AIDS Memoirs
121
the word (AIDS) as a sort of reverse hex,” Monette said, “as if by daring to speak
I would neutralize its power. Being scared is not the same as being convinced. Fear
still has room to maneuver, and every wave of its energy goes into pushing the
terrible thing away, like the ocean leaving a body on the sand” (63).
About halfway through Horwitz’s nineteen-month battle with AIDS, Monette’s
denial transforms itself at times into unmanageable anger at the suffering and
debasement incurred by his lover: night sweats, fevers, pneumonia, infections,
and eventually blindness. And Monette’s anger was further fueled by what he
perceived to be a heartless and uncaring government and media that were doing
little to educate the public about the virus because it was deemed to be only a “gay
disease.” Monette said he watched as AIDS became the fodder for gossip— “glib
and dismissive, smutty, infantile.” He adds:
.. .1 was beginning to witness states of denial I’d already been through,
and they left a taste like dirty metal in my mouth. Gay men in the high
purlieus of West Hollywood—that nexus of arts and decoration, agentry,
publicity, fifteen minutes in a minispot—^would imply with a quaff of
Perrier that AIDS was for losers. Too much sleaze, too many late nights,
very non-Westside. And that’s when I started getting angry...(19)
According to Kubler-Ross , the display of anger over the patient’s predicament
often follows when the stage of denial cannot be maintained any longer. At that
point, the logical question becomes: “Why me?” Such anger, Kubler-Ross notes,
often is displaced in a variety of directions, with doctors, nurses, family members,
testing methods, and dietary restrictions the prime targets (63-64). In Monette’s
case, his anger at the disease consuming Horwitz spills over into targeting
government officials, mainstream journalists, and gays not willing to come out of
the closet. He even, although a little ashamedly, admits to feeling anger and
resentment toward people who were not ill and not afflicted with AIDS (47). KublerRoss asserts that a patient who is respected and understood, who is given attention
and some time to cope, will soon reduce his or her level of anger. “He will know
that he is a valuable human being, cared for, allowed to function at the highest
possible level as long as he can” (65). However, Monette’s anger persisted when
confronted with a number of doctors and nurses seemingly indifferent to the plight
of gay men with AIDS (311).
From Kubler-Ross’ perspective, the anger exhibited by many terminally ill
patients eventually bums out when seething proves futile, giving way to the next
stage of bargaining. This phase often hinges on making an agreement with God to
postpone the impending death in exchange for the patient’s promise to engage in
good behavior, typically “a life dedicated to God” or “a life in the service of the