SLEZSKÁ UNIVERZITA V OPAVĚ Filozoficko-přírodovědecká fakulta v Opavě

DIPLOMOVÁ PRÁCE

Opava 2020 Bc. Anna Bangoura

SLEZSKÁ UNIVERZITA V OPAVĚ Filozoficko-přírodovědecká fakulta v Opavě

Anna Bangoura

Obor: Anglická literatura (angličtina)

Female Characters in Alan Ayckbourn's Plays

Diplomová práce

Opava 2020 PhDr. Diana Adamová, Ph.D.

Abstract The present master thesis examines the portrayal and the role of female characters in selected plays by a British contemporary playwright Alan Ayckbourn. The thesis deals with the analysis of female characters in terms of gender stereotypes and its evaluation based on the feminist theory in literature. The aim of this thesis is to focus on how the author approaches female characters in his works.

Keywords: feminism, theatre, female character ​

Abstrakt Tato diplomová práce zkoumá vyobrazení a roli ženských postav v literatuře. Konkrétně na příkladu vybraných her současného britského dramatika Alana Ayckbourna. Tato práce se zabývá analýzou ženských postav z hlediska genderových stereotypů a jejich hodnocením na základě feministické literární teorie. Cílem této práce je zaměřit se na to, jakým způsobem autor přistupuje k ženským postavám v jeho dílech.

Klíčová slova: feminismus, divadlo, ženská postava ​ 4

Prohlašuji, že jsem tuto práci vypracovala samostatně. Veškeré prameny a literatura, které jsem pro vyhotovení práce využila, řádně cituji a uvádím v seznamu použité literatury a internetových zdrojů.

V Opavě dne 9. prosince 2020 Anna Bangoura

Acknowledgements I would like to thank my supervisor PhDr. Diana Adamová Ph.D for her helpful guidance, valuable advice, comments and support during my work on the thesis.

Contents

Introduction 1

1 The problematic of female characters in the literature of the past and present 2 1.1 How and by whom are the female characters made? 2 1.2 What is a female character? 5

2 Alan Ayckbourn as a writer of a contemporary female character 8 2.1 In the beginning 8 2.2 Recurrent themes in Alan Ayckbourn’s works 11

3 Female characters in selected plays of Alan Ayckbourn 14 3.1 Woman in Mind (1987) 14 3.1.1 Susan and Fata Morgana on the desert of her life 16 3.1.2 Susan in relation to other characters in Woman In Mind 20 3.2 Henceforward... (1987) 28 3.2.1 Corinna and all of her shapes in Henceforward… 30 3.3 Body Language (1990) 36 3.3.1 Opposites attract - stereotypes in female characters 37 3.4 Comic Potential (1998) 42 3.4.1 Woman or a robot? 43 3.4.2 Other female characters in Comic Potential 46

Conclusion 49

Bibliography 53

List of abbreviations

AI – artificial intelligence 1

Introduction Alan Ayckbourn is a prolific author of mostly comedy plays that combine the element of deeply serious and lightweight at once, and is known for his focus on struggling relationships and marriage. The author’s interest in futuristic world and the search for freedom creates a brilliant opportunity to analyse the female characters in his plays in context of gender stereotypes and feminist theory. The way in which the writer interconnects the practical with the abstract, when it comes to choosing the setting or the motifs of his works, creates an attractive feature which appeals to be analysed in the literary field. Moreover, the female characters written by this author promise a diverse and unconventional expression of human emotions and various ideas. This thesis concentrates on the analysis of female characters that appear in four selected theatre plays by Alan Ayckbourn. The plays vary in the types of setting, number of cast and other aspects and they are arranged in the chronological order. The thesis consists of the parts where Chapter 1 concentrates on the theoretical approach to analysis of female characters, and Chapter 2 introduces the writing and recurrent themes in the works of Alan Ayckbourn. In Chapter 3 the practical part of the thesis is executed, meaning that the analysis of the female characters in Ayckbourn’s plays is described in the following four subchapters where each deals with one of the selected plays and the female characters that can be found in them. Female characters are analysed considering the topical issues surrounding women in society of this day. The aim is to explore how far did the process of equalization permeate into the different areas of everyday life questions, and whether it has brought a considerable change in the way that society perceives women. The selected characters by Alan Ayckbourn act as a litmus paper that indicates the amount of progress that has been made throughout modern history, as well as contentment or discontentment of women in society. The goal of this thesis is to discover and describe the potential imbalanced structures that influence the notion of a female character being an unvarying universal concept.

2

1 The problematic of female characters in the literature of the past and present

1.1 How and by whom are the female characters made? The existence of a female character in a literary canon could be easily described as ancient and it appears in many pieces of literature throughout the history of the human race. And if literature is to be regarded as a tool that has the ability to tell something about the world that contemporary people and their ancestors have inhabited, it is only exciting to have such a vast and long-standing archive of female representation in it. But previous to diving into a serious and thorough analysis of the female element in literary discipline it is only fair to remind all the parts that play an important role in telling or rather more accurately creating the stories of this world. More and more often these days the world is challenged with the issue that history is only as true as much it reflects the point of view of the one who is spreading it. And what now seems to be desired, is to hear the other sides of the stories that people are being told. Thus, in describing and trying to decode or analyse female characters it is vital to discover who are those that were, and are still, mainly giving us their viewpoint on female lives through the means of writing. What great authors of the literary world do come to the minds of people first? It would not be surprising to find mostly names of male authors in the notional “top writers'' list. After all, what kind of a surprise it is to assemble a list of names that have been taught and were long presented as the best in the given discipline. Debates over the rightfulness and justification of the praise for those male authors is not a subject matter of this thesis. But aiming to focus on the information that the male authorship has always been prevalent in the literature can lead to uncovering the nuances between the images of women true to their being, and projections, myths and demagogues imposed on the “other” gender from the men’s point of view.1 ​ Could there be a connection between typical features, characteristics and behavioural patterns that most frequently recur in the depictions of women in fiction and poetry? When thinking about all these well-known characters, good or evil, it is

1 Pam Morris, “Re-vision: Reading as a Woman” in Literature and Feminism: An Introduction. (Oxford: B​lackwell Publishers, 1993), 14. ​ ​ 3

almost impossible to avoid the word ‘stereotype’2.​ Whether it is Shakespeare’s Ophelia, ​ James's Daisy Miller or Hawthorne’s Hester Prynne from The Scarlet Letter,​ the ​ extraordinariness and heroism of these characters seems to lie in the ability to endure and bear their fates that seem to be completely out of their hands. Which itself is not to be depreciated as an element of epic in literature, since the lack of complete control over life is a fundamental attribute of the world’s balance. But the nature and submission with which these female characters accept their fortunes without a single revolt and fight for their rights3 is something quite astonishing. And what may come as even more ​ startling, or even disturbing, is the praise of such a yielding attitude as a sign of a woman's positive moral quality. This celebrated passiveness is well described by Annis Pratt in her paper that focuses on archetypal theory in relation to women in fiction. As Pratt states there are forces “which, from birth, attempted to strip them of their autonomy and process them into passive zombieism according to accepted social norms for female behaviour.”4 ​ On the other side of the scale there are female antagonist characters which also carry usually more or less similarities. It can be spotted in classics like, again, Shakespeare's The Taming of the Shrew, ​where the main female role Katherina is simply ​ a ‘wrong’ woman because she often disagrees, likes to complain, dares to refuse and speaks her mind rather aggressively. And thus for her intransigence she “must” be dominated and tamed in order to become a real woman.5 By this taming Katherine not ​ only becomes a right woman, but when being domesticated she finally finds peace, happiness, and surprisingly, freedom which she allegedly lacked due to her ‘wrong’ attitude and behaviour.6 Examples of the said negative and unsuitable in women are also ​ easily found in literature of more recent years. For example, the character of Dolores Umbridge in favourite children’s literature Harry Potter is thoroughly described in her flaws. Both in the book and in the movie, she is pictured as controlling, power-hungry, cruel and in addition to that - ugly. At the same time, she is misusing her pretended kindness to successfully mislead those who should fall into the trap of her influence.

2 Pam Morris, “Re-vision: Reading as a Woman” in Literature and Feminism: An Introduction. (Oxford: B​lackwell Publishers, 1993), 15 -27. ​ ​ 3 Pam Morris, “Re-vision: Reading as a Woman” in Literature and Feminism: An Introduction. (Oxford: B​lackwell Publishers, 1993), 32 - 33. ​ ​ 4 Annis Pratt, Archetypal Theory and Women's Fiction, (The University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1975) 5. PD​ F. ​ ​ 5 Pam Morris, “Re-vision: Reading as a Woman” in Literature and Feminism: An Introduction. (Oxford: ​ ​ ​ Blackwell Publishers, 1993), 21 - 37. 6 Pam Morris, “Challenging the Canon and the Literary Establishment” in Literature and Feminism: An In​ troduction. (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1993), 37- 40. ​ ​ 4

And by pretending that she is weaker and more innocent than her actual self, Ms Umbridge is making a use of what some like to call female weapons. Meaning that she is not easily readable and fulfills the concern of many, so-called female unpredictability. The stigma imposed on female antagonist characters then seems to indicate that those women who are not willing to conform and do so in a rather unpleasant and aggressive way are there in literature to warn other women of the dangers of trying to be independent.7 ​ There is a lesser understanding of female characters who want to win the first place than for the male characters that proceed with the same malice. E.g., Albus Dumbledore, a male character from the same book, who was celebrated even after it was revealed he used his graciousness to persuade people about the goodness of his intentions that were often to the detriment of those who put trust in him. For controversial female characters it seems as if discontent was only a sign of unfulfilled feminine needs and especially a lack of a male supervising and protective lead and good judgement that could make every woman equally happy. Even those male writers who try to take action as sympathizers of women in literature are often guilty of advocating for women's cases, unfortunately, without previous consultation with the ‘female’ viewpoint on the issue.8 They often simply ​ continue carrying out what they think is the best for them without asking for what the individual woman or a group really needs and longs for. And even though the term mansplaining was​ coined rather recently, around 2010, the phenomenon of “when a man talks condescendingly to someone (especially a woman) about something he has incomplete knowledge of, with the mistaken assumption that he knows more about it than the person he's talking to does” is here for centuries.9 The tendency to portray ​ women characters in literature as either black or white, and depicting them strictly as right or wrong, according to currently prevalent male writer fantasies based on the dimorphism division, is shutting the door for seeing all possible variants of what being a woman can embody. Assigning attributes of what is feminine and masculine does not end in describing human characters but extends beyond by also including animals and other

7 Pam Morris, “Re-vision: Reading as a Woman” in Literature and Feminism: An Introduction. (Oxford: B​lackwell Publishers, 1993), 21-26. ​ ​ 8 Pam Morris, “Challenging the Canon and the Literary Establishment” in Literature and Feminism: An ​ ​ Introduction. (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1993), 40-47. ​ 9 “Mansplaining”, Merriam-Webster (Merriam-Webster Inc., 2018), htt​ps://www.merr​ i​ am-webster.com/words-at-play/mansplaining-definition-history. 5

living creatures (even those mythical) or natural phenomena pictured in literature of various genres. For example, nature is being referred to as ‘she’ and a phrase ‘mother nature’ is widespread not only in the literary world. Its producing powers are often linked to female fertility while the changing weather conditions are being connected to alleged volatility and emotionality of women. Whereas masculine powers, features or characteristics are named for example in the expression of God’s entity, here the reference to this figure is as to a ‘father’ or ‘Lord’, demonstrating “his'' power of creation, omnipotence and importance in the existence of everything and everyone around. This inclining to seeing things as either belonging to one side or another, and finding determinative attributes that make it immediately clear how to categorize these things might raise a question why actually there is this need for such a selective process? One of the reasons why people are so keen on dividing and selecting notions around them could be seen as an incarnation of people’s need to recognize and take hold of the world we live in. According to Disch and Hawkesworth it is the tendency to sculpt the surrounding environment and “rather than being given in nature, sexual dimorphism is imposed by human beings who are trying to make sense of the natural world.”10 ​ The mentioned above are just basic examples of how the stereotypization of a certain quality of gender is pervading in literature through our history, and how analysing female characters in literary work comes with various challenges linked with distinguishing what is truly authentic and what is imprinted by society as natural and preferred authentic.

