tbp world of pinter

8/10/2019 Tbp World of Pinter

1/15


2/15


3/15

56 The

Tulane Drama

Review

humanity."

he

religion

and

society

whichhave

traditionally

tructured

human

morality,

re,

n Pinter's

plays,

he

mmoral

gents

hat

destroy

he

individual.

Like

Osborne,

Pinter

ooks back in

anger;

like

Beckett,

Pinter looks

forward o

nothing

not

even

Godot).

Pinter

has createdhis

own

distinc-

tive

and dramaticversionof Man vs.

the

System.

ituating

him

between

Beckett nd the

Angries

s

only

a first

approximation

f his achievement.

The

house

as

human

dwelling

s a

metaphor

t

least as

old

as

the

Bible,

and

on the

stage

that

house

s most

asily

reducedto

a

room

e.g.

Graham

Greene's Living Room, Beckett'sEndgame). Pinter's rooms are stuffy,

nonspecific

ubes,

whose

atmosphere

rows

teadily

more stale and

more

tense.

The titular

Room

of

his

first

lay

is

"A room

n

a

large

house";

in

The Dumb

Waiter,

we

descend to "a

basement

room";

in

The

Birthday

Party,

we

have

"The

living

room

of a

house

in a

seaside

town,"

and,

in

The

Caretaker,

t is

simply

A

room."

Unlike

the tree nd

road

of

Godot,

which

uggest

egetation

nd

distance;

or

the

shelter

f

Endgame,

which

looks out

on

earth

and

sea;

unlike

the realistic

one-room

flat..,

at

the

top

of

a

large

Victorian

house"

of

Look Back in

Anger,

Pinter's

rooms,

partsofmysteriousnd infinite eries, re like cells without vista.At

the

opening

curtain,

these rooms

look

naturalistic,

meaning

no more

than

the

eye

can

contain.But

by

the

end of

each

play,

they

ecome sealed

containers,

irtual

coffins.

Within

each

Pinter

room,

the

props

seem to be

realistically

unctional,

and

only

in

retrospect

o

they

cquire

symbolic

ignificance.

onsider,

for

example,

Pinter'streatment

f

such

crucial details

as food

and cloth-

ing,

in

comparison

with

the

casual

realism

of

Osborne,

or

the frank

symbolism

f Beckett.

The various

preparations

or

tea

in

Look Back

in

Anger

seem to be

parallelled

by

the

prosaic

cocoa, tea,

bread,

sand-

wiches,

crackers f

Pinter's

plays;

in

sharp

contrast s

the

farcical

and

stylized

arrot-turnip-radish

business"of

Godot. So

too,

three

men

grab-

bing

for

an

old man's

bag

in

The

Caretaker

has

few

of

the

symbolic

overtones

f

the

slapstick uggling

of

derbies

n

Godot.

It

is,

however,

n their

respective

se of that

innocuous

prop,

a

pair

of

shoes,

that

the different

ymbolic

echniques

of

Beckett

and

Pinter

are in

most

graphic

evidence.

Early

n

Godot,

Vladimir

establishes

hoes

as a metaphysical ymbol:"There's man all over foryou, blamingon

his

boots

the

faults

of his feet."

At

the end

of

Godot,

it

is

by

virtue

of

being

barefoot hat

Estragon

dmits

he has

always

compared

himself

o

Christ. In

Pinter's

Caretaker,

the

old

man

keeps trying

n

different

shoes that

might

enable him

to

get

on

the road

to

Sidcup,

where

he


4/15

RUBY

COHN

57

claims

to

have

left

his

identity

apers.

Each

pair

of shoes

s

rejected

for

specific

misfit-"a

bit

small,"

"too

pointed,"

"no

laces"-before

the

curtain-lines f the play: "they'reall

right..,

if I was to... get my

papers..,

would

you...

would

you

let..,

would

you..,

if

I

got

down

... and

got

my...."

The

finality

f the

fragments

ndicates hatno

shoes

can

ever

fit,

hat

the

journey

to

Sidcup

cannot

be made.

Thus,

the

symbolic

ignificance

f the shoes is

instantaneouswith

Beckett,

umu-

lative with

Pinter.

Most

crucial to an

understanding

f

Pinter's theatre s

the

symbolism

of

his

characters.

or

all

their

nitially

ealistic

ppearance,

their

cumu-

lative

mpactembraces hewholeofhumanity.n so generalizing, inter

extends

the

meaning

of his

characters

beyond

such

particulars

s

Os-

borne

treats;

nevertheless,

e

does

not

achieve the

metaphysical

cope

upon

which

Beckett

insists,

from

his

opening

lines:

"Nothing

to

be

done."

