Father Son Dynamic

A man on his deathbed reaches out to estranged loved ones for reconciliation. This is not a novel construct in fiction or reality, however, in Bruno’s Dream, Iris Murdoch trudges this familiar road with unique perspective. We encounter Bruno Greensleave in his “little prison box” (38) of a bed which will undoubtedly be his deathbed as we discover the decrepit state of this man “Real death was nothing to do with obelisks and angels. No wonder they all averted their eyes.” (8) This is a man who, although he may not be on death’s door, is certainly camped out on the front lawn. And with such close proximity to the end, he naturally takes inventory of his life which the reader is privy to. An arachnophile by nature and philatelist by nurture, Bruno seems to have missed the bus on his true calling (this phrase is actually used for Adelaide and I suspect it is a recurring theme for multiple characters) and looks back on a life of regret muttering “Poor Bruno, poor Bruno, poor Bruno….” (17) Even in the midst of his bitter nostalgia, he does not take responsibility for his decision to going into his father’s business of the printing press over pursuing his love of zoology (that is his father’s fault, obviously) nor does he own the consequences of his infidelity, allowing his wife’s call to him on her deathbed to go unanswered. But the most interesting relationships Bruno wrangles with, and one which I would like to delve further into, is the one he has with his son Miles as I am interested in Murdoch’s treatment of this father-son deathbed dynamic. The main question I am left to consider after reading the first six chapters is, what is the reason for Bruno’s decision to reach out to Miles? Or as Murdoch states, “Was there any point in trying even now to be reconciled whatever that meant?” (12) Especially when considering Bruno’s toxic relationship with his own father, whom he already blamed for his unfulfilled life and describes as “a source of negative energy, a spring of irritation and resentment, a hole through which things drained away.” (8) Although his father has long since passed away, this relationship is ostensibly set up as a major source of consternation for Bruno and, if his reflections are any indicator, it is very much still present in Bruno’s mind. So perhaps Bruno’s desire to reestablish a connection with his son is a way in which he can rewrite his own paternal relationship issues, simply an illustration of psychological displacement from father to son. I find this to be an unsatisfying answer, though, as the dynamic between Bruno and his father and Bruno and his son are very different. Bruno believed that “only through business, only through money, had he ever really communicated with his father” (8) and pursued a career in his father’s printing business because of this. Miles, on the other hand, did not feel the need to follow his father and grandfather’s legacy and Bruno “had admired his for refusing to go into the works, envied him perhaps.” (11) Not only did Miles clearly diverge from his father in terms of paternal communication/identification, Bruno was aware of this and even coveted Miles for this feat. Therefore it would be dubious to believe that Bruno’s desire is a mere displacement for his unresolved issues with his own father. When one reaches the end of their life, the possibility of infinite nothingness is a terrifying prospect. For this reason, many people turn to their religious/spiritual beliefs, particularly clinging to the notion of an afterlife, to assuage their concern that their last breath really is their last. By accepting the possibility of an afterlife, particularly the Christian notion of Heaven and Hell, one must therefore confront their actions on a moral level. For this reason do we find that people on their deathbed will reach out and make amends to people they perceive to have wronged. In Bruno’s case, he rehashes his unkind treatment to Miles’ soon to be wife, stating that he does not wish to have “coffee colored grandchildren” and also reflects on the fact that his infidelities to his wife may also be the reason that Miles “had forgiven nothing” (12) Moreover, with Bruno’s dismissal of his wife before her death and the subsequent realization that “the most precious thing of all was lost to him forever” (40) perhaps it is on a moral ground that Bruno wishes to reconnect with Miles. He wonders to himself “could Miles forgive him on behalf of the others (*I take this to be referencing his wife and daughter in law) or would it all be coldness and cruelty and an increase of horror?” (13) In his projection of what it would look like to see Miles again, he imagines “{Miles} would bow his head and look upon his father with great gentleness and the room would be filled with an aura of reconciliation and healing” (31) Surely the hope that Bruno has for his son’s forgiveness and the possibility of healing is a testament to a moral basis of Bruno’s motivation? Unfortunately, this explanation also falls short of expectation for “as one grows older, thought Bruno, one becomes less moral, there is less time, one bothers less, one gets careless” (10) In fact, as the novel progresses, it is clear that the offenses which he has committed against his son (to the point of needing reconciliation) do not bother him at all. “It was his accusers and not his crimes which troubled him” (31) So again I posit the question of why? Why is it that Bruno believes “there are things I can only talk to Miles about” (33) when regarding the potential of his “life confession”? The most reasonable answer to be found is actually provided in the text with the caveat that Bruno’s choice is most likely an ill-advised and foolhardy one. Specifically, “it was a mere convention after all that one ought to be on good terms with one’s son or father. Sons and fathers were individuals and should be paid the complement of being treated as such.” (12) Bruno is not reaching out to Miles because he is psychologically tormented by his relationship with his own father (he might be, but that is not the reason for his communication with his son) nor is he looking for forgiveness and reconciliation because he fears eternal damnation and seeks redemption. It is simply because it is what one does at the end of one’s life. The conception that “blood is blood” is sociologically ingrained in our culture and we often follow this convention even when it can suck the life out of us, as it did with Bruno and his father. This also provides a reason for why, even after making his decision and insisting Danby write the letter (not that very day of course) he immediately begins to rethink his decision as “{Miles} could hurt him now terribly…it was better to die in peace.” (37) Clearly, this convention, although ingrained, does not supercede one’s own natural selfish considerations. The caveat that sons and fathers should be paid the complement of being treated as such is also supported historically in literature. In considering celebrated father/son pairs, in the vein of Odysseus and Telemachus or King Henry and Prince Hal, one common theme they share is the vast amount of distance these individuals have between them for the majority of the tales. It is only with this distance that the sons come to respect their fathers and vice versa. It is with knowledge of this that I am concerned about the results of Bruno’s conventional crisis.