“We can evade reality but we cannot avoid the consequences of doing so”

The chasm between reality and the imaginary is precarious. A faltered step across the
border of reality and fantasy may mean the difference between the escapist relief in
momentary illusion or the consequence of instead falling into the bottomless pit of
insanity. When we escape reality, Tennessee Williams suggests that we not do invalidate
that which we left behind. Through the parable of Blanche Dubois when it particularly
evident how sinister the consequence of delusion can be, abandoned and unwanted
elements of reality can grow, fester and encroaches further and further along, pushing the
light-headed further across the border. In William’s fictional A Street Car Named Desire,
Blanche flees from the real world as bubonic reality becomes intolerable. Her miseries
chase her away, and not safely over the bridge to a fantasy, but rather to mindless
insanity. According to Williams, we can escape reality, but cannot escape the
consequences of doing so.

Although reality triumphs over fantasy in a Street Car Named Desire, seclusion in fantasy
as a sparingly used escapist tool is celebrated. To interpret Williams implied critique of
reality it is most useful to define it as the consensus reality – the state of things as they
actually are by the apparent consensus. When Blanche is overwhelmed by the burden of
reality, she retreats to an illusionary world where she is fortunate enough to somewhat
maintain the genteel appearance and behaviour of a Southern Belle. Unfortunately, this
degenerates into further delusion as she comes to believe that she is being taken on a
cruise by a billionaire gentleman. She escapes into fancy at her fancy and willingly
abandons the real world. “I don’t want realism, I want magic!” she exclaims. Her
imagination allowed her to filter out the dread of being examined by a psychiatrist, but it
did not filter out the real world result. Material consequences are independent of delusion
in the internal environment in the mind in the novel. Williams is suggesting that the
world outside his fictional reality operates in much the same way. Through the use of
Blanche, he suggests that consequences for evading reality exist at least for those who are
not implicated in a false or evaded reality.

To contrast and compare Williams with other entities that have engaged in the debate on
escapism and consequentiality I will examine a few key philosophers and philosophical
perspectives on the issue. I will also consider extended views on the prompt that give a
fuller account of the ‘internal’ and ‘mental’ consequences of escaping reality that
William neglects.

Ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle held the view that we experience a representative
reality. According to the philosophy of perception, we rather experience our minds’
appropriations of external stimulus that simulates reality. In this respect, we can never
truly escape reality, as we are always only teetering on the edge of grasping it at all. If we
define reality as all that is, rather than the consensus reality, the conundrum of escaping
reality becomes even greater. Blanche’s delusions in the former sense are imaginary
relative to the consensus of those in Stanley’s household. Congruent with the former
definition, these delusional concepts within her mind are percepts with equal integrity to
the percepts of another person. A mirror image of a vase is identical, in terms of
perception, to a real vase, in terms of visual stimuli. Two people looking at either will
receive the exact same visual stimuli. That is, they will perceive light. With this
considered, there is no escape from reality, only escape from relative aspects of reality,
Further considerations must by taken for the philosophical stance of Berkley Idealism and
Scepticism. The consequences of Blanche’s delusions are implicated in her mind. Since
she is able to escape from reality by retreating into her mind, consequences, which are
perceived in her mind may be as easily perverted internally as the integrated elements of
reality are. This is purported by Berkley Idealism. ‘Sceptics’ diverge at an early stage in
this debate by proposing that that inherently uncertain nature of reality makes this entire
debate irrelevant. Although Williams does not suggest how consequences impact
specifically on the escapee, philosophers have already prefilled that void for him.
Tangential to this, other significant thinkers have held opposing views that suppose that a
discussion on consequentiality is irrelevant since through either lexical technical or
philosophical grounds and thus escaping reality is not in question.

The capacity to escape reality and deterministic consequence is a contentious issue in

philosophical, literary and neuropsychological studies. Williams boldly debate that:
whilst a useful tool, evading reality has consequences in the world external to the
escapee. This is demonstrated by Blanche’s final descent into madness. He does not
elaborate on what he believes is incurred in consequence to the individual in question.
However, notable philosopher have, and from each of Aristotles representative realism,
Berkley idealism and Scepticism there have been differing views as the answer of Who’s
Reality. There is no onerous enough burden of evidence or logic on the topic of escapism
or determinism to establish either a link between the two and neither is it beyond reason
to doubt the plausibility and application of each of escaping reality and enduring the
consequences of doing so. T. S. Eliot said that “Humankind cannot stand very much
reality. It follows that we do not understand very much of reality either.