The Actual versus the Fictional in Betrayal, The Real Thing and Closer by Johanna Alida Krüger submitted in accordance with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Literature and Philosophy In the subject THEORY OF LITERATURE at the University of South Africa Supervisor: Prof Marisa Keuris November 2014 Student number: 4667-829-8 I declare that “The Actual versus the Fictional in Betrayal, The Real Thing and Closer” is my own work and that all the sources that I have used or quoted have been indicated and acknowledged by means of complete references. ________________________ _____________________ JA Krüger DATE i ABSTRACT: Although initially dismissed as superficial, Harold Pinter’s Betrayal, Tom Stoppard’s The Real Thing, and Patrick Marber’s Closer use the theme of marital betrayal as a trope to investigate metatheatrical and epistemological issues. This study aims to demonstrate how these three plays define and explore the concept of authenticity within the fictional as well as the actual world; how arbitrary the construction and mediation of the characters’ identities are, not only from their own perspective, but also from the audience’s; the significance of the audience’s role in these plays and how issues of authenticity, fictionality and dishonesty impact on a genre that depends on illusion. This study intends to provide a new interpretation of these three texts through an analysis drawn from postmodern and poststructuralist theories, concerning the concept of authenticity within art and language. This study finds that the fictional worlds in these plays are created through mediation, which includes everyday language as well as complex works of art. Authenticity is shown to be an elusive concept. Language is either unsuccessfully used to force authentic responses from characters, or as a shield. In Betrayal, language functions as a protective barrier, preventing the characters from knowing one another. The Real Thing suggests that although inauthenticity may be established, the inverse is not necessarily true. In Closer, the characters try in vain to access authenticity through different registers of language. Furthermore, neither the body nor the mind is shown to be the locus of authenticity in Closer. Within the postmodern context where originality is impossible, mimicry is not seen as something external and inauthentic, but as inextricably part of human existence. The audience is drawn into the fictional world of these plays as its members are able to identify with the disillusionment of the characters and their inability to form a definitive view of each other. Simultaneously, the audience is ousted from the fictional world by being reminded of the author’s presence through metatheatrical devices. These plays take advantage of the fictional status of theatre to explore issues of authenticity, positioning them in direct opposition to postdramatic and verbatim plays. Keywords: authenticity; Betrayal; Closer; fictional world; Marber; metatheatre; mimicry; Pinter; postmodernism; poststructuralism; Stoppard; The Real Thing ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: Financial support by The University of South Africa is hereby gratefully acknowledged. I would like to thank my promoter, Prof Marisa Keuris, for her support, patience and guidance in this study. A word of thanks is also due to Prof David Levey, who was responsible for the language editing of this thesis. I am very grateful to the Department of Afrikaans and Theory of Literature, where I was employed for the duration of this study, for accommodating me with sufficient academic leave days. A word of thanks is due to my friends, Terrence Carney, Candess Kostopoulos, and Christi Kruger. As fellow doctoral students, their encouragement and support were invaluable. Lastly, thank you to my parents, Gert and Doefie, my sister, Anneke, and the rest of my friends for their prayers and emotional support. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS: DECLARATION i ABSTRACT ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii TABLE OF CONTENTS iv LIST OF FIGURES vii A NOTE ON THE TEXT viii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1 1.1. Contextualisation 1 1.2. Postmodernism, poststructuralism, and the concept of authenticity in popular culture 2 1.3. Pinter’s Betrayal, Stoppard’s The Real Thing, and Marber’s Closer 5 1.4. Literature survey 7 1.5. Research problem and objectives 7 1.6. Thesis statement 8 1.7. Methodology 9 1.8. Conclusion 10 CHAPTER 2: THEORIES ABOUT TRUTH AND ARTIFICE IN LITERATURE AND THEATRE 12 2.1. Introduction 12 2.2. The impossibility of authenticity 12 2.3. Language: barrier or conduit to the real self? 17 2.4. Literature: mimesis and metatext 22 2.4.1. Art as reproduction of the actual world 22 2.4.2. Realism 24 2.4.3. Postmodern metatext 30 2.4.3.1. Definition 30 2.4.3.2. Conditions