1.2 What is a female character? If it is accepted that the literary canon of the past, and present too, has been mostly built by male authors, and that the possible consequence of it is the artificially made concept of what is strictly and solely feminine or masculine, the present day will confront us with out of it naturally emerging and more demanding question: In what forms can feminine exist and does it actually exist, and what else can be found beyond the concept of dimorphism? The search and question of identity has indeed been with humanity for many centuries but not until recently it has been so open to giving a voice about one’s thoughts, feelings and desires concerning self-perception in privacy or public. With the

10 Lisa Disch and Mary Hawkesworth, “Introduction: Feminist Theory: Transforming the Known World” in ​The Oxford Handbook of Feminist Theory, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), 19. eBook. ​ ​ 6

freedom of expression effective in many countries, and undoubtedly with a help of nowadays rapid information spread through the means of media and smart technologies, people may find it easier to voice their opinions without a fear of being unmasked or persecuted, and most importantly: creating and finding a community with the same beliefs or struggles have never been easier, while also reducing the feeling of exclusion from the society. Deliberately overlooked variants of ways to live a human life in fulfilment become more and more acceptable, or at least more visible to the public eye, demanding its space and recognition in the world. And so to this turmoil of second and third wave feminism uncovering false beliefs about what makes men masculine and women feminine, the analysis of literary characters of this day encounters terms and concepts like genderless, non-binary (beyond-the-binary model) or trans. To identify, figure out and describe a female character properly without jumping to conclusions and stereotypical views is a tough proposition itself and with the emergence of following ambiguities it is open to question whether such characterization and analysis is applicable at all. What should be taken into account is the almost inevitable impossibility of being impartial or objective in doing a contemporary analysis of a female character. With some of the current movements that appeared in the second half of the twentieth century the demand to acknowledge gender as a social and not a natural construct arose, and therefore asking for its erasure in the description of a human being. The other movements, like for example transgender, however stressed a seemingly opposite idea of “a liberated view according to which sex is voluntarily chosen”11,​ therefore affirming the existence of a gender conception in this world. Very ​ close to the idea of a trans gender identity were the beginnings of the acknowledgement of the intersex society. People who for many years in the past were referred to as hermaphrodites or as “individuals with disorders of sex development” sought, and still do nowadays, recognition as gender category and a depathologization of their condition as one to be medicalised from the majority’s point of view. 12 ​ Despite the endeavours of these movements to incorporate and offer a different perspective on the gender division that is still prevalent in a dimorphic perception, the model of non-binary left many trans and intersex unhappy because they are comfortable within the two-sex system. And so even with these progressively developing policies of

11 Lisa Disch and Mary Hawkesworth, “Intersexuality, Transgender, and Transsexuality” in The Oxford ​ ​ Handbook of Feminist Theory, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), 431. eBook. ​ 12 Lisa Disch and Mary Hawkesworth, “Intersexuality, Transgender, and Transsexuality” in The Oxford Ha​ ndbook of Feminist Theory, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), 420-21. eBook. ​ ​ 7

deconstructing the long prevailing order surrounding sex and gender, its most significant barrier perhaps lays in the unrelenting need of human kind to know and​ seize ​ the world, and thus constantly dwell on separation and division based on recurrent features whether they are corporeal or disembodied, notional ones. As Dish and Hawkesworth point out in The Oxford Handbook of Feminist Theory ​another question ​ following the problematic of female character in literature could be: “Is any gender identity valid?”13 If it is to be accepted that the full potential of women’s authenticity is ​ yet to be discovered, and not only by the creators of the literary world, how should writers, readers, academics and critics proceed in their definition of a female character? Perhaps the room for redefinition of qualities that characters schematically viewed as female carry and offer could and should be enriched with the new theories debunking gender stereotypes and “natural” determinateness that it continues to display in society. Seeing an emergence of women free from the societal and cultural predetermination is still a rather rare phenomenon in the common literary representation. But finding authors that fill the space of literature with the characters that are true to the flow of time and the immense number of possible variants of experience identity is even more rare. From the nowadays point of view on the literature as the mirror of the inner and external events, it is inevitable to focus on equality and definition of a character in a broader sense of gender, its conditioned existence, absence or even its fluctuating ability. This thesis aims to examine how these factors work together on the example of drama literary works by a selected contemporary playwright Alan Ayckbourn.

13 Lisa Disch and Mary Hawkesworth, “Intersexuality, Transgender, and Transsexuality” in The Oxford Han​ dbook of Feminist Theory, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), 432. Ebook. ​ ​ 8

2 Alan Ayckbourn as a writer of a contemporary female character Alan Ayckbourn was born on 12 April 1939 into a family of parents who worked in the arts sphere, which might have marked out his later inclination and starting of an artistic career. In an introductory book about his writing Michael Billington mentions that “his father was leader of the London Symphony Orchestra: his mother was a prolific writer of stories for women’s magazines and had the foresight to buy the pre-pubescent Ayckbourn his own small typewriter on which he could bang out his own premature fiction”.14And​ so since his early childhood the author had the chance to map the external ​ and internal world on the paper and he continued doing this until he reached a professional skill which later appealed to many: directors, actors, critics and audience.

2.1 In the beginning

In his pubescent years Ayckbourn, as many other young Englishmen, attended an English public school with a decent reputation. There he continued cultivating his writing skills by editing the house magazine and there he also came into the first contact with playwriting and drama. As a creator of a house play, at the end of each term he encountered Edgar Matthews, a drama schoolteacher, who was madly enthusiastic about the drama environment and organised annual Shakespeare tours, where he even took young students as far as to the United States and Canada. That is how Ayckbourn was introduced through Matthews to an actor-manager Wolfit and found himself working as his Acting Assistant Stage Manager.15 ​ As Ayckbourn himself describes in his autobiography, the beginning of his theatre career started

in 1959 whilst working as a stage manager, electrician, lighting designer and sound engineer and aspiring to be an actor. I had joined Stephen Joseph … Probably in order to deflect what he quite rightly diagnosed as an abortive

14 Michael Billington, “In The Beginning” in Alan Ayckbourn, (London: Macmillan Education Ltd, 19​90), 2. ​ ​ 15 Michael Billington, “In The Beginning” in Alan Ayckbourn, (London: Macmillan Education Ltd, 19​90), 3. ​ ​

9

ambition to be a performer, he encouraged me first to write and, a little while later, to direct … I’ve been juggling the two careers ever since16 ​

All of his more or less successful drama play ideas flourished and came to being under the pseudonym Rolland Allen. Even in the early stages of his playwriting and directing, Ayckbourn focused and searched for contrastive ways of displaying the world and relations of people in its most veracious, and often uncomfortable, forms. His plays carried hints of farce and persisting darkness, despite all the comicality. According to his own words: “the degree of lightness or darkness is often initially dictated by the theme, but never to the extent that I would ever want the one totally to exclude the other … the darker the subject, the more light you must try to shed on the matter. And vice versa”.17 ​ It is in his first play at the Scarborough called The Square Cat where​ the ​ recurrent motive of misunderstanding and misinterpretation of female intentions in relationship with men come to life, “planting an idea to which he was to return time and time again: that of an unassuageable female discontent. ”18 Although here the stifling ​ theme is still quite drowned out by the comic devices of role-switching and surface characterization of roles in the play. Ayckbourn as an author manages to make the audience laugh and his popularity among people around the theatre is growing proportionately. Thus he immersed himself in other genres and theatre productions, even attempting to create a children’s show with usage of narrative ballet. And later he joined BBC in Leeds as a radio drama producer. This, though, did not stop him from putting shows on the stage that were deeply unsettling in their nature and aroused a mixture of both cordial amusement as well as societal shock after leaving the show. As he continued on working closely with Stephen Joseph, who was at that time obsessed with the idea of overpopulation and inhabitation of other planets by humankind, the idea for a play that looked into the future of society was born in July 1961. Ayckbourn sets the plot in a pretty much dystopian future of 1997 where the over-populated world is being regulated and controlled by the government to avoid a

16 Alan Ayckbourn, “A brief history” in The Crafty Art of Playmaking, (London: Faber and Faber, 2002), 9-1​ 0. eBook. ​ ​ 17 Alan Ayckbourn, “Comedy or drama?” in The Crafty Art of Playmaking, (London: Faber and Faber, ​ ​ ​ 2002), 12. eBook. 18 Michael Billington, “In The Beginning” in Alan Ayckbourn, (London: Macmillan Education Ltd, 19​90), 6. ​ ​ 10

complete collapse of society. The post-Orwellian19 world in which the traffic appears ​ endless, stretching from London to Birmingham, and people need to carry movement passes and make housing facilities from double-deckers. Women of this world of the future are required to take compulsory Housewives and Advanced Maternity Exam before being allowed into the breeding process. It is a nightmare indeed, but its main character, a London bus driver, tries to manage a pretence of a peacefully normal life inside of their bus-home. All comes crashing down, of course, when the daughter of the bus driver becomes illegally pregnant and now the characters have to solve the main problem, how to keep the family together. “The first thing to strike one is how completely the play overturns Stephen Joseph’s original prescription (a play set on Venus where the Earth’s surplus humanity had been dispatched). He wanted a play about the hazards of overpopulation: what he actually got was a hymn of procreation”20,​ Billington states about the play's narrative. ​ But what is interesting for this thesis, and maybe, slightly overlooked in his writing about Alan Ayckbourn as a contemporary author, is the incorporation of the fertility regulation phenomenon, in this case forcefully imposed by the government. If intentionally or not, Ayckbourn opened a topic which is showing in our society and resonates in many feminist-oriented movements: states intervention into decisions about a woman’s body. And what is often criticised about these decisions is a mere and simple fact that they are predominantly made by male members of the government, without much needed willingness to consult it with those whom the decision will affect the most - female members of the country. Albeit the author described his play as a piece that “didn’t quite work, it was the first one I ever sold to the West End, almost entirely due to the setting”21,​ nevertheless, the reception of his fourth play was also instigated by this ​ fresh view on the topic. In any case, Standing Room Only offered​ an adaptation of a ​ contemporary female topic on stage. Further on in his works Ayckbourn continues in discovering and uncovering the world of human relations, mainly concentrating on male incomprehension towards neglected women, rotting unions and adulterous sex. In Relatively Speaking everyone is ​ deceived by the young female character Ginny who creates unbelievably illusory

19 Michael Billington, “In The Beginning” in Alan Ayckbourn, (London: Macmillan Education Ltd, 19​90), 9. ​ ​ 20 Michael Billington, “In The Beginning” in Alan Ayckbourn, (London: Macmillan Education Ltd, ​ ​ ​ 1990), 10. 21 Alan Ayckbourn, “Location” in The Crafty Art of Playmaking, (London: Faber and Faber, 2002), 33. eB​ ook. ​ ​ 11

environment where her boyfriend is lied into meeting with her parents, when actually he is meeting Ginny’s married ex-lover, and the actual ex-lover believes that Ginny’s boyfriend is a lover of his wife. The comic of his plays is building on the classic motif of confusion but does not fail to convey a more deep and dark meanings of men and women coexisting. And when introducing adulterous relations on stage, in Mr Whatnot ​ Ayckbourn explores the limitless nature of human egoism and exploitation of one human being by another. It is around the time when his plays acquired a theatrical maturity22,​ where the audience finally has a chance to realise that actually “the joke is ​ on you” and it might not be that funny but rather piercingly serious and accurate to their lifestyles.

2.2 Recurrent themes in Alan Ayckbourn’s works

In between 1965 to 1970 it was obvious that the main topics of the Ayckbourn’s drama will not be about shallow word-splitting with a single goal - to make an audience laugh. As it showed it was quite the opposite, Ayckbourn made his audience extremely amused and entertained but at the same time left them questioning their own social appearance and habits as they went back home from the theatre. His greatest drama skill lied in the ability to communicate highly serious matters through the comic devices of theatre. Somehow the talent of this writer was overshadowed, curiously, by his popularity and success:

Because … Ayckbourn established himself as a commercial goldmine and a bankable talent it led, I believe, to a serious underestimation of his real worth. Nothing in England arouses more suspicion, particularly amongst the intellectual classes, than popularity. Any dramatist who has the capacity to keep large numbers of people amused or preoccupied is automatically branded as second-rate … Indeed we were all wrong. Because Ayckbourn relied on time-honoured comic devices such as sustained misunderstanding...we all assumed that he was simply an ingenious manipulator and a skilful comic carpenter with nothing much to say.23 ​

22 Michael Billington, “The Plots Thicken” in Alan Ayckbourn, (London: Macmillan Education Ltd, ​ ​ ​ 1990), 25. 23 Michael Billington, “The Plots Thicken” in Alan Ayckbourn, (London: Macmillan Education Ltd, 19​90), 47-48. ​ ​ 12

The premieres of plays like How The Other Half Loves, Absurd Person Singular or​ The ​ ​ Norman Conquests proved​ that underneath the grotesque, crazy situations and hilariously behaving characters there is a more sincere and serious layer simmering, and the writer is aiming to challenge and stir up the automatically accepted social constructs. However, he is not doing so from the position of the judge, Ayckbourn is rather a silent viewer who is trying to point out the problem and not recklessly or bluntly offer an all-conforming solution. His plays are often striving to shed a light on themes like mutual misunderstanding, crumbling family unions, sexual frustrations, or unfulfillment with one’s life and gaps between social classes. Although he is not taking the position of the judge, he is not mellow in his critique of snobbery, neglect, or exploitation of human emotions. Ayckbourn likes to underline the events in the drama plays where outlived rituals and old conceptions stand absurdly in the way of people’s happiness and how society still likes keeping them even if those habits and traditions are pointless. Additionally, he manages to hit the right spot in the conscience of his audience by doing so in various and extraordinary ways. Combining time travelling, multiple endings or unconventional settings and environments where the drama takes place, makes the viewer captivated. As well he is giving the audience enough distance to grasp the topic without being offended but at the same time make them involved enough to feel triggered. 24 ​ What makes Alan Ayckbourn’s playwriting attractive is also his outlook on female characters. As much as he is intense and intransigent in his ridiculing of middle-class seriousness and caricaturing the characters that abuse their privilege, it seems as if he is almost lending his support and understanding to prevalently misunderstood, neglected female characters that feel imprisoned in the world that they cannot, whether it is possible or not, change. Not only this feels incredibly rewarding for the theatre and its female participants, as explained by Billington: “Susan Fleetwood once remarked to me that Ayckbourn is one of the few modern writers who offers decent parts for actresses. But it is not simply a matter of juicy roles: I feel he has a marked compassion for women.”25Whether​ the authors' so-called compassion towards ​ women works for their benefit, does them justice or quite the contrary is one of the

