Postmodernism and Pinter: With Special Reference to The Dumb Waiter

                                                A Term Paper

Submitted for presentation to P.G Dept. of English Utkal University Bhubaneswar               

                                                                   For

                   Partial fulfillment of course work leading to PhD programme.

Submitted By:                                                                                Submitted to:

Biswa Ranjan sahoo                                                              Prof. Himanshu Sekhar Mohapatra

Course work for PhD Admission Student     

Utkal University Bhubaneswar

 

At the outset of my paper Postmodernism and Harold Pinter: with special reference to The Dumb Waiter, I would like to discuss, modernism giving attention to how it led up to postmodernism. Then my discussion will focus on postmodernism and its characteristics. Thereafter I would apply postmodernism to the selected text showing the applicability and relevance of the theory.

            Modernism began as a movement in art, culture, music, painting, literature and architecture. It started in Vienna in 1890-1910 in the form of art movements like cubism, Dadaism, surrealism, and futurism, which had a long lasting effect on France, Italy, and Germany and eventually in Britain. In all the arts influenced by modernism, we find a rejection of a large part of the tradition. Melody and harmony were forbidden in music; painting abstained from perspective and direct representation; the traditional forms and materials were rejected by architecture. The realistic convention in literature-chronological plot, continuous narratives relayed by omniscient narrators, closed endings etc. were amended in favour of the experimental forms.

            The chief characteristics of modernism were: emphasis on impressionism and subjectivism i.e., on how we see rather what we see, a preoccupation evident in the use of stream of consciousness; avoidance of the objectivity of omniscient external narration, clear cut moral position in case of novel; blurring of distinction between genres so that the novels became lyrical and poetry became documentary and prosaic; a new liking for fragmented forms so that the works became discontinuous narrative and random seeming collages of disparate materials; a tendency towards change so that the poems, plays, and novels raise their issues concerning their own nature, status and role. This great change made the literary works experimental and innovative.

            After its high point modernism seemed to retreat in 1930s, in 1960s resurgence took place- it can be said to share many features with the foregone modernist movements but it was certainly not a continuation of modernism. This is the movement called to be postmodernism. But it left an impact on postmodernism. Let’s define postmodernism. According to J.A. Cuddon, “postmodernism is characterized by an eclectic approach, [by a liking for] aleatory writing, [and for] parody and pastiche”. (60) So far this definition doesn’t apply exclusively to postmodernism because these methods were vigourously used by modernist writers. Let me little explain my stand how modernists used it. Eclectic suggests the fragmented forms which were best used by Eliot in The Waste Land-a modernist poem. ‘Aleatory forms’ meaning randomness of selection of various elements that was mostly used by Dadaist who made poems taking sentences from newspapers. The use of parody and pastiche clearly ignores the divine presence of omniscient narrator best found in modernist writings.

            Then what is postmodernism? Both modernism and postmodernism gave importance to fragmentation but they held radically divergent views on it. The former lamenting it, the later celebrating it. Ezra Pound in The Cantos, his major work called it a ragbag of modern age but regretted about the fact. In T.S Eliot’s The Waste Land, too, the persona laments the fragments. The lament, desperation, and pessimism are best expressed in fractured forms. For the postmodernists, by contrast, fragmentation is exhilarating, amusing and liberating phenomenon. In short postmodernists enjoyed what the modernists lamented.

Here I would like to discuss the famous trio of postmodernists. Jurgen Habermas, Jean-Francois Lyotard and Jean Baudrillard. For Jurgen Hagerman the modern period begins with Enlightenment. The project of modernity believed in breaking away from tradition, blind habit and slavish obedience to religious percepts and prohibition which could bring about a solution to the problems of society. Modernists lamented for a lost coherence, a lost system of values but they retained some faith in reason and the possibility of progress. For Habermas the poststructuralist thinkers rejected the kind of Enlightenment modernity. The modernists attacked the ideals of reason, clarity, truth, and progress, as they were thereby detached from the quest of justice Habermas identified them as ‘young conservatives’ and declared the project of modernity incomplete.  

            For Lyotard, Habeamas wished to rely on authoritative explanation of things from Christian, Marxist or mythical point of view. These metanarratives are really illusion fostered for difference, opposition and plurality. They impose a false sense of unity in social existence and discourse and thereby erasing the inherent plurality of social life.So Lyotard discredited metanarratives as being irrelevant to contemporary society where as mininarratives are contingent, temporary which provide basis for action for particular group.

