Page : 1
(Cover Page)
Department Of English
Name of Institution :................................................................................
MA (Final) Year
TERM
PAPER
ON
Submitted to:
Name of Teacher...........................
Lecturer/Assistant/Associate Professor
Department of English
Name of Institution.........................
Prepared by:
Name of the Student...................................
Class Roll :...............
Session :.................................
Department of English
Name of institution........................................
Page : 2
Department of English
Name of Institution..........................
Declaration
Name of the Teacher.........................
& Signature: ................................
Page : 3
Abstract
Modern drama, which developed around
the turn of the twentieth century, focused on alienation and disconnection.
These themes can be seen in some of the most famous plays of playwrights such
as Henrik Ibsen, George Bernard Shaw, and Eugene O'Neill. Drama, literature that is written to
be performed on the stage, is a form that goes back to the ancient Greeks and
includes such writers as Shakespeare, Sophocles, and Christopher Marlowe.
However, it is a form that tends to go in and out of fashion depending on the
availability of theaters and audiences. The most prominent plays involved in
modern drama discussions revolve around sociopolitical aspects of a
playwright's life and times. Plays such as "Pygmalion," "The
Importance of Being Earnest" and "The Glass Menagerie" all
delved into social issues at the time they were written. "The Importance
of Being Earnest" commented on English social structural barriers and the
absurdity of upper-class thought.
Modern drama also focuses on different
performing styles and aesthetics as they changed from operatic styles in Europe
from the 1700s and early 1800s. Sets, characters, actors and portrayals were
more open for interpretation. Playwrights were less concerned with fantastical
plots, lush scenery and histrionic characters. Instead, playwrights focused on
realistic topics, such as incarceration, poverty, social status, racial
tension, war and everyday plights of workers. "Modern Drama" expounds
upon several subjects of theatrical performances. The quarterly publication began
in 1958. Reviews, analysis and peer-reviewed articles are included in the
journal. After a period of being dormant for much of the nineteenth century,
drama made a comeback in the last decades of the century and the early decades
of the twentieth century, thanks to writers like Henrik Ibsen, George Bernard
Shaw, and Eugene O'Neill. Though these writers were very different, their work
shared characteristics that were representative of a new form of drama known as
modern drama.
The modern drama is characterized by
its unique subject matter like the romanticism of the poor, the strict
depiction of real life and the use of symbols, imagery and metaphors. Although
modern drama evolved over time, its theme of using theater to challenge and
experiment upon social norms remained constant. The first phase of modern drama
began in the late 19th century with the rise of romanticism. Like other
modernist plays, romantic productions focused on the stories of those who
inhabited the lower rungs of the social ladder. However, where later modernist
drama movements would attempt to portray these stories as truthfully as
possible, romantic plays exaggerated, dramatized, warped and romanticized the
character's lives for the theater.
Realism was the second phase of modern
drama. Realism used the same subject matter as romanticism. However, the two
movements differ in that realism did not attempt to romanticize its subjects
lives. Realism theater sets, costumes and props, were made to mirror their
real-life counterparts. Realism strived to eliminate the distance between the
audience and the stage by making its productions mimic real life as close as
possible. Naturalism exhibits the same characteristics of realism. However,
naturalist plays removed the dramatic elements of theater in an effort to
present a real-life moment of its subjects. Naturalist plays were therefore
considered "slice of life" plays because they rarely changed their
settings, and the time span of the play mirrored the passing of time for the
audience.
The Modern Drama, as all modern
literature, mirrors the complex struggle of life, — the struggle which,
whatever its individual or topical expression, ever has its roots in the depth
of human nature and social environment, and hence is, to that extent, universal.
Such literature, such drama, is at once the reflex and the inspiration of
mankind in its eternal seeking for things higher and better. Perhaps those who
learn the great truths of the social travail in the school of life, do not need
the message of the drama. But there is another class whose number is legion,
for whom that message is indispensable. In countries where political oppression
affects all classes, the best intellectual element have made common cause with
the people, have become their teachers, comrades, and spokesmen. The medium
which has the power to do that is the Modern Drama, because it mirrors every
phase of life and embraces every strata of society, — the Modern Drama, showing
each and all caught in the throes of the tremendous changes going on, and
forced either to become part of the process or be left behind.
Ibsen, Strindberg, Hauptmann, Tolstoy,
Shaw, Galsworthy and the other dramatists contained in this volume represent
the social iconoclasts of our time. They know that society has gone beyond the
stage of patching up, and that man must throw off the dead weight of the past,
with all its ghosts and spooks, if he is to go foot free to meet the future.
This is the social significance which differentiates modern dramatic art from art
for art’s sake. It is the dynamite which undermines superstition, shakes the
social pillars, and prepares men and women for the reconstruction. Modern life as embodied in Modern Drama with reference to G. B. Shaw’s
You Never Can Tell, Eugene O’Neil’s Desire Under the Elms, Arthur Miller’s
Death of a Salesman, Tennessee William’s The Glass Menagerie will be this
term paper's principle subject.
Page : 4
Table of Contents
Chapter - One
1.1 Introduction……………………………………………………………....................(page no)
1.2 What is Modern Drama..................................................................................................(p.n)
1.3 History of Modern Drama in
English Literature.........................................................(p.n)
1.4 1.4 Modern Drama
Characteristics...............................................................................(p.n)
Chapter – Two
2.1
Modern life as embodied in G. B. Shaw’s You Never Can Tell :.............................................
2.2
Modern life as embodied in Eugene O’Neil’s Desire Under the Elms :.................................
2.3 Modern life as
embodied in Arthur Miller’s Death of a Salesman:.........................................
2.4 Modern life as
embodied in Tennessee William’s The Glass Menagerie :................................
Bibliography………………………………………………………………………………….
Appendix……………………………………………………………………………………..
Page : 5
Chapter – One
1.1 Introduction :
Drama, literature that is
written to be performed on the stage, is a form that goes back to the ancient
Greeks and includes such writers as Shakespeare, Sophocles, and Christopher
Marlowe. However, it is a form that tends to go in and out of fashion depending
on the availability of theaters and audiences. After a period of being dormant
for much of the nineteenth century, drama made a comeback in the last decades
of the century and the early decades of the twentieth century, thanks to
writers like Henrik Ibsen, George Bernard Shaw, and Eugene O'Neill. Though
these writers were very different, their work shared characteristics that were
representative of a new form of drama known as modern drama.
Unlike the earlier drama of Shakespeare and
Sophocles, modern drama tended to focus not on kings and heroes, but instead on
ordinary people dealing with everyday problems. And like much of the literature
of this period, which expressed reactions to rapid social change and
cataclysmic events like World War I, it often dealt with the sense of
alienation and disconnectedness that average people felt in this period. Modern
drama, which developed around the turn of the twentieth century, focused on
alienation and disconnection. These themes can be seen in some of the most famous
plays of playwrights such as Henrik Ibsen, George Bernard Shaw, and Eugene
O'Neill.