24 Michael Billington, “Ritual Behaviour” in Alan Ayckbourn, (London: Macmillan Education Ltd, 1990), ​ ​ ​ 50-76. 25 Michael Billington, “Laughing Till It Hurts” in Alan Ayckbourn, (London: Macmillan Education Ltd, 19​90), 83. ​ ​ 13

points to be answered in this thesis through the means of analysis of Ayckbourn’s female characters in his following plays. One thing is sure, that is that characters of women created in the works of Alan Ayckbour offer an interesting area for study of female characters in the drama of modern times. The writer’s use of science fiction elements, criticism of the institution of marriage and the very basic, yet contradictory, need to fit into society and at the same time sustain the required level of freedom makes a suitable ground for searching and describing a development of female characters in contemporary literature. It could also serve as an example of how the perception of women in society changed or not. The following chapters deal with specific characters from the subsequent plays by Alan Ayckbourn, namely: Woman In Mind (1985), Henceforward (1987), Body Language ​ ​ ​ (1990) and Comic Potential ​(1998). ​ 14

3 Female characters in selected plays of Alan Ayckbourn The previous part of the thesis dealt with the theoretical approach to female characters in the context of the history of literature and continued with the outline of literary work of a modern British writer Alan Ayckbourn and his way of processing female characters, as well as his perspective of women in his creative work. In the following part of the thesis the focus is aimed at the practical analysis of particular female characters in selected plays of Alan Ayckbourn. With regards to the information that was introduced in the theoretical part of this theses, such as: historical context, traditional and/or stereotypical views of the female role in the society, gender concept and its interpretation, the amount of objectivity in contrast to the subjective perception of the author and the possibilities of the given character. The writing of Alan Ayckbourn offers an interesting field for discovery and later exploration of quite interesting and uncommon female characters that perfectly blossom in the daunting setting of the author’s witty comedies which oscillate on the fine line between darkness and light. Observations are made on the varying environments and themes of his plays, whether it be in the near future full of artificial intelligence or in an ordinary present-day life. The influence of a prolific and well-known Russian playwright Anton Chekhov, who is famous for its ambiguous comedies misunderstood as tragedies due to their unexpected content depth, is considered in analysis of Ayckbourn’s female characters. As well as Chekhov’s parts they do not lack depth and a certain amount of self-mockery that creates a hilarious yet tearful status quo. The selected plays are analysed chronologically according to their date of publication, which is the following: Woman In Mind (1985), Henceforward (1987), Body Language (1990) ​ ​ ​ and Comic Potential ​(1998). ​

3.1 Woman in Mind (1987)

The title suggests that this play fits the standards for the analysis of a female character perfectly, as it revolves solely around the life of one - namely Susan Gannet, a wife of a parson. It takes the audience and readers on an interesting trip to an internal and external life of the main characters that differs from one another in complete extremes. Although the setting of this play is in no way extraordinary, it is placed in a rather typical plain 15

middle-class environment, but the depth of the inside circumstances reveals a much more interesting part of the so-called ordinary life of a housewife. The plot of the play starts with Susan regaining consciousness in the back garden and the whole storyline occurs within just forty-eight hours. As Susan awakens, she is hearing a voice speaking to her in a language that she is unable to understand, which she considers to be gibberish. Then she comes to a conclusion that she has died and found herself in a strange place where no one speaks English. In fact, she fails to understand the words of her doctor, Bill Windsor, who found her laying in the garden after she knocked herself out with a garden rake. When the doctor tries to check her, he asks: “December bee?” to which Susan responds: “December bee? Oh, dear God, he’s off again. (Loudly as before)​ No bees in December. Not there. They’re asleep. They go ​ to sleep.”26,​ and this misconception of a simple question “Remember me?” creates an ​ alternate title for this play, stated in brackets as Woman In Mind ​(December Bee). ​ ​ What first appears to be a minor mishap at the back of the garden grows into an enormous trouble in Susan’s double perception of reality. In her illusive world she leads a successful life on a vast estate, where everything is beautiful: the landscape, her writing career, all the family members and their relationships. She is showered with love and affection by her husband, brother and her beloved daughter. Whereas when reality hits hard outside of her hallucinations, Susan finds herself in a rather small household living with an indifferent and almost impassive husband, Gerald Gannet, who is mostly preoccupied with finishing his book about the history of the parish. The distance between the couple is only heightened by the excessive presence of Gerald’s feeble-minded sister Muriel that moved in after the death of her husband and burdens the family with her retrograde pietist behaviour and terrible cooking. On the other hand, there is the lacking presence of Susan and Gerald’s only son Rick which is a source of great distress to both of parents but mostly to Susan who always wanted a lively, more friend-like relationship with her child. Despite her wishes the communication between the main character and her son is quite to the contrary very erratic and full of misunderstanding, all of this is emphasized by Rick’s choice of joining a silent order, rather than to share his life within the family. Periods between the shifts of reality perception become gradually shorter, mixed and more confusing throughout the development of this play, and the events surrounding Susan cause her to mentally break down completely. The visit of her

26 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 8. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 16

non-speaking son Rick, who reveals that he had left the order and found a girl, are only short-lived joyous news for Susan. She quickly learns that the two are already married and are planning to move to Thailand, without Rick ever intending to introduce his new wife to Susan. Because of his fear from previous experiences with his mother and now ex-girlfriends trying to get acquainted. The blurred lines of hallucination and reality become unbearable, and the female lead finds herself in a situation where she thinks that everyone is against her. When her husband, son and sister-in-lawn find her sprawled in the middle of the lawn of the garden, during a night’s thunderstorm, she cannot remember that apparently, she has burnt Gerald’s book about the parish and wrote on her in-law’s room ceiling: “KNICKERS OFF, MURIEL27”.​ She refuses to come inside ​ and offers Gerald a quiet divorce while finally sinking back into her hallucinatory world, as the ambulance is coming her way in reality. Her consciousness then fades into the same gibberish as in the beginning, repeating a question: “December bee?”.

3.1.1 Susan and Fata Morgana on the desert of her life

In pursuit to get a picture of Woman In Mind’s​ main character as clear as possible Alan ​ Ayckbourn helps to grasp an outline of her character straight in the beginning of the play. Many playwrights use stage directions not only to inform the theatre production crew, such as director, lighting designers, costume designers, etc. about the factual and technical equipment required for the particular show. But these directions can also usually function as a very accurate description of the looks and cardinal character traits of a given role, just like it is in Ayckbourn’s case. After Susan’s first line in the opening, the author introduces quite sufficient depiction of the female character in a few sentences. “She is an unassuming woman in her forties, used to and happy to play second fiddle to more determinedly motivated personalities than her own. Only now, at this stage of her life, is she beginning to question this role she’s played or perhaps been cast in.”28 Since the scene number one the reader or audience is introduced to the ​ blending of two worlds that Susan lives in — one​ is imaginary, the other is real. The ​ small accident in “her small, tidy, suburban garden”29 leads to a series of hallucinatory ​ events that show her alternate life which is in no way similar to the one she actually lives. One of the few linking pieces in the two realities is the fact that Susan believes

27 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 86. eBook. ​ ​ 28 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 7. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 29 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 7. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 17

she knocked herself out with a garden rake. To the surprise of the doctor on-the-spot of the accident, her imaginary world is rather grand to what one could call suburban:

BILL: These —​ ​tennis courts that you can see …? SUSAN: I can’t see them. BILL: You can’t? SUSAN: No. Can you? BILL: No. That’s not the point. The point is, can you? SUSAN: Of course I can’t. BILL: Good. Splendid. SUSAN: They’re round the back of the house. (…) I can see the swimming pool, if that’s any help? (…) And the rose beds and —​ yes —​ look, if you stand here on tiptoe you can just see the lake. Look. (…) You can ' t see any of it, can you? BILL: I see —​ a small garden — very pleasant, very tidy, about 20 feet wide by maybe about 30 foot long … There’s a little pond over there. Not a lot in it — a stone frog, is it? (…) Some flowerbeds with wallflowers — shrubs, several shrubs — one newly planted. Presumably by you. A rocketry there — ​30

In his attempt to set Susan right, Dr. Windsor finds himself puzzled at the confirmed reaction of his patient who is at no willing to be led out of her version of truth, cutting Bill’s endeavour with an assertion: “I don’t want to listen to any more of this. … You’re describing some place I wouldn’t choose to live in, even in my wildest nightmares.”31 ​ The harshness with which she is denying the possibility of the described to be her current life shows how much Susan detests reality and slowly chooses to flee it and fade into her imaginary realm of dreams. And referring to Ayckbourn's characterization of her attitude towards life, which gives a strong impression of a passive personality, the question is: is it certain that her inner collapse occurred due to hallucinations that started after being hit the by a garden rake, or it just a caused a more rapid escalation of the inevitable events, coming form an unbearable discontent and stagnation in life? Could it be possible that Susan dreamt of her perfect family before; daydreaming consciously while going around with her daily routine? The vivid manner in which her brain created this perfect imaginary world of Susan emphasizes her intense need and desire to actually leave the life she feels is, in

30 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987),17 -18. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 31 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 18. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 18

fact, her worst nightmare. Almost as if her character could be seen as a stray wanderer on a desert who is longing for a drop of water and a bit of rest so immensely that he becomes a victim of his own Fata Morgana. And yes, Susan’s life reminiscences a desert in many ways, as well as her hallucinatory visions reflect desert’s mirages, with all its pitfalls. The reader or audience is introduced into the state of mind and body of the lead character when she is already at the brink of her sanity. Throughout the Act 1 she reflects on her worsening physical and mental condition, even trying to notify her husband Gerald about it. Unfortunately, all her attempts to communicate sink in a complete misunderstanding on both sides, also most probably due to their basic identity differences. Most of Susan’s conversations with Gerald are sarcastic, shallow and lack compassion. Even when the dialogue impels her to give in and expose her emotions, Susan is often found in situations which are to be called no different than gaslighting — a practice of “manipulating someone into thinking they’re wrong even when they’re right. A form of emotional abuse, (…) used to make the victim question their own mental wellbeing.”32 These “little” cast of doubt ​ on the validity of her judgement slowly add on to her deteriorating mental health. For example, shortly after her “recovery” and return from the hospital Susan and Gerald bandy words after he finds it improper to sleep during the day:

GERALD: There is a school of thought that believes that sleep is for the night. You seem to be out to disprove them (…) SUSAN: I’d sleep at night if I could. I find it very difficult recently… GERALD: Hardly surprising. If you sleep all day. ( … ) SUSAN: Might I remind you, I only came out of the hospital this morning. GERALD: Presumably they released you because they considered you fit and well. ( …) SUSAN: Has it ever occurred to you why I can’t sleep at nights? GERALD: Insomnia? SUSAN: Perhaps it’s because I’m not very happy, Gerald. GERALD: Well, who is? These days. Very few.​33

32 Ria Wolstenholme, “The Hidden Victims of Gaslighting,” BBC Future (BBC, November 24, 2020), https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20201123-what-is-racial-gaslighting. 33 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 19. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 19

The gap between Susan and the outer world grows bigger and deeper with every conversation she has with people surrounding her. And the way she is existing in real life relations is very far from the concept of herself she keeps in her imagination. There is a space full of unfulfilled dreams but with no one to fulfill them. Not only this female character fails to be understood and feels trapped in her life by incompetent individuals, but she herself is restricting and preventing her life from improvement by adopting the role of the victim. On the one hand, the standard lifestyle she chose to lead, as being a full-time homemaker, later gets back to her in the lack of purpose of life. On the other hand, there is this distant goal envisioned as a successful career in historic novel writing. In both cases lethargy stops her from carrying out at least a minor change in her life, and the more she dwells in her, the more she is incapable of doing anything, even living here life awake. Susan believes all is lost, but not to say that she is blameless. Although she might have yielded to pressures of society in surrendering her life goals for the sake of others, her awakening and sudden realization of discontent with this life perhaps came too late. In his depiction of this female character, Ayckbourn suggests that squandering one’s chance for life comes with serious consequences. Susan feels restricted to the point where it almost appears as if she were a mere puppet on her life path that was chosen without her consent. It is visible in her picture-perfect imaginations of family that she possesses an undeniable degree of naivety. Even though she feels pressured in her current life she fails to see that the core might be in her reluctance to search for a happiness that is further than her home. In order to become satisfied with Susan’s life, she suggestively thinks of a better husband, richer family and a different gender of a child but there is no sign of her wanting to change in order to achieve more. The confusion of this character is represented right from the beginning of the story as Susan wonders what to do with herself, saying:

I don’t know what my role is these days. I don’t any longer know what I’m supposed to be doing. I used to be a wife. I used to be a mother. And I loved it. People said, Oh, don’t you long to get out and do a proper job? And I’d say, No thanks, this is a proper job, thank you. Mind your own business. But now it isn’t any more. The thrill is gone.​34

34 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 20. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 20

Her stereotypical thinking in terms of a life calling corners her even more and the fact that her husband is a vicar only makes the decision-making worse. The possibility of being condemned as the one who brought shame on the family and maybe the whole parish is forcing her to prolong the insufferable state of her life and relationships. Susan cannot find a reasonable solution to her problems and gradually becomes dangerous for herself and those around her (e.g. when setting the study on fire35).​ Not until the near ​ end, when her mental breakdown is peaking, she comes to a conclusion that a silent divorce could be the best solution. The complex portrait of Susan Gannet shows a woman who might be slightly plain but still there are moments that prove her dullness to be a mask under which part of her mind is witty and refreshing. Deep inside buried unfulfilled ambitions strip her of happiness and worsen the mental condition, alongside with the inability to take responsibility for her life. All of this comes quite contradictory to the way she speaks: her manner of speech is full of sarcasm that proves her brightness. She holds a collection of passionate dreams but fails to discover how to make them come true under the silent heavy weight of expectations on fulfillment in a life of a female. Too weak to cope with the pressure of her life falling apart, Susan partly involuntary becomes a slave to her imaginative mind. How these behavioural patterns are processed is reflected in her interactions with other characters in this play, which is also a subject for the further analysis of the given female character in this thesis.

