본문 바로가기
  • Home
Basic Search

Theatereality: Beckett's Strategy of Late Dramaticules

  • Journal of Modern English Drama
  • Abbr : JMBARD
  • 2011, 24(2), pp.283-298
  • Publisher : 한국현대영미드라마학회
  • Research Area : Humanities > English Language and Literature > English Literature > Contemporary English Drama

Hwang, Hoon-sung 1

1동국대학교

Accredited

ABSTRACT

This paper is a semiotic investigation into the textual phenomenon of “theatereality.” I will discuss two late masterpieces: Play and Not I, where the echoing relationship between the stage fiction and the stage fact prevails. This echoing phenomenon is so dominant that critics can hardly deal with Beckett’s late plays without mentioning it. since it functions as a paradigmatic tool for Beckett’s late dramaturgy. Theatereality refers to a near convergence between the stage fiction and the stage fact; semiotically translated, it parallels “a technique of problematizing the relationship between verbal sign (parole) and visual signs (mimique, geste, mouvement, maquillage, coiffure, costume, accessoire, décor, éclairage)”. In other words, Beckett’s late plays present a playful mirror-game between the protagonist’s fiction and the stage scene; e.g., a playful relationship between the parole/éclairage in Play; a playful mirroring between the parole/ mimique, geste, and mouvement in Not I, Footfalls, and Ohio Impromptu; and a mirroring between the parole/ geste, mouvement, costume; and décor in A Piece of Monologue and Rockaby. In Play, theatereality is interwoven with the topos of theatrum mundi, the light-interrrogator creates a “theatereal” moment, in which the three players are simultaneously real and theatrical. The audience is thus alerted to the similarity between the theatrical condition of the three players and the real condition of its own life, i. e., a limbo-like situation where absolute loneliness and eternal suffering are real. Instead of theatrum mundi topos, theatereality is highlighted in Not I. If theatereality is conceived as the moment when the narrator’s verbal fiction echoes his/her condition of narration on stage, there are five “theatereal moments” in this play. The powerful image of the mouth produces multiple layers of meaning: literal, metaphoric, and symbolic. The latter two levels of signification extend this play in depth. Metaphorically, Mouth’s logorrhea, discharged form a human orifice, stands for the indigestible nature of the heroine’s life. Symbolically, Mouth is no less than an archetypal icon of the threshold between darkness (chaos)/ light (logos), offstage/ stage, thereby laying bare the process of theatrical represenation. In short, theatereality is a methodological awakening: although the audience does not succeed in identifying the referent, they are awakened to their own habitual (thus naturalized) way of receiving a theatrical performance. Semiotically speaking, they are provided with valuable insights about how theatrical communication and signification occur in the course of theatrical reception.

Statistics

  • 186 Viewed
  • 1 Downloaded

Tools

Issue List

Citation status

* References for papers published after 2023 are currently being built.

Basic Search Advanced Search