1.2 What is Modern Drama :
The drama which had
suffered steep decline during the Victorian Age was revived with great
force at the beginning of the 20th century and the course of six
decades has witnessed many trends and currents in the 20th-century drama. The
drama of Modernist Movement in England was much less innovative in technique
than it was its poetry and novel. According to Emma Goldman “In order to understand the social and
dynamic significance of modern dramatic art it is necessary, I believe, to
ascertain the difference between the functions of art for art’s sake and art as
the mirror of life. Art for art’s sake presupposes an attitude of aloofness on
the part of the artist toward the complex struggle of life: he must rise above
the ebb and tide of life. He is to be merely an artistic conjurer of beautiful
forms, a creator of pure fancy. The Modern Drama, as all modern literature,
mirrors the complex struggle of life, — the struggle which, whatever its
individual or topical expression, ever has its roots in the depth of human
nature and social environment, and hence is, to that extent, universal.” (The
Social Significance of the Modern Drama)
1.3 History of Modern Drama in
English Literature :
English Drama during the
Modernist Period (1845-1945) A.D. falls into three categories:
1. The first and the earliest
phase of modernism in English Drama is marked by the plays of G.B. Shaw (read Summary of Candida) and John Galsworthy,
which constitute the category of social drama modeled on the plays of Ibsen
and.
2. The 2nd and the
middle phase of Modernist English drama comprise the plays of Irish movement
contributed by some elites like Yeats. In this phase, the drama contained the
spirit of nationalism.
3. The 3rd and the
final phase of the Modernist English Drama comprise plays of T.S. Eliot and
Christopher Fry. This phase saw the composition of poetic dramas inspired by the earlier Elizabethan and Jacobean tradition.
The three categories
reflect the three different phases as well as the three different facets of the
Modern English Drama.
1.4 Modern Drama
Characteristics :
- Realism
Realism is the most
significant and outstanding quality of the Modern English Drama. The dramatists
of the earlier years of the 20th century were interested in
naturalism and it was their endeavor (try) to deal with real problems of life
in a realistic technique to their plays. It was Henrik Ibsen, the Norwegian
dramatist who popularised realism in Modern Drama. He dealt with the problems
of real life in a realistic manner of his play. His example was followed by
Robertson Arthur Jones, Galsworthy and G. B. Shaw in their plays.
Modern drama has developed
the Problem Play and there are many Modern Dramatists who have written a number
of problem plays in our times. They dealt with the problems of marriage,
justice, law, administration, and strife between capital and labor in their dramas.
They used theatre as a means for bringing about reforms in the conditions of
society prevailing in their days. Henrik Ibsen’s play A
Doll’s House is
a good example of problem play. The problem play was a
new experiment in the form and technique and dispensed with the conventional
devices and expedients of theatre.
- Play of Ideas
Modern Drama is essentially
a drama of ideas rather than action. The stage is used by dramatists to give
expression to certain ideas which they want to spread in the society. The
Modern Drama dealing with the problems of life has become far more intelligent
than ever it was in the history of drama before the present age. With the
treatment of actual life, the drama became more and more a drama of ideas,
sometimes veiled in the main action, sometimes didactically act forth.
- Romanticism
The earlier dramatists of
the 20th century were Realists at the core, but the passage of time
brought in, a new trend in Modern Drama. Romanticism, which had been very dear to Elizabethan Dramatists found its way in Modern
Drama and it was mainly due to Sir J.M. Barrie’s efforts that the new wave of
Romanticism swept over Modern Drama for some years of the 20th
century. Barrie kept aloof from realities of life and made excursions into the world of Romance.
- Poetic Plays
T.S. Eliot was the main
dramatist who gave importance to poetic plays and was the realistic prose drama
of the modern drama. Stephen Phillips, John Drink Water, Yeats etc were from
those who wrote poetic plays.
- History and Biographical Plays
Another trend, visible in
the Modern English drama is in the direction of using history and biography for
dramatic technique. There are many beautiful historical and biographical plays
in modern dramatic literature. Shaw’s Caesar and Cleopatra are
historical plays of great importance. John Drink Water’s Abraham Lincoln and
Mary Stuart are also historical plays.
- Irish Movement
A new trend in the Modern
English Drama was introduced by the Irish dramatists who brought about the
Celtic Revival in the literature. In the hands of the Irish dramatists like
Yeats, J.M. Synge, T.C. Murrey etc. drama ceased to be realistic in character
and became an expression of the hopes and aspirations of the Irish people from
aspirations of the Irish people from remote ways to their own times.
- Comedy of Manners
There is a revival of Comedy
of Manners in
modern dramatic literature. Oscar Wild, Maugham, N. Coward etc. have done much
to revive the comedy of wit in our days. The drama after the second has not
exhibited a love for comedy and the social conditions of the period after the
war is not very favorable for the development of the artificial comedy of the Restoration Age.
- Impressionism
It is a movement that shows
that effects of things and events on the mind of the artist and the attempt of
the artist to express his expressions. Impressionism constitutes another
important feature of modern drama. In the impressionistic plays of W.B. Yeats,
the main effort is in the direction of recreating the experience of the artist
and his impressions about reality rather than in presenting reality as it is.
The impressionistic drama of the modern age seeks to suggest the impressions on
the artist rather than making an explicit statement about the objective
characteristics of things or objects.
- Expressionism
It is a movement that tries
to express the feelings and emotions of the people rather than objects and
events. Expressionism is another important feature of modern drama. It marks an
extreme reaction against the naturalism. The movement which had started early
in Germany made its way in England drama and several modern dramatists like
J.B. Priestly, Sean O’ Casey, C.K. Munro, Elmer Rice have made experiments in
the expressionistic tendency in modern drama.
Chapter
– Two
2.1 Modern life as
embodied in G. B. Shaw’s You Never Can Tell :
George Bernard Shaw is perhaps one of the
most prolific writers of the modern era. Though he is best known as a
playwright, Shaw was also a respected critic, journalist, novelist, and
essayist. A noted social reformer, Shaw wrote plays which dramatized social
commentaries, and in 1925 he was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature for his
achievements. Today, his works are studied in literature classes worldwide and
are considered classics of modern drama.
You Never Can Tell is an 1897 four-act
play by George Bernard
Shaw
that debuted at the Royalty Theatre. It was published as part of a volume of
Shaw's plays entitled Plays Pleasant. In June 2011, the play was revived
at the Coliseum Theatre in Aberystwyth, Wales, where it had been performed
exactly one century earlier. With its mixture of farce, romance and trenchant social
commentary, it has all the elements of his later plays, but in a bumpy,
undigested form. Introducing the free-thinking author Mrs Clandon (Eleanor
Methven) and her three children, who have returned to the south coast of
England from Madeira, the first act laboriously establishes a plot that is a
delivery system for arguments about marriage, society and parenthood which
still have bite.