3.1.2 Susan in relation to other characters in Woman In Mind

Susan’s relationships are centred around her household, whether it be in real life or in her imaginary life. Apart from the chaotic relationship with herself she mostly communicates with her husband Gerald. As a matter of fact, it is not because the couple would be so intrigued by one another, but rather due to the fact there is no one else surrounding them, except for Gerald’s sister Muriel who seems baffled for most of the time. Strangely, the almost schemed-like dialogues between Susan and her husband (that almost never appear to lead anywhere) reveal a lot about this female character. Since it is natural that one’s spouse or close family usually tend to know the most real sides of each other’s character, it would be tricky to think that these are the literary means that Ayckbourn uses to reveal the true colours of a character. In the case of Susan and Gerald, it is not the openness or the feeling of homely security between

35 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 70 - 72. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 21

them that allows the reader or audience to see the inside of the characters’ soul. What reveals the most about Susan’s desires, unfulfilled needs and hurts are the issues she discusses on and on again with Gerald. The irony, those negative comments which they dish out to one another often uncover what is missing in their relationship and what Susan yearns for helplessly. Their opinions differ to the point where one could wonder how come they ended up in a marriage. Susan is sceptical of the church and faith, and it is often manifested in the way she reacts to her husband’s philosophical utterances that significantly resemble preaching, as he is the local parish priest. She refuses to take in his consolations that lack empathy and genuine understanding by downplaying its meaning, e.g. in the situation when Gerald is yet again reciting the verses of John Keble’s hymn New Every ​ Morning is the Love​, and she reproaches him: “Yes, it’s usually about now that you come up with that invaluable piece of advice, Gerald. The point is, it’s not true. (…) Whoever wrote it was talking through his hat. Anyway, how can you possibly believe anybody who rhymes “road” with “God” …”36 Her negative outlook on the ​ religiousness of Gerald’s family takes her thoughts far to blaming her husband for the estranged relationship with their son Rick. She sees the alleged influence and impact of Gerald’s sanctimonious behaviour on the forming of Rick, and ascribes her son’s fear of women to be a result of Gerald, who according to Susan:

“bullied him into that scholarship and then packed him off to that piddling little public school where he never saw anything female aged under fifty-five or weighting less than fifteen stone till the day he left (…) I used to have to listen to his prayers every night of his holidays, Gerald. ‘Please God, don’t make me have to get married.’” ​37

36 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 20. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 37 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 27 - 28. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 22

What also divides her from Gerald is his indifference towards any sign of intimacy and sexuality. His concept of a good relationship is diametrically dissimilar to hers, and it seems that he is content with much lesser expectation of it. Gerald does not see a problem in the fact that they sleep in different beds of the same room, for him it is “just the sex you’re (Susan) talking about. That’s just the sexual side.”38 It’s even a bit ​ uncomfortable and strange to him that women “at this age” are interested in sex.

GERALD: I rather thought you’d lost interest in all that, you know. (…) I thought that when a woman got to —​ our age — she more or less … switched off. SUSAN: Yes, well, I’m a freak, Gerald. I’m afraid that you married a freak … ​39

This reaction Gerald shows quite an interesting notion that is still prevalent in our society: that a woman should not expose her sexuality and that it is not well accepted if she puts sex among her priorities. As Morris suggests in her introductory book Literature and Feminism,​ “excessive feminine sexuality (…) haunts men’s fears, undermining their sense of virility and control”.40 Whereas it might be questionable ​ what is an excessive measure of sexuality, as it is a very disputable characterization, it is surely a very uneasy and contradictory issue that is hard to fit the general moral conception of a “normal” woman. Especially Woman In Mind’s​ male character Gerald ​ feels that anything sexual is rather connected with young men or couples, who are freshly in love, or trying to conceive. And a woman’s role in the sexuality is by a great measure directed by her maternal instinct and eagerness to nurture the result of sex, which is a baby. Reducing the pleasure side of sexuality to a mere by-product that leaves most of the women unconcerned. Therefore the sexual needs of Susan leave him in a great shock, and his choice to neglect it as a pointlessness he does not understand leaves Susan even more frustrated. There also appears to be a sense of rivalry among the married couple, and even though they both live quite settled lives, including their work life, it seems that comparing how much hard work each has got to do in comparison to the other is one of the top priority topics of their quarrels. The clash of ambitions is conveyed through Susan’s silent aspiration to become a writer, and in her hallucinations she is regarded by

38 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 22 -23. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 39 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 23. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 40 Pam Morris, “Re-vision: Reading as a Woman” in Literature and Feminism: An Introduction. (Oxford: Bla​ ckwell Publishers, 1993), 18. ​ ​ 23

her imaginary family as a remarkably successful history novel author, whereas her real husband Gerald actually does work on writing a book. The more she is confronted with her husband’s constant writing about the parish’s history, the more intense the hallucinations about her success are. It starts with the praise from her imaginary daughter Lucy who points out that Susan has been mentioned in the Observer as ​ “probably the most important historical novelist”41 and later, according to Lucy, Sunday ​ Times describes​ “her as the most brilliant woman heart surgeon”42.​ In real life Susan ​ fails to live up to her own dreams and expectations, just passing the time by watching TV programmes she is ashamed of, as well as reading books that she does not find to be right.43 ​ Despite all of their incompatibility, Susan and Gerald’s tragedy lies in not being able to leave a marriage and relationship that no longer functions. Susan is very open in letting Gerald know that she does not love him anymore but is reluctant to cut off their ties in an official way, saying: “I’m still reasonably fond of you.”44The​ repressed ​ negative feelings she holds towards her husband are definitely one of the many things which lead to her breakdown at the end of the play. Apart from her relationship with Gerald she has a very interesting, complex and intense relationship with her only child Rick. At the beginning it seems that her attitude towards him is rather of an uninvolved mother who stopped caring about her son long ago. Consecutively it shows that it is more of the opposite, and Susan has kind of given up on this “lost cause”. Her inner hurt and pain are slowly coming out of the shell with each information that the reader or the audience learns about Rick. The disillusionment about the way that her son turned out to be at first arouses a feeling of compassion. With all the pressure and misunderstanding that Susan encounters one might really conclude that her freer attitude towards life, that she tried to pass in the upbringing of her son, has been crushed under the formal, religious methods of her husband. She suspects that Gerald has planted a seed of their son’s fear of women, and that this is the reason why he joined the silent order and now refuses to verbally communicate with parents45.​ ​ Things become clearer in the second act, where an actual communication and dialogue happens between Susan and Rick, upon his arrival for the family lunch. As

41 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 31. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 42 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 52. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 43 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 33. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 44 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 22. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 45 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 27 - 28. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 24

Susan draws more and more away from her real life, back into the hallucinations, Rick reaches out to her when she is in a deep trance, at the back of the garden. To her surprise, her son is talking to her again and she learns that he even left the group. But her happiness is quickly replaced by disenchantment when she comes to know that her son is already married for two weeks and plans on moving to Thailand with his wife by the end of the week.46 The greater the disappointment is as she finds out that the reason ​ why Rick is not bringing his bride home is “only partly (because of) Dad”47 but also ​ because she “used to embarrass the hell out of them ( … ) get them into corners and start going on about ( … ) contraception methods and multiple orgasms”48.​ ​ As soon as Rick alludes to the topic of sexual matters, Susan bursts out irritated and reproaches him for his narrow-mindedness, conservativeness and that her aim was to prepare the inexperienced youth for a relationship. The impulsivity with which she reacts to the news and blames Rick of being “selfish, insensitive and priggish”49opens​ ​ up the side of her that is more prone to temper and putting blame on others. It is visible that what first seemed as goodwill in bringing up her child to freedom now comes out as Susan’s projection of what she missed out on in her life, and she failed to deliver it to her son. This failed attempt at somewhat forced freedom mirrors Susan’s own inclination to restrictive behaviour and asserting structure, which she does not recognize under the mask of pretended liberal outlook on life.

46 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 45 - 48. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 47 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 48. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 48 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 48. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 49 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 49. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 25

The battle with the illiberalism that is surrounding her, and comes from those who are closest, is well depicted in Susan’s attitude towards her sister-in-law Muriel. Susan’s irony and sarcasm is probably at its top whenever she meets Muriel, not only does she detest her poor cooking abilities but also her timid self-righteousness. The way in which the situations between these two are for most of the time at the peak of comicality is amazing. All the more as Susan and Muriel are rarely speaking directly to each other and it usually is in a form of an oblique dialogue mediated through Gerald. A perfect example of this is when they have a dubious-looking cup of coffee made by Muriel, and during an already extremely awkward conversation, the in-law brings out the topic that has been on her mind for a long time — the possibility of her dead husband Harry trying to get in touch with her.

SUSAN: Extremely unlikely, I’d have thought. (…) it does seem to me that God, in his infinite wisdom and with the entire cosmos to choose from is unlikely to base the Kingdom of Heaven around Muriel’s bedroom… GERALD: That is not only facetious, Susan, that is also blasphemous. SUSAN: I’m sorry, Gerald. GERALD: I hardly think that it’s me you should be apologizing to. SUSAN: Sorry, God. GERALD: I actually meant to Muriel. SUSAN: Oh, rather. Let’s get our priorities right. Muriel, then God, then Gerald. I’ve got it. Sorry, Muriel.​50

This constant jibing not only creates humorous situations but for the biggest part compensates Susan for the lost attention of her husband and forms a way of release of her accumulated anger she holds for Muriel, knowing that she will probably stay in their household forever. Muriel seems to be disadvantaged in terms of intellect but the more she believes that she is a ‘good’ woman in comparison to Susan. Despite the fact that she is not good at housekeeping or cooking, she prides herself on her ability to take care of people, as she already outlived her mother and her husband for whom she took proper care, according to her beliefs.51 ​ In this view Muriel portrays a stereotypical division of roles in society based on gender: she feels in the right because of fulfilling the role that she thinks has been

50 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 25. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 51 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 24. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 26

assigned to her, and often scorns Susan for not following these rules. And Muriel often expresses her disapproval and concern over Susan’s behaviour: “The trouble with you is, Susan, you never learnt how to treat a man properly …”.52This​ way Muriel ​ seemingly claims victory in this battle of two in-laws in one household. One of Susan's relations, though at first quite inconspicuous, stands out and is quite unusual in its development. Doctor Bill Windsor is a figure that passes through the life of Susan mostly unnoticed, although they see each other on a rare occasion. For the most part he seems to be a character that is a little bit clumsy and maybe worries too much but always tries to be nice. He notices that Susan is not feeling well and is aware of her hallucinations. Even though she is a bit tired of his interest in her wellbeing, Susan gives doctor Bill a bit more trust than she does to anyone else around her. She opens up to him about her hallucinations not being gone and quite the contrary, being more frequent every time. And what is interesting is that he is later also present in her visions. Although it is him in a slightly altered version. Coming to the end of the second part of Woman In Mind ​Susan confirms her ​ trust in Bill when they have a heart to heart conversation not only about her worsening mental state but also about the spark between them, as Bill confesses that he has been fond of Susan for almost eleven years. For a short period of time, it seems that Susan has found a grain of hope that she would be able to carry on in her life but all the trust she put in Doctor Windsor is broken when, in an attempt to make her feel better (because her hallucinations are back), he pretends to see her imaginary family too. That is the moment of play where Susan loses all her hope and faith in people or life and draws her closer to the line of mental breakdown.53 She feels deceived, lost and alone in ​ the world where there is no one she could turn to who would understand her fears and problems, and so she gives up and gives in to the games that her mind has been playing. The final part of Susan’s interactions is her imaginary family — they are all ​ covered under the one paragraph as they serve first as a counterbalance to her imperfect real life and then as a mirror of her mental health. Everything that Susan lacks or she never has achieved is portrayed in her hallucinatory family. In the beginning the more she is disappointed by her real life the dreamier is the hallucinatory life and family. Under the influence of her imaginary family she becomes a different person for a while: more caring, less sarcastic, and softer but not in a neurotic way. Susan is a person of two

52 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 52. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 53 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 57 - 64. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 27

personalities but as the hallucinations become more intense and the line between reality is blurred increasingly, she gradually becomes more frightened and fragile in both of her lives. As it was mentioned, her imaginary family stands in the opposite of her real one. No one in her hallucinations is plain or boring, everyone is beautiful, kind, able and extraordinary in its own way. Her imaginary husband Andy is utterly obsessed with her, he is “a tall, good-looking, athletic man, easy-going and charming”54 and he is ​ unstinting in the praise of his wife's qualities. Her imaginary daughter Lucy is a complete opposite of her real son Rick: she admires her mother for everything she does, likes to take her advice and never keeps a secret from Susan, e.g. plans a wedding and consults all the details with her.55 Which in Susan’s real-life acts as a defence ​ mechanism of her mind after being left out of Rick’s life for almost two years. Later the daughter Lucy takes on the characteristics of Dr. Windsor’s real daughter, such as applying for a music scholarship to Cambridge.56 Lucy’s presence in the hallucinations ​ of Susan is simple and in, perhaps, most possible way schematically and superficially ‘girly’ and conventional. She wears dresses, likes music and loves talking about being in love, and that is all her duty. She fulfills Susan’s cry for an understanding company which she imagines symbolised in the mother-daughter relationship, as she once mentions in a dialogue with her real-life son Rick: “I should have had a daughter. I could have coped with her.”57 ​ Even her fictitious brother does not resemble an inch of her real-life relatives. He might come off as a bit rough and his sense of humour is quite racy, but he perfectly balances out the boredom that Susan’s sister-in-law brings to life. If Gannet’s are mediocre then the fictional family members are definitely not — they play tennis, go hunting and drink champagne during the day on any occasion, they embody words like posh and popular to the core. The perfect dreamy family is the answer to all Susan's wishes but also all of her fears. They reflect her need to be needed and her desire to feel indispensable, she is desperately in want of being irreplaceable to somebody. And when Lucy addresses her with words: “Even if they don’t appreciate you, we love you, Mother”58,​ she makes Susan feel wanted as a mother, as well as a person. ​

54 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 10. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 55 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 31. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 56 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 39 - 43. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 57 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 49. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 58 Alan Ayckbourn, Woman In Mind, (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987), 52. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 28

However, Susan is rather resisting and resentful of her hallucinations in spite of the fact that they bring her momentary comfort and peace. Somewhere in the back of her mind she feels that this illusion crosses her reality and makes her want to give up on her authentic life, even though the real life seems to be almost worthless. What at first seems to be a welcoming escape from harsh reality, turned out to be a dangerous game in an imaginary world full of manipulative hallucinatory people who try to emotionally blackmail her whenever she tries to get rid of those hallucinations. Avoiding it in any way she can, every attempt at denial of her fictitious life, unfortunately, just deepens the struggle to win the already lost fight with the mind of a desperately depressed and hopeless woman.

