Candidate # 34408 1 Power in Drama L N250 A S S S E S S E D C O U R S E W O R K E S S A Y LITERATURE AND SOCIETY IN BRITAIN, 1900- PRESENT, 2002/3 Candidate # 34408 Assessed Coursework 26 April 2003 LN250 / Wrenn
Candidate # 34408 2 CONSIDER THE DIFFERENT WAYS IN WHICH POWER AND POWER RELATIONSHIPS ARE DRAMATISED IN THE WORK OF ANY TWO OR MORE TWENTIETH CENTURY PLAYWRIGHTS. Power is a common theme in dramatic literature, perhaps because it so closely echoes the experiences of everyday life. In constant exchanges with familial authorities, political and religious leaders, and personal power struggles, playwrights and their readers and audiences can readily identify with the dramatisation of power on the stage. But power is not limited to a singular idea or subject, as the works of George Bernard Shaw, Harold Pinter, and Samuel Beckett illustrate. Each playwright motivated by a specific agenda or reserve of experiences takes a unique approach to the theme of power: Shaw s Mrs. Warren s Profession is about a mother and daughter s conflict of moral values; Pinter s The Birthday Party shows the confrontation between a non-conformist individual and the greater society; and Beckett s Endgame details the tenuous relationship between master and slave. An exploration of each play s consideration of power and depiction of power relationships reveals the many similar and different nuances that flesh out the theme of power in drama. The theme of power abounds in Shaw s four-act play, Mrs. Warren s Profession, about independent, 22-year old Vivie Warren and her ultimate emancipation from all forms of external authority, including that of her mother s. The characterization of Vivie is of central importance to the play because it shows her to be an unconventional representative of power. From the very beginning in Act I, she grips the hand of guest Mr. Praed with a resolute and hearty grip, and is described as prompt, strong, confident, [and] self-possessed (Shaw 212). Having studied mathematics at Cambridge, she informs Mr. Praed that she plans to work in actuarial calculations and conveyance, and refutes any attraction to art, romance, and holidays. Thus, within the first ten minutes, Shaw has introduced the character of Vivie as a full reversal of the docile and submissive image of
Candidate # 34408 3 like women in her day, already playing with the idea of power in the context of societal expectations. The main power relationship that drives the play, however, is that between Vivie and her often distant and little-known mother, Mrs. Warren. Conflict erupts when Mrs. Warren talks with maternal authority to Vivie, who having little idea of her mother s past, responds without regard or obedience but with her own authority: VIVIE. Has it really never occurred to you, mother, that I have a way of life like other people? MRS WARREN. What nonsense is this you re trying to talk? Do you want to shew your independence, now that you re a great little person at school? Don t be a fool, child. VIVIE. That s all you have to say on the subject, is it, mother? MRS WARREN. Don t you keep on asking me questions like that. Hold your tongue. You and your way of life, indeed! What next? Your way of life will be what I please, so it will. I ve been noticing these airs in you If you think I m going to put up with them you re mistaken; and the sooner you find it out, the better. Do you know who you re speaking to, Miss? VIVIE. No. Who are you? What are you? MRS WARREN. You young imp! (Shaw 240) Shaw relies successfully on the raw emotion and dialogue between Vivie and Mrs. Warren to portray the growing tensions on stage, and this is especially evident when Vivie s assertions of power push Mrs. Warren to emotional rage: MRS WARREN. Oh, I won t bear it: I won t put up with the injustice of it. What right have you to set yourself up above me like this? You boast of what you are to me to me, who gave you the chance of being what you are. What chance had I? Shame on you for a bad daughter and a stuck-up prude! (Shaw 242) At this display of retaliation, Vivie is no longer confident; for her replies, which have sounded sensible and strong to her so far, now begin to ring rather woodenly and even priggishly against the new tone of her mother (Shaw 242). The balance of power between mother and daughter, then, has tipped from Vivie to Mrs. Warren s favour, and Shaw indicates this through the appropriate stage direction and consequent dialogue. This change in Vivie s confrontational demeanour is followed by a gradual relaxation of tensions, as Mrs. Warren at last intimates her past to her daughter. It is a life of poverty and of prostitution, of being powerless and nearly compelled to the work she undertook primarily on practical terms to survive. Upon realizing her mother s
Candidate # 34408 4 circumstances, Vivie softens her hard-hearted manner towards her mother and experiences a growing respect and affection for her. The power relationship between mother and daughter becomes less one of dominance and more of companionship, and the two share a sentimental moment at the end of Act II. Thus, Vivie s abandonment of superiority and Mrs. Warren s confession of truth (or, at least, the partial truth) place the two on equal footing. Shaw does not end the play on such peaceful terms, however. When it is revealed that Mrs. Warren is still involved in the prostitution business as a managing director, Vivie responds in shock and disgust. The once-balanced mother-daughter relationship is in jeopardy again, and despite Mrs. Warren s appeals, Vivie asks in Act IV for them to never meet again. Vivie is revolted that her mother continues in an abhorrent business, but her mother s