of metareference 34 2.4.3.3. Forms of metareference 36 2.4.3.4. Functions of metareference 37 2.5. Theatre: the authenticity of corporeality 39 2.5.1. The truth paradox in theatre 39 2.5.1.1. Ostension 39 2.5.1.2. The duplexity of theatre 42 2.5.1.3. The actual frame running with or against the fictional 44 2.5.2. Experiments in eliminating the actual and the fictional in theatre 47 2.5.3. Metatheatre 52 2.5.3.1. Definition 52 iv 2.5.3.2. The function of metatheatre in postmodern drama 55 2.5.3.3. Metatheatrical strategies 56 2.6. Conclusion 62 CHAPTER 3: HAROLD PINTER’S KALEIDOSCOPE OF BETRAYALS 64 3.1. Introduction 64 3.2. Pinter’s influences and influence 64 3.3. Pinter and postmodern drama 66 3.4. Betrayal within Pinter’s oeuvre 70 3.5. Mediation as theme and dramatic strategy in Betrayal 73 3.5.1. Isolation versus community among the three characters in Betrayal 74 3.5.2. Pinter’s veiled language 78 3.5.3. The narrative in memory 87 3.5.4. The unoriginality of language 90 3.6. Recycling and mimicry 91 3.7. Metatheatrical implications of Betrayal 94 3.8. Conclusion 98 CHAPTER 4: TOM STOPPARD’S PERPLEXING HALL OF MIRRORS IN THE REAL THING 101 4.1. Introduction 101 4.2. Stoppard’s place in the dramatic canon 101 4.3. The Real Thing within Stoppard’s oeuvre 107 4.4. The characters’ debates about authenticity in art and life 113 4.4.1. Brodie’s writing versus Henry’s 113 4.4.2. The authentic versus the inauthentic in romantic relationships 121 4.5. Mimicry 125 4.5.1. Mimicry in the characters’ behaviour 125 4.5.2. Mimicry in the mise en abymes and outer play 128 4.6. Metatheatrical implications of the various mise en abymes in The Real Thing 129 4.7. Conclusion 136 CHAPTER 5: THE CHARACTER AS MIRAGE IN PATRICK MARBER’S CLOSER 139 5.1. Introduction 139 5.2. Cool Britannia and the inspiration for Closer 139 5.3. The body versus the mind 148 5.4. Mediation failing as authentic representation of the actual world 152 5.4.1. Calling a spade a spade 152 5.4.2. The narrative in memory 154 5.4.3. Written and visual media 158 5.4.4. Performative media 161 5.4.5. Love versus honesty 163 v 5.5. The recycling and mimicry of various images in Closer 165 5.6. Metatheatrical implications of form and metareference 170 5.7. Conclusion 174 CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION 176 LIST OF REFERENCES: 182 vi LIST OF FIGURES: Fig. 1 The continuum of realist texts and metatexts Fig. 2 The architecture of the performance space showing a separation between areas representing the actual and fictional worlds Fig. 3 The sequence of the scenes in Betrayal and their place in the chronology of the play Fig. 4 The sequence of events in The Real Thing, indicating the placement of mise en abymes and structural mimicry Fig. 5 The sequence of events in Closer, showing the romantic links between characters, adapted from Rosenthal (2007: xxiv) vii A NOTE ON THE TEXT: All quotations in this document were taken verbatim from the relevant editions used. Apart from obvious errors I have neither indicated any variant forms of spelling nor gender bias in quotations taken from older texts. When quoting from the plays, capitalisation, punctuation, and any textual notation are left intact. Marber uses a system of textual notation to indicate where and how his actors should emphasise certain words. Any underlined, italicised or capitalised words therefore appear as in the original text. viii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION Just because you feel it Doesn’t mean it’s there – Radiohead, “There there. (The Boney King of Nowhere.)” (2003) 1.1. Contextualisation When Harold Pinter’s play, Betrayal (1978), was first performed in that year, it was poorly received by theatre critics, with the single exception of Benedict Nightingale (in Elsom, 1981:254). The play was dismissed as an uninteresting, bourgeois soap opera. In fact, according to Elsom (1981:249), Pinter had not received such negative reviews since The Birthday Party (1960) in 1958. Billington (2001:129) states in the Guardian of 16 November 1978, that in Betrayal, “Pinter has betrayed his immense talent by serving up this kind of high-class soap opera.” Kennedy (in Page, 1993:57) also disliked the play and felt that “the characters and their petty, bourgeois concerns fail to suggest a significance wide enough or deep enough to justify sustained interest.” Billington (1996:258) did review his initial reaction to Betrayal later, while more recent critics such as Gray (2004:149) and Scolnicov (2012:106) do point out that the early reviewers of the play ignored the fundamental epistemological questions that it poses. Pinter chose to explore the question of “how can we trust what we know?” specifically through the plot line of adultery in this play, to focus on the social grouping of a romantic couple: the most intimate relationship between people.