A Commentary of Space by Mark Strand

Space, by Mark Strand, is a short story set in contemporary New York. It begins in
medias res and presents a situation in which a woman is interrupted as she is about to
jump from the roof when a man appears dressed to sunbathe. The narrator gradually
provides us with details about the physical appearance of the characters and the woman,
in particular, will be described from the point of view of the man. These physical
descriptions lead to the narration of the thoughts and perceptions of the man which are
interwoven with the words he addresses to her, expressed in direct speech. The linear
progression of the narrative culminates when, following the narration of the mans
ultimate thoughts and perceptions the woman disappears over the edge.
Basically, the story tells how the man attempts to persuade the woman not to
jump off the roof; the motives of the woman are never made clear, but the mans
thoughts and perceptions are clearly of a sexual nature; his words would be more suited
to the context of someone trying to chat up or seduce a woman in a bar, rather than an
attempt to calm someone about to commit suicide. Neither of the characters knows the
other and while the male characters nature gradually becomes apparent to us through
his thoughts and words, we have only the way the woman looks at the man and her
actions (she steps back at first, pulls her hair away from her face, turns to look at the
man, clenches her teeth, and so on and finally jumps) to allow us to infer what she
might be feeling, and this only regarding her attitude towards the man (antipathy). As
regards characterisation, then, the narrator avoids direct exposition; there is no authorial
comment and therefore we have a more dramatic presentation which depends on what
the characters say to each other (in this case only the man speaks; the womans silence
is significant) as well as the presentation of the male characters thoughts. Basically, the
male characters thoughts and speech indicate to us that the woman appears to him
solely as a sexual object. The womans silence and the way she looks at him (she gazes
at him point blank, an expression used to refer to firing a gun at close range, and
clenches her teeth) suggest that she knows this type and finds him disagreeable. Hence,
although the man is clearly presented as an individual, he corresponds to the type that is
usually called a male chauvinist. The text allows us to make a few suppositions about its
meaning which is closely related to the title and the repetition of the word space at the
end of the story: basically this beautiful woman dislikes being regarded as a sexual
object; the man clearly is only capable of seeing the woman in this way; the space
between them is much more than the ten paces that separate them, but a social and
ideological space that is insurmountable as the man fails to appreciate or understand
what might possibly have led to this situation: the inference might well be that her
suicide has been motivated by just this sort of treatment from men and so the space
between them could never be crossed.
Before looking at the text in more detail, a few words should be said about
narrative technique. This is a linear narration in which the narrator avoids involvement:
only in the opening lines to we find straight narration where the narrator describes the
situation: we would hesitate to call this an orientation or setting the scene, as the action
is already underway (as we said the story begins in medias res); then, gradually, the
perspective shifts to the point of view of the man (this is indicated by the use of he saw,
he wished, he looked at, he wandered, etc.). However, the point of view appears to be
on the roof already as the man is described as coming out on the roof as opposed to
going out. Deixis here might suggest that we are presented with the point of view of the
woman, or what we might call a camera-eye perspective. In any case, this is internal
focalisation which shifts gradually to the man who becomes the internal focaliser
throughout the rest of the story (except right at the end). In the same way we find that
the narration begins with summary but gradually tends towards scene as the process of
observation of the character and the presentation of his words in direct speech and the
indirect presentation of his thoughts (indirect discourse/thought presentation (he wished
he could reach out and pull her towards him) and narrativised discourse /psycho
narration (The man looked at her hands which were now crossed in front of her.She
wore no wedding band). The narrative, then, tends towards mimesis (as opposed to
diegesis) in terms of the degree of perceptibility or intrusiveness of the narrator.
Basically, this is an ulterior narration in which a heterodiegetic narrator (at an
extradiegetic level) adopts internal focalisation which shifts towards the male
protagonist.
Essentially all of this combines to make the text more dramatic as we tend to be
less aware of the involvement of the narrator as we are presented with the thoughts and
speech of the character.