defence indicates the sense of power she gets from continuing in a lucrative and thriving industry, however questionable: MRS WARREN. But you don t know all that that means: you re too young. It means a new dress every day; it means theatres and balls every night; it means having the pick of all the gentlemen in Europe at your feet; it means a lovely house and plenty of servants; it means the choicest of eating and drinking; it means everything you like, everything you want, everything you can think of. And what are you here? A mere drudge, toiling and moiling early and late for your bare living and two cheap dresses a year. Think over it. (Shaw 278) Vivie firmly rejects her mother partly on moral grounds, informing her, If I had been you, mother, I might have done as you did; but I should not have lived one life and believed in another (Shaw 282). The play closes with Vivie alone, satisfied, and ready to pursue an unhindered future of her own choosing. Bernard Dukore in Bernard Shaw, Playwright: Aspects of Shavian Drama notes that Vivie s rejection of her mother is but one of four major rejections, allowing her to be free from all authority at the end of Mrs. Warren s Profession. Her rejection of Crofts, Mrs. Warren s business partner, shows that she is not interested in the appeal of wealth and social position, and her rejection of Praed, Mrs. Warren s friend, symbolises a rejection of
Candidate # 34408 5 art. Her further rejection of Frank, with whom she plays with affectionately throughout the exposition of the play, signals a rejection of romantic love, and the final rejection of her mother indicates a rejection of maternal love (Dukore 73). In each relationship, a character tries unsuccessfully to persuade Vivie to change her mind, and Shaw finishes the play with an empowered, fully independent Vivie the apparent victor of these numerous power struggles. Shaw wrote Mrs. Warren s Profession not just for mere entertainment but also as a criticism to a society that practically forced women to consider prostitution and then condemned them for having chosen so: Though it is quite natural and right for Mrs Warren to choose what is, according to her lights, the least immoral alternative, it is none the less infamous of society to offer such alternatives (Shaw 200). Hence, while Mrs. Warren s Profession details the power struggle between mother and daughter and considers power through the guises of wealth, independence, and self-respect, it is also a play largely motivated by this political message playing as before on the idea of power in the context of society. There is a similar political motivation in Harold Pinter s The Birthday Party, a frightening three-act play that deals with the power struggle between a defiant individual and the society that demands of him conformity and obedience, although on the surface it looks little like this. In The Birthday Party, two intruders named Goldberg and McCann arrive at a seaside boarding house to meet Stanley, a retired concert pianist who has been staying with Petey and his wife Meg, the boarding house s owners. While it is obvious that Goldberg and McCann have been directed to find and reform Stanley, it is never clear what Stanley has committed or where precisely Goldberg and McCann come from, resulting in a complicated power struggle involving fear, pressure, and conformity. The threat of an intrusion is real from the start, setting the tone for the rest of the play. Upon hearing that Meg is preparing for two gentlemen, Stanley becomes somewhat
Candidate # 34408 6 dishevelled. I don t believe it, he tells Meg, and later concludes, They won t come. Forget all about it. It s a false alarm. A false alarm (Pinter 11). Once the gentlemen have arrived, Stanley becomes slightly more frantic, bombarding Meg with questions: What two gentlemen? Who are they? What do they want here? How long for? But why here? Why not somewhere else? What are they called? What are their names? (Pinter 22-3). It is clear that these two gentlemen pose a threat to Stanley s otherwise lazy and uneventful existence in the boarding house, but again, the reason is unknown. It is this element of the unknown that gives the power relationships in Pinter s The Birthday Party a different dimension than that found in Shaw s Mrs. Warren s Profession, where most of the crimes are eventually revealed and known. When McCann and Stanley meet at the beginning of Act II, Stanley holds control of the situation. He asks of McCann s origins and reasons for staying, later gripping McCann s arm and hissing to him an unclear defence ( I ve explained to you, damn you, that all those years I lived in Basingstoke I never stepped outside the door (Pinter 30).) McCann is the presumed inferior, for Stanley tells him, Look. You look an honest man. You re being made a fool of, that s all. You understand? (Pinter 30). As this scene illustrates, Pinter has the action of the play depend on the setting, focusing on who is in control of the room [as] the stage becomes the territorial space in which characters try to dominate and take, or keep, possession (Naismith 4). Thus far, Stanley is holding possession, using dialogue as a means of combat and self-defence. But this changes completely once Goldberg enters the scene, and Stanley is left to defend himself against two ruthless men. Stanley initially attempts to assert his own authority, keeping control of the situation by attempting to expel Goldberg and McCann: STANLEY. I m afraid there s been a mistake. We re booked out. Your room is taken. Mrs Boles forgot to tell you. You ll have to find somewhere else. GOLDBERG. Are you the manager here? STANLEY. That s right. GOLDBERG. Is it a good game?
Candidate # 34408 7 STANLEY. I run the house. I m afraid you and your friend will have to find other accommodation. (Pinter 32) Goldberg resists, and Stanley forces a final and emphatic, Get out (Pinter 33). But from this moment onward, Goldberg and McCann slowly dominate the drama, and Stanley is left to succumb to their strength in both numbers and tenacity. Interestingly, Pinter has the characters involved in a host of movements before Stanley finally sits. Goldberg moves to the armchair, McCann moves to Goldberg, Stanley moves away from them, then later to the table, McCann sits on the table, and so forth. The effect of this is to further add to the growing tension in the room, a precursor to the vicious assault to be had on Stanley. This merciless assault by Goldberg and McCann takes the form of a tortuous interrogation, with staccato-like, rapid-fire accusations and questions from the basic ( Where did you come from? and Why did you come here? (Pinter 35)) to the absurd ( Is the number 846 possible or necessary? and Who watered the wicket in Melbourne? (Pinter 37,8)). With the exception of McCann s snatching of Stanley s glasses, there is minimal physical action during the interrogation, lending it to resemble a kind of conditioning using repetitive and quick statements and questions. The assault proves victorious, as Stanley screams from the harassment, and Goldberg and McCann are now clearly in command of the situation. Again, it is unknown to the audience why Goldberg and McCann have come to harass Stanley, but Pinter writes with a particular agenda. Regarding The Birthday Party, he states, [T]he hierarchy, the Establishment, the arbiters, the socio-religious monsters arrive to effect alteration and censure upon a member of the club who has discarded responsibility towards himself and others (Naismith 41). With this in mind, Goldberg and McCann are representatives and perhaps even missionaries of the Judeo-Christian tradition in Western civilization a tradition that demands conformity in family, career,
Candidate # 34408 8 politics, and religion. The play, then, is not simply a power struggle between Stanley and the two intruders, but also a power struggle between an individual non-conformist (like a musician, in Stanley s case) and the strict traditions of the greater society. It is perhaps for this reason that few details are disclosed regarding Goldberg and McCann s arrival and Stanley s defensive panic. Structured as a series of verbal confrontations, The Birthday Party illustrates society s so-called revenge on those who choose to opt out of their usual roles and responsibilities as members of that society. Goldberg and McCann, as forceful delegates of the society s authority, effectively destroy Stanley s identity and transform him into the visual representative of respectable society as seen in Act III: clean-shaven and dressed in a well cut suit and white collar (Naismith 47). The play closes with the triumph of Goldberg and McCann (and thus, society) as they take Stanley away from the boarding house to an unknown place. Pinter, in detailing this power struggle between Stanley and the two intruders, the individual and society, leaves his audience with this ominous and chilling thought: conformity overpowers individuality. Now, both Shaw in Mrs. Warren s Profession and Pinter in The Birthday Party dramatise the power struggle between two entities in a straightforward environment, with commonplace props, familiar surroundings, and realistic conversations and relationships. Beckett in Endgame, however, does not follow suit, and creates a world of his own where two characters, Hamm and Clov, exemplify the power relationship between master and slave. Furthermore, Beckett does not seem to include much of a necessary political or social message in Endgame, but rather seems to present his play as a metaphor for infinity. One noticeable distinction in Beckett s dramatisation of power is that the setting of the one-act Endgame is simple, intended to focus attention on the extreme simplicity of dramatic situation and issue in the play (Fletcher 102). The interior is bare with two small windows, and onstage there are two ashbins (the residences of Hamm s parents, Nagg and
Candidate # 34408 9 Nell) and an armchair on castors. The dialogue is simple as well, consisting mostly between Hamm and Clov throughout the play of short phrases and statements. This dialogue serves the important purpose of affirmation, of knowing that one exists because there is a reply and response. Essentially, Hamm and Clov engage in conversation as a reassurance that the other is there. It is clear that Clov is a servant of Hamm given Hamm s various requests to Clov and Clov s subsequent obedience, but this does not make Clov any less powerful. The ambiguity of the relationship between the two is highlighted by the fact that although the master [Hamm] has social superiority, the servant [Clov] is actually more powerful, since he is more necessary to the master than vice versa (Pilling 71). Consequently, the two characters engage in a tenuous, dependent relationship, as Hamm and Clov need each other to pass the time: HAMM. I ll give you nothing more to eat. CLOV. Then we ll die. HAMM. I ll give you just enough to keep you from dying. You ll be hungry all the time. CLOV. Then we shan t die. I ll go and get the sheet. HAMM. No! I ll give you one biscuit per day. One and a half. Why do you stay with me? CLOV. Why do you keep me? HAMM. There s no one else. CLOV. There s nowhere else. (Beckett 14) Their dependency is further confirmed by their complimentary characteristics; for example, while Hamm can sit, Clov cannot (Beckett 16), and while Hamm is blind, Clov can see. Hamm needs Clov to wait on him, and Clov needs Hamm to open the larder. The two seem inseparable, and their relationship is always in a precarious, almost self-contradictory balance: CLOV. So you all want me to leave you. HAMM. Naturally. CLOV. Then I ll leave you. HAMM. You can t leave us. CLOV. Then I shan t leave you. (Beckett 29)
Candidate # 34408 10 A threat to this power balance exists as Clov alludes to leaving Hamm throughout the play, forcing Hamm to live on his own. In response to one of Hamm s many requests, Clov responds, Do this, do that, and I do it. I never refuse. Why? (Beckett 32). It is clear that Clov realises his advantage as the servant, for towards the end of the play, Hamm claims, Gone from me you d be dead, and Clov replies, And vice versa (Beckett 45). At the close of the play, Clov is prepared to leave, and the audience is left to wonder whether or not he will sever his relationship with Hamm permanently. Power in Endgame, thus, has little to do with wealth, defiance, or conformity, as in the example plays previous, but more with an affirmation borne through superiority and dependence. With sparse physical resources, Beckett s drama is driven by the ongoing dialogue between Hamm and Clov, with an interlude of interactions between Hamm and his parents, Nagg and Nell. 1 Beckett s play is perhaps more obscure than Shaw s or Pinter s but still relies heavily on dialogue to convey the power dynamic and demonstrates yet another approach to the dramatisation of power and power relationships. Naturally, the theme of power is never completely absent in dramatic literature; for where there is conflict, there also lies a definite struggle for power. Shaw, Pinter, and Beckett each undertake an individual approach to this theme in their works, and we should expect them to. The subject of power is vast, encompassing wealth and integrity in Mrs. Warren s Profession, conformity and fear in The Birthday Party, and dependency and affirmation in Endgame. There are, essentially, no boundaries for playwrights regarding the dramatisation of power and power relationships, as both of these take an infinite array of forms and actions, situations and scenarios. Shaw, Pinter, and Beckett are but a few of the countless playwrights who dramatise power to further the reach of dramatic literature, consequently drawing from all edges of human existence. Power in drama, for them and their audiences, thus becomes a spectacle of humanity engaging, illuminating, and familiar. 1 These interactions, interestingly, are further comments on the nature of power, for although Nagg and Nell are domestically superior to Hamm as his parents, they are the ones hidden in ashbins, fed and controlled by Hamm.
Candidate # 34408 11 BIBLIOGRAPHY Beckett, Samuel. (1985) Endgame. London: Faber & Faber. Dukore, Bernard. (1973) Bernard Shaw: Aspects of Shavian Drama. Columbia: University of Missouri Press. Esslin, Martin. (1973) Pinter: A Study of His Plays. London: Eyre Methuen. Fletcher, John. (2000) Samuel Beckett: A Faber Critical Guide. London: Faber & Faber. Naismith, Bill. (2000) Harold Pinter: A Faber Critical Guide. London: Faber & Faber. Pilling, John. (1994) The Cambridge Companion to Beckett. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pinter, Harold. (1960) The Birthday Party: A Play. London: Samuel French. Shaw, Bernard. (1946) Plays Unpleasant. Middlesex: Penguin Books.