Liana de Camarqo Leão METAVISION& ENTRANCES AND EXífS IN TOM Âk£ MA D, Dissertação apresentada ao Curso de Pós-Graduação em Literaturas de Língua Inglesa, do Setor de Ciências Humanas, Letras e Artes da Universidade Federal do Paraná, para a obtenção do grau dc Mestre cm Letras. Orientador: Proí1. Dr\ Anna Stegh Camati. t994 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS >1 man had need have sound ears to hear himseíffranifij criticised; and as títere are feu' who can endure to hear it without ùeing nett fed, those who hazard the undertaking of it to us manifest a singular effect of friendship; for 'tis . to (ove siticerehj indeed, to venture to wound and off end us, for our ou>ngood. (Montaigne) First of all, I would like to acknowledge the enlightening, patient and constructive guidance I have received, throughout my graduate studies, from my advisor, Dr. Anna Stegh Camati. I also wish to thank the generous commentaries and suggestions of Dr. Thomas Beebee from Pennsylvania State University and Dr. Graham Huggan from Harvard University. I am extremely grateful to Dr. David Shephard, and to my colleague Cristiane Busato, who patiently revised parts of this dissertation. Finally, my affection and gratitude to my husband, Luiz Otávio Leáo, for his support in providing free time for me to study. iii TADLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT vi ; RESUMO viii 1 INTRODUCTION: Till« CIUTICO' ANXllfiTY" FOH TOM STOPPARD'B ORIGINALrrY 1 2 THE FRAMEWORK OF ROSENCRANTZ AND OUILDENSTERN ARE DEAD: STOPPARJD'S VISION OF REALITY AS SET OF INTERCHANGEABLE FRAMES 20 3 TWO PRUFROCKEAN SHAKESPEARE CHARACTERS IN SEARCH OF GODOT 50 3.1 ELIOT'S INFLUENCE: A HUNDRED INDECISIONS BEFORE DYING 64 3.2 PIRANDELLO'S INFLUENCE: TWO CHARACTERS IN SEARCH OF THEMSELVES 58 3.3 BECKETT'S INFLUENCE: WAITING FOR A PLOT.... 63 3.4 THE TRANSWORLD IDENTITY OF ROS, GUIL AND THE PLAYER 71 4 WORDS, WORDS, WORDS ...: STOPPARD'S PREOCCUPATION WITH LANGUAGE AND STYLE 83 5 MEETING DEATH IN THE THEATRE 103 5.1 THEATRE AS THEATRE... 104 6.2 DEATH AS A FAILING TO REAPPEAR ON THE STAGE 109 iv 6 ' STOPPARD'S REVISION OF THE CONFLICTING WORLDVIEWS OF HIS . TIME IN ROSENCRANTZ AND GÜTLDENSTERN ARE DEAD. 123 6.1 THE SUBVERSION OF THE CONCEPT OF ORDER AND THE PLACE OF MAN IN HAMLET. 125 6.2 THE SUBVERSION OF BASIC REALITIES IN BECKETT'S OUEVRE 140 6.3 TENSION OF OPPOSITES IN ROSENCRANTZ AND QUILDENSTERN ARE DEAD. 162 7 CONCLUSION: TOM STOPPARD AS A POSTMODERN SCRIPTOR 170 8 BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES 177 A&STRACT - Throughout this dissertation a dual objective has been kept in mind: first, to validate Stôppard's parodie method of 'composition, and secondly, to account for the Implicit 'cosmovisions that are compared and contrasted by means of framing techniques within the play. Concerning form, I have traced the procedures by which earlier texts are integrated and transformed in Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead, which center around the selection, assemblage and artistry with which the borrowed parts and ideas are Interwoven. As for content, I have tried to show that the foregrounding of form within the play, in a sense, makes the form become the content of the work. Thus, the metatheatrical devices that the playwright employs dramatize the ideas that he has wished to project. By exploring the framing structure, characterization, language, the intertwined themes of metatheatricality and death, I have sought to demonstrate how Stoppard illustrates man's existential confusion and search. By comparing and contrasting both the Shakespearean and the modern tragic sense, evidence has been provided that the playwright offers the audience several perspectives from which to build their own vision: to see a whole world in a grain of sand or to detect nothingness in the vast firmament depends, as great poets and philosophers have stated, not on the world, but on the answer given by the individual to this world. In relation to literary theory, I have adopted a poststructuralist approach, where the concepts of parody, allusion, intertextuality, text-conciousness, metatheatricality, framing techniques and the author as scriptor have enabled me to describe and account for a play in which the very relationship of life and art is pervasively debated. Within this theoretical framework, I have also tried to account for what the term originality means within a postmodern context, showing how Stoppard defies the traditional notion of originality, inserting himself in the contemporary trend of postmodern writing. vii KE5UM0 Ao longo dessa dissertação, persegui um objetivo duplo: primeiro, validar o método paródico de composição de Tom Stoppard, e segundo, dar conta das cosmovisões implícitas que são comparadas e contrastadas por meio de técnicas de moldura dentro da peça. Em relação a forma, procurei traçar os procedimentos pelos quais textos anteriores são integrados e transformados em Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead, técnicas essas que giram em torno da seleção, composição e artisticidade com as quais textos e idéias tomadas emprestadas de outros autores