The opening description in the story focuses on physical appearance; however,
at this point, the narrator limits himself to describing the woman as beautiful and her
situation at the edge of the roof. There is a more detailed description of the man at this
point which seems to be described from a perspective that is already on the roof
(coming out on the roof) and which could be attributed to the woman (she stared at
him): here it is as if she were annoyed at the man for intruding at this point. Here, too, it
is his physical appearance that is emphasised although there is no evaluative epithet
about his looks: that is, he is not described as being good-looking and if this is what the
woman sees, there is no implication that she finds him even remotely attractive.
Just the opposite is the case of the man, whose thoughts, observations and words
are all openly sexual in their import: the man observes her hair, her face, her blouse, her
skirt, her high-heeled shoes, and her bare feet. It then becomes more detailed as through
narrativised discourse or psycho narration we find he focuses on her long thighs, small
round buttocks and bikini underpants. He even takes time to notice that she doesnt
wear a wedding ring. However, while the man observes all this, the reader becomes
aware of an attitude in the woman that the man seems not to perceive: as he observes
her hands to check for a ring, the reader notices that her hands are crossed in front of
her; while this detail does not seem striking to the man, it ought to be a signal to the
reader: the woman is on the defensive, may even feel threatened and would seem to be
covering herself from the gaze of the man; that is, it is as if she were protecting herself
from him. While her gaze is point blank (the man seems to interpret this as being direct
and to the point) the reader becomes aware that she is sending a warning shot or is
staring daggers at him. That she is on the defensive, angry or annoyed is suggested by
the fact that her teeth are clenched. While all of this is being interpreted in this way by
the reader, the man limits his observations to the womans beauty and sexuality and the
fact that she is single. This divergence between our point of view and that of the male
character is a source of irony which remains until the end of the story. The fact that we
are in the presence of the subjective and limited perceptions and thoughts of the man is
made more apparent by the use of attributive phrases like he saw and he wished.
At this point the dialogue begins. In most of his utterances we find an attributive
phrase (he said, the man said) although the first intervention is followed by he yelled
(perhaps because of the wind, or perhaps because he talks, inappropriately, too loud at
first). What is notable here is that only the man speaks; his interlocutor responds on no
occasion which is indicative of a lack of cooperation; while this might be seen as a
failure to observe the maxim of politeness, the circumstances in which the dialogue
takes place suggest otherwise. The mans speech is offensive and totally out of place. It
begins with a commissive utterance; his opening move is an invitation: Ill take you to
dinner. This follows immediately after he observes the womans thighs and buttocks
and implies the motives underlying this invitation (he feels not concern or alarm about
the womans situation, but sexual attraction: more irony). However, what is clear here,
and throughout the rest of the dialogue, is that there is a mismatch between the
discourse context (a situation of urgency and distress) and the communicative strategy
(a ploy to chat up or get of with a woman in a bar, etc.). As the dialogue continues, the
womans failure to respond becomes more and more clearly an indication of the mans
lack of tact and/or understanding with regard to her situation and, obviously, women in
general: that is, the space between them. As there is no responding move, that is, she
ignores him, he restarts with another opening move, another commissive, another
invitation or, on this occasion, an offer to talk. Once again, she ignores him; there is no
responding move and he restarts once again, but this time with a different strategy. His
constative or declarative utterance, you have nothing to fear might be construed as an
indirect speech act, a directive, to make her relax or calm down. However, it also
suggests the self-centred nature of the man (she was already going to jump before he
appeared) as well as indicating that she may well feel threatened by his presence. Notice
that during the dialogue, there are no interpolations on the part of the narrator, only
what we might call stage directions indicating what the characters do (on this
occasion the man covers himself, perhaps aware of the incongruence of the situation: he
is almost naked). Later we will also find the presentation of the mans thoughts.
The mans next attempt to restart the conversation is an expressive: I know its
depressing. This is followed by the presentation of his thoughts through narrativised
discourse and indirect discourse (he was not sure what he had meant (narrativised
discourse); he wandered if the woman felt anything (attributive phrase followed by
indirect discourse). We also find his feelings and perceptions linked by the narrator as
he imitates the process of his observations (he liked the way her back curved into her
buttocks and so on. Again we find an attributive phrase to introduce his thought, it
struck him, and later, he wished. At this point we find a significant phrase which
appears here for the second time in the story: as if. Earlier, it was as if she were
preparing to dive, now, it is as if to give him some hope. What is significant here,
along with phrases like it struck him is the impressionistic nature of the narration.