The play is set in a seaside town and tells
the story of Mrs Clandon and her three children, Dolly, Phillip and Gloria, who
have just returned to England after an eighteen-year stay in Madeira. The children have
no idea who their father is and, through a comedy of errors, end up inviting him
to a family lunch. At the same time a dentist named Valentine has fallen in
love with the eldest daughter, Gloria. However, Gloria considers herself a
modern woman and claims to have no interest in love or marriage. The play
continues with a comedy of errors and confused identities, with the friendly
and wise waiter, Walter (most commonly referred to by the characters as
"William," because Dolly thinks he resembles Shakespeare), dispensing
his wisdom with the titular phrase "You Never Can Tell."
At a seaside resort, the young dentist,
Valentine, extracts a tooth from his first patient, the voluble Dolly, who has
just arrived with her family from Madeira. Her equally voluble twin brother,
Philip, appears, and at once they invite the dentist to lunch. They are joined
at the dentist's office by their mother, the famous Mrs. Clandon, authoress of
social-reform treatises; and by their elder sister, Gloria, who is her mother's
haughty disciple. Valentine promptly falls in love with Gloria, though she
initially seems to have no interest in him.
Believing she has no need of a husband and
her children have no need of a father, Mrs. Clandon, though presses by
Valentine and the children, refuses to tell her children who their father is
(she separated from him when the children were very young, and they haven't
seen him since); and she leaves. At that time, Valentine's landlord, the
ill-tempered Fergus Crampton appears, wanting an aching a tooth pulled.
Valentine bets the six weeks rent that he owes Crampton that he can extract the
tooth without Crampton feeling it. Crampton agrees, and Valentine pulls off the
feat, surreptitiously using a bit of anesthetic. The twins immediately invite
Crampton to also join them for lunch.
Later in the day, on the terrace of the
resort hotel, Mrs. Clandon and her three children meet with her solicitor,
Finch McComas, before lunch. McComas is an old friend of Mrs. Clandon and at
one time a suitor, but is now simply her efficient solicitor. Mrs. Clandon has
invited him to lunch to tell her children about their long-lost father.
However, they quickly learn of the coincidence that Valentine's landlord,
Crampton, is none other than the father they can't remember. Their dismay at
such a discovery is somewhat allayed when they learn he is wealthy. At that
time Valentine and Crampton arrive, and Crampton is greatly upset by the
unexpected meeting with his family. The luncheon party threatens repeatedly to
blow up, and is saved only by Walter Boon, the "perfect waiter," who
diplomatically smoothes everyone's feelings and tells them of his son, a
distinguished attorney for the queen. After lunch, Gloria infuriates Crampton
with her cold rationality, but is herself completely thrown off balance by
Valentine's "sensible and scientific" courting methods.
Later in the day, the wild-spirited twins
explain to their mother that Gloria's recent emotional and out-of-character
behavior is due to her having fallen in love. Valentine adds that he has won
Gloria by using "thoroughly modern" scientific methods in the
"duel of sex." However, when Gloria hears that Valentine has loved
other women, she furiously rejects him. McComas, in the meantime, reports that
Crampton is demanding custody of the twins and observes that, though Crampton
is uncouth, he is a kind man who has been unfairly dealt with in the separation
deal. He further convinces Mrs. Clandon to agree to arbitration by the waiter's
attorney-son, who is soon to visit.
That evening, during a masked ball, the
visiting attorney expertly brings about a friendly reconciliation between the
members of the family—and between Valentine and Gloria. It appears that Gloria,
too, has had a number of romantic relationships, a fact that shocks and enrages
Valentine but also opens the way their peacemaking and engagement. As all dance
the evening away, Valentine, "the defeated Duellist of Sex," ruefully
observes that he feels like "a married man already." The waiter,
Walter, comfort him about marriage: though his wife, like Gloria, "was of
a commanding and masterful disposition," his marriage turned out very
well. "I'd do it again, I assure you," he tells Valentine. "You
never can tell, sir."
Having to watch a dentist performing an
extraction would normally launch me into a condition closely approximating
hyper-hysteria. Years of painful dental treatment have left me not only with
rather fewer teeth and a much-reduced bank balance, but also an indescribable
terror that makes me break into a sweat even as I pass a dentist’s surgery on
the street! However, on this occasion I managed to retain my composure and
dignity during the opening scene of this production of George Bernard Shaw’s
‘You Never Can Tell’.
The dentist in question here is one Mr
Valentine (played by Ryan Kiggell). He’s a ‘five shilling’ dentist because all
his dental treatments cost five shillings (contrast this with my £500 dentist
who never charges less than that amount!). However, Mr Valentine is unique in
my experience of dentists in that he is broke, owing 6 weeks’ rent to his
landlord. However, his luck has just changed because his first client is
sitting in his chair as the play begins. The patient is Dolly (played by Sínead
Matthews) who is the younger daughter of Mrs Clandon. She bravely faces the
extraction without ‘gas’, and then proceeds to interrogate Valentine with
numerous questions about his practice and personal life. Soon, her twin brother
Phil as well as her mother and elder sister, Gloria, arrive to collect her. Mrs
Clandon (ably played by Diana Quick) is separated from her husband, and the
children have been raised in Madeira knowing nothing of their father, but seem
intensely inquisitive to find out about him. By an unlikely coincidence, it’s
not long before they bump into him in the English seaside hotel they’re staying
at. Mrs Clandon is an author who writes ‘Twentieth Century Guides’ on almost
any subject under the sun, which her children can merrily quote from memory. As
the story unfolds, we learn that she left her husband in order to protect her
children from his authoritarian and hard-hearted Victorian attitudes. Thus, the
play contrasts the values of the nineteenth with the up-coming twentieth
centuries, and the role and status of women and men.
The title of Shaw’s play sounds like one of
those introductory phrases you come across in ‘complete the following sentence’
competitions: “You never can tell … (complete in less than 25 words). I’m not
sure how Shaw’s play helps us to complete it, if that were indeed the
intention. But the phrase is actually used repeatedly as a matter-of-fact
statement by the wise old hotel waiter, played by Edward Fox, who sounds like
he’s recovering from a bad case of tonsillitis when we first meet him in Act 2.
Fortunately, his gravelly pronunciation improved as the play wore on, leaving
him sounding even more like an old Etonian than his QC son (who, thanks to ‘the
long arm of coincidence’, also happens to fetch-up at the hotel in order to
take the sea air).
Shaw wrote ‘You never can tell’ in 1895-96,
and described it as a comedy. But it also contains the kind of highly contrived
coincidences, such as the family bumping into their estranged father at the
seaside, which one finds in farce. Interestingly, the first production went
into rehearsal in 1897, but Shaw was unhappy with progress and withdrew it –
apparently, the actors didn’t understand what kind of play they were
performing, and I can sympathise with some of their concerns. First, it’s
overly long which makes it rather ponderous and unduly protracted. This is
largely because Shaw uses a hundred words where a handful would do. And it’s
exacerbated by the twists and turns, particularly in the relationship that
develops between Valentine and Gloria, which seem endless to the point of
infuriation. Also, the characters of the 2 younger children seem ill-defined.
