Theatrical Language and Form of Beckett and Pinter

The plays of Harold Pinter and Samuel Beckett contributed much to their time in their use of staging and language. Their plays are focused more on the language that is use, or not used in Pinter's case, than on the plot itself. Each playwright incorporates a different style in the performance of his work as well as in the speech of his characters. Pinter tends to primarily use a pause between lines or thoughts while Beckett uses much more repetition in his work.

In Pinter's The Homecoming, he tries to portray the play as realistic. He claims that "what goes on in my plays is realistic, but what I'm doing is not realism" (Burkman 1971: 3). Much of what goes on in the play seems realistic - including the dialogue. However,
"The drama of Harold Pinter evolves in an atmosphere of mystery. While the surfaces of life are realistically detailed, the patterns below the surface are as obscure as the motives of the characters, the pause as prominent and suggestive as the dialogue. Despite the vivid naturalism of his characters' conversations, they behave very often more like figures in a dream than people with whom one can easily identify, at least on superficial levels" (Burkman 1971: 3).

Pinter's primary technique in dialogue is the "pause." He uses this pause between almost every line throughout The Homecoming. The pause "heightens the effect of noncommunication…" while repetitions and lack of logic of ordinary conversation that are omitted from realist plays give it a "distinctive combination of the banal and the strange" (Burkman 1971: 5). There are scenes throughout the play that exemplify this argument, such as:

Teddy: I've…just come back for a few days.
Lenny: Oh yes? Have you?
Pause.
Teddy: How's the old man?
Lenny: He's in the pink.
Pause.
Teddy: I've been keeping well.
Lenny: Oh, have you? Pause. Staying the night then are you?
Teddy: Yes. (Pinter 1991: 38)

In this short scene, one can see the awkwardness that the pause creates in a conversation. Pinter does not specify what goes on during these pauses and leaves it up to the director and actors to effectively communicate to the audience the awkward situation at hand.

It seems that as the play progresses the absurdity of it becomes more apparent. The conversation between Max and Lenny in the opening seems very realistic. Yet, it does have its moments of going off track whenever a pause appears in the script. It seems that every few lines or so the characters change the topic of conversation as well as their attitudes. Toward the final curtain the absurdity is clearer with Ruth having her sexual power over the men as well as their "business" proposal to her.

Beckett's Endgame is much more obvious in its absurdity than The Homecoming. His style can be described as a drama "of the nonspecific" (Murphy 1994: 43). The absurdity of the play stems from its stage setup as well as its dialogue and plot (or lack thereof). Like Pinter, Beckett uses a lot of pauses - although not nearly as much as Pinter does - between lines and repetition of lines, phrases, and questions.

The play opens with repetitive questions followed by Nagg's repetition. Beckett believed that "No language is so sophisticated as English. It is abstracted to death" (Eliopulos 1975: 58). There is also the ever-present dialogue without meaning or response. "The characters can speak to each other without communicating anything, for the experience has become incommunicable" (Eliopulos 1975: 53).

Much of the absurdity can be found in the characters themselves, even before they speak. Hamm is first seen sitting in an armchair, covered by a cloth on stage. There are also Hamm's parents, Nagg and Nell, who are introduced to the audience by coming out of garbage bins. More absurdity can be found in the actually setting of the play. Beckett does not specify what year, day, time, or place in which the play is occurring. There are references to there being no world outside; but then why are the characters still alive and where does their food come from if Hamm can't walk and Clov never leaves?

The audience is left to wonder what sort of world it is in which these characters are living. Nothing in the dialogue elaborates on what is occurring in the play; no questions about the setting or the characters are answered. The same conversations reappear throughout the duration, such as Hamm and Clov arguing about leaving the house. Every few pages in the text Clov states, "I'll leave you" in the middle of a conversation and Hamm will usually ignore it and continue with whatever he has been saying.

Beckett and Pinter both belong to an absurdist style of theatre however much their styles differ one another. Pinter's absurdity in The Homecoming is much more subtle and limited than that of Beckett's Endgame. Both playwrights focus primarily on the absurdity of language and communication - if that is what you can call it - than on the plot at hand.

Each play leaves much to the directors' and actors' discretion as to how to interpret the dialogue; do the playwrights themselves even know what goes on during the pauses and repetitions? Even with all the complications of the performance and interpretation, Beckett and Pinter have left an impact on modern theatre (more so in Europe than anywhere else). Their techniques and use of language can be seen in many more modern plays and playwrights.

Works Cited

Beckett, Samuel (1958) Endgame. Faber and Faber Limited. London.

Burkman, Katherine H. (1971) The Dramatic World of Harold Pinter: Its Basis in Ritual. Ohio State University Press. Ohio.

Eliopulos, James (1975) Samuel Beckett's Dramatic Language. Mouton & Co. N.V., Publishers. The Netherlands.

Murphy, P.J. (1994) Critique of Beckett Criticism. Camden House, Inc. South Carolina.

Pinter, Harold (1991) The Homecoming. Faber and Faber Limited. London.