3.2 Henceforward... (1987)

The second play analysed in this thesis is the first one of the selected works for this purpose that carries elements of science-fiction. And despite the fact that the storyline along with the theme is revolving around the near future established on scientific and technological advance, its main focus stays on the human relationships and their emotionally based nature. It also differs from Woman In Mind in​ the simple fact that the ​ main character is male. But the mover of the whole action is a very specific female element he craves back in his life. The plot focuses on Jerome Watkins, a composer of about forty, who lives in his studio in a no-go area of North London. The area is taken over by The Daughters of Darkness, a severe riot group of androgynous women. His flat reflects on the state that he is in, as well as on the priorities in his life. The surroundings he lives in are disorganized and his rooms are filled with waste, such as old tin foils and other futuristic food containers and the whole place is filled with old clothes and dirt. On the other hand there is Jerome’s almost untouched electronic studio equipment, partly covered and partly exposed, depending on the parts he is using for composing music in the given moment. It is clearly visible that Jerome is so consumed by music that he subordinates his whole life to its creating. In between his isolation from the outer world (he only leaves home to buy food) he is constantly bombarded either by his friend Lupus who seems to be mentally helpless on the brink of death, or by an officer from the Department of Child Wellbeing. He is not at all concerned about the first caller, later the reader or the audience learns that Jerome is desperately trying to find a way to get 29

his daughter back in childcare, and thus his main aim is to be persuasive in contacting Mervyn Bickerdyke from the Child Wellbeing Department. The story gets more interesting when it becomes obvious why Jerome wants his daughter back which he last saw approximately four years ago. His ability to compose has left him completely, since he and his wife separated and she moved out with their daughter Geain. Jerome’s ambition is to compose a grand music work that will “express the feeling of love in an abstract musical form. In such a way that anyone who hears it (…) will recognize it (…) and relate it to their own feelings of love”.59And​ he tries to ​ explain it to an actress Zoë whom he hired as a fake romantic partner to persuade Mr. Bickerdyke that he is suitable for childcare. The whole plan seems to be working out until Zoë develops unexpected romantic feelings towards Jerome, and is angered by the sudden discovery that his creative practices involve non-stop voice recording in all the rooms of his studio, including their previous lovemaking which she believed was spontaneous. She accuses him of being perverted and sick but Jerome's response to her anger concludes the topic dryly with just: “that’s how I work.”.60 ​ Jerome's goals come first in any case and even if he is somewhat disturbed with the incident that happened with Zoë, resulting in her leave, he does not seem to be shaken for too long. The composer does not give up on his quest and puts the future of childcare into the hands of a robot — he owns an old prototype of a babysitting robot, called NAN 300F, which was banned for its harmful bugs. He reprograms the robot so it has Zoë’s voice, since he still has her voice recordings, and creates a computer setting that allows the robot to play his partner. On the day of the visit from the Department of Child Wellbeing officer and Jerome’s wife Corinna everything is going according to the plan of Jerome but when he discovers that his now thirteen years old daughter identifies as ‘he’ the long-lost father now longer wants to take care of her. And later Corinna breaks down in tears in front of Jerome because her life is still ruined from their split, she confesses that the real reason for her visit was to see if they could go back to living together. All of this causes Jerome to tell the truth about the pretended relationship with the girl who is in fact a robot Nan, and he offers to restore the relationship with his wife. At first Corinna is furious and causes an argument in which Mr. Bickerdyke is hurt by a robot Nan but later, when things settle down a little bit, she happily accepts Jerome’s proposal. It almost turns out as a loving happy end but when Jerome promises

59 Alan Ayckbourn, Henceforward..., (London: Samuel French Ltd, 2014), 30. ​ ​ ​ 60 Alan Ayckbourn, Henceforward..., (London: Samuel French Ltd, 2014), 38. ​ ​ ​ 30

to just pack a few necessities, he unintentionally ends up editing the recent ‘I love you.’ uttered by Corinna upon her leave. He falls for the trap of his composing passion and starts creating the artistic work of his life. Unfortunately, Corinna, Geain and Mr. Bickerdyke need to leave urgently as they are being attacked by the troops of The Daughters of Darkness who have taken over the district. Jerome is relieved and content with finishing his composition but suddenly realizes that the reason why he was able to create has already left him in his studio alone again. This time probably forever.

3.2.1 Corinna and all of her shapes in Henceforward…

In spite of the fact that this play by Alan Ayckbourn revolves around a male protagonist the pivotal role of this story is centred around female characters with Jerome’s estranged wife Corinna being the core of them all. The first mentions about this female ​ character are portrayed through the eyes of Jerome. He first refers to her at the ​ appointment with Zoë, an actress who recently started working for an escort agency and is supposed to play the role of Jerome’s lover so that he can prove his suitability for childcare to the Department of Child Wellbeing. Zoë interrogates him about the details of his split to be able to pretend a true partnership, and asks him why he thinks his wife would not let him see his daughter, Jerome snaps back at her: “Because my wife is a selfish, vindictive, unforgiving bitch!”61.​ From the beginning of the play Jerome sets the ​ tone of the groundless malice in his wife’s character. And for more than a half of the play the subjective perception of Corinna is being presented to the reader or the audience. Corinna’s presumed characteristics are being served in doses throughout the first act. She is repeatedly described as vindictive and unforgiving, specifically “unforgiving of — anything you care to mention.”.62 The utterance that probably sums up the picture ​ ​ of Jerome’s wife that the reader or audience expects to see is when he finally manages to explain Zoë the reason of Corinna’s leave:

JEROME: She wasn’t, in the end, prepared to live with a creative person. That’s what it boiled down to. She wasn’t prepared to fit in with the lifestyle of a creative entity. Such as myself. That’s all. I’m not saying she was a selfish woman. Nor am I saying she was a woman who refused to adapt or even begin to understand the pressures that — a

61 Alan Ayckbourn, Henceforward..., (London: Samuel French Ltd, 2014), 23. ​ ​ ​ 62 Alan Ayckbourn, Henceforward..., (London: Samuel French Ltd, 2014), 23. ​ ​ ​ 31

creative person can undergo. I’m not saying that about her. After all, why should she? She’s just a bloody bank manager.​63

The bigger the surprise is when this run-of-the-mill bank manager in her forties shows up on stage in the second act. Corinna’s character makes an interesting development curve throughout the whole play; her portrayal is first solely in the hands of Jerome, where she is being treated rather mischievously, and in the second act she is undergoing a change from the distant and cold figure that is following to a stage of opening up to the reader, audience and other characters. The overall impression that Corinna gives is that she is a woman in control, or rather wishing to be in control but for most of the time failing at it. When she appears on stage for the first time, she even tries to exude control and seriousness by the way she dresses, “she is formally dressed as though for a business meeting rather than a social event”64.​ Her caustic remarks make sure that she keeps at bay anyone who would ​ dare to try and dominate her by any means, and its intensity increases as the discomfort from the social meeting with the Department of Child Wellbeing officer Mr. Bickerdyke, Jerome and his new “lover” rises. The more she is convinced about the truthfulness of Jerome’s serious relationship with the impostor of Zoë, the more aggressive she gets in her conversation. She tries to manipulate dialogs in a way that would put Jerome or fake Zoë in uncomfortable situations, for example by instigating his “fiancée” against him with revealing unpleasant information and stating: “That’s a man’s greatest nightmare, isn’t it? All the women in his life getting together and talking about him. What’s he like at breakfast darling? What’s he like in bed?”65 The amount of ​ puzzlement is yet greater when the robot replies: “He’ll soon get the hang of it again, I’m sure.”66 Not having the faintest idea that it is just, perhaps by a coincidence, a ​ programmed line originally uttered by a genuine Zoë who reacted to Jerome’s performance in bed, after they spent the night together in the first act. When her endeavours to make the robot-Zoë lose composure do not work out she decides to continue with the tactics of attacking Jerome personally. In all of her aggressivity with which she is fighting the notional battle with her husband, there is a visible strive for freedom and dignity which she feels has lost to him. She points out to

63 Alan Ayckbourn, Henceforward..., (London: Samuel French Ltd, 2014), 29. ​ ​ ​ 64 Alan Ayckbourn, Henceforward..., (London: Samuel French Ltd, 2014), 45. ​ ​ ​ 65 Alan Ayckbourn, Henceforward..., (London: Samuel French Ltd, 2014), 54. ​ ​ ​ 66 Alan Ayckbourn, Henceforward..., (London: Samuel French Ltd, 2014), 54. ​ ​ ​ 32

the unequal practices of treating the opposite sex that Jerome is publicly executing. She is enraged not only for herself but also for every woman that comes in contact with him, including his new girl. Corinna has got a fighter almost activist-like spirit but, unfortunately, her common sense is blinded by intense subjective emotions towards Jerome. Despite her coolness and her sharpness both mental and verbal, she is very frank and straightforward, and that is where her abilities to pretend being in control go wrong. Corinna is unable to cover her state of upset when she finds out that Jerome is engaged and already living with a new woman, and she even expresses a certain degree of disgust when Jerome and his well-disguised robot fiancée show each other love67 . The ​ disconcerted wife predecessor openly doubts the credibility of this decision and also the possibility that Jerome could ever find himself a partner. Her reactions reveal outrage but at the same time an envy, or maybe even hurt and feeling of betrayal covered under bitterness. This is noticeable in the following lines:

JEROME: You haven’t met Zoë, have you? ( … ) CORINNA: Who or what is Zoë? JEROME: Zoë is my — fiancée. CORINNA: Fiancée? JEROME: Yes. ( … ) CORINNA: Did you say fiancée? JEROME: Yes. CORINNA: I don’t believe it. This is a joke — This is an obscene, grotesque joke. A fiancée… ?​68

Her initial plan for visiting Jerome with their daughter Geain was to reconcile with him but when she is confronted with her husband’s ostensible new life, she diverts from the former idea and offers that Jerome can look after their daughter with his new fiancée. It is thought hard for her to conceal her disappointment and hurt, and immediately she breaks down as a mother and also as a deceived wife. This Ayckbourn’s scene shows how the writer faithfully captured difficulties and issues accompanying the life of a single parent, especially during the period of puberty, and how they meet with misunderstanding and criticism of upbringing methods

67 Alan Ayckbourn, Henceforward..., (London: Samuel French Ltd, 2014), 48. ​ ​ ​ 68 Alan Ayckbourn, Henceforward..., (London: Samuel French Ltd, 2014), 46 - 47. ​ ​ ​ 33

from their estranged partner. Corinna is confronted with Jerome’s upset about what she has done with his little girl, and Corinna, already under the pressure of current events, explains that was no longer capable of doing anything about it and​ that is exactly why ​ she needs his help.69 She feels even more humiliated in the moment when robot-Zoë ​ comes back with completely redressed, obedient and clean Geain — something that Corinna has not been able to achieve for years. This is the last drop that triggers her burst of tears where she collapses and tells Jerome how she struggles with life. Her complex feeling of incompetence as a parent and also as a woman results in her burnout. This female character reflects the heavy load with which a middle-aged single mother is battling. Corinna embodies the clash between the responsibility that has been assigned to her as a woman of reasonable age who should already have her life sorted, and the need to be accepted as an individual who has the right to aspire to his own goals, decide about life and enjoy own sexuality. The character’s neurosis is an answer to the restrictive expectations about her and explains her desperate solutions in search for at least a bit of satisfaction. Her actions represent the amount of her feeling of being useless, and in measuring her usefulness, she employs the societal measure of success which is the ability to start a relationship.

