expressed shame, pity, [and] horror, in a laugh” (377). The owner of the hotel, Pat Scully has painted the hotel precisely for this reason: to attract the attention of the passengers who will spend their time, and their money, in his hotel. Scully himself is putting on a show for his guests, creating an environment that is hospitable in order to promote continued growth of his business. It is clear from the beginning of the story that Scully’s hospitality is an act put on for the benefit of business: “It was notable that throughout this series of small ceremonies the three travelers were made to feel that Scully was very benevolent. He was conferring great favors upon them. He handed the towel from one to another with an air of philanthropic impulse” (377). The passage states that the travels “were made to feel” and that Scully had “an air” is suspicious because it is not claimed by the speaker directly that Scully is either benevolent or a philanthropist. Instead, these qualities of the host are presented as an act; Scully, like his hotel, are putting on a show for the passengers who have sought refuge from the overwhelming storm outside.

The significance of “acting” in this story is far-reaching, as all the characters are putting on an act, though some are more convincing than others. The Swede is also putting on an act, like the host of the hotel, as described by the speaker: “His eyes continued to rove from man to man…he said that some of these Western communities were very dangerous…It was plain that the demonstration had no meaning to the others” (378). The Swede in this passage is sizing up the men around him, evaluating the dangers he believes to exist in “Western communities” and presents a “demonstration”—an outward show of manliness with his “wink and laugh” (378). The Swede winks again on the following page, initiating a repetition of both gestures and phrases that continue throughout the story, creating a cyclical pattern of behavior that only escalates the show of the men inside the hotel as they continually struggle for control of the situation. The character of the Swede suffers greatly for his over-confidence by cutting himself off from the companionship of the other men in the hotel.

The repetition of gestures and phrases creates a loose camaraderie between the cowboy, the Easterner, Scully and his son, Johnnie, but serves only to isolate the Swede who continues to assert his own manliness as a defense against the men he believes want to kill him. A turning point in the story occurs on page 385; in this passage Scully becomes a metaphor for all men, as even his speech takes on an almost universal quality becoming a “combination of Irish brogue and idiom, Western twang and idiom, and scraps of curiously formal diction taken from story-books and newspapers” (384). His speech at this moment asserts his control over his hotel through repetition:

“What do I keep? What do I keep? What do I keep?” he demanded, in a voice of thunder… “I keep a hotel,” he shouted. “A hotel, do you mind? A guest under my roof has sacred privileges. He is to be intimidated by none...” He wheeled suddenly upon the cowboy and the Easterner. “Am I right?”

“Yes, Mr. Scully,” said the cowboy, “I think you’re right.”

“Yes, Mr. Scully,” said the Easterner, “I think you’re right.” (385)

What is significant about this passage is that Scully claims to provide a haven that is free of intimidation, yet he intimidates his guests into agreeing with him. He asserts himself at this moment as the man in control of the situation, but instead comes across as just as intimidating and irrational as the Swede; the cycle of intimidation and the struggle for power escalates into the fight between Johnnie and the Swede, and ultimately the death of the Swede. Scully repeats the word “keep” four times, which signals to the audience (the reader as well as the men in the hotel) that he intends to recover his claim to authority that has been called into question by the men who seek to throw one of this guests out of the hotel. Though it seems strictly a business decision, the outburst is more than that as it is a reassertion of his manliness—his power and control as the owner and host—threatened by his son and his guests.

It is not until the final scene that we are presented with the definition of manliness, realizing that their manliness was only an act and that there were no “men” in the hotel that night. The Easterner explains to the cowboy: “Johnnie was cheating. I saw him. I know. I saw him. And I refused to stand up and be a man…Usually there are from a dozen to forty women really involved in every murder, but in this case it seems to be only five men…” (396). Here the idea of masculinity is made clear as the Easterner not only denies himself the role of a man, but he also compares the four men in the hotel that night to a large group of women who, he claims, are “usually…involved in every murder.” To be a man, by this definition, is not to commit murder, for that is the role of a woman, and a man instead would have stood up for the Swede; would have pointed out that Johnnie was cheating; would not have encouraged the fighting that ended in the death of a man. True manliness is not power or control over a situation: instead is the power and control of oneself with regards to a situation, and making the right decision based on what is right and not what is dictated by others. This is significant about the repetition in the story: the men fall into the trap of repeating the mistakes of one another instead of making their own decisions.

The combination of “putting on a show” of manliness and the constant repetition in this story proves deadly. None of the men shows true character, instead choosing to look to each other for guidance for behavior, continuing the escalation of the power struggle throughout the story. If even one man had walked away from the fight things might have turned out differently. The hotel itself, a painted actor on the stage of Fort Romper, Nebraska, will continue its show as the men inside will continue theirs. Manliness becomes a form of crowd assimilation instead of individuality, which is precisely the problem being addressed in the story.