            Baudrillard the third of the postmodernist trio in his book Simulations (1981), states that postmodern world is pervasively influenced by film, TV, and advertising that has led to a loss of distinction between real and imagined, surface and depth, reality and illusion. The result is a culture of ‘hyperreality’ in which the distinctions are blurred. He supposed that the sign which was indication of depth was lost and merely an index of other signs. He says when signs do not represent depth or underlying reality, but merely became of other signs then the whole system became a simulacrum.    

            Taking the above post modernist views I would like to look into my selected text The Dumb Waiter of Harold Pinter, to see whether it exemplifies the above claims of postmodernism or not. The reason for doing this is to rediscover Pinter as a postmodernist or to move the discussion beyond the absurdist or existentialist Pinter. Take language as one of the postmodern characteristics. In Samuel Beckett’s waiting for Godot, the clash of words between two tramps without meaning constitute the social bond. No doubt Estragon and Vladmir, the two tramps, play the language game without understanding its significance. The language is not transcendental and they are actually validating to the purpose of their mundane talks. But in Pinter the two hired assassins Ben and Gus engaged with the mundane discussion before their job. Gus’s questions to Ben are ignored. This shows the class superiority of Ben over Gus. No doubt both of them are lower class criminals; the senior Ben tries to imitate the aristocracy. For Pinter speech, as a strategy, is designed to cover the naked silence with a constant aura of violence and intimidation. Beckettian dialogues, as Lyotard says, atrophy the real where as reality is deliberately subdued by silence and menacing speeches in Pinter.

 Pinter’s stage in The Dumb Waiter is reduced to a small chamber without ventilation, incommunicable and prison like. The play focuses on jealousy, betrayal and class politics, but it is his dialogues-and the lack of dialogue-for which he is known. Pinter’s language, usually lower class vernacular has been described as poetic. His Irish forebear Beckett took silence to a new level. Beckett’s silences hint at alienation, boredom, and slow approach to death whereas Pinter’s are ominous and violent.

            The impact of off stage character is discernable in The Dumb Waiter and The Waiting for Godot. In both cases they are powerful and influence the onstage character. The later Godot presents a neutral God-like character for which the characters wait, but in the former case Wilson is a malevolent god whom the characters wait for in violent silence. The Dumb Waiter carries the Lyotard’s concept of mininarrative-consisting of one act, which is a postmodernist characteristic. It does not have formal plot, character, or action. In The Dumb Waiter the characters read the newspaper and quarrel for the trivial things whenever they forget the responsibility bestowed on them by their superficial Boss. Their silence, mini conversation, attention to command from Wilson and fear for death make their thought fragmented. They quarrel for the phrase ‘light the kettle’. They are engaged to fulfill the orders of sophisticated dishes, made through the dumb waiter- an elevator connected the upper floor for transporting food from the kitchen where the two rogues sheltered, inorder to impress their Boss. Though they remember their last victim, a girl, they do not lament for it. Gus is worried about the order so he asks questions to his senior Ben about when Wilson will come. The answer is most predicted he says, “He might not come. He might just send a message. He doesn’t always come”. At last for them the fragmentation becomes strategic, they welcome and enjoy. The play ends up when Gus goes on to the lavatory to get water, at that time the dumb waiter whistles, Ben listens to it and repeats it loud the order that the man has arrived and they will be commencing their job shortly. Hurriedly Gus comes out from the lavatory stripped off clothes and gun. Ben near dumb waiter poses to kill him and they stare.

            Postmodernism is not an approach to drama criticism as it is an approach to fiction or other semiotic practices but drama can also reveal interesting possibility when viewed in the light of postmodernism and Pinter is a very good case of postmodernist writing.

               

Working Bibliography

Abrams,M.H. A Glossary of Literary Terms. New Delhi: Akash Press, 2007.print.

Barry,Peter. Beginning Theory. Oxford Road: Manchester U P, 2010.print.

Batty,Mark Taylor. Harold Pinter. New Delhi: Atlantic Press, 2010.print.

Pinter,Harold. The Dumb Waiter. New York: Grove Press, 1960.print.