What we have are the thoughts of the character which colour the narration; the
implication is that his understanding of the situation is limited and subjective and,
essentially, as we shall see, mistaken. On this second occasion, the use of as if, implies
that she is certainly not trying to give him hope although he would like to think
otherwise. Throughout, we find that the mans thoughts and observations never stray
from things sexual.
Of course, at no time does the woman cooperate with the man and the way she
ignores him leads to a further restart and a new strategy: Ill tell you what, the man
said, Ill marry you. The fact that he is identified as the man in this case would seem
to place emphasis on gender. Sexual difference is always a factor in this text and, as we
said, is essentially what creates the space between these two characters. Once again, we
have a commissive utterance a promise or an offer of matrimony, but again, we are
aware of the mismatch between context and strategy: what the man says is totally
inappropriate under these circumstances. The following description focuses once again
on the mans observations and his inability to consider the woman as anything other
than a sexual object (he observes the skirt pulled tight against her buttocks). Note, that
at no time after he says Lets go some place and talk (perhaps the least offensive and
most appropriate of all his utterances) does the woman turn round to face him. This
indicates a lack of cooperation, perhaps, but may also be interpreted as indicative of her
commitment to jumping from the roof as well as the failure of the mans strategies in
trying to help her. Commissives follow fast on each other now: well go to Bologna, eat
great food, walk around, drink at night, and observe the world, read books . All of
this, is like a scenario from a film, an idyllic honeymoon, which the man promises.
What is important, though, is the incongruity of everything he says: ironically, the
reader is aware of this, but the male character is not.
Now, as if to confirm our thoughts on the subject, the woman, once more, fails
to respond and the narrator, whether or not from the perspective of the character,
reminds us that the woman does not cooperate; she does not respond, she doesnt turn
round and she doesnt step back from the edge. Her determination and the failure of the
character is being emphasised here. Now, though, we certainly do have the point of
view of the character as he observes the view beyond where the woman is standing.
Here, it is a world that continues unconcerned with what is going on on the roof that is
described. Life goes on in spite of the crisis that is taking place; yet another irony,
perhaps, just as the mans inability to see beyond his own sexual arousal is another.
From now on, there will be no other opportunity for the man to speak. The pause
that ensues only allows time for the man to think about how else he might convince her
not to jump, to close his eyes and, when he opens them, to observe the space between
the womans feet and the edge. However, there is an interpolation on the part of the
narrator now; the narrator intrudes to emphasise (by repeating the word space) that the
woman is now beyond help because of the gap between herself and a society that seems
unable to understand her or her situation, something that we can only infer, although the
story gives us a number of clues to understand her motives which derive from male
behaviour (this mans, too) towards her.
The story ends with the narrator distancing both himself and the reader from the
character. The oxymoron, long moment, indicates the relative nature of time: in
moments of crisis, time seems to slow down; and the narrator also anticipates the
outcome: when she existed before him for the last time. Her suicide is imminent and
the narrator takes time to indicate that the man seems unaware of this, even
unconcerned. His only thought, which indicates even further, the space between them, is
How lovely she is. The climactic moment, is combined with what we might call
understatement here. There is no drama, only a bald statement of the fact.
The end of the story avoids any type of interpolation on the part of the narrator
regarding either the womans motives or the apparent lack of feeling or understanding
on the part of the man. Neither of the characters is developed and, as we said, it
gradually becomes apparent that the male character is a type, what used to be referred to
as a male chauvinist. The woman maintains the same attitude throughout except at those
moments when it is possible to infer her antipathy towards the man. All of this requires
the active anticipation of the reader to interpret a text in which two relatively young
people living in an expensive apartment building in the heart of New York dont even
know each other. Bright lights and big city, in this very intense short story, do not
guarantee happiness. The two characters probably live in the same building but dont
know each other. The attitude of the man towards the woman is superficial; he sees her
only as a beautiful young woman and a possible sexual conquest. The space between
them is the space that exists between everyone in a big city where nobody knows
anyone in a world that doesnt care.