The Birthday
Party: title of the play
indicate that someone’s birthday party may be celebrated in the play but after
studying the play we come to know that there isn’t any party. Play is known as
‘comedy of menace’ and absurd.
What is comedy of menace? What is
absurdity? What are the symbols, what each symbol indicate? What are the
changes between movie and play?
Here I am giving answers
about above questions which are asking in worksheet of The Birthday Party, so I
hope it may helpful to others.
Here I am sharing my
viewpoints about the play.
Pre viewing task: Comedy of menace: The phrase “comedy of
menace” as a standalone description inspires both positive and negative
feelings. Comedy is used during a dangerous situation to cause audiences to
draw judgments about a particular character or communication. The words used
are the focus of often powerful stories that create conflicting emotions from
its audience. The title “Comedy of Menace” immediately brings contradictions to
mind, because comedy is generally something that makes people laugh, and the
word "menace" implies something threatening. Quite literally, then,
this phrase involves laughing at an ominous situation.
This phrase is part of the title of a British play called The Lunatic View: a Comedy of Menace,
by David Campton. Irving Wardle, a critic in the 1950s, emphasized the phrase
when writing a review of the plays of Harold Pinter. Wardle used "comedy
of menace" in a review of several of Pinter's works, although at the time
he had seen only one, The Birthday
Party.
Some plays are able to successfully
mingle drama with comedy. One specific example from The Birthday Party is a character joking around about being in a
menacing situation.
Phrase “comedy of menace” often applied
to his early plays like; “The Room”, “The Birthday Party” and “A Slight Ache”.
Menacing situation is shown in all above plays.
A particular atmosphere:
It also created by Pinter’s ability to drop suddenly
from a high comic level into deep seriousness. By this technique the audience
is made aware that the comedy is only at surface layer. The sudden outbreaks of
violence (verbal/physical?) in the play confirm this and leave the audience
unsure of what will come next.
While we are talking about atmosphere
there is some kind of fear in the play but that – fear for what? – by whom? But
this type of question is remaining unanswered. Just as Stanley or Meg is the
main vehicle for comedy in the play; so one more question arises that is he the
main vehicle for the presentation of fear? Or is any other character
frightened?
Answer of this question is yes
because tone of the play is tragic or fearful but fear of what? It isn’t
clear. All the characters are suffering from some unknown fear. May be possible
that characters are laugh to forget their fear; they live in a past or avoid
seeing in mirror because of fear.
The room or house represents security
from the outside world but sadly it is impossible to sustain. So we can say
that atmosphere is freighting.
Painteresque: Swedish Academy defines
characteristic of painteresque where people are at the mercy of each other and
pretence crumbles. With a minimum plot, dramas emerge from the power struggle
and hide and seek of interlocution…...
‘The Birthday Party’
as a Political Play with reference to Harold Pinter’s Noble Speech: ‘Art, Truth
& Politics: in that Pinter clarify that; “There are no hard distinctions between what is real and what is unreal
nor between what is true and what is false. A thing is not necessarily either
true or false it can be both true or false” and je further says that I
always start a play by calling the characters A, B, and C...It’s strange moment
the moment of creating characters who up to that moment have had no existence.
And now he talks
about art and politics: he says that political language as used by politicians
which is not in truth but in power -the
real truth is that there never is any such thing as one truth to be found in
dramatic art. There are many. These truths challenge each other, recoil from
each other, reflect each other, ignore each other, these each other are blind
to each other…
In his speech he very beautifully and logically argues about
his play with real situation, truth in drama is forever elusive. He further
talks about U.S. and says that ‘I spoke
earlier about tapestry of lies and describes Nicaragua as a ‘totalitarian
dungeon’
While viewing task:
Pinter’s Birthday Party film and the play in
article: in that Harriet and Irving Deer says quality of Pinter’s
style in both play and film. They says that he is an accomplished writer in
both drama and film, Pinter is faithful to the texture of the play, movie
starts with early in the morning, shots of car driving camera is moving first
car and then point of view of driver. Both film and play seems to be trivia.
Sense of emptiness and menace comes primarily in the film, so it is Pinter’s
purpose in both to magnify trivia he used meaningful techniques in film.
Magnified ripping sound as McCann tears his newspaper or
party in which we see the room looks like cage it is more clearly visible while
game blind-man’s bluff. It is Pinter’s technique he shifts from an emphasis on
people in the play to an emphasis on things in the film. He beautifully writes
as well as shut.
How many times the
‘knocking at the door’ happens in the play? So many times knocking the door happens
and yes it is creating menacing effect while viewing the movie.
Silence and Pauses are very important and Pinter
successfully does it in movie during the conversation between Meg and Stanley
or conversation between McCann, Goldberg and Stanley this time he uses pauses
and silence.
Newspaper: play and movie both
open with scene of Petey reading newspaper and Meg working in the kitchen Meg
asking him that what is in the news. Here asking someone and telling someone is
itself shows power-position.
Mirror: is also one of the
symbol in Pinter’s plays, mirror image is always a kind of unrealistic or lie
image which shows what we are.
Breakfast: Meg giving Petey
corn flex it shows she makes fuss over everything the paper, the fried bread,
or her housekeeping anything. The whole
breakfast scene is reminiscent of the king of domestic trivia.
Toy drum: in the act one ends
that time Meg gave toy drum to the Stanley, it remains to the end. It is
well-intentioned but stupid present.
Window-hatch: from that Stanley
shows who is coming because he frighten from some unknown fear and from window
we can’t see full sight means we only shown half thing or unclear thing. At the
end of the movie Petey also shoes in the window.
One more symbol I want to include that is;
Door: it is very important
symbol because first it gives threatening sound and also symbol of some fearful
feeling, knocking the door create menacing image.
Each scene has symbolic meaning. Interrogation scene- in that McCann, Goldberg is force to sit down
to Stanley in that repetition of the dialogue or situation like Stanley is
sitting down and they both standing up shows power-position.
Birthday party scene- in that Stanley
constantly saying it isn’t my birthday. In that all are playing game
blind-man’s bluff it shows different point of views of each character. Room is
look like prison in that Stanley searching something.
Resistance scene: in that Stanley who
is now clean shaved, once again Goldberg and McCann subject him to an
unendurable verbal barrage, but it is superfluous Stanley will to resist has
vanished and he can only make meaningless sound.
Post viewing task:
At some extant movie is giving the effect of menace but
reading and seeing both are very much different reading is always more effective than reading while
reading interrogation scene McCann and Goldberg are force to Stanley for sit
down and they asking Stanley some unclear thing that we don’t know context this
are menacing situation while viewing this effect we can’t feel.
With which of the following observations you agree: I am agree with this; “It's
impossible to imagine a better film of Pinter's play than this sensitive,
disturbing version directed by William Friedkin”
If you were director or screenplay writer, what sort of
difference would you make it the making of movie? – movie is very much faithful
to the original play in my opinion everything is okay no need to change or add
in the movie and direction or screen play writing it isn’t my cup of tea, but I
want to change Petey’s character, he played very minor role so I want to give
more space to his character.
All actors’ plays beautifully and faithfully played their
role but Stanley’s acting much affect me.
So these are my opinions about the play. At last thanks to Dilip Barad sir for gave me
advice to post it on my blog.