são costuradas. Em relação ao conteúdo, tentei demonstrar que ao privilegiar a forma na peça, em certo sentido, Stoppard faz com que a própria forma se torne o conteúdo do trabalho. Deste modo, os recursos metateatrais que o dramaturgo emprega dramatizam as próprias idéias que ele desejou projetar no texto. Ao explorar a estrutura de molduras, a caracterização das personagens, a linguagem e os temas interligados da metateatralidade e da morte, procurei transmitir de que maneira Stoppard ilustra a busca e a confusão existencial humana. Ao comparar e contrastar o i sentido do trágico em Shakespeare ' e no mundo atual, evidenciou-se que o dramaturgo oferece à platéia muitas perspectivas atráves das quais construir sua própria visão: ver viii o mundo num grão de areia ou detectar o nada no vasto firmamento depende, como disseram grandes poetas e filósofos, não do mundo em si, mas da resposta dada pelo individuo a esse mundo. Em termos de teoria literária, adotei uma metodologia pos-estruturalista onde os conceitos de paródia, alusão, intertextualidade, auto-consciência do texto, metateatralidade, ! técnicas de moldura e o autor como scriptor me permitiram descrever e dar conta de uma peça em que a própria relação da vida com a arte é debatida. Neste contexto teórico, tentei mostrar como Stoppard .desafia a noção tradicional de originalidade e se insere na corrente literária pós-moderna. 1 'Would¡ fiadphrases that are not Sqiown, utterances that are strange, in a new language that has not Been used, free from repetition, not an utterance which has grown stak, which men of oíd have spoken. (KhakherperresenB - an "Egyptian scriße of2000 'B.C.) Tom Stoppard's Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead1 is, as its title overtly advertises, a parody of Hamlet.2 Stoppard's play has been greatly criticized for its derivativeness and lack of originality, as being a mere shadow of Shakespeare, Beckett and the theatre of the Absurd. Versions of this initial critical opinion are still to be found in recent studies. I aim at responding to this critical scepticism of the play's originality by investigating it from various perspectives: the framing structure, characterization, language and style, metatheatricality and (.humo, n,m1 u ooinp/u-luüii Ol' t.liu dUTúruiil. world'vIí.iIoiki Implicit! In I.Ihi text. By examining these several aspects, I intend to demonstrate how Stoppard's parodie method of composition includes many postmodern strategies and characteristics. ¡ I RG is Stoppard's first professional play and one of his most popular works. It was initially presented on the fringes of the Edinburgh Theatre Festival in August 1967. Though it was widely acclaimed in a new and longer version at the National Theatre at the Old Vic in London in that same year, and received the 1967 John Whiting Award, the 1968 Evening Standard Award for the most promising playwright, and the 1968 Tony and the Drama Critic's Circle Best Play Awards, it has, nevertheless, opened a battlefield populated by critcs both for and against Stoppard's work. Among the first negative critiques in 1967, Philip HOPE- WALLACE described the London production as "a tedious witty theatrical trick".3 John WEIGHTMAN judged it as <'a brilliant idea, inadequately worked out" while questioning "its lack of seriousness"4, and John Russell TAYLOR acknowledged its cleverness and ingenuity, but argued that it offered nothing new: (...) if you know your way around Beckett and early Pinter, not to mention a shoal of minor followers, you will be likely to find the road Rosencrantz and Guildenstern follow to dusty death all too familiar and uneventful to be worth travelling for a whole evening.5 However, the play was also celebrated by critics, among them Irving WARD LE, who praised It as "an amazing piece of work with frank debts to Pirandello and Beckett, (...) which prove a route towards theatrical brilliance and powerful feeling".6 Harold HOBSON and Ronald BRYDEN saluted it, respectively, as "the most important event in the British Professional theatre"7, and "the most brilliant dramatic debut of the sixties".8 3 The polemics continued. Robert BRUSTEIN, Andrew KENNEDY and Normand BERLIN somehow summarize the negative reception toward RG- BRUSTEIN called it a theatrical parasite, feeding off Hamlet. Waiting for Godot, and Six CI)arao.tovs_in_S_oai:ch_Oi_aiTLAutllQi:. (•••) an immensely shrewd exercise enlivened more by cunning than by conviction, a work without any real weight or texture, (...) the product of a university wit which though amusing fails to Justify the 'violation' of Shakespeare's text.® KENNEDY complained that it was the play's parodie quality which prevented it from seriously dealing with the important issues it raised: "Stoppard's parody (...) has no centre of feeling, it is anaesthetized".10 BERLIN, likewise, saw it as an "extremely intellectual play", somewhat "thin and shallow", especially when Stoppard "meditates on large philosophical issues", lacking the "feeling and emotion we associate with Godot and Hamlet".11 It is only in the late 70's and 80's that RG achieves a certain positive unanimity among critics.