Pinter's

defenseless

ictims re a

middle-aged

wife,

a

man

who

asks

too

many

questions,

n

ex-pianist,

broken

old man.

Ruthlessly

obbed

of

any

distinction,

hey

come

to

portray

the

human

condition.

And

Pinter's

villains,

initially

as

unprepossessing

s the

victims,

gradually

reveal their insidious significance hroughsome of the most skillful

dialogue

on

the

English

stage

today.

For it

is

language

that

betrays

he

villains-more

pat,

more

clichd-ridden,

ith

more

brute

power

than

that

of

their

victims.

Even

hostile

critics

have

commented n

the

brilliance

of

Pinter's di-

alogue,

and it

is

in

the

lines of

his

villains

that

he

achieves

precise

dramatic

timing

and

economical

manipulation

of

commonplaces.

Rep-

resentatives

f

the

System,

inter's

villains

give

direct

expression

to

its

dogma.

n

the

plays

of

Osborne

and

Beckett,

which

also

implicitly

ttack

the

System,

he

oppressive

orces re

presented

hrough

he

words

of

their

victims.

Jimmy

orter

of

Osborne's

Look

Back

in

Anger garbs

the

System

n

contemporary

orporate

metaphors:

JIMMY

PORTER....the

Economics

f

the

Supernatural.

t's

all a

simple

matter f

payments

nd

penalties...

Reason

and

Progress,

he

old

firm,

s

selling

ut.

Everyone

et

out

while

the

going's

ood.

Those

forgotten

hares

ou

had in

the

old

traditions,

he

ld

beliefs

re

going

up--up

and

up

and

up.

There's

going

to

be

a

changeover.

A

new

BoardofDirectors,who are

going

to see thatthedividendsare

always

attrac-

tive,

nd

that

hey o

to

the

right

eople.

Sell

out

everything

ou've

got;

all

those

tocksn

the

old,

free

nquiry.

he

Big

Crash

s

coming,

you

can't

scape

t,

o

get

n

on

the

ground

loor

with

Helena

and

her

friends

hile

here's

till

ime.

And

there

sn't

much

f

t

left.

ell

me,


5/15

58

The Tulane

Drama

Review

what

could

be more

gilt-edged

han

the next world It's

a

capital

gain,

and it s all

yours.

Vladimir and

Estragon,

at the

beginning

of Beckett's

Godot,

describe

the

invisible

deity

figure

in trivial human

terms:

VLADIMIR.

Let's wait and

see what he

says.

ESTRAGON.Who?

VLADIMIR. odot.

ESTRAGON.Good

idea.

VLADIMIR.

Let's wait till

we

know

exactly

how

we

stand.

ESTRAGON.

n the other hand it

might

be

better

to

strike he iron

before

t

freezes.

VLADIMIR.

'm

curious

to

hear

what

he

has to offer. hen we'll

take

it or

leave

it.

ESTRAGON.What

exactly

did

we

ask him for?

.. And what did

he

reply?

VLADIMIR.That

he'd see.

ESTRAGON.

hat

he

couldn't

promise

anything.

VLADIMIR.

That

he'd

have

to think

it

over.

ESTRAGON.

n the

quiet

of his

home.

VLADIMIR.Consult his

family.

ESTRAGON.

His friends.

VLADIMIR.His

agents.

ESTRAGON.is

correspondents.

VLADIMIR.

His

books.

ESTRAGON.His bank

account....

Where

do

we

come in?

VLADIMIR.

Come in?

ESTRAGON.ake

your

time.

VLADIMIR.Come in?

On our

hands and

knees.

In Pinter's Birthday Party, Goldberg and McCann express the System

by

echoing

modern

commonplaces

of

social

success.

Pinter

damns

them

with

their

own

deadly

cliches.

GOLDBERG.etween

you

and

me,

Stan,

it's

about time

you

had a

new

pair

of

glasses.

MCCANN. ou can't

see

straight.

GOLDBERG.

t's true.

You've

been

cockeyed

for

years.

MCCANN. ow

you're

even

more

cockeyed.

GOLDBERG.e's

right.

You've

gone

from

bad

to worse.

MCCANN.Worse than worse.

GOLDBERG.You

need

a

long

convalescence.

MCCANN.

change

of

air.

GOLDBERG.

omewhere over the

rainbow.


6/15

RUBY

COHN 59

MCCANN.

Where

angels

fearto

tread....

GOLDBERG.

e'll make a man of

you.

MCCANN.nd a woman.

