Talk:Cat on a Hot Tin Roof

message: The infobox lists homosexuality and alcoholism among the "subjects", but the Theme section fails to mention either.  These are clearly major focuses of the story and merit inclusion.Artaxerxes (talk) 15:42, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Theme

message: Cat on a hot Tin Roof is a play by Tennessee Williams.  It tells the story of a Southern woman who suffers in her husband's oppressive home and from her unfullfilling marriage.
do you really think that's the content of the play?
:"Content?" I'm not sure what you mean by that, but I think that summary you have given describes just the play from Maggie's viewpoint.  I wonder if it should be changed... - THE GREAT GAVINI {T-C} 20:27, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Premise

message: *My English teacher told me that Williams said Brick was not gay. Cls14 22:12, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Williams does not make it clear, nor would the character Brick make it clear.  Big Daddy was more accepting than Brick (Big Daddy had positive dealing with a man named Ochello, and with maturity comes the ability to see beyond the pat and facile, even in his own son).  Brick felt because he wasn't a "fairy" he wasn't gay, that homosexuality was dirty and disgusting, and what he and Skipper had was deeper and more profound so he could not possibly be gay.  Of course audiences, then as now, see through this, and so does Big Daddy.  The main theme is mendacity, the lies we tell others, and the lies we tell ourselves. When Skipper reached out to Brick, Skipper was met with hostility and rejection.  This rejection leads to his suicide, and Brick's downward spiral (of course Brick loved Skipper in that way but to the very end he could not admit it). Williams himself wrote that he intentionally left the question unanswered, that Brick's sexuality was to be forever ambiguous (both on the stage, and in Brick's mind).  The teacher probably did not  say Brick was not gay, but more likely to have said Brick could not see himself as gay. Jacksinterweb (talk) 15:10, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Brick "not [being able to] see himself as gay" is really due to the fact he is living in Cold War-era America. Compulsory heterosexuality was a part of belonging to the American nuclear family, and anything other than heterosexuality was a sign of deviancy, which lead to loose morals, then being susceptible to influence of the much-feared COMMUNISM. So, to perceive yourself as a homosexual was to perceive yourself as a traitor due to this Cold War ideology (I am heavily referencing lecture notes from my Modern Theatre and Society course at York University). Like the above commentator, it is quite clear to me that Brick is struggling with some level of homosexuality. Williams' plays are largely autobiographical, and as a homosexual himself, he seems to write his voice into Brick, and the play as a whole is autobiographical of his life in the American South. That being said, evidence that Brick had a sexual relationship with Skipper is downplayed to the point of nonexistence in the 1958 film version (Cold War ideology strikes again), hence, many people seem to glance over the true nature of the Brick-Skipper relationship when reading the play. Mattpmarshall 12:45, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

text: There must be other forums online for discussing the meaning of the play. This page is supposed to be for discussing improvements to the article, which is marred by apparent OR - Original Research and the lack of citations to reliable sources to support assertions about Themes, and other material, such as judgments about which productions or performances were finest.Parkwells (talk) 13:26, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brick's sexuality 

message: The article alludes briefly to the fact that Williams prepared different versions of the play (I believe this is particularly true of the third act).  The article should describe the differences and explain why the revisions were made.  74.96.11.178 (talk) 01:33, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It should do this based on valid sources, not some editor's ideas about it.Parkwells (talk) 13:27, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Different versions 

message: The title seems obscure  -  unless it is meant to be rhyming slang for the well-known 4-letter word for a homosexual. Is that meant to be it? 86.148.131.107 (talk) 15:13, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Have you seen the play?  The title comes from the phrase that Maggie uses to describe her situation.  It would be interesting to know whether TW just made the image up, or did it already exist?  Poof does rhyme with roof, but so does horse's hoof - none of this is relevant to the play's title (at least not in the universe that I inhabit!) 82.32.112.174 (talk) 01:10, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Meaning of the title? 

message: I propose moving the page to Cat on a Hot Tin Roof (play) and then make "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof" a disambiguation page. There are at least three notable film adaptations with the same title. Any objections? --Bensin (talk) 21:44, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move proposal 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Cat on a Hot Tin Roof. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130103134414/http://www.playbill.com/news/article/170231-Benjamin-Walker-Debra-Monk-and-Ciaran-Hinds-Will-Join-Scarlett-Johansson-in-Broadways-Cat-on-a-Hot-Tin-Roof to http://www.playbill.com/news/article/170231-Benjamin-Walker-Debra-Monk-and-Ciaran-Hinds-Will-Join-Scarlett-Johansson-in-Broadways-Cat-on-a-Hot-Tin-Roof
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:35, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Based on Tenessee Williams' views on the key theme of this play, it seems as if the question of whether brick 'is' gay (or 'isn't' gay) is not particularly important. In the opinion of the play's writer, anyhow. If we can grant that TW is allowed to ask questions of his audience, without being responsible for providing answers, I wonder how the community expects to decide what sort of information an article like this OUGHT to contain? The most interesting info in this article (I reckon) is the statement that the original text that TW wrote was not the text that was originally performed.  Regarding these two versions, I wonder if it possible to find out whether the text used by UK National Theatre in 2017 is close to the version as originally written by TW? 82.32.112.174 (talk) 01:05, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation is not always needed!