Though they are supposed to be minors, they merrily swig away at lager and
claret cup, and speak as though they had recently taken doctorates in English
language. And though they are initially anxious to find out about their father,
they soon seem to lose interest once they meet him face-to-face.
Overall, the play is rather stuffy and
out-of-date (if not entirely meaningless) for a modern audience. And Peter
Hall’s direction does nothing to rectify this. Indeed, two young women sitting
next to me appeared completely bored during the first half, and I was not
surprised when they did not return after the interval. Although Shaw liked
comedies to ‘touch’ as well as amuse him, I’m afraid ‘You Never Can Tell’ left
me totally unmoved, longing only for the curtain to fall.
At a seaside resort, the young dentist,
Valentine, extracts a tooth from his first patient, the voluble Dolly, who has
just arrived with her family from Madeira. Her equally voluble twin brother,
Philip, appears, and at once they invite the dentist to lunch. They are joined
at the dentist's office by their mother, the famous Mrs. Clandon, authoress of
social-reform treatises; and by their elder sister, Gloria, who is her mother's
haughty disciple. Valentine promptly falls in love with Gloria, though she
initially seems to have no interest in him.
Believing she has no need of a husband and
her children have no need of a father, Mrs. Clandon, though presses by
Valentine and the children, refuses to tell her children who their father is
(she separated from him when the children were very young, and they haven't
seen him since); and she leaves. At that time, Valentine's landlord, the
ill-tempered Fergus Crampton appears, wanting an aching a tooth pulled.
Valentine bets the six weeks rent that he owes Crampton that he can extract the
tooth without Crampton feeling it. Crampton agrees, and Valentine pulls off the
feat, surreptitiously using a bit of anesthetic. The twins immediately invite
Crampton to also join them for lunch.
Later in the day, on the terrace of the
resort hotel, Mrs. Clandon and her three children meet with her solicitor,
Finch McComas, before lunch. McComas is an old friend of Mrs. Clandon and at
one time a suitor, but is now simply her efficient solicitor. Mrs. Clandon has
invited him to lunch to tell her children about their long-lost father.
However, they quickly learn of the coincidence that Valentine's landlord,
Crampton, is none other than the father they can't remember. Their dismay at
such a discovery is somewhat allayed when they learn he is wealthy. At that
time Valentine and Crampton arrive, and Crampton is greatly upset by the
unexpected meeting with his family. The luncheon party threatens repeatedly to
blow up, and is saved only by Walter Boon, the "perfect waiter," who
diplomatically smoothes everyone's feelings and tells them of his son, a
distinguished attorney for the queen. After lunch, Gloria infuriates Crampton
with her cold rationality, but is herself completely thrown off balance by
Valentine's "sensible and scientific" courting methods.
Later in the day, the wild-spirited twins
explain to their mother that Gloria's recent emotional and out-of-character
behavior is due to her having fallen in love. Valentine adds that he has won
Gloria by using "thoroughly modern" scientific methods in the
"duel of sex." However, when Gloria hears that Valentine has loved
other women, she furiously rejects him. McComas, in the meantime, reports that
Crampton is demanding custody of the twins and observes that, though Crampton
is uncouth, he is a kind man who has been unfairly dealt with in the separation
deal. He further convinces Mrs. Clandon to agree to arbitration by the waiter's
attorney-son, who is soon to visit.
That evening, during a masked ball, the
visiting attorney expertly brings about a friendly reconciliation between the
members of the family—and between Valentine and Gloria. It appears that Gloria,
too, has had a number of romantic relationships, a fact that shocks and enrages
Valentine but also opens the way their peacemaking and engagement. As all dance
the evening away, Valentine, "the defeated Duellist of Sex," ruefully
observes that he feels like "a married man already." The waiter,
Walter, comfort him about marriage: though his wife, like Gloria, "was of
a commanding and masterful disposition," his marriage turned out very
well. "I'd do it again, I assure you," he tells Valentine. "You
never can tell, sir."
“You
Never Can Tell” is an early work of Shaw’s, written in 1896, while he was still
honing his craft. He wanted to both entertain and educate his audience, and
mainly he accomplished this, for the play as written is largely lighthearted
and breezy, yet contains sparks of Shaw’s philosophy of women’s independence
and marriage. In Cal Shakes’ production, the setting is the 1890s, in a town
much like Santa Cruz, California, rather than the English seaside resort in the
original script. I was grateful that the actors didn’t need to affect English
accents, which I find disruptive, if not done well.
The plot revolves around Mrs. Clandon (Elizabeth
Carter), her staid and somber older daughter, Gloria (Sabina Zuniga Varela) and
her animated 18 year-old twins Dolly (Khalia Davis) and Phillip (Lance
Gardner), who have all just returned after an eighteen-year stay in Caracas,
Venezuela. Mrs. Clandon had moved there to escape the domineering husband she
left in England. While in Caracas, she wrote “Twentieth Century Treatises,” a
best-selling series expounding her progressive feminist philosophy on gender
relations, parenting, cooking, conduct and clothing, which her children
regularly recite.
The children have been kept in the dark about
their father, until a happenstance meeting at the office of Valentine, the
impecunious dentist (nicely done by Matthew Baldiga) results in the family
lunching with Valentine and their long-lost father, Fergus Crampton (Michael
Torres). At first, the children want nothing to do with their unknown and
obstreperous father, who claims he is due their love and loyalty by virtue of
their genetic connection (“… because I am your father …”).
In the meantime, Valentine has fallen in love
with Gloria. However, Gloria, her mother’s daughter, is a modern woman who has
little interest in love and none in marriage. She personifies Shaw’s philosophy
about women retaining their autonomy in marriage, which he later expounded upon
in “Man and Superman” (1903). I enjoyed watching Valentine and Gloria negotiate
their way through their difficulties with the institution of marriage, while in
the throes of love and attraction for each other.
The glue that holds this production together
is Danny Scheie as the streetwise Irish waiter whose stage presence, timing and
delivery are so perfect that he can make the word “Chardonnay” hilarious. Both
overtly attentive and subtlety sardonic, he continually reassures the obstinate
lovers and family members who oppose reconciliation with the commonplace
phrase, “You never can tell.” Yet, his encouragement ultimately enables all
parties to find their way.
2.2 Modern life as
embodied in Eugene O’Neil’s Desire Under the Elms :
Eugene Gladstone O'Neill (October 16, 1888 –
November 27, 1953) was an American playwright and Nobel laureate in Literature. Eugene O’Neil’s contribution to American drama is
immense. Undoubtedly, he is a pioneer in American theatre. He is one of the
widely acclaimed dramatists in American literatur. His poetically titled plays
were among the first to introduce into U.S. drama techniques of realism. O'Neill's plays
were among the first to include speeches in American English vernacular and
involve characters on the fringes of society. They struggle to maintain their
hopes and aspirations, but ultimately slide into disillusionment and despair.
Nearly all of his other plays involve some degree of tragedy and personal pessimism.