GOLDBERG.

ou'll be re-orientated.

MCCANN.

ou'll

be rich.

GOLDBERG.

ou'll be

adjusted.

MCCANN.

ou'll be

our

pride

and

joy.

GOLDBERG.

You'll be a mensch.

MCCANN.

ou'll be a success.

GOLDBERG.

ou'll be

integrated.

MCCANN.

ou'll

give

orders.

GOLDBERG.

ou'll

make

decisions.

MCCANN. ou'll be

a

magnate.

GOLDBERG.A statesman.

MCCANN.

ou'll

own

yachts.

GOLDBERG.

Animals.

MCCANN.Animals.

In

comparing

the three

excerpts,

we

note

that

Osborne's sustained

metaphors re almost yricalwithrebellion,butboth Beckett nd Pinter

resort

to

pithy

stichomythia. lthough

the

passages

are

typical

of the

technique

of

each

play,

the

respective

onal differences

epend

upon

the

dramatic

structure.Osborne's satiric

hostility

ecurs

throughout

ook

Back in

Anger,

but

Beckett's

ttitudetowards

Godot is ambivalent.The

quoted

excerpt

occurs

early

in

the

play,

when the

tramps,

n

spite

of

their

pathetic

plight,

an

still

attempt

o

define

the

System

n

familiar

human

terms. ut

by

the

end

of

the

drama,

man and

diety

re

poignantly

reduced to

their

ompulsive,

mpossible,

roblematical

nterrelationship:

"in this mmense onfusion ne thing lone is clear,"saysVladimir."We

are

waiting

for

Godot to

come."

In the

Pinter

play,

the

messengers

f

the

System

libly

mouth

ts

pat

phrases-increasingly

ointed

as the

dehumanization

f

the

victim

pro-

gresses.

n the

quoted

excerpt,

which

occurs

towards

the

end

of

the

drama,

the

seemingly

rrelevant

onclusion,

"Animals,"

corrosively

li-

maxes

the

process.

The central

victim-villain

onflict

may

be

traced

through

inter's

four

plays.

In

the

one-act

Room,

where the

presentation

f

the

human

di-

lemma is somewhatdiffuse, ictimand villain are recognizedas such

only

at the final

curtain.

Rose

and Bert

Hudd,

wife

and

husband,

alone

onstage

when

the

play begins,

re

almost alone

when

the curtain

falls-

except

forthe

still

body

of

the

blind

Negro,

whose

head

Bert

has

kicked


7/15

60

The Tulane

Drama

Review

against

the stove. But

it is Rose

who is Bert's

victim,

Rose whose

suffer-

ing

is

sustained

throughout

he

play,

Rose

who is

suddenly

and

finallyafflicted ith the

Negro's

blindness.

When the

play

opens,

Rose

is

busy

preparing

a realistictea

in

their

realistic

room,

while

Bert

Hudd

quietly

reads a realistic

newspaper.

Bert's silence n the

face

of Rose's

disconnected

ambling,

eems to be

a

lower-class,

marital-comedy

ilence. When

Mr.

Kidd,

the

landlord,

enters

to look

at

the

pipes,

to converse

withhusband and

wife,

Bert's

persistent

and insistent ilence

takeson a

threatening

uality.

Mr Kidd

talks

about

the

house,

about the

time he used

to

live in their

room.

Quite suddenly,

room and inhabitants ose their humdrumexterior, nd take on new

depth.

When Rose

asks how

many

floorsthere are

in the

house,

Mr.

Kidd

replies,

Well,

to

tell

you

the

truth,

don't

count

them

now."

Close

upon

this

rejection

f

the

numerable,

Mr.

Kidd reminiscesbout

his dead

sister,

his

Jewish

mother.

There

is

a

sporadic

return

to small

talk,

as Mr.

Kidd

admiresBert

Hudd's

van,

his

driving.

After

Mr. Kidd

leaves,

Bert

Hudd,

in

increasingly

inister

ilence,

goes

down

to his

van.

During

his

absence,

a

Mr. and

Mrs.

Sands come

looking

for a

room;

a

man

in

the basementhas told them

there

was one

for rent.

There is

a

confusedconversation bout the landlord,whom Mr. Sands mixesup

with

Bert,

ince the names Hudd

and

Kidd

sound

alike.

Rose's

security

is

shaken,

nd

she

denies the rumor

of

a

vacancy.

Mr.

Sands

insists

hat

the

man

in

the

basement

has offered hem

number

even-Rose's room.

When the

Sands

couple

leaves,

carrying

with

them

all

hint of social

satire,

he

surface

lausibility

f the

dialogue

collapses

completely.