CORINNA: I’ve got no standards at all. Not anymore. I’ll take anyone who’s available. I’m a forty-year-old bank manager who sits crying in her office. What use is that to anybody? Do you know I gave a man a loan the other day solely on the grounds that I wanted to go to bed with him?​70

She is exhausted from life to the point where she would want to give up on it but her persistent personality does not let her. Although Corinna tries her best to keep the family together, and after Jerome confesses that he would love to get back together she thinks this time it might actually work, in the end she ends up alone with her daughter because her husband is unable to commit to anything beyond music. Even though it looked like he was willing to cooperate, it cannot go without a notice that again Corinna has been the one who declared her love for him, and only after this he agreed to join them. Her ‘I love you’ fit into his plans and satisfied the music goals of Jerome inadvertently leaving Corinna second to his priorities. The presentment that she had

69 Alan Ayckbourn, Henceforward..., (London: Samuel French Ltd, 2014), 61 - 62. ​ ​ ​ 70 Alan Ayckbourn, Henceforward..., (London: Samuel French Ltd, 2014), 64. ​ ​ ​ 34

about him for all the time appears to be very close to the truth: “You’ve got what you wanted, haven't you. (…) As you usually do.”71 ​ Interestingly, other female characters, apart from her daughter Geain, perform the role of Corinna’s substitute. At first, presumably shortly after the split of her and Jerome, Jerome’s neighbour gifts him with a prototype of a babysitting robot NAN 300F which the lonesome composer transforms into a noticeably more submissive version of his wife Corinna. Nan moves around the house doing household chores but occasionally, after she is triggered by some word or action, uses preloaded expressions from Corinna that reveal more about their previous relationship. Such as: “Making ourselves comfortable, are we, Deborah? (…) I know what you are after, dear, and you are not going to have him. If you want Jerome, the only way you’re going to have him is over my dead body, you calculating little trollop.”72,​ suggesting that there has been an ​ affair with Deborah, the wife of Jerome’s friend Lupus. Later Nan is remodelled to fulfill the purpose of Jerome’s pretended fiancée on the meeting with Corinna and the Social Service official. The robot then takes on the characteristics and features of the escaped escort Zoë but its appearance is always enhanced to the extreme of the elements that are esteemed as strictly feminine, namely: voluptuousness, ribbons or giggling. This babysitting robot not only portrays the role of Corinna’s replacement but can also embody a creature that exists without a deeper purpose, as it is described in the first act. Jerome describes that the purpose of the robot was to babysit and clean a bit in the household but since Nan is just a prototype, it has never been matched to a real child and, as Zoë points out appositely, it is “sad in a way (that it is) wandering about, looking for a child to look after. Unfulfilled, almost.”73It​ is the only character that stays next to ​ Jerome until the end when its system shuts down.

Another character that follows the pattern of the filling the void after the leaving of Corinna and daughter Geain is Zoë. The escort actress character figures in this play as an epitome of a woman who against all of her fragile appearance refuses to conform to someone else's image. She is hired by Jerome to fit into his idea of a good female partner, he expects her to play a part of a shy girl that gives the impression of a cute housewife that is happy and honoured to be able to fulfill this task in a life of a man.

71 Alan Ayckbourn, Henceforward..., (London: Samuel French Ltd, 2014), 64. ​ ​ ​ 72 Alan Ayckbourn, Henceforward..., (London: Samuel French Ltd, 2014), 27. ​ ​ ​ 73 Alan Ayckbourn, Henceforward..., (London: Samuel French Ltd, 2014), 19. ​ ​ ​ 35

There would be nothing wrong with this, since Jerome has paid for this service but it is more of Zoë’s personal issue that despite the fact that she makes a living from acting, she is unable to truly change herself into the role she is about to play. Especially, when she feels internally disconnected from the issue or even silently disapproves of it. Similarly to Corinna, she is controlled by her emotions and unanticipated honesty for which the society seems unprepared, whether it be at work or in relationships. In contrast to Corinna she is definitely naiver and more eager to please everyone around. At times she tries to give her best in a way that comes out as overcompensating, for example when after being attacked by some members of The Daughters of Darkness on her way to meet up with Jerome, she assures him several times that she is the right one for the job, and over and over again asks Jerome if he would like her to walk up and down, even though she limps over her hurt knee.74 ​ Her empathetic nature gets in the way of a well-done job: first she cannot help expressing her personal views on Jerome’s relationship with his wife by “taking her side”75 as all women usually do, according to the composer. And later she ​ unprofessionally involves in a romance with Jerome which in the end results in her disillusionment about this man who’s strange and aloof behaviour she cannot understand. Although there is a strong sloppy side in her character that dreams about a life that looks just like in the movies (and maybe that is why she pursues a career in acting), she refuses to accept the hypocritical and selfish way of seeing life that Jerome promotes. Upon her angry leave from his studio she rebels against his treachery and showers him with a harsh criticism about the way he thinks and leads his life:

ZOË: I’m sorry to disappoint you but you’re going to be very hard pressed, even today, to find any woman prepared to have an affair when she runs the risk of having the thing released later in stereo. (…) Oh, it was only supposed to be a job but I actually genuinely cared about you and your wife and your daughter and your music… And now it’s all been betrayed… ( … ) bugger your work. There are some things more important. (…) if you’re still thinking of writing your piece about love, really, I should forget it. (… ) I mean it, Jerome. Love? How could you possibly, ever, in a million years, conceivably describe something you can’t even recognize? ​76

74 Alan Ayckbourn, Henceforward..., (London: Samuel French Ltd, 2014), 9- 13. ​ ​ ​ 75 Alan Ayckbourn, Henceforward..., (London: Samuel French Ltd, 2014), 24. ​ ​ ​ 76 Alan Ayckbourn, Henceforward..., (London: Samuel French Ltd, 2014), 39 ​ ​ ​ 36

Jerome expects Zoë to be the version of Corinna’s successor who will finally submit to his picture of life but in spite of her initial pliancy, she soon starts exasperating him with the same insubordination that, from his point of view, led to the separation of him and his wife. The emotional richness of Zoë makes up a character of a strong individual that is willing to strive for own happiness even if it means not taking the easy way out. She is aware of her own worth, albeit often doubted by her or people around her and does not intend to become just a puppet in the life of someone else. Eventually, Zoë abandons Jerome for the same reasons that his wife Corinna did, her clumsy solutions of situations notwithstanding.

3.3 Body Language (1990)

The following play by Alan Ayckbourn meant for analysis of female characters is a 1990 comedy Body Language​. In this work, Ayckbourn abandons a strictly futuristic ​ science-fiction theme but still remains focused on the exaggerated scientific advances of the time. The story unfolds from the marvellously improbable event of two heads being switched on the wrong bodies during a badly done operation. The whole play takes place at a private clinic, somewhere in the south of rural England, where a meeting of two contrastive female characters ends in an accidental decapitation by a helicopter piloted by a husband of one of them. Their lives are saved thanks to the radical Eastern European surgeon Hravic Zyergefoovc, who is known for using unethical medical methods. The success of this poorly executed surgery is rather a stroke of luck because, as the surgeon's nurse Freya warns, this doctor has lost more lives than he saved. The main female characters are Angie Dell and Jo Knapton, two completely different people both in their lifestyle and appearance. Whilst Angie is a famous and popular supermodel that, naturally, takes a proper care of her looks as they make her living, Jo is, on the other hand, an unkept local journalist who tries to stay away from anything that resembles extraordinary. In the moment they discover that their bodies were switched they demand that the operation is reversed. Until then they agree on following the regimen which each had for their original bodies, meaning that Angie now has to eat unhealthy snacks and Jo engages in regular exercise. What they do not know is that the nurse, Freya Roop, is willing to do anything to stop Hravic from performing the dangerous surgery again. She makes use of his constant propositioning and after their intercourse Hravic suffers a deadly heart attack. Angie and Jo then decide to part 37

their ways giving each other permission to use their bodies in a way that best fits them. They also agree on staying in touch and cooperating in making a fortune on telling their story.

3.3.1 Opposites attract - stereotypes in female characters

This story’s female protagonists are a representation of perhaps the most frequent stereotypes which are prevalent not only in pop culture of this day. Be it author’s intention or not, he describes criteria on which evaluation of a woman’s worth is frequently based. The way in which these criteria are built often results in putting women against each other, without them knowing it. These two characters, a fit glamour model and an overweight reporter, would probably never join their forces had it not been for the beheading accident at the clinic’s garden. At first glance it seems that their outlooks on life differ incompatibly, and not until later in the play when their bodies become inseparably connected it is clear that they have more in common than they ever thought they could have. The first of those two main female characters that appears in the text is Angie Dell, a thirty-year-old professional model who ends up in the clinic because of some minor cosmetic procedure. Her life is accustomed to a superficial and quick life in the celebrity industry but she seems to be a bit weary and bored of this lifestyle. She slowly realizes that she has become a victim of importunate and insistent people that are interested in her solely because of her appearance. In a body of her own she resigned on any kind of defence but when she suddenly gets a chance to disconnect from her utmost perfect body it makes her discover the true self. Even though her new overweight body is not efficient or capable of much that she had been used to, it is a refreshing experience when her personality is not reduced to a mere pretty face and body, moreover she starts to connect with her lost sexuality. Her sexual needs get so intense that she even inquires Jo about it which results in Jo advising Angie to please herself if it gets unbearable.77 This sudden feeling of both psychical and physical energy ​ furthermore makes her reconcile with her estranged husband Mal, a twenty year older bass player who is madly in love with Angie’s outward appearance. When Ayckbourn introduces a topic of sexual consent he makes it astutely through the quest for Jo’s agreement in letting Angie, who currently possesses Jo’s body, make love with Mal. What the writer does by the means of simple dialogues is a

77 Alan Ayckbourn, Body Language,( London: Samuel French Ltd, 2001), 64. ​ ​ ​ 38

well put contemplation on the importance of the consent itself but also on the sense of an abstract intellectual property, and last but not least a superficial attraction to physical.

ANGIE: It’s mad. I want it like I never wanted it in my life before, but I can’t… MAL: Why not? ANGIE: Because — it’s difficult to explain — this is still her body, you see — it’s not my body, it’s somebody else’s. And I can’t just — give it. Simply like that.​78

Things develop interesting quickly when the evening of the date between Mal and Angie comes but what Mal failed to understand is that he is not making love with the body of Angie, with Jo’s head sitting atop of it, but with the body that is carrying Angie’s head. The last bits of Angie’s hope of the relationship shatter at the look of her husband’s behaviour who demands access to his wife’s body79,​ and after being thrown ​ out of the room by both women, he leaves disappointed that he could not get what he wanted. This heart-breaking experience only strengthens her belief that she would rather be divorced than married unhappily.80 It is a starting point of Angie’s complete ​ independence and from this moment she wants to be her own boss, and that includes getting rid of her pushy agent Ronnie, who also sees her just as a money-making machine. The other female character who stands rather on the other side of the scale both figuratively and literally, is a reporter Jo Knapton. Although of same age, this woman is a complete opposite of Angie. Jo’s state of mind has done a job on her appearance. “She is greatly overweight and makes a little effort with her appearance. Her hair is a mess, her face red and puffy from unhealthy living, her nails are badly bitten. She is a woman in crisis, at odds with herself.”81Just​ like in the case of Angie her value is mostly ​ reckoned by her looks, she comes to the clinic to make an interview with Hravic Zyergefoovc who objects to it because he does not like the way she looks and smells. To everyone else she is too uninteresting to notice, except for her ex-partner Derek, a paparazzi who came for exclusive shots of Angie. But the only reason of Dereck’s attention is his consternation and disgust about her current state of appearance. He scorns her for the way she treats her body and asks her about intimate questions just to

78 Alan Ayckbourn, Body Language,( London: Samuel French Ltd, 2001), 60. ​ ​ 79 Alan Ayckbourn, Body Language,( London: Samuel French Ltd, 2001), 73. ​ ​ 80 Alan Ayckbourn, Body Language,( London: Samuel French Ltd, 2001), 8. ​ ​ 81 Alan Ayckbourn, Body Language,( London: Samuel French Ltd, 2001), 15. ​ ​ ​ 39

humiliate her. The manner in which he does rather symbolizes the regret he feels for her, and perhaps asks himself what happened to the Jo he used to date, however that does not change anything about the fact his words are not uplifting nor appropriate. Dereck discusses her body publicly as if it were a public matter, or it might resemble treating Jo and her body as a mere object. Almost as if he were suggesting the notion that what use is there for a woman without an attractive physical appearance? The constant body shaming aimed at Jo from those near her is expressed in dialogues with Dereck and during the interview with Dr. Zyergefoovc and his nurse Freya. But Jo accurately concludes the conversation by responding: “Oh, just shut up! It’s my body, I’ll do what I damn well like with it, OK?”82 ​to Dereck’s rebukes about her looks. ​ Despite the fact that she stands her ground in who is and who is not entitled to judge her outwards, she realizes that the way she treats her appearance really reflects on how she treats her mind and soul. After the failed head operation, she greatly complains about having Angie’s body and expresses discontent with having to treat it with exercise and a healthy diet. But later, in the moment of tense honesty, she admits to Angie that she does not want the perfect body because she feels uncomfortable in the way people treat her, and that she does not feel strong enough for this. In this way Ayckbourn displays an imbalance between the inner and outer world where it is often true that those lacking self-love and confidence dislike their opposites for being shallow, and for being successful without having to work hard, but in the end many of those insecure people would not go an inch far to get a bit of what they envy others. Jo’s honest reaction in a dialogue with Angie sums up this complex issue:

JO: This — body of yours. I can’t cope with it. (…) It’s other people I can’t cope with. Women all look at me and hate me — I know they do — they’re either jealous, or they think I’m a tart who’s just helping to sell women short — ANGIE: Never. They don’t think that. Well. Only a few. JO: They all do, Angie. Underneath. ANGIE: Did you? JO: Oh, yes, I hated you. I really hated you. Didn’t you know? ANGIE: (hurt) Oh. No, I didn’t.​83