Desire Under the Elms, tragedy in three parts by Eugene O’Neill, produced in 1924
and published in 1925. The last of O’Neill’s naturalistic plays and the first
in which he re-created the starkness of Greek tragedy, Desire Under the
Elms draws from Euripides’ Hippolytus and Jean Racine’s Phèdre, both of which feature a father
returning home with a new wife who falls in love with her stepson.
Patriarchal and matriarchal affection is indispensable for any generation
to rescue them from the clutches of degeneration. Parental endearment is
conspicuously invisible in his play, Desire Under the Elms. The setting
is a New England farmhouse in 1850. Two great, oppressive, drooping elms frame
the house. Eben Cabot, a handsome but hard
young man, lives there with his two half-brothers, Simeon and Peter. Their father, Ephraim Cabot (known as Cabot), an
old but strong man, left two months ago for an unknown reason. The brothers all
want the farmland and claim that it is theirs. Eben believes his claim is
strongest because his beloved Maw died working it, and
for that he resents his father strongly.
The cardinal characters in the play are
Ephraim cabot, Abbie, his third wife and Eben who is the son of Ephraim’s
second wife. Simon and Peter are the sons of Ephraim’s first wife. Ephraim is a
man of industrious nature. It is evidenced in his efforts to transform a
sterile and rocky field into a fertile farm. He anticipates the same kind of
hard work from his sons. He is an oppressor whose dictatorial attitude is
thrust on his sons. His rigid and harsh traits are hated by his sons. His
patriarchal kinship towards his sons is glaringly invisible. He resembles an
old Testament God who is harsh and lonely. Ephraim, a stony hearted man, does
not care for the ambitions and desires of his sons. As a parent, it is his
ethical duty to consider their aspirations.
But
he remains inconsiderate and exhibits a kind of lukewarm attitude towards his
sons which is inconceivable. Needless to say, there is a lack of cordial
relation between father and sons which is conspicuous. As a parent, he is
supposed to be instrumental in shaping the bright future of his sons. Ephraim
does not think about the fruitful future of his sons. His love for his
offspring appears a strange phenomenon. Perhaps, he distrusts the philosophy
that love grows out of love. This attitude of the father lays seeds of hatred
among his sons. It is natural that they are compelled to abominate him. His
greed for possession of their farm reflects his materialistic attitude.
His strength resembles that of Samson where as his snobbishness reminds us of
Satan. His greediness for the farm symbolizes the materialistic society, a
society bereft of humanity, love and understanding. At the age of seventy five,
he marries Abbie, his third wife, throwing the future of his children into a
dustbin. His egotism and unconcerned nature towards his sons increase aversion
and enmity towards their father. The depletion of parental endearment towards
his sons is clearly evident.
Eben,
his second son, is trusted to be a ray of hope in the family. Cordial relations
are found missing between father and son since Eben is at loggerheads with his
father, whose memory always chases him. An irresistible feeling lingers in his
mind that a lot of injustice has been done to his mother. His father possessed
the farm along with his mother who had been illtreated by his father. These
factors intensely induce Eben to resort to revenge on his commanding father,
Ephraim. A desire for revenge on his father possesses his mind. The dual
intention of Eben is to own the land along with his father’s wife, Abbie. He
strongly loathes his father and desires his father’s death. His father’s
tyrannical behaviour does not provide any scope for the existence of cordial
kinship between them.
Abbie
is an evil designer. Abbie’s sole intention in marrying Ephraim is to possess
his farm. Eben enlightens his stupid brothers that their father had married the
third wife. They brood over the idea that the farm would be owned by their
new-stepmother, Abbie. The three brothers not only abominate their father, but
also wish he were dead. Such kind of inhuman kinship exists among them which
proves that there is a depletion of parental endearment and attachment.
Abbie’s
marriage with Ephraim has a wicked plot. She poisons the mind of Ephraim
against Eben. She does not enjoy conjugal relations with her old husband. She
seduces Eben to have a child so that she can possess the farm which provides
her economic security. Unmindful of her relation to Eben, she wishes to
conceive, which is not only unethical but also a blot on her position as wife.
In order to avenge his father, Eben possesses Abbie. She delivers a son whose
birthday is celebrated by Ephraim. All the guests are aware of the fact that
Eben is the father and they mock at him.
Ephraim
poisons the mind of his son, Eben, against his supposed mother which shows that
a father is not a source of parental love which is denied by Ephrain to his
son, Eben. Such sort of parental endearment towards his offspring is unheard
of. Initially, Abbie’s love for Eben is not deep-rooted but only
superficial which is generated out of her greediness to possess the farm. Eben
still suspects Abbie’s motive of love. But gradually her love turns out to be
genuine for Eben. In order to prove her devotion and sincerity, she smothers
her baby. There is a lack of parental love for the child which is expected of
any mother. Abbie denies her parental endearment to her own baby. Eben, the
real father of the infant, assists Abbie in the execution of the plot to kill
the baby. If all parents emulate them, there will be gradual extinction of the
human race.
Ephraim,
an isolated man, seeks company for which he married Abbie, but ironically
becomes isolated after her arrest. Surprisingly, even the Sheriff is greedy and
he wants to possess the farm.
“It’s a jim-dandy farm
no denying wished I owned it.”
However,
the play has varied themes such as desire, possession, usurpation etc. But the
controversy arises regarding the protagonist of the play. Fredric I Carpenter
views that the spirit of nature is the real hero.
As
far as the title of the play is concerned, it alludes to the two enormous elm
trees which bend on both sides of the house: “They appear to protect and
at the same time subdue. There is a sinister maternity in their aspect, a
crushing jealous absorption. They have developed from their intimate contact
with the life of man in the house an appalling humaneness. They brood
oppressively over the house.” O’Neil’s title is befitting for the play. But it
is found in the play that there is a depletion of parental endearment among the
kith and kin.
Ephraim Cabot, a selfish skinflint, owns the best farm in the county. He
has robbed his youngest son, Eben, of his birthright by taking land belonging
to Eben’s mother as his own upon her death. Eben swears to recover this land.
When Ephraim goes away, leaving his three sons in charge of the farm, Eben
persuades his two half brothers, Simon and Peter, to renounce their claim to
inherit in exchange for $300 each. Simon and Peter set out for California. Ephraim
returns home with a new wife, Abbie.
Eben resents Abbie and is hateful to her.
Meanwhile, she convinces Ephraim that they should have a child. She also
seduces Eben, convincing him that he can get revenge on his father by making
love to her. Abbie bears Eben’s child, whose arrival occasions a party. The
celebrants realize that 76-year-old Ephraim is probably not the child’s father.
At the party, Ephraim taunts Eben with how Abbie has tricked him out of his
inheritance. Eben confronts Abbie, who now loves him.
To show that Abbie really loves Eben, she
smothers their child. Eben gets the sheriff, but then realizes that he loves
Abbie. He falsely admits complicity in the infanticide. Both are arrested.
