Are Plays of the 19th and 20th Century Still Germane?

There is a certain immortality involved in theatre, not created by monuments and books, but through the knowledge the actor keeps to his dying day…of all the unsingable heartsong the ordinary man may feel but never utter. And by that he somehow joins the ages. – Arthur Miller

The above spoken lines highlight the task of a writer and an actor, as they play a crucial role in ‘revolutionizing’ the arts, the theatre and people’s perception of reality. Some believe this process can undertake under the category of ‘Realistic Theatre’, in which the protagonist of the play asserts himself against an injustice that affects him/her personally or a segment of the society that the protagonist represents. The overriding concept of realism is ‘verisimilitude’ which is the truthful representation of reality within a theatrical frame of reference along with its dialogues being as raw as everyday speech. This code of conduct is followed by Henrik Ibsen (Father of Realism) in his play, ‘Ghosts’ (1881) hinting at the various themes like society, feminism, corruption and morality. On the other hand, some playwrights believe realism to be too constricted because of its form, and use absurd ways to represent the absurd condition of the society. Samuel Beckett presents motifs like humanity, modernism and post-modernism in his play, ‘Waiting for Godot’ (1952), under ‘The Theatre of The Absurd’. These plays, by using different techniques, discuss various concerns that were prevalent in the past, are still prevalent in the present and to an extent will be prevalent in the future as well.

Ibsen’s Realism comes into play because of The Modern Breakthrough Movement in Norwegian Drama, elaborating on contemporary environments which examined modern problems in an essentially critical spirit. He presents a critique on the present hypocrisies of the bourgeois classes, questioning their strength and moral uprightness. The play revolves around the dead Captain Alving, deeply revered by his society, under a false pretense. Accepting and making sure these pretenses do not cease to exist are the figures of Engstrand and Pastor Manders. Regina’s father, Engstrand, in a very unfatherly manner, pleads his only daughter to be a sight of amusement for the tired sailors, reinforcing this idea under terms like ‘duty’ and ‘self-sacrifice’. Sadly, Regina mimics her father by seeing her advantage in being related to Mrs. Alving in order to elevate her position in society. Owing to this tendency, Nietzsche points out, “The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently,” hence, unconsciously justifying manipulation in their minds.

Pastor Manders, despite knowing the immoralities of Captain Alving’s life, hushed his wife by denying her the freedom of divorce because of her ‘duty’. He forbids her to read books as they can lead one’s mind away from the ‘traditional belief systems of the society’. Like a true patriarch, he defends Engstrand’s drinking habits by quoting, “Ah, that distressing weakness,” justifying his demand of making her daughter a prostitute, as well as, Alving’s monstrosity when he forced his little boy to smoke by addressing him being “full of life.”

This period also accommodates interest in the discussion of place accorded to women in society. The upcoming democratic ideas presented platforms for the playwrights to focus on feminism. In the notes made for ‘A Doll’s House’, Ibsen writes that a woman cannot be herself in contemporary society, it is an exclusively male society with laws drafted by men, and with counsel and judges who judge feminine conduct from the male point of view. Mrs. Alving lived her life pretending that her husband was a character worth remembering. He presents her failure in making her husband’s home joyful, with the assumption that she is less driven by duty and had she not obliged, the captain would have not ventured out to seek his pleasure elsewhere. In doing so she could have circumvented the catastrophe which is Oswald’s madness, a result of syphilis inherited from father who was infected outside the cold home. As John Templeton says in his essay, ‘Mrs. Alving’s Ghosts and The Shape of Tragedy’, The readers get a feeling that it is due to her lack of responsiveness her husband suffered. This cornerstone of the modern theatre makes this play about a woman who fails as a wife and a mother. Manders purges societal and religious pressures on her when it comes to serving a household by saying, “You were terribly unfair to your husband” and “you are profoundly guilty as a mother”. Her reward of submission is the syphilitic son, terrible manifestation of the sickness and the tenacity of ghosts, which were the old, dead ideas and beliefs that haunt Mrs. Alving’s dark parlor. Metaphorically, Ghosts refer to distortions of the middle-class with their mad lust for power, sex and glory. Her grand character deteriorates into something so trivial that in the end she willingly takes her life with her son. On the other hand, she also emerges as a powerful character as she made continuous efforts to ensure her son safety from his father, along with maintaining her images in the eyes of the society by wanting to open an orphanage in the honor of her dead husband. Regina is another victim of the society who does not mind losing her virginity to a high-born. She herself was a product of an illicit sexual relationship.

‘Ghosts’, depict the immorality and perversity as the very concept of an idealistic family gets undermined and everyone promotes his/her selfish ends, bringing forth mutual jealousy and rivalry. In such a society there is no genuine compassion with the greatest shock being a recourse to religion in order to justify the norms of the society. Instead of focusing on Captain Alving’s actual behavior, the Pastor fixates on his failed attempts to hide his wicked ways from his wife. Throughout the play, Ibsen demonstrates the extent to which people invest in their appearances and the amount of destruction to interpersonal relationships this can cause. This also highlights the harmful obsession with reputation that was a characteristic of the 19th Century society. Ibsen’s plays upset people precisely, because audience recognize that their domestic talks are dangerously charged with coveted meaning by presenting a world in his plays with people like ourselves in it. Otto Rienert in the essay, ‘Ibsen and Mimesis’, points out that this transmission from out there to the script, the act of mimesis, is an event in the creative consciousness. Corruption, mendacity and hidden sexuality are announced as the leitmotivs of the family drama. Reputations are untarnished of people who live an immoral life and fixated themselves o economic success. Engstrand, prioritizes wealth and other superficial indicators of success over morality. He will rather manipulate people around him hoping to trick them into pursuing his various personal aspirations, like he did with Manders. By all these incidences Ibsen urges the audience to recognize the ways in which underserving people often profit off of society’s corrupt norms.

In ‘Waiting for Godot’, Estragon and Vladimir represent fear, hope, hatred and love. Like majority of the modern people, they consider themselves inactive. The ceaseless and indefinite waiting does not show any tangible result for a great number of people and these two protagonists are no exception to it as they ignorantly and aimlessly wait for, “Godin…Godet…Godot”. The play begins with the line “Nothing to be done”, introducing the audience the bleak worlds of the characters, filled with unending agony. Following the ‘Avant-Guard’ school of thought along with post-modernism, Estragon’s stance on the Bible is devoid of any reverence and significance, as his idea of salvation is not God but only Godot. Instead of looking at the Gospels with a holistic perspective, Vladimir points out the petty self-contradictions and label its followers as “bloody ignorant apes”. Similar concept is presented in Alok Bhalla’s play “Adha Yug”, in which Krishna is the man of justice and the truth we can all become. He is the advocate of all created things and their finest embodiment. But, because of Kaliyuga, instead of following the path of self-righteousness, the minds of men have become skeptical about Krishna, questioning his morals and capabilities. Innumerable absurd moments like, suddenly Vladimir leaving the stage, nonchalant suggestions of suicide in order to pass time and their attempts to justify themselves on purposely not meeting their savior, indicate disorientation and loneliness. Becket does not present these observations simply, rather the reader has to read in between the lines. As Kimberly Bohman-Kalaja, points out in her essay, “Playing the Spectator while Waiting for Godot”, the concept of cooperative antagonism, which involves multiple strategies to overcome the readers habits and expectations. These ‘games’ of popular model of human behavior were becoming increasingly popular in the mid- 20th century.

In order to trace the roots of this movement, one must keep in mind the beginnings of the modernistic period, as after World War I, there was a breakaway from the past to find new ways of expression. This process lead people to discover their raw identities, slowly and gradually evolving into nothing but absurdity. Jean-Paul Satre and Albert Camus, under the Existential school of thought (mid-20th century), see human beings as isolated with the universe presenting no inherent truth, value or meaning. Influenced by this, according to Ionesco, a man is lost cut off from his religion, metaphysical and transcendental roots; all his actions being senseless, absurd and useless. Their suffering is amplified because of a person whom they have never met, because they are filled with Nihilism, a perception which renders all values as baseless. Likewise, Vladimir and Estragon are more than simply empty in the sense of being sad or despairing because they have lost their humanity. They care not for the condition of Lucky or Pozzo who returned blind in the second act. On the other hand, one can experience the prevalent post-modernism period by seeing alienation from tradition and questioning our ancient narratives. Another is the pervasive sense of enslavement with lack of a central authority. For instance, they both are trapped in their own minds like Lucky, unable to break free. Rather, do they even want freedom? Furthermore, they repudiate the knowledge of good and evil and don’t want to know what decision other than prolongation of helplessness are possible. Their ignorance extends to the identity of Godot himself whom they would be unable to recognize. As there is no purpose for Lucky for carrying sand, similarly the only purpose of their waiting is to prolong their frustration. Estragon mistakes his own identity as Adam; has no shame in begging for money; Pozzo wants to be praised as he speaks such elite English; his lost control over his thoughts; Vladimir’s lost sense of time along with his irrationality suggest the exact condition of a post-modernist man living in the 21st Century.

Like Mrs. Alving’s Ghosts which “seem to come back from the dead somehow”, these themes of reputation, duty, feminism, wealth and manipulation keep occurring time and again reminding the readers the prevalent hypocrisy in the society. Although, in ‘Waiting for Godot’ not all critics agree on their disgraceful stance, as Kierkegaard reflects on the constant process of ‘becoming’ of the postcolonial man. According to him, waiting is a process of becoming, through which they seem to realize that they exist, hinting at the strong sense of hope Vladimir and Estragon have even after their constant failure for fifty years. Their ‘tomorrow’ never arrives, but there ‘tomorrow’ is always there.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Gelber, Michael Werth, and Joan Templeton. “Ibsen and Feminism.” PMLA, vol. 104, no. 3, 1989, pp. 360–362. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/462452. Accessed 14 Apr. 2021.
2. Reinert, Otto. “Ibsen and Mimesis.” Scandinavian Studies, vol. 82, no. 2, 2010, pp. 213–230. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/40851750. Accessed 14 Apr. 2021.
3. Beckett, Samuel. “Waiting for Godot.” Grove Press, 2006.
4. Boehman-Kalaja, Kimberly. “Playing the Spectator while Waiting for Godot.” International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, vol. 3, no. 7, 2013.