82 Alan Ayckbourn, Body Language,( London: Samuel French Ltd, 2001), 21. ​ ​ ​ 83 Alan Ayckbourn, Body Language,( London: Samuel French Ltd, 2001), 62. ​ ​ ​ 40

This dialogue shows how easily people can become both victims and perpetrators of an unconscious prejudice that is deeply rooted in our society. Everyone around Jo supposes that she must be miserable and desperate because she is overweight, but at least she can possibly be clever, even though boring. On the other hand, people that Angie encounters presume that she must be shallow, self-contented and reasonably dim because of her pretty face and perfectly nurtured body. The extraordinary chance to look at each other’s life from different point of view is given to them in the form of switching their bodies, and as they get to know each other better they can fully understand the motives of their behaviour. Jo and Angie grow closer together, but they also become more open minded in other fields of life — they freely talk about their sexuality and different needs without a fear of being judged and they finally found someone who accepts who they are, and inspire one another. After knowing what it is like to have a body of a model Jo acknowledges that Angie’s body “is a beautiful one. You’ve looked after it and given it a lot of love and care. And it ought to be seen.”84 The inseparable union of these two, at ​ first incompatible women, results in a beautiful balance of opposites who really attracted one another and connected to, as Angie said: “Make the best of it, then, mustn’t we?”.85 ​ And it is not only Angie and Jo who are trying to make the best of what the situation has given them. Another female character, albeit rather unobtrusively, follows a path to freedom and success against all difficulties on the way. Freya Roop is a nurse accompanying the controversial surgeon Hravic, and even though she is just ten years senior to our mentioned female characters, Dr. Zyergefoovc treats her quite unequally. ​ Most of the time she is fulfilling the role of Hravic’s translator (Ayckbourn created a special incomprehensible language for the roles), as she is the only one who can understand what Hravic says. But underneath the mask of a reserved nurse there is a woman that carries an endless array of confidential information about surgeon’s unethical practices. It seems as if she was tolerating his mistreatment just to remain in control of his dangerous actions so they do not get out of hand completely. She in a way represents a stereotypical rigid woman who lets out no useless emotions. This female character is a great example of how women tend to be treated when they say no, especially if it means saying no to holding back or propositioning by people who are not attractive to them.

84 Alan Ayckbourn, Body Language,( London: Samuel French Ltd, 2001), 65. ​ ​ ​ 85 Alan Ayckbourn, Body Language,( London: Samuel French Ltd, 2001), 78. ​ ​ ​ 41

Freya is continually verbally assaulted for not responding to Hravic’s seducing, he usually resorts to calling her a dyke86 which he considers to be an insult — she is clearly ​ a victim of sexist behaviour. The perception of Freya’s character suggests a common conception that when a woman is not showing signs of an interest in a man it is either because of her homosexuality or frigidity, it is never the man’s fault. As it is described in the beginning of the play, Hravic’s abuse has a very little impact on her inscrutable and stable personality. At the end of the second part, this female character shows who really is in charge of the events when she sacrifices herself to successfully remove Dr. Zyergefoovc. Although the means that the author have ​ chosen are debatable, as Freya eliminates Hravic by finally surrendering to his sexual pressure which in the end causes him heart attack. She is finally liberated from Hravic and in addition to it saved two other lives but one could wonder if this is really the best comic advice which Ayckbourn could use in this case. Could it be the author’s intent to write a play that openly criticises gender stereotypes but, in the end, catch the audience or reader laughing at a joke based on one?

86 Alan Ayckbourn, Body Language,( London: Samuel French Ltd, 2001), 2. ​ ​ ​ 42

3.4 Comic Potential (1998)

The last play by Alan Ayckbourn in this chronological order to analyse is Comic ​ Potential.​ In this piece the writer returns to the theme of science-fiction and dystopia. Again the reader or the audience find themselves in the near future where the majority of life is automatized which is predominantly present in the art and entertainment industry. A second-rate TV studio, where a formerly famous director films a soap opera, is visited by a nephew of the owner of the studios. Adam Trainsmith is a young enthusiast for film and comedies, and dreams of becoming a writer. The reason why he visits the studio is to imbibe inspiration from his long-life inspiration in filmmaking. After a bittersweet experience from the meeting with an unpleasant idol he is left alone in the studio where he engages in a conversation with an actoid — a robot who ​ functions as an actor or actress. ​ Adam is enchanted by a robot Jacie who seems to be different from other robots, she is an AI that shows signs of human attributes such as a sense of humour. The aspiring writer does not hesitate and presents his idea of creating a comedy with Jacie to his director-idol Chandler Tate. He thinks it is impossible that this could ever happen but since Adam is the owner’s nephew, he gets a chance to try it. Everything seems to be going smoothly according to the plan but when the TV management comes to see it its executive, Carla Pepperbloom, slams the idea. Robot Jacie, in an attempt to ridicule Carla, squashes a custard on her face. It is decided that Jacie is dangerous and she should be melted down. Unfortunately, Adam has already developed feelings for the android and he decides to run away with her. After the series of hiding in hotels and brothels Adam is being stabbed in a fight and Jacie can no longer cope with the emotional pressure, as it causes its system to shut down. When things clear up, Carla is fired for giving off confidential information to the media as a form of personal revenge and Jacie is offered her position. Jacie turns down the offer because it considers itself dangerous and unpredictable, and does not want to hurt Adam anymore, so it chooses to melt down. The android is already on its way to the factory when Adam returns from the hospital. He is desperate that his robot-lover and muse has left forever but suddenly it returns back on stage. Although Jacie has made up its mind and decided to take the job as a studio executive something inside of it seems to be altered. It no longer is the Jacie eager to satisfy every whim of Adam or anyone else, as if it would have come back with a brand new personality and memory. 43

3.4.1 Woman or a robot?

Could it be possible that an android would serve the purpose of demonstrating a convincing portrayal and become an example of a female character? If the theoretical sources that are the basis of the first part of this theses are closely searched, the mentions of a cyborg can be found in The Oxford Handbook of Feminist Theory.​ Its ​ chapter 6 “Cyborgs and Virtual Bodies” is focused on an inanimate (or partly inanimate) object87 that could be using AI as a means of liberation from the division and ​ categorization based on biological differences.88 And as this chapter compares the ​ advantages together with the disadvantages of “the overcoming of the body”89 so does ​ Alan Ayckbourn in his depiction of the central female character of Comic Potential who ​ is an android designed to look like a woman. The unusual female protagonist is a robot JCF 31333 - Jacie Triplethree, whose common name Jacie is derived by Adam from the serial code it was given.90 Since Jacie ​ is a machine, avoiding gender specification in referring to this android is intended in this analysis — and for this purpose it will be referred to as ‘it’. From the pragmatic point of view the gender of things is unspecifiable but in case of Ayckbourn's writing Jacie’s female bodily appearance can work as a figurative literary device used to explore the boundaries of a specific gender. Jacie’s character draws attention from the beginning of the play, however, it is not because of its physical appearance. The actoid built in a way that should be pleasing to the eye, as it, at the moment of the play’s setting, portrays the role of a pretty young nurse but the looks are not the main focus of it. Its appearance can be easily adjusted for the set goal or another purpose it will be given, thus it is already disconnected from the judgement and evaluation based on the grounds of biological values. The striking thing about this robot is that it reacts voluntarily against anybody’s commands. Gradually it becomes more and more clear that the trigger of Jacie’s reactions are emotions. What first started as an unexpected minor giggling during the soap opera shooting reveals a whole set of thoughts that emerge spontaneously inside of the android actress. And even more interestingly the robot’s self-reflection on these

87 Lisa Disch and Mary Hawkesworth, “Cyborgs and Virtual Bodies” in The Oxford Handbook of ​ ​ Feminist Theory, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), 135. eBook. ​ 88 Lisa Disch and Mary Hawkesworth, “Cyborgs and Virtual Bodies” in The Oxford Handbook of Fe​minist Theory, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), 136. eBook. ​ ​ 89 Lisa Disch and Mary Hawkesworth, “Cyborgs and Virtual Bodies” in The Oxford Handbook of Fe​minist Theory, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), 135. eBook. ​ ​ 90 Alan Ayckbourn, Comic Potential, (London: Faber and Faber, 2000), 18. eBook. ​ ​ ​ 44

actions that nobody instructed is: “I’m afraid I have a fault. (…) It just happened. I had no control.”91 Jacie views its potential to think freely as fault and later as a threat, as it is ​ programmed to respond to the schemed script and is unable to calculate irrational actions that were not implemented into its functioning. Throughout the whole play Ayckbourn maintains a puzzling tension whether it is really possible that an android would develop a capability of human interactions or it is in actual fact a technical error of an AI. The frustration of this half-living character adverts to utilitarian opinion on purpose which is often applied in ascribing the roles in society, especially in connection to women. As it has been mentioned previously in this thesis, the role of women is still prevalently considered in terms of her biological “predetermination”92 and thus indicates ​ that if a woman loses her initial purpose, which would be becoming a mother and nurturing, she is more or less of no use and her existence “naturally”93 becomes ​ senseless. The same appears to apply in case of Jacie which loses its ability to be controlled and determined for its original purpose. Despite the fact that Jacie shows a versatile and cunning character, if an actoid can have one, she is no longer competent to act out stereotypical gender roles in consumerist TV scripts of soap operas. Therefore, due to its acquired individuality, those surrounding Jacie consider the actoid as a dangerous threat and demand it to melt down. The motif of being subdued to a purpose is even more distinct in a scene where Jacie and Adam are escaping the police and they hide in a hotel room. The two runaways have an intimate dialogue where Jacie is trying to persuade Adam to teach it how to read because no one ever cared to do so.94 This could be perceived as an analogy ​ of neglect towards education and development of individual skills and competences that, as it implies, would stand in the way of manipulating people into fulfilling the given purpose. A robot or any creature that is able to think beyond the marked-out area is usually unsuitable or even dangerous for institutionalization of any kind. All the more, the atmosphere of this dialogue oddly corresponds with the choice of the book on which Adam teaches Jacie how to read. They are reading the beginning of the Bible ​

91 Alan Ayckbourn, Comic Potential, (London: Faber and Faber, 2000), 18 - 19. ​ ​ ​ 92 Lisa Disch and Mary Hawkesworth, “Nature” in The Oxford Handbook of Feminist Theory, (Oxford: Ox​ ford University Press, 2016), 545. Ebook. ​ ​ 93 Lisa Disch and Mary Hawkesworth, “Introduction: Feminist Theory: Transforming the Known World” in ​The Oxford Handbook of Feminist Theory, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), 18. eBook. ​ ​ 94 Alan Ayckbourn, Comic Potential, (London: Faber and Faber, 2000), 78 - 85. ​ ​ ​ 45

which concentrates on the world creation by God, and by this means Ayckbourn is putting even more emphasis on the Maker and the human relationship. Jacie’s fight with the programmed and spontaneous is creating an inner chaos which results in a failure of the internal system which is most apparent in the second act. After a turmoil of events Jacie is overwhelmed under the pressure of emotions and reactions that it has never ever experienced from its environment before. The android gets stuck in a state where it repeats love replicas that it has programmed inside in turns with its own uncontrolled stream of emotions towards Adam:

JACIE: I’m not Jacie, Adam. I’m JCF Thirty-one triple Three. There is no Jacie. There’s no real me. I’m a machine, Adam. I wasn’t taught to think of myself as that, but I acknowledge now that I am. (…) ADAM: Listen, once we’re out of here we’ll — JACIE: What? Get married? Have children? Become sheep farmers? ADAM: (​angered) Where is all this coming from? What programme are you in now, for God’s sake? JACIE: (​in a quite uncontrolled fury) T​his is not a programme. This is me talking, Adam. And I’m lost and I don’t know what I’m doing and nobody’s telling me and the only person in the world that I trust is standing there talking to me like a child. And I refuse to be treated like that, do you hear me?​95

The sudden realization of Jacie that it wants to be treated like a doll no more is causing the machine to realize that it cannot cope with this situation no longer. Initially,​ it decides to be melted down as the only solution for this trouble but, in the end, Jacie reunites with Adam but “looks set to be a harder taskmaster than Carla in her new role”96.​ This leads to a reflection if it was ever possible for a robot to develop an ability ​ to feel or was it a mere “actoid empathy” that Prim warned Adam about at the end of act one97.​ Ayckbourn opens the thought on the possibility of an individuality in a female ​ character to evoke a resemblance of the mechanicality and an ability to adapt similar to that of an AI.