Ephraim is left alone with his farm. In this play, as in many of his other
plays, O’Neill is much influenced by Greek tragedy, particularly by such plays
as Euripides’ MEDEA and Sophocles’ Oedipus trilogy. One of O’Neill’s
most-admired works, Desire Under the Elms invokes the playwright’s own
family conflicts and Freudian treatment of sexual themes. Although the play is
now considered a classic of 20th-century American drama, it scandalized some
early audiences with its treatment of infanticide, alcoholism, vengeance, and incest; the
first Los Angeles cast was arrested for performing an obscene work.
2.3 Modern life as embodied in Arthur
Miller’s Death of a Salesman:
Arthur Asher Miller (October 17, 1915 –
February 10, 2005) was an American playwright, essayist, and a controversial
figure in the twentieth-century American theater. The drama Death
of a Salesman has been numbered on the short list of finest American plays
in the 20th century. Death of a Salesman is a 1949 play written by American playwright Arthur Miller. It won the 1949 Pulitzer Prize
for Drama and Tony Award for
Best Play. The play premiered on Broadway in February 1949, running for 742
performances, and has been revived on Broadway four times, winning
three Tony Awards for
Best Revival. It is widely considered to be one of the greatest plays of the 20th
century.
Arthur Miller is a great modern American
dramatist who keenly observes the ambitions and ideals of an individual
as well as the internal and external forces which are responsible for
the tragic failure of these ideals. “Death of a Salesman” is a beautiful
example in this regard in which the protagonist of the play, Willy Loman,
intensely desires an outstanding success for himself and for his sons but this
desire is thwarted by powerful social and commercial forces which causes
a tragic defeat of Willy Loman’s dreams.
“Death of a Salesman” is one of those great pieces of art which have been the subject of hotly debated controversy. Arthur Miller calls it a tragedy and there are several critics who see eye to eye with him but these are sources of highly learned critics who bring certain allegations to prove that it falls far short of having the status of tragedy. First of all they reject it on the basis of Aristotelian concept of tragedy and tragic hero and assert that, instead of being a king or prince, Willy Loman is a common man who remains unable to arise required tragic feelings. Therefore, it cannot be placed among great Sophoclean and Shakespearean tragedies.
Arthur Miller's play Death of a
Salesman addresses loss of identity and a man's inability to accept change
within himself and society. The play is a montage of memories, dreams,
confrontations, and arguments, all of which make up the last 24 hours of Willy
Loman's life. The play concludes with Willy's suicide and subsequent funeral.
Miller uses the Loman family — Willy,
Linda, Biff, and Happy — to construct a self-perpetuating cycle of denial,
contradiction, and order versus disorder. Willy had an affair over 15 years
earlier than the real time within the play, and Miller focuses on the affair
and its aftermath to reveal how individuals can be defined by a single event
and their subsequent attempts to disguise or eradicate the event. For example,
prior to discovering the affair, Willy's son Biff adored Willy, believed all
Willy's stories, and even subscribed to Willy's philosophy that anything is
possible as long as a person is "well-liked." The realization that
Willy is unfaithful to Linda forces Biff to reevaluate Willy and Willy's
perception of the world. Biff realizes that Willy has created a false image of
himself for his family, society, and even for himself.
Death of a Salesman uses flashbacks to
present Willy's memory during the reality. The illusion not only “suggests the
past, but also presents the lost pastoral life.” Willy has
dreamed of success his whole life and makes up lies about his and Biff's
success. The more he indulges in the illusion, the harder it is for him to face
reality. Biff is the only one who realizes that the whole family lived in the
lies and tries to face the truth.
Willy Loman, an old salesman, returns early
from a business trip. After nearly crashing multiple times, Willy has a moment
of enlightenment and realizes he shouldn’t be driving. Seeing that her husband
is no longer able to do his job as a traveling salesman, Willy’s wife, Linda,
suggests that he ask his boss, Howard, to give him a local office job at the
New York headquarters. Willy thinks that getting the new job is a sure thing
since he (wrongly) sees himself as a valuable salesman.
We begin to learn some family background and hear about Willy and Linda’s grown sons, Biff and Happy. Biff has just returned home from working as a farmhand in the West. Willy thinks Biff could easily be rich and successful, but is wasting his talents and needs to get on track. Willy thinks Biff is being wish-washy to spite him. Willy Loman returns home exhausted after a business trip he has cancelled. Worried over Willy's state of mind and recent car accident, his wife Linda suggests that he ask his boss Howard Wagner to allow him to work in his home city so he will not have to travel. Willy complains to Linda that their son, Biff, has yet to make good on his life. Despite Biff's promise as a football star in high school, he failed in mathematics and was unable to enter a university.
Biff and his younger brother, Happy, who is
temporarily staying with Willy and Linda after Biff's unexpected return from
the West, reminisce about their childhood together. They discuss their father's
mental degeneration, which they have witnessed in the form of his constant
indecisiveness and daydreaming about the boys' high school years. Willy walks
in, angry that the two boys have never amounted to anything. In an effort to
pacify their father, Biff and Happy tell their father that Biff plans to make a
business proposition the next day.
The next day, Willy goes to ask his boss,
Howard, for a job in town while Biff goes to make a business proposition, but
both fail. Willy gets angry and ends up getting fired when the boss tells him
he needs a rest and can no longer represent the company. Biff waits hours to
see a former employer who does not remember him and turns him down. Biff
impulsively steals a fountain pen. Willy then goes to the office of his neighbor Charley,
where he runs into Charley's son Bernard, now a successful lawyer. Bernard
tells him that Biff originally wanted to go to summer school to make up for
failing math, but something happened in Boston when Biff went to visit his
father that changed his mind. Charley gives the now-unemployed Willy money to
pay his life-insurance premium. Willy shocks Charley by remarking that
ultimately, a man is "worth more dead than alive."
Happy, Biff, and Willy meet for dinner at a
restaurant, but Willy refuses to hear bad news from Biff. Happy tries to get
Biff to lie to their father. Biff tries to tell him what happened as Willy gets
angry and slips into a flashback of what happened in Boston the day Biff came
to see him. Willy had been having an affair with a receptionist on one of his
sales trips when Biff unexpectedly arrived at Willy's hotel room. A shocked
Biff angrily confronted his father, calling him a liar and a fraud. From that
moment, Biff's views of his father changed and set him adrift.
Biff leaves the restaurant in frustration,
followed by Happy and two girls that Happy picked up. They leave a confused and
upset Willy behind in the restaurant. When they later return home, their mother
angrily confronts them for abandoning their father while Willy remains outside,
talking to himself. Biff tries unsuccessfully to reconcile with Willy, but the
discussion quickly escalates into another argument. Biff conveys plainly to his
father that he is not meant for anything great, insisting that both of them are
simply ordinary men meant to lead ordinary lives. The feud reaches an apparent
climax with Biff hugging Willy and crying as he tries to get Willy to let go of
the unrealistic expectations. Rather than listen to what Biff actually says,
Willy appears to believe his son has forgiven him and will follow in his
footsteps, and after Linda goes upstairs to bed (despite her urging him to
follow her), lapses one final time into a hallucination, thinking he sees his
long-dead brother Ben, whom Willy idolized. In Willy's mind, Ben approves of
the scheme Willy has dreamed up to kill himself in order to give Biff his
insurance policy money. Willy exits the house. Biff and Linda cry out in
despair as the sound of Willy's car blares up and fades out.
