Bad Summer People

The reference to Susan Steinhagen introduces a more absolute version of morality that stands as a contrast to the other characters’ moral relativism, and her watchful and judgmental observations of the behavior around her serves to emphasize the presence of an ethical rubric that the younger generation of summer people on Fire Island neglects to employ in their own dealings with others. Even when the main characters were children, Susan often imposed ordinary good-sense rules, which were to their benefit and safety. Now, as adults, the primary characters interpret Susan’s various social rules as being unreasonably judgmental. They still feel that Susan judges their behavior within strict categories of right or wrong, or good versus evil, standing as a sharp contrast to their much more flexible sense of morality. Yet Susan is not the only character who raises the question of The Consequences of Moral Relativism, for even young Micah, jaded by the unsavory information he gleans through his job as a bartender, wonders whether the previous generation lost their moral direction as a result of growing old or if there is something about Salcombe that has irreparably changed them. As the novel progresses, it becomes clear that Salcombe’s relative isolation from the complexity of the outside world contributes to an attitude of permissiveness that allows people to more actively pursue the desires that they would ordinarily suppress.

Within this overarching philosophical framework, this section of the novel intensifies the various conflicts at work, for the main characters are beginning to experience the discomfort that comes as a consequence of the dishonesty of their choices. However, that discomfort is not yet sufficient to deter them from their self-indulgent behavior. As the major players continue to spiral out of control, the perspectives of minor characters have a grounding effect, for they provide a more impartial view of the people who constitute Lauren and Jason’s social group. Minor characters such as Paul and Micah also illustrate that although other people’s problems are different from those of the main characters, everyone struggles with similar dilemmas. The moral of the postmodern emphasis on micronarratives is aptly summarized by Lisa Metzner when she chastises the gossiping group at the beach, reminding them that no one is so virtuous that they can afford to judge others. Her diatribe reveals the author’s broader philosophy, for it reflects the merit of the postmodern approach. This stance allows the author to develop the multi-faceted yet universal aspects of humanity in multiple characters, with no one character taking on the mantle of ultimate good or ultimate evil despite the many flaws on display.

Whereas Lisa voices the author’s postmodern perspective on human frailty, Susan embodies a more traditional perspective, for she recognizes the fallibility of her fellow human beings, but she also judges them according to the larger metanarrative of right and wrong. Within this framework, certain behaviors are deemed to be proper, such as marital fidelity, financial honesty, and adherence to rules as minor as preventing children from running on the boardwalk. Other things, by contrast, are simply not acceptable in Susan’s view. Yet even so, Susan finds herself shackled by her own strict values, for she also embodies the belief in everyone’s right to privacy and therefore keeps her secrets to herself, unlike the people whom Lisa chastises for gossiping. Susan judges the people around her, but she also tries to guide them toward better behavior, which explains her decision to indirectly warn Robert (via Rachel) to be more circumspect with Lauren. Ultimately, keeping her neighbors’ secrets is an expression of the value of fidelity for Susan; she shows loyalty to her community by refusing to spread damaging gossip.

As the author continues to develop her main plotlines, the overarching theme of Betrayal and Disloyalty becomes particularly prominent. For example, Sam’s breakdown at the beach marks Jason’s first close encounter with his so-called best friend since Jason’s affair with Jen first began. His memory of Sam saving him from drowning when they were children imposes an obligation on him to keep an eye on Sam now, and the encounter forces him to lie to Sam outright. They are alone, face to face, with no way to easily escape one another. In this context, Jason has no way to avoid the uncomfortable issue; he can either lie or tell the truth. While the truth would likely destroy their friendship, Jason would be free to pursue Jen openly; however, because he is unaware that Jen has already lost interest in him, Jason chooses to continue his deception of Sam.

Similarly, Robert’s discomfort grows along with the amount of money he has been stealing from the club, and his affair with Lauren becomes more socially dangerous, but he still doesn’t seriously consider backing away from either form of betrayal. Thus, Robert also explores the theme of moral relativism when he rationalizes his actions by reflecting that the $5,000 will not do more than pay a few bills, so it isn’t enough to make him feel like a thief. In absolute terms, identity as a thief is not defined by the amount taken, but the act of theft itself. Ironically, Robert persists in viewing himself as being morally superior to the summer people because in his mind, moral behavior is a matter of the scale of a transgression rather its innate nature as the “wrong thing” to do. He believes that the others are worse than he is because they steal more and cheat more; Lauren, after all, is the one who initiated their affair and who is using Robert for her own enjoyment. Robert’s double standard arises from the intersection of moral relativism and power; he perceives the summer people as being worse than himself because they have more money and thus more power to pursue their illicit desires.