Absurdity was achieved with this brilliantly constructed play. I liked how Printer, as a playwright, was successfully able to capture the atmosphere of the setting (West London right after World War II) and the spirit of the characters from his imagination to bring them to life. He is able to make the reader feel like he/she is present in the succeeding events of the play. The characters show absurdity from the words that come out of their mouth and the constant and useless repetition. It has a humorous side to it as do all “absurd” plays have, but not too funny. Printer once said: "As far as I am concerned, The Caretaker IS funny, up to a point. Beyond that point, it ceases to be funny, and it is because of that point that I wrote it." According to this quote, the main goal behind writing an absurd play was not only for comical reasons but to point out the social issues affecting the country and perhaps to mock the current political situation at the time.
Based on experience, I did not particularly enjoy reading works for this genre in Drama. I would prefer to follow logical events in a literary work such as a play rather than laugh about something that makes absolutely no sense. As previously mentioned, the playwright did a great job in portraying the absurdity of characters from their speech to their actions but not enough for my taste. I’m considered as more conventional since I prefer the element of logic to be present in the works I read.
2 comments:
Reading theatre of the absurd has been the most interesting genre in English that we have studied, in my opinion. The absence of logic is what sends out a strong message. I also have an opposing opinion to your take on The Caretaker. Pinter did a good job portraying the characters and the mood of West London after WWII. Yet, I really didn't enjoy reading it, and thought it was too boring. Also, in comparison to The Bald Soprano, the actions of the characters were no where near as absurd and nonsensical. For me, there was absolutely no element of humor, I didn't enjoy reading anything about the play. But you were right, the play was successful in serving its purpose which is to depict social and political issues occurring at the time.
By the way, it's Pinter, not Printer :P
I agree that Harold Pinter does capture the setting and mood of England at the time very well, and although I thoroughly enjoy reading Theatre of the Absurd plays I didn't particularly enjoy this one, overall, it's not a bad play but it simply didn't really catch my attention.This play is quite dry compared to The Bald Soprano and is not as absurd and existentialist as Waiting for Godot which we read in higher level. I love the post you included, I think it's very appropriate to what his intention and purpose is for this play.
Post a Comment