The final scene takes place at Willy's
funeral, which is attended only by his family, Charley and Bernard (Bernard
says nothing at the funeral, but in the stage directions, he is present). The
ambiguities of mixed and unaddressed emotions persist, particularly over
whether Willy's choices or circumstances were obsolete. At the funeral Biff
retains his belief that he does not want to become a businessman like his
father. Happy, on the other hand, chooses to follow in his father's footsteps,
while Linda laments her husband's decision just before her final payment on the
house.
The night’s fight
ends with Willy realizing that Biff, although a "failure," seems to
really love him. Unfortunately Willy can’t get past the "failure"
bit. He thinks the greatest contribution that he himself can make toward his
son’s success is to commit suicide. That way, Biff could use the life insurance
money to start a business. Within a few minutes, there’s a loud crash. Willy
has killed himself. In the final scene, Linda, sobbing, still under the
delusion that her husband was a well-liked salesman, wonders why no one came to
his funeral. Biff continues to see through his family’s lies and wants to be a
better man who is honest with himself. Unfortunately, Happy wants to be just
like his dad.
Willy's Tragic Flaw :
In classical tragedy, the main
character frequently suffers from the specific hamartia (the
Greek-derived term for tragic flaw) of hubris, or excessive pride. But
the tragic hero of Death of a Salesman, Willy Loman, doesn't necessarily
suffer from pride. Instead, he suffers from a false vision of what helps a man
achieve the American dream. Willy firmly believes that being well-liked and
well-connected are what really matter when it comes to success, even if one is
liked on the basis of half-truths. In a way, this is a kind of pridefulness
insofar that Willy refuses to accept reality as is. The unfortunate truth is
that this is a superficial understanding of American opportunism. Success, in
actuality, requires hard work, often at the expense of being liked. Because of his
misunderstanding of what it takes to achieve the American dream, Willy's
biggest flaw is that he is unable to understand anything other than the grand
visions he has crafted of himself and his family, however untrue they may be.
2.4 Modern life as embodied in Tennessee
William’s The Glass Menagerie :
Thomas Lanier "Tennessee"
Williams III (March 26, 1911 – February 25, 1983) was an American
playwright. Along with contemporaries Eugene O'Neill and Arthur Miller, he is considered among the three foremost playwrights
of 20th-century American drama. After years of obscurity, at age 33
he became suddenly famous with the success of The Glass Menagerie (1944) in New York
City. This play closely reflected his own unhappy family background.
The Glass Menagerie is a memory play by Tennessee Williams that premiered in
1944 and catapulted Williams from obscurity to fame. The play has strong
autobiographical elements, featuring characters based on its author, his histrionic mother, and his
mentally fragile sister Laura. In writing the play, Williams drew on an earlier
short story, as well as a screenplay he had written under the title of The
Gentleman Caller. The Glass Menagerie was Williams' first successful
play; he went on to become one of America's most highly regarded playwrights.
The action of The Glass Menagerie takes place in the Wingfield family's apartment in St.
Louis, 1937. The events of the play are framed by memory - Tom Wingfield is the play's narrator, and usually smokes
and stands on the fire escape as he delivers his monologues. narrator,Tom is a
character in the play, which is set in St. Louis in 1937. He is an aspiring
poet who toils in a shoe warehouse to support his mother, Amanda, and sister,
Laura. Mr. Wingfield, Tom and Laura’s father, ran off years ago and, except for
one postcard, has not been heard from since.
Amanda, originally from a genteel Southern
family, regales her children frequently with tales of her idyllic youth and the
scores of suitors who once pursued her. She is disappointed that Laura, who
wears a brace on her leg and is painfully shy, does not attract any gentlemen
callers. She enrolls Laura in a business college, hoping that she will make her
own and the family’s fortune through a business career. Weeks later, however,
Amanda discovers that Laura’s crippling shyness has led her to drop out of the
class secretly and spend her days wandering the city alone. Amanda then decides
that Laura’s last hope must lie in marriage and begins selling magazine
subscriptions to earn the extra money she believes will help to attract suitors
for Laura. Meanwhile, Tom, who loathes his warehouse job, finds escape in
liquor, movies, and literature, much to his mother’s chagrin. During one of the
frequent arguments between mother and son, Tom accidentally breaks several of
the glass animal figurines that are Laura’s most prized possessions.
Amanda and Tom discuss Laura’s prospects, and
Amanda asks Tom to keep an eye out for potential suitors at the warehouse. Tom
selects Jim O’Connor, a casual friend, and invites him to dinner. Amanda
quizzes Tom about Jim and is delighted to learn that he is a driven young man
with his mind set on career advancement. She prepares an elaborate dinner and
insists that Laura wear a new dress. At the last minute, Laura learns the name
of her caller; as it turns out, she had a devastating crush on Jim in high
school. When Jim arrives, Laura answers the door, on Amanda’s orders, and then
quickly disappears, leaving Tom and Jim alone. Tom confides to Jim that he has
used the money for his family’s electric bill to join the merchant marine and
plans to leave his job and family in search of adventure. Laura refuses to eat
dinner with the others, feigning illness. Amanda, wearing an ostentatious dress
from her glamorous youth, talks vivaciously with Jim throughout the meal.
As dinner is ending, the lights go out as a
consequence of the unpaid electric bill. The characters light candles, and
Amanda encourages Jim to entertain Laura in the living room while she and Tom
clean up. Laura is at first paralyzed by Jim’s presence, but his warm and open
behavior soon draws her out of her shell. She confesses that she knew and liked
him in high school but was too shy to approach him. They continue talking, and
Laura reminds him of the nickname he had given her: “Blue Roses,” an accidental
corruption of pleurisies, an illness Laura had in high school. He reproaches
her for her shyness and low self-esteem but praises her uniqueness. Laura then
ventures to show him her favorite glass animal, a unicorn. Jim dances with her,
but in the process, he accidentally knocks over the unicorn, breaking off its
horn. Laura is forgiving, noting that now the unicorn is a normal horse. Jim
then kisses her, but he quickly draws back and apologizes, explaining that he
was carried away by the moment and that he actually has a serious girlfriend.
Resigned, Laura offers him the broken unicorn as a souvenir.
Amanda enters the living room, full of good
cheer. Jim hastily explains that he must leave because of an appointment with
his fiancée. Amanda sees him off warmly but, after he is gone, turns on Tom,
who had not known that Jim was engaged. Amanda accuses Tom of being an
inattentive, selfish dreamer and then throws herself into comforting Laura. From
the fire escape outside of their apartment, Tom watches the two women and
explains that, not long after Jim’s visit, he gets fired from his job and
leaves Amanda and Laura behind. Years later, though he travels far, he finds
that he is unable to leave behind guilty memories of Laura.