When

Mr.

Kidd

reinters,

Rose

pounces upon

him

to

affirm er

claim to

the

room.

But

Mr.

Kidd

can

talk

only

of a

mysterious

man

in

the

basement,

who

has

been

waiting

forBert

Hudd

to

leave,

so

that

he can

come

up

to

see Rose. Even as she denies

any

knowledge

of the

man,

she

consents

o

see him.

When

a

blind

Negro

enters,

Rose

screams

hat

she

doesn't

know

him,

that

his

name

is

not

Riley,

as

he

claims.

Riley

announces

his

mes-

sage:

"Your

father

wants

you

to

come

home."

Calling

her

Sal,

Riley

soon

shifts

o,

"I

want

you

to

come

home."

[My

italics]

After

Riley's

final,

"Come home

now,

Sal,"

Bert

Hudd

returns

to the

room,

and

speaks

for

the

first

ime.

n

short,

harsh

sentences,

he

describes

driving

his van

through

he cold streets:

She

took

me

there.

She

brought

me

back."When Rileyaddresseshim,"Mr. Hudd, yourwife-," Bertcries,

"Licel"

He

knocks

Riley

down and

kicks

his head

until he

lies

still. Rose

stands

clutching

her

eyes,

moaning,

"Can't

see.

I

can't see.

I

can't

see."

Of the

rival

claimants

for

Rose,

Riley

and

Bert,

the

latter

bludgeons

his

way

to

triumph.

Bert's

role as

villain

explodes

climactically,

or

t is


8/15

RUBY COHN

61

Riley

whofirst

ppears

o menace

Rose.

But

silence,

onventional

on-

nubial

demands,

nd a van

(female

n

Bert's

ines)

are

victorious

ver

theblindNegrofather-surrogate.arlier, he landlord,Mr. Kidd, is

nearly

riven

off

is

squiff"

yRiley's

nsistancen

seeing

Rose.

With

Bert,however,

r.

Kidd

seems o have

reached modus

vivendi,

ven

though

ertnever

ddresses

im.Mr. Kidd

admires

ert's

riving

bil-

ity;

he

too

speaks

f

thevan

as

a woman.

heir

very

ames,

Kidd

and

Hudd,

sound

o

much

like

thatoutsidersuch as the

Sands,

onfuse

themwith ne

another.t

is the

presence

f

Riley

gainst

which

oth

Kidd

and Hudd

react-the

former ith

error,

he atterwith

violence.

Although iley s kicked nconsciousyBert,t sRose-Salwho sBert's

ultimate

rey.

A

woman f

sixty," arrulous

nd

shuffling,

he

speaks

disparagingly

f

foreigners,

wells

n her

physical

omforts,

s

ungracious

to

the

Sands,

nd

hostile

o

Riley.

At

the

ast,

he

makes

no

attempt

o

defend

iley

from

ert,

ut

succumbs

o

herown

blindness.,

inter

as

stripped

er

of all

appealing ualities,

o that

ny

ympathy

he

nspires

must

e rooted

n her

plight.

Pinter's

econd

play,

the

one-act umb

Waiter,

oncentrates

ven

more

pointedly

n

the

plight

f the

victim.

s

in The

Room,

t

is

not

immediatelyvidentwho s victimndwhovillain. entbyan offstage

Wilson to do

a

job,"

Gus and

Ben,

the

play's

wo

characters,

wait

n-

structions

n a

basement

oom

which

ontains wo

beds

separated

y

a

hatch-a

dumb-waiter.

hile

hey

ait,

Gusbusies

imself

ith

repara-

tions or

realistic

ea,

nd

Ben

reads

he

bloodier

tems

rom

realistic

newspaper.

heir

life seems

o lie

in

their

Kafka-like

areer;

as

Gus

summarizes

t,

you

ome

nto

place

when

t's till

dark,

ou

ome

nto

a room

you've

never

een

before,

ou

leep

ll

day,

you

do

your

ob,

and

then

yougo away

n

the

nightgain."*

Despite

hemenace

mplicit

n the

ob

itself,

arly

disquieting

igns

are

plausible

y

their

ery

riviality:

he

toilet as

a

deficient

allcock,

the

bed

sheets re

dirty,

us

and

Ben

cannot

ee a

football'game

ecause

all

teams

re

playing

away."

After

n

envelope

f

matches

s

myste-

riously

lipped

under

he

door,

hey

uarrel

ensely

bout

whether

ne

*

Compare

his

escription

ith

hat f

Jimmy

orter's

aturalistic

undays

in Look

Back n

Anger:

Always

he

ame

ritual.

Reading

he

papers,

rinking

tea,

roning.

few

more

hours,

nd

another

week

gone.

Our

youth

s

slipping

away."On the ther

and,

bserve

ladimir's

learly

metaphysical

outine

n

Godot:

"Tomorrow,

when I

wake,

or

think

do,

what

shall

I

say

of

today?

That

with

Estragon

my

friend,

t

this

place,

until

the

fall of

night,

waited

for

Godot?

That

Pozzo

passed,

with his

carrier,

nd

that

he

spoke

to

us?

Probably.

But

in

all

that

what

ruth

will

there

e?"


9/15


10/15

RUBY

COHN

63

It is because

he has

not

been

content

o be

a

"dumb

waiter" that

Gus

is

destroyed.

lthough

only

a

junior

partner, erhaps

because

he is

only

a

junior

partner,

he has

complained

about the

job,

and

begun

to ask

questions;

he has

found

Wilson "hard

to

talk

to,"

has

even meant

to

ask

questions

of

him.

But the

organization

urns

upon

Gus beforehe

can

probe

or

expose

it.

Until

his

first

hree-act

lay,

The

Birthday

arty,

he threats

n

Pinter's

drama

emanate

mysteriously

rom

a

vague

apparatus

of

master-mes-

senger-organization.

ut

with

his third

play,

Pinter not

only

defines

he

enemy

more

explicitly,

ut

casts

a

retrospective

ight

upon

the villains

of the earlierplays.Goldbergand McCann, who represent he System

in

The

BirthdayParty,

do not

appear

on scene until the end

of

the

first

ct,

and

until

they

do,

the

living

room

of the

Boles'

boardinghouse

is

Pinter's

most

photographically

eal

set.

Although Stanley

Webber's

reaction

against

the

two

prospective

boarders

seems

disproportionate,

and

his review

of

his

earlier

concert areer

ambiguous,

we

do

not

defin-

itively

eave

the

realistic surfaceuntil

Goldberg

and

McCann

actually

enter

by

the

back

door.

Partners ike

Ben

and

Gus,

they

arry

o

revolvers,

but

pose

as

casual

vacationers

n

the

seaside

boardinghouse

where

Stanleyhas takenrefuge.Their firstmonosyllabic xchange establishes

their

relationship:

MCCANN.

IS

this

t?

GOLDBERG.

This is it.

MCCANN. re

you

sure?

GOLDBERG. ure I'm

sure.

Their

Jewish-Irish

ames and

dialects

suggests

vaudeville

skit,

and

it

is not

long

before

we realize that

that

skit is

the

Judaeo-Christian

tradition s it appears in our

present

ivilization.

Goldberg

s thesenior

partner;

he

utters

he

sacred

clich6s

of

family,

lass,

prudence,

propor-

tion.

McCann is

the

brawny

es-man

hose

trength

eEnforces

oldberg's

doctrine.

Although

Meg

and

Petey

Boles have

sheltered

tanley

n their

home,

they

are

unable to

recognize

that

the sinisternew

guests

threaten

the

welfare

of their

guest. Meg

acquiesces oyously

o

Goldberg's suggestion

of

a

birthday

party

for

Stanley

"to

bring

him

out of

himself."

Villains

and

victim,Goldberg-McCann nd Stanleyare not broughtface to face

in

Act

I,

but

Stanley

lready begins

to

feel

trapped.

Before

the

party

that

fillsAct

II,

Stanley

tries

to

convince

McCann

that

he is

not

"the sort

of

bloke

to-to

cause

any

trouble,"

that

t is

all

a

mistake,

hat

Goldberg

and

McCann

have

to leave

because

their

room


11/15

64

The

Tulane

Drama

Review

is

rented.

Having

forced

tanley

o

sit

down,

Goldberg

and,

secondarily,

McCann

engage

in a

verbal

fencing-match

ith

Stanley,

n

which

Pinter

parodies

the

contemporary

mptiness

f the

Judaeo-Christian

eritage.

Interrupting

tanley's

fforts

t

self-defense,

eg

comes

down

ready

for

the

party.

n

the maudlin

mixture

f

drinking,

awing,

and

reminiscing

that

follows,

a

game

of Blindman's Buff

is

played.

An

increasingly

desperate Stanley

tries to

strangle

Meg,

a

mother-surrogate,

nd

rape

Lulu,

the

sexy

neighbor,

but

Goldberg

and

McCann

advance

upon

him

each

time.

As Act

II

closes,

"[Stanley's]

giggle

rises

and

grows

as

he

flattens imself

gainst

the

wall.

Their

[Goldberg

and

McCann]

figures

convergeupon him."

Act

III

is

a

virtual

post

mortem.

Goldberg,

McCann,

and

Petey

talk

about

Stanley's

"nervous

breakdown." McCann

complains

to

Goldberg

about this

job,

and

Goldberg

encourages

him

by

an

interweaving

f

cliches,

n

which

the Biblical

tradition

s

the

warp,

and modern

success

formulas he

woof:

"Play

up,

play

up,

and

play

the

game.

Honour

thy

father and

thy

mother.

All

along

the line.

Follow

the

line,

the

line,

McCann,

and

you

can't

go

wrong."

When

McCann

finally

shers

Stanley

down,

"dressed n

striped

trou-

sers,black jacket, and white collar," the victim has lost thepower of

speech,

and

his

glasses

are

broken.

Again, Goldberg

and McCann

attack

him

verbally,

n

even

pithier

phrases,

but this

time

they

promise

him

worldly

uccess

f

he

complies.

Stanley nly

gurgles

unintelligibly.

"Still the same

old

Stan,"

Goldberg

pronounces,

nd he and

McCann

start to lead

Stanley

to an

unexplained Monty.

When

Petey

Boles

ob-

jects

that

Stanley

can

stay

on at

the

boardinghouse,

he

macabre

pair

scornfully

nvite

Petey

to

join

them,

Come with

us

to

Monty.

There's

plenty

f room

n

the

car."

An

automaton

propped

between

the

partners,

Stanley

s

helped

out while

Petey,

broken-hearted,

alls, "Stan,

don't

let

them

tell

you

what to do "

But

Goldberg's

car

is heard

starting

p,

then

fading

nto the

distance.

When

Meg

Boles

comes down

with

a

morning

hangover,

Petey

does

not

even

tell

her

Stan

is

gone,

but

encourages

her

to dreamof the

birthday

arty,

t which

he was

the

"belle of

the

ball."

The

thread

running

through

all

Pinter's

plays

now

appears

more

clearly.

f

we

recall The

Room

in

the

ight

f

The

Birthday

arty,

we

see

resemblances

between

Goldberg

and

Mr.

Kidd,

who

had a

Jewish

mother.Both emphasizethe value of property, f progress, f family,

of tradition.

Similarly,

he Irish

names of

Riley

and

McCann

seem

to

indicate

a

Christian

continuance

of the

Judaic

legacy;

in

both

plays,

they

are the

weaker

members,

lthough

never

as weak

as

Gus

of The

Dumb

Waiter,

who is

metamorphosed

nto a

victim.


12/15

RUBY COHN

65

In The

Birthday

Party

and

The Dumb

Waiter,

there

s a

higher,

n-

visible

power

behind the

messengers,

ut

Monty

remains

even

more

mysterious han Wilson, and more authority s invested in Goldberg

than

in Ben. In

all

the

plays,

the

motor

van

becomes a

clear

symbol

of

modern

power.

In

the first

lay,

The

Room,

the van

belongs

to

Bert

Hudd,

but is

the

object

of Mr.

Kidd's

admiration. n

The

Birthday

Party,

s in

The

Dumb

Waiter,

the

van

is

the

property

f

one

of

the

messengers--in

ach

case,

of the

dominantand

senior

partner.

t

seems

to be the

older,

rueler

raditionwhich

best

embracesmodern

mechaniza-

tion.

Only

the

recalcitrantndividual

mustbe

quashed.

As thevictim-villainonflictn The Room is somewhat iffused ythe

socially

atirized

ands

couple,

so the

Boles

couple

in

The

Birthday arty

provides

a

comic relief

from

the

mounting

tension.

And

yet

the latter

couple

functions

more

directly

n the

symbolic

context,

for

the

Boles

are

not,

like

Mr.

Kidd,

mere

landlords;

they

provide

a

temporary

f

tawdry

efuge

or

tanley.

Distasteful s are

the

attentions

f

Meg-mother-

mistress,

mpersonal

as is

Petey's

presence,

the

Boles

express

affection

and

concern

for

Stanley.

But human

emotions

are

trickedor

brushed

aside

by

the

ruthless eam

of

a

dogmatic

ystem.

In Pinter's atestplay,The Caretaker, s in theearlierDumb Waiter,

there

are

no

deflections rom

the

hunting

down

of

victim

by

villain.

Although

none

of

Pinter's

victimsare

sentimentalized-Rose

is

gruff,

Gus

has

performed

loody

deeds

before

he

has

begun

to

question

them,

Stanley

s

ungrateful

o

Meg-the

old

man of

The

Caretaker

s

perhaps

the

least

sympathetic

f

all. He

is

ready

to take

anything

rom

nyone,

he

feels

superior

to "them

Blacks,"

he

is

suspicious

of

everyone,

he

re-

peatedly

complains

that the

weather

prevents

his

going

to

Sidcup

for

the

papers

whichhe

left

here

uring

the

war,

nd

which

an

establish

his

identity.

After

the

opening

tableau

of The

Caretaker,

n

which

the

leather-

jacketed

Mick

slowly

examines

the

miscellaneous

objects

in

the

room,

Mick

exits

when he

hears

voices.

Aston

enters n

worn

but

conventional

clothes,

nd

after

him

comes

the

ragged

old

man,

"following,

hambling,

breathing

heavily."

Thrown

out

of

his

ob

and

beaten

up by

a

younger

man,

old

Davies

has

been

rescued

by

Aston

and

brought

to

the

room.

There

seems

to

be

no

reason for

this

kindness.

The

old

man

takes

stock

of the scatteredcontentsand inquires about the other rooms in the

house.

When

Aston

replies,

"They're

out

of

commission,"

we

find

our-

selves n

familiar

inter

country.

ston

nvites he

old

man

to

sleep

with

him in

the

room,

until

he

gets

"fixed

up";

he

gives

him

money

and a

key,

ets him

try

n

some old

shoes.


13/15

66 The

Tulane Drama Review

After

night's

sleep,

the conversation

s

more

erratic.When

asked

where

he was

born,

the old man

replies,

"I

was...

uh...

oh,

it's

a

bit

hard, ike,to set

your

mind

back..,

see what I mean

..

going

back...

a

good

way..,

lose

a

bit

of

track,

ike..,

you

know...."

When

Aston

leaves,

the

old man examines the various

objects

in the

room.

Mick

enters,

watches

ilently,

hen

suddenly

prings

nd forces

he old

man to

the floor.

What's the

game?"

he

rasps

at the old

man,

as

Act

I

ends.

In

Act

II,

Mick

insistently

uestions

the

old man

about

his

name,

while

the

old

man

whines to

Mick,

"I

don't

know

who

you

are " Mick

compares

he

old

man to various

outlandish

relatives

nd

acquaintances,

refusing o believe thestory f how he came to thisroom,ofwhich he

announces

himself

he

owner,

and his

brotherAston the

tenant. After

Mick

makes

a

long,

caustic

speech

about

the

rent

he intends

to collect

from

the

old

man,

Aston

reeinters.

When

Mick

leaves the

room

Aston

mentions

his

do-it-yourself

emodeling

plans

for

the

house.

Abruptly,

Aston

suggests

hat the

old man

become

caretaker

f

the

premises,

but

the

old

man

thinkshis

assumed name

may

create

difficulties.

When the old

man

next

enters

the

room,

t is

dark,

and

he

defends

himself rom

n

invisible

enemy

who

proves

to

be Mick

with

an

"elec-

trolux."Friendlynow,Mick confides o the old man thathe cannotget

Aston,

his

elder

brother,

o

redecorate

the

premises.

As

owner,

Mick

offers he old man

a

job

as

caretaker.

This

time the

old

man

quickly

accepts,

but

Mick

mentions the

necessity

or

references.

Reassuringly,

the

old

man

explains

it

is

merely

question

of

getting

down

to

Sidcup

for

his

papers.

f

only

he

had

a

pair

of

shoes...

After

quick

blackout,

Aston

wakens the old man

so

that

he

can

start

early

for

Sidcup,

but the

old man

pleads

that the

weather

s

too bad.

Aston

closes

Act

II

with a

long monologue

about his

experiences

n a

mental

hospital.

By

Act

III,

the old man

falls

n

with

the

wildly

mbitious

redecorating

schemes f

Mick.

Since

they

have

been

living

n

the

same

room,

Aston

and the

old man are mutual

sources

of irritation

o

each

other.

Feeling

secure

in

his

relationship

with

Mick,

the

old man

carps

at Aston's

idiosyncrasies.

When

Aston

suggests

he

old man

find

nother

place,

he

retorts,

Youl

You better

find

somewhere

else."

After

the old

man

threatensAston

with a

knife,

he

elder

brother

rders,

Get

your

stuff."

MumblingthatMickwillprotecthim,the old manleavestemporarily.

But

Mick

turns

on

the

old

man,

for

Aston

is

his

brother.

Only

if

the

old

man is

an

interior

decoratorof

great

capability,

an

he

stay.

When

the old

man

protests

e

is

merely

caretaker,

Mick

accuses him

of

lying

all

the

time,

boasting

bout

non-existent

ccomplishments.

n

the

future,


14/15

RUBY

COHN

67

Mick intends

to

leave

the

house

entirely

n Aston's

hands.

"What

about

me?"

pleads

the old man. There

is no

answer

as Aston

enters

nd

Mick

leaves;whentheypass each other, he two brothersmilebriefly.

The old

man

attempts

o make

peace

with

Aston,

nd

suggests

arious

compromises

o facilitate

heir

iving together,

ut

to all

of

them

Aston

replies,

"No." He does

not need

the old

man's

help,

and will

not

have

him

as caretaker.

More and

more

desperate,

he

old

man

begs

to

stay,

but Aston

turns

his

back

on

him.

As

the

old

man

swears

that he

will

go

down

to

Sidcup

for

his

papers

so

thathe

will

have

the

proper

references

to be

caretaker,

Aston

remains

till,

his

back

to

him,

at the

window,"

and the

curtainfalls

n

a

"long

silence"

duringwhichAston sas stone.

Although

Mick is

slang

for

rish,

t is

not clear

in

The

Caretaker

hat

Pinter

is

again

designating

he

Christian

tradition

by

an

Irish

name.

Rather,

the two

brothers

ointly

seem

to

symbolize

he

family

ompat-

ibility

between

a

religious

heritage

and

contemporary

alues.

Thus,

it

is the

elder,

conventionally

ressed

Aston

who

is

a

carpenter,

with

its

evocation

of

Christ,

nd it

is

the

leather-jacketed

Mick

who

is

in

the

building

trade

and

owns

a

motorizedvan.

It

is

Mick

who

destroys

statue of

Buddha,

and

who

has

grandiose

schemes

for

redecorating

he

house.Aston'sprojects re humbler;he has been restored o competence

by

modern

treatments

or

mental

deviates;

before

the end

of

the

play,

he

does

manage

to

tar

the

roof

of

the

room,

so it

no

longer

eaks.

Al-

though

Mick

is

presumably

he

owner

and

Aston

the

inhabitant

f

the

house,

the

possession

s

finally

eft n

doubt.

As

Mick

explains,

"So

what

it

is,

it's a

fine

egal

point,

that's

what

it

is."

In

their

attitudes

owards

he

old

man,

the

human

derelict,

he

two

brothers

present

only

surface

contrasts.

Mick

begins

by

knocking

him

down,

whereas

Aston,

nstead

of

allowing

him

to

die

in

despair,

rescues

him,shares his roomwithhim,and opens

up

hope

to him. Both the

brothers

name the

old man

as

caretaker,

ffer

im

a

kind

of

security,

which

they

both

subsequently

withdraw.

Mick

turns

his

back

on

the

old

man

for

failing

o fulfill

role

to

which

he

never

aspired,

but

Aston

re-

jects

him

for

what he

is--cantankerous,

elf-deluded,

nd

desperate.

Of

all

Pinter's

plays,

The

Caretaker

makes the

most

bitter

commentary

on

the

human

condition;

nstead

of

allowing

an

old

man

to

die

beaten,

the

System

nsists n

tantalizing

him

with

faint

hope,

thereby

mmeas-

urably ncreasing

his

final

desperateanguish.There is perhaps a puncontained in

the

title:

the

Caretaker

s

twisted

nto a

taker

on

of

care,

for

are is

the

human

destiny.

Pinter's

drama

savagely

ndicts

System

which

sports

maudlin

physical

comforts,

ulgar

brand

names,

and

vicious

vestiges

f

a

religious

tradi-


15/15

68

The

Tulane Drama

Review

tion. Pinter'svillains

descend from

motorizedvans to close

in

on

their

victims

n

stuffy,habby

rooms.

The

System

hey

represent

s as

stuffy

and shabby;one cannot,as in Osborne's realisticdramas,

marry

nto it,

or sneak

into

it,

or even rave

against

it in

self-expressivenger.

The

essenceof the

Pintervictim s

his final

puttering

elplessness.

Although

Pinter's

God-surrogates

re

as invisible as

Godot,

there

is

no

ambiguity

bout their

message.

They

send henchmen

not to

bless

but

to

curse,

not

to

redeembut to

annihilate.As

compared

to

the

long,

dull

wait for

Godot,

Pinter's

victims

re

more

swiftly

tricken

with

a

deadly

weapon-the

most

brilliant and

brutal

stylization

of

contemporary

clich6 on theEnglish tagetoday.

tbp world of pinter

Documents