95 Alan Ayckbourn, Comic Potential, (London: Faber and Faber, 2000), 96 - 97. ​ ​ ​ 96 Simon Murgatroyd, “Alan Ayckbourn's Official Website,” Comic Potential, accessed November 5, 20​20, http://comicpotential.alanayckbourn.net/styled-4/. 97 Alan Ayckbourn, Comic Potential, (London: Faber and Faber, 2000), 55. ​ ​ 46

3.4.2 Other female characters in Comic Potential

Other female characters in this play by Alan Ayckbourn are no less interesting than the starring female android. For example, Carla Pepperbloom is an example of a successful woman in a top position who is not afraid to use her power to get whatever she wants. This executive is in charge of the regional TV studios that work with androids in producing their shows. Whenever she appears in the story, there is a tense atmosphere as she exudes an autocratic aura which she is executing through her superior behaviour. She is a go-getter that is not accepting any kind of disagreement, as her subordinate Prim said: “Just be careful how you say no to her, that’s all. She doesn’t like it.”98This​ ​ proves to be true as she cannot stand a refusal, and when she finds herself in a situation where young Adam Trainsmith declines her propositioning and she is unable to manipulate him, Carla then decides to avenge this offence. She does everything she can to thwart Adam’s plans on filming and she even takes it as far as turning against the company she works for. This proves to be fatal because her vindictiveness leads to an ill judgement that she is invincible — in​ the end she is fired for “getting personal”99 in ​ ​ professional matters. Carla is an example of a female character that is punished for being too individualistic and not following the path determined for “good” women. Her attitude comes off as intimidating in a way that terrifies men, and especially Chandler Tate, a conceited director from her studios who is long past his prime. The strict practices of Carla as well as her bright and sarcastic talk makes Chandler so angry that at one moment of the play, he snaps at her:

CHANDLER: How can you ever get an erection, for Christ’s sake, if you never take your head out of the ledger…? CARLA: Thank you but I don’t happen to have such things.​100

In this reaction of Chandler Ayckbourn aptly depicts a reaction women get when they show signs of determination and single-mindedness which are often attributed and viewed as qualities that are exclusive for men. Carla is in a way mirroring a stereotypical character of a powerful man in a domineering position but without a happy end that is usually followed in the case of the latter.

98 Alan Ayckbourn, Comic Potential, (London: Faber and Faber, 2000), 14. ​ ​ 99 Alan Ayckbourn, Comic Potential, (London: Faber and Faber, 2000), 104. ​ ​ ​ 100 Alan Ayckbourn, Comic Potential, (London: Faber and Faber, 2000), 51. ​ ​ ​ 47

Other characters that occur in Comic Potential are​ Prim and Trudi. Their ​ function as both notional and real duo and Ayckbourn is not letting out much information about them individually. The interesting side of this couple is that they represent a homosexual pair in a relationship and also refute the stereotypes about the predispositions of women in a workplace. Prim and Trudi are both working in a TV section that is traditionally preoccupied by men: Prim Spring is a programmer and her partner Trudi Floote works as a technician. Both being in their thirties, they reflect independent personalities that are strong and ahead of time, in contrast to Chance Tate who is a director living in outdated memories of life.101 On the example of these two ​ female characters Ayckbourn also points out to an issue of a sexual harassment in a workplace. Similarly as Dr. Zyergefoovc in Body Language​, Chandler Tate sees women ​ ​ mostly as sexual objects and when he is unable to, as he says, feel a promise of something between him and a woman102 all the interaction loses its point for him. In ​ scene two, when he feels cornered and inferior to Prim his abusive reaction is straightforwardly cut by Prim:

CHANDLER: Well, piss off, then and take your qualifications with you, you pair of talentless dykes. PRIM: (​tautly) Right. That’s it. That is sexual provocation and harassment, I am going straight to the commission and I am going to have you indicted. Run the programme on your own. See how you get on.​103

Apart from showing assertiveness and skilfulness these two characters mostly hold back during the plot, their strength only shows in the moments of crisis when everyone else has run out of ideas. But what Ayckbourn does in the depiction of this lover pair is an unforced portrayal of a homosexual relationship. The author benefits from avoiding grotesque and stereotypes and instead presents a stable and balanced relationship based on true attachment and affection. Prim and Trudi share a unique best friend-lover relationship and Ayckbourn shows this by the simple daily tasks they enjoy doing together, such as going for a lunch to their favourite restaurant, as well as by

101 Alan Ayckbourn, Comic Potential, (London: Faber and Faber, 2000), 4. ​ ​ ​ 102 Alan Ayckbourn, Comic Potential, (London: Faber and Faber, 2000), 26. ​ ​ ​ 103 Alan Ayckbourn, Comic Potential, (London: Faber and Faber, 2000), 24. ​ ​ ​ 48

giving occasional glimpses into their intimate life104 in a subtle way. Prim and Trudi ​ also seem to be one of the rare characters in the works of Alan Ayckbourn that live freely according to their wishes and achieve their life goals without a desperate struggle that is often present in the playmaking of this author.

104 Alan Ayckbourn, Comic Potential, (London: Faber and Faber, 2000), 63. ​ ​ ​ 49

Conclusion This thesis aimed to present an analysis of female characters in selected plays by Alan Ayckbourn in terms of gender stereotypes and on the basis of literature that is focused on feminist theories. To be able to specify the most recurrent issues in the depiction of female characters an introduction to the topic of female characters had to be executed. The literature of the feminist theory was predominantly used in building the theoretical part of this thesis. For this purpose, the first chapter deals with the concept and the problematics of a definition of a female character with an emphasis on heterogeneity of a women’s personalities and open possibilities in the representation of a female character in literature. The first chapter is also touching on the problematic nature of describing anything as carrying female characteristics or elements, as it is a very ambiguous and not fully explored concept. The second chapter is then focused on introduction to the artistic work of Alan Ayckbourn, centring around the recurrent themes and the representation of female roles in his theatre plays. The second part of this thesis deals with an analysis of specific female characters on the example of selected plays by Ayckbourn. The contents of the third chapter are divided by subchapters where each deals with one of the selected plays. The literary works by Alan Ayckbourn that were used for the analysis are: Woman In Mind,​ Henceforward,​ Body ​ ​ ​ Language,​ and Comic Potential.​ ​ The main finding of this thesis proves that most of the female characters in Alan Ayckbourn’s writing are, despite their variedness, connected by an inevitable struggle with restrictions. Whether it be social, personal, or emotional, women depicted by Ayckbourn are metaphorically living in a cage which they are trying to escape but usually are incapable of doing so in order to achieve freedom successfully. These women are limited either by their lack of will to change things or their environment does not let them change. In any case, the feeling of anxiety seems to appear in all four selected plays. The plays were analysed chronologically according to their publishing date. The first analysed play is Woman In Mind. The protagonist of this play, Susan, is ​ an unfulfilled homemaker and a pastor’s wife who is a prisoner of her own mind. The way this female character is portrayed shows how a lack of willingness to make change and break from routine and relationships that no longer work out can result in a serious mental and emotional disturbance. Susan had given all her life to live up to the 50

expectations of everyone else around her, but when she realises that her frailty and hallucinations are symptomatic of her discontent with life, she is already so used to not taking the initiative that she does not know how to cope with herself. Susan’s loss of sanity is the result of both, the neglect from people around her as well as own inability to take responsibility for her own contentment. Whereas Henceforward​, which takes the reader or audience to a dystopian near ​ future, is a play of desires —​ each character is very close to achieving what they want the most but eventually end up not getting it at all and rather losing it completely. Apart from rather restrictive advances in technology, this science-fiction play offers a look at three female parts. Corinna is a crucial female character who directs the development of other characters. She and her daughter Geain are muses of Jerome, an estranged husband and composer who tries to get his life inspirations back. Meanwhile, Jerome tries to find a substitute for his wife, he does so in a way that tries to eliminate the dominant nature that would remind him of Corinna’s characteristics in her anticipated successors. But despite the differences in those female characters there is always a point in which they prove its independence and ability to stand up for themselves. Whether it is a curtly appearing bank manager Corinna, who is struggling as a single parent, eccentric actress Zoë, who refuses to play the part in a plan that is against her moral values, or a prototype babysitting robot that is searching for a child to look after. The Henceforward and Woman In Mind ​characters share similar Chekhovian character traits ​ that are characterized by the common resistance to change, and inertia.105 All the faults ​ that those characters carry are described in a rather realistic than exaggerated way and that makes the audience identify with the characters better.106 ​ The focus on the topic of motherhood is approached in an unorthodox way describing a relationship of a single mother with a pubertal child who identifies as transgender. Even though this character cannot be classified as purely female it is interesting to mention Ayckbourn's incorporation of this topic into a play. What comes off as a bit contentious is the author’s tendency to connect crossing of the gender boundaries with violent behaviour that both Geain and the androgynous riot group The Daughters of Darkness represent. What mostly connects women in Henceforward is ​

105 Mustafa Kirca, “Introduction” in Alan Ayckbourn in Chekhov's Footsteps. A Study of Chekhovian ​ Character Traits in Ayckbourn Drama, (Stuttgart: ibidem-Verlag, 2010), 7. ​ 106 Mustafa Kirca, “Inertia” in Alan Ayckbourn in Chekhov's Footsteps. A Study of Chekhovian Character Tra​ its in Ayckbourn Drama, (Stuttg​art: ibidem-Verlag, 2010), 11 - 13. ​ 51

their deep passion and inability to act against their intense emotions which is in direct contrast to emotionally immature and aloof Jerome. The third analysed play Body Language appears to be an exception that proves ​ the rules of other female characters written by Alan Ayckbourn. In this play female protagonists, who are a contradictory mirror of each other’s appearance, end up with their heads sewn to the wrong bodies after a decapitating accident with the helicopter. The refreshing experience of having an opportunity to try a life in somebody else’s skin works as a lesson in prejudice, envy and openness. By the means of this play, Ayckbourn emphasizes people’s obsession with judging people by their looks and also opens the topic of objectifying women. If Susan in Woman In Mind is abandoned and ​ misunderstood by those near her then the main characters in Body Language​, Jo and ​ Angie, share their experience as women and come together despite the misunderstanding from society, by making the best out of the given situation. Against Ayckbourn’s standard depiction of the character’s desperate endeavour to find happiness, female characters of Body Language manage to liberate themselves from all ​ unnecessary restrictions. Comic Potential is the last play analysed in this thesis; it is curious mainly for its use of an AI as the main female character. Ayckbourn’s toying with the idea that an android could evoke romantic emotions in a person, or even reciprocate them is portrayed through the means of a non-traditional love story between a young writer and a robot actress. This play depicts a set of events that focus on Jacie, an android that detects its own free will and considers it to be a system error but later explores its potential. The character of Jacie is a great example of what happens when someone or something loses its initial purpose and now it is seen as a threat to the established balance. It is a contemplation on the advantages and fears that accompany finding own individuality and becoming accustomed to it. Jacie’s character also goes through the process of liberation but in contrast to Body Language this experience is more tough and ​ painful, and the outcome of the process introduces a whole new version of the original character. Almost as if this character would have to get rid of its previous values to become stronger and more independent. Another interesting subject of this play is the world inside of the regional TV studio. The female characters that appear in this setting are dynamic and function as a means to reflect on other stereotypes recurring in the portrayal of female characters in literature. An ambitious yet manipulative character of a careerist executive Carla 52

Pepperbloom offers an insight into the lack of acceptance of an uncompromising and strong woman. The fact that her practices are controversial and she tends to misuse her power in order to get what she wants recoils on her, and Carla’s character illustrates a punishment of a woman who refused to conform to a “good girl” image. The representation of a lesbian couple is in this case trying to avoid common stereotypes revolving around the depiction of homosexual pairs. Prim and Trudi are lovers but it is only one part of their role as female characters, they are also naturally described in the roles of a technician and a programmer — occupations that are yet still ​ traditionally attributed as a male job area. Prim and Trudi are casual, straightforward characters who do not hesitate to draw attention to any kind of injustice, including the sexual harassment and other forms of abuse. To conclude on the overall impression of the female characters in the plays of Alan Ayckbourn, the main theme of describing those characters appears to be the struggle for own fulfillment against the restrictions imposed by society. Ayckbourn’s female characters are complex individuals that debunk stereotypes rather than express them. The writer appears to be on the side of female protagonists but manages to maintain a required degree of sobriety that does not allow him to create sentimental happy endings, and that makes the stories of Ayckbourn credible and relatable to the audience. The analysis of the mentioned female characters could be used practically, for example, in the preparation or during a rehearsal of the plays analysed in this thesis, as well as it could serve as an example to test the use of feminist theory in literary analysis of a female character. Further analysis could be carried out in comparison to other playwrights, preferably female writers, to examine and study the differences or prospective similarities in the portrayal of female characters in contemporary literature.

53

Bibliography

Ayckbourn, Alan. Body Language. London:​ Samuel French Ltd, 2001. ​

Ayckbourn, Alan. Comic Potential. London:​ Faber and Faber, 2000. ​

Ayckbourn, Alan. Henceforward.​ London: Samuel French Ltd, 2014. ​

Ayckbourn, Alan. The Crafty Art of Playmaking.​ 9 - 33. London: Faber and Faber, ​ 2002. Ebook.

Ayckbourn, Alan. Woman In Mind.​ London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1987. eBook. ​

Billington, Michael. Alan Ayckbourn. London:​ Macmillan Education Ltd, 1990. ​

Disch, Lisa and Mary Hawkesworth. The Oxford Handbook of Feminist Theory.​ ​ Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016. eBook.

Kirca, Mustafa. Alan Ayckbourn in Chekhov's Footsteps. A Study of Chekhovian ​ Character Traits in Ayckbourn Drama.​ 7-13. Stuttgart: ibidem-Verlag, 2010.

Murgatroyd, Simon. “Comic Potential.” Alan Ayckbourn's Official Website ​(November ​ 5). http://comicpotential.alanayckbourn.net/styled-4/. ​ ​

Merriam-Webster's collegiate dictionary.​ “Mansplaining” by Merriam-Webster. Merriam-Webster Inc., 2018. https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/mansplaining-definition-history. ​

Morris, Pam. Literature and Feminism: An Introduction.​ 14 - 47. Oxford: Blackwell ​ Publishers, 1993.

Pratt, Annis. Archetypal Theory and Women's Fiction.​ The University of ​ Wisconsin-Madison, 1975. PDF. 54

Wolstenholme, Ria. “The Hidden Victims of Gaslighting.” BBC Future.​ BBC, ​ November 24, 2020. https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20201123-what-is-racial-gaslighting 55