Elements
of Style: Symbol and Metaphor :
The title of the play, The Glass Menagerie,
refers to a collection of glass figurines that can be seen as a representation
of the family because each embodies elements of emotional fragility, and they
are all merely reflections given to us through Tom's memory. But the character
who most closely resembles the qualities of a glass figurine is Laura. Williams
describes her in the play as being 'like a piece of translucent glass touched
by a light, given a momentary radiance, not actual, not lasting.' In order to
understand the symbolic message Laura represents, we need to examine her
encounter with Jim.
Her shyness is so extreme that when Jim comes
to the door, she pleads for her mother to answer it, and only when her mother
refuses to does she reluctantly make herself open the door and awkwardly invite
Jim into the house. Then she pretends to be busy with the record player. Jim is
an easygoing, upbeat sort of character who was a star athlete in high school
and who is hopeful about his prospects at the shoe factory. His comfort and
ease with life sharply contrasts with Laura's emotional instability. Laura
becomes so overtaken by her nervousness that she has a panic attack and
struggles to regain her composure by sitting on the couch while the others sit
down for dinner.
Modern
Tragedy - Tragic Heros in The Glass Managerie :
I am not sure if each
tragedy is only suppose to have one tragic hero. Because in The Glass
Menagerie, I fee like all three members of the Wingfield family fit
the criteria of a "modern" tragic hero. Amanda, however, is possibly
the most "obvious" tragic hero character in this play.
"She is not paranoiac, but her life is
paranoia". It is stated clearly in the character list that Amanda's fault
is not in herself, but in the environment she is in. At first Amanda appears to
be a "normal" mother; however, it is not long before the audience
discovers her obsession with her past. Her husband leaving, burdening her with
the responsibility to take care of the children all by herself tramatizes
Amanda deeply. Amanda's insecurity that is caused by her husband's departure
makes her suspicious and bitter towards her children. She is afraid that Laura
and Tom would hurt her or leave her like their father did; so she forcefully
"ties" herself to them (e.g. always talking the family as a whole and
not as individuals. She also addresses herself as "your mother" when
talking to her children).At the same time of being a tragic hero, Amanda also
contributes to the "environment" that makes her children tragic
heroes.
Amanda's ultimate goal in life is to have Laura fulfill her unaccomplished dreams. Amanda herself made a huge mistake by marrying a drunk and irresponsible man (which, she blames Mr. Wingfield's irresistible charms). Amanda describes herself as having so many gentlemen callers that she didn't have enough chairs to accommodate them all. However, (unfortunately) her daughter Laura did not turn out to be like her. At one point of the play, Jim provides Amanda with a glimpse of the chance of victory (some hopefulness is essential for a tragedy). But that faint hope is crushed with a sudden and almost unrealistic plot twist.
Tom
as a Man of Imagination in The Glass Menagerie :
The problem of hesitation
to cross a threshold is basic to the play The Glass Menagerie. In this play Tom
Wingfield is afflicted with an anxiety to cross the threshold between
adolescence and youth, dependence and independence. Tom was on the brink of losing
his adolescence and entering a new phase of youth. Thus, this time was
extremely important for it. Moreover, it was a time of transition.
So, it was natural for Tom
Wingfield to quarrel with those who can't understand the nature of his problem.
He was so irritated by his mother's frequent nagging that he called her a witch
in a moment of irritation. His imminent transition from adolescence to youth
represents the change in his taste also. Tom is a poet. He is eager to write
poetry. His life in confinement has handicapped him to write poetry. He feels
that his work in the Warehouse Company has created an extreme dissatisfaction
in him. Oppressed by the cruelty of home and monotonous work, he wanted to run
away from the responsibility and duty. Here one question arise - why did Tom
Wingfield fail to grapple the dreary reality and sterile life courageously. The
cogent and convincing answer to this question is that Tom Wingfield is a man of
imagination. He has been gifted with an imaginative cast of mind. In his mind
the faculty of imagination functioned more effectively than the faculty of
reason. But that does not mean Tom's mind was devoid of reason. Reason was
there. But it was less effective in comparison to the power of imagination.
When the faculty of
imagination gained an upper hand in his mind, he quarreled with his mother and
went away from his mother and sister. His movement toward adventure can be
interpreted as a movement toward independence. It is a kind of flight from
reality and private and public responsibility.
But when he was in a long
distance from his house he was pulled back from the path of adventure by his
real love for his mother and daughter. Tom's return to his house on the
strength of love offers lots of social implications. His return to his house is
a return to the socially established norms and values. His return is a real
return to the standard of practical thinking. Only a man of imagination is
capable of returning to reality with a better insight and with a higher level
of awakening.
Bibliography
1. Dervin, Daniel (1975). Bernard Shaw: A
Psychological Study. Lewisburg PA: Bucknell University Press. ISBN 978-0-8387-1418-8.
2. Dukore, Bernard F. (1992). "Shaw and
American Drama". Shaw and the Last Hundred Years. University Park: The Pennsylvania
State University Press. ISBN 978-0-271-01324-4.
3. Kaufmann, R. J. (1965). G. B. Shaw: A Collection of Critical Essays.
Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice Hall. OCLC 711587.
7.Hartman, Murray. "Desire Under the Elms: In the Light of
Strindberg's Influence." American Literature. 3rd ed. Vol. 33. N.p.: Duke
UP, 1961. 360–69. Print.
8.Koon, Helene. Twentieth Century Interpretations of Death of Salesman.
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
9.Meserve, Walter. Studies in Death of Salesman. Columbus, Ohio: Charles
E. Merrill Publishing Company. ISBN 0-675-09259-0.
10.Gans,
Andrew."Starry
Revival of Arthur Miller's 'Death of a Salesman' Opens on Broadway" Archived
2012-03-17 at the Wayback
Machine playbill.com, March 15, 2012
11.Itzkoff, Dave (25 August 2010). "Christopher Lloyd stars in
'Death of a Salesman'". The New York Times.
Retrieved 2010-09-08.
12.Itzkoff (8 April 2015). "Arthur Miller Classic Death Of
A Salesman To Make West End Transfer]". LondonTheatreDirect.com.
Retrieved 2015-04-22.
13.The
Glass Menagerie, New Directions, reissued in 2011 with an Introduction by Tony
Kusher, ISBN 978-0-8112-1894-8
14.Saddik,
Annette J. Glass Menagerie The Politics of Reputation: The Critical
Reception of Tennessee Williams (books.google.com), Fairleigh Dickinson
Univ Press, 1999, ISBN 0838637728, p.
25
15.Lyle
Leverich, "Tom: The Unknown Tennessee Williams", W. W. Norton &
Company, Inc. (April 1, 1997) ISBN 0-393-31663-7
16. The Glass Menagerie,
1950" Archived
2014-01-08 at the Wayback
Machine tcm.com, accessed January 8, 2014
18."The
Glass Menagerie, with Joe Mantello and Sally Field, Opens March 9" Archived
2017-03-12 at the Wayback
Machine Playbill, March 9, 2017
Appendix
কোন মন্তব্য নেই:
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন