Plays Within Plays

8/18/2019 Plays Within Plays

1/13

P l a y s - w i t h i n - P l a y s i n T h r e e M o d e r n P l a y s :

M i c h a e l F r a y n ' s N o is e s Off, Tom S toppard ' s

T h e R e a l T h i n g

and Alan Ayckbourn ' s

A C h o r a s o f D i s a p p r o v a l

Pilar Zozaya

Univers idad de Barce lona

On e of the tech niq ue s tha t au th or s have frequent ly favoured in the his tory of

d ra m a is t he u se of a p l ay -wi th in -a -p l ay . Kyd ' s

T h e S p a n i s h T r a g e d y ,

S h a k e s p e a r e ' s

H a m l e t ,

B u c k i n g h a m ' s

T h e R e h e a r s a l ,

She r idan ' s

The Cri t ic ,

P i n e r o ' s T r e l a w n y o f t h e W e l l s ' , a n d m o r e r e c e n t l y T o m S t o p p a r d ' s

R o s e n c r a n t z a n d G u i l d e n s t e r n a r e D e a d , T h e R e a l I n s p e c t o r H o u n d and

T h e R e a l T h i n g , I l oward Bren ton ' s T h e C h u r c h i l l P l a y , M ichae l P ' rayn ' s

Noises Off ,

Rona ld Harwood 's

T h e D r e s s e r ,

David Hare ' s

A M ap of the W orld ,

and A lan Ayckbourn ' s

A C h o r u s o f D i s a p p r o v a l

- jus t to ment ion the most

fam ous o nes- ha ve re l ied for pa r t of the ir th ea tr ic al effect on the creat io n of an

im ag in ar y world ins ide a ñct ic ious one, so they can jug gle with the con cepts

rea l i ty and ¡I lus ión, and inter w eav e the different la ye rs of f ic tion an d m et a-

fiction.

On e mig ht wo nder abou t the reaso n why this "oíd ' featu re is s t i l l favoured by

the mos t popula r and success fu l of our con tem porary p layw r igh ts . The ans we r

m ay be rooted in the inh ere nt qua l i t ies of th is device . W hen an au tho r in ser ts a

play within another one, he is a t once changing the general approach to his work

of ar t . Som e of his ch ar ac te rs become ' ac tor s ' in the play emb edded in the ce ntr a l

piece, whi le others now take the role of the audience, thus becoming one with us .

A cióse re l a t io ns hip is es tab l ishe d betw een s tag e and publ ic , and th e foot l ights

seem to d i sa ppe ar whi le we watch the new p lay " toge ther . ' N otw i ths ta nd ing the

im por ta nce of th i s com mu nion , th i s i s no t the so lé mot ive th a t p r om pt s th e

au tho r to use th i s t echn ique . A p lay wi th in -a -p lay h e lp s the p la yw r ig h t to

reinforce , broa den an d deepen the cen tra l motif in his m ain play; i t becom es a

very val id means to make his audience think about the f ic t ional i ty of real l i fe

and th e real i ty of fict ion; and, if i t s form is th a t of th e m oc k- re he ar sa l th e

pl ay w rig ht is furnishe d with the form ula th at wil l ena ble him to point out the

f laws an d enh anc e the v i r tu es of the thea t re , and to com me nt la rge ly on the s ta te

of the th ea tr e of his t im e.

To i l lus t ra te the enormous poss ib i l i t i e s o f th i s p rac t ice , we have chosen th ree

p lays by th r ee con tem porary p layw r igh ts : Michae l Fra yn ' s N o i s e s O ff (1982),

189


2/13

Tom S toppa rd ' s T h e R e a l T h in g (1982) , and A lan Ay ckbo urn 's A C h o r u s o f

D i s a p p r o v a l (1984). Th ese th re e plays have been selected, not only beca use

they ha ppc n lo be thr ee grc at successes of mo dern E ngl ish dr am a, bul bec ause

thcy use the play-w ithin-a-p lay form ula w ith different pu rpos es . As will be seen ,

in the case of N o i s e s O f f this technique helps the author to pay his devoted

homage to the world of the theatre , in that of


to express an

inte l l igent comment on i ts f ic t ional i ty/real i ty , and in that of A C h o r u s o f D i s

a p p r o v a l to mirror , deepen and re inforce the centra l theme in the main play.

N o is e s O f f

In Michae l Fra yn ' s Noises Off , th i s t echnique of inse r t ing a p lay wi th in ano ther

one reac he s i ts u tm ost pos sibi l i t ies , as the au tho r plays each s i tua t ion to the hi l t .

Th is p lay was f irs t per formed a t the Lyric Th ea t re , H am m er sm i th , on 23

F eb ru ar y 1982, and t rans ferr ed on 31 M arch to the Savoy T he at re , London. I t

was given The Best Comedy of the Year Award in 1982, and, after six years of

un re len t in g po pu lar i ty , it i s s t i l l p lay ing to full hous es . A s im ilar succe ss wa s

achieved on Broadway -where i t was a lso chosen as The Best Comedy of the Year

in 1984-, an d in M adrid in 1985. In th e following yea r, the play was stage d in

Barce lona wi th ye t ano ther h i s t r ion ic component tha t added an ex t ra d imens ión

to the f ic ti tious e le m en t of f ic t ion; the acto rs used two differe nt la n gu ag es :

Ca ta l án i n Noises Off , Spanish in N o t h i n g O n .

N o i s e s O f f

is a ski l ful , h i la r iou s , farc ical an d, a t the sam e t im e, lovin g

comment on the very essence of the theatre , on the wizardry, and a lso on the

drudgery, effor t and pain needed to make a man's dreamt world come to l i fe .

Righ t from the m om ent we buy the pro gra m m e, we ar e t rapped by the r ing s of

circ le s with in c i rc les of the plot , una ble to draw a c lear l ine betwee n f ic t ion and

real i ty , as , next to the customary l is t of the cast , in order of appearance, ñame of

d i rec tor , e t c . , we a re p lea san t ly surp r i sed w hen we rea l ize the re i s a second

Russian dolí inside the first one: the cast of N o t h i n g O n . We are informed th at

the play was wri t ten by Robin Housemonger , d i rected by Lloyd Dal las , and that

this is the "World pre m iére pr ior to na t ion al tour . ' Th is va luab le inform ation is

followed by a long and d eta iled l ist of da te s and tim es of pe rfo rm an ce, ru le s of th e

house , the p roduc t ion c red i t s and the ñames of the sponsors - sa rd ines , con tac t

lenses , s t ra i t jacket and coff ins are duly thanked to the different companies , and

special m ent io n is given to the Eur op ean Bre we ries for the ir "ge nero us s uppo rt"- .

Moreover , we are a lso given a summary of the successful careers of the actors ,

con ta in ing such in te res t ing de ta i l s as :

G a r r y L e j e u n e ( R og er T r a m p l e m a i n ) . . . R e ce n tl y m a d e h is b i g s c r e e n ' d e b u t in U p th e V i r g i n

S o ld ie rs , l'or which be wa s nom inate d as Best . Male Newc om er un der Fo rty in any B ri t ish Low-

B u d g e t C o m e d y K i l m b y r e a d e r s o f t h e S u n n e w s p a p e r .

U r o o k e A s h t o n (Vicki) is prob ably b est knuwn as the gir l w ear ing n othi ng but "good, hones t ,

na tu r a l f 'roth' in the H aup tbahn hofb rau lager comm erc ia l . . . C in em ago ers saw her in The Girl

in R o o m H , where she p layed theGir l in Room312.

190


3/13

F r e d e r i c k F e l l o w e s (Ph i l ip B re n t ) . . . was recen t ly seen in the con t rovers ia a l l -ma le ve rs ión o í'

T h e T r o j a n W o m e n .

I ' o p p y N o r t o n - T a y l o r (A ss isl an l St ag e M an ag er) is f'rom a family f 'ound m ore of' ten on th e

B o a r d s u f l e a d i n g c o m p a n i e s t h a n o n t h e b o a r d s w i t h t o u r i n g c o r n p a n i e s . . .

Th ese w i t ty d igs a t p r ize g iv ing , adv er t i s in g ja rgo n , g r a tu i tuo us ch angos in wel l

es tab l i shed thea t r ica l convent ions , snobbery , e tc . , a re the su i tab le in t roduc t ion

to a first Act w he re all the ar ch ety pa l ele m en ts used in farces are mixed in a m ost

ingenio us com bina t ion . A new p lay

- N o t h i n g O n -

is going to open in 24 hours

and the director -Lloyd Dal las- is having a dress rehearsal -not a technical one as

some of h i s ac tors th ink . W orking aga in s t t ime , and some o ther m inu t iae - l ike

ac tor s who do not know the ir exi ts and entr an ce s , doors th at do not open prop er ly ,

and as s i s tan ts who explode in sudden ou tbu rs t s o f ang er and je lousy- the smal l

company and i ts d i r ec to r man age , a f te r m any i n t e r ru p t i on s , t o have a run -

thro ug h of a mos t in te r es t i ng p lay tha t s t a r t s wi th a cha t ty he lp , Mrs Clacke t t -

who has not gone home yet because " they 've gol colour here , and i t ' s the roya

wh a t ' s i t c a l l ed" [ l ] , and a youn g ma n , Roge r T ram pl em a in , w ho works fo r

Sq ui re , Squi re , Ha ckm an and Dudley - the house -agents in charg e of ren t ing the

"del ightful s ix tee nth ce ntu ry posset mil i . . . lovingly conv erted"- , and ar r iv es

acco m panie d by Vicki "a de sirab le prop er ty in her ear ly twe nt ies "- with the idea

of having a few hours of re lax in the presumably empty house, he is pass ingoff as

his own. I low ever their p lan is thw arte d by the ar r iv al of Phi l ip and Fla via

Brent, who have come back home from Majorca for a few weeks, after having

dodged the Bri t ish Inland R even ue. W ith five people -a da i ly he lp an d two

couples- who should not be there , the play becomes an exci t ing game of hide-and-

seek, as they a l l keep on nea r-m iss in g each oth er in th ei r f ran t ic ex i ts an d

en t ran ce s . Th ing s ge t rea l ly ou t of p ropor t ion w hen two o ther v i s i to rs a r r iv e ; the

f i rs t one an oíd burglar , the second a real Arab Sheik who wants to rent a house.

In N o t h i n g O n Fra yn ha s effectively included al l the arche typ al c ha ra cte rs of a

fa rce : a s impl i s t i c char wi th a sof t spo t fo r the a r i s tocracy , and a ce r ta in

malapropis t ic t endency; a young dar ing execu t ive a lways ready for the sexua l

game; a dumb blonde, not iceable by her good looks and small brain; a modern,

succesful w ri te r , obsessed with escapin g his duty as a tax- pay er ; a jea lou s wife

eas ily prov oked ; and a scruffy oíd bu rg la r who com pla ins beca use of the facil i t ies

the y give him to rob. I low eve r this is only one of the I aye rs of our p lay as a

second one N oi se s Off- encircles and modifies i t .

In the ' m ain ' p lay, we ar e confronted with the > e a l ' ch ar ac ter s behind those

pr es en t in the rehe ars ed one. H ere , ag ain, we f ind plenty of farce in s tore with a

whole gal lery of comic types: the self -concei ted actor who knows al l the answers

but can never a r t i cú la te them in a coheren t and comple te sen tence ; the young

actress hopeless ly in love with the leading actor ; the empty-headed s tar le t whose

mis takes s top the rehearsa l aga in and aga in ; the insecure ac tor who needs to be

g iven end less S ta n is la vsk yan reason s to go on wi th th e fa rce ; the m oth er l y

ac tre ss a lw ay s ready to chee r up the oth ers and soothe the f r ic t ion; the dr un ke n

acto r co nsta nt ly th re at en in g the smoo th runn ing-o n of the play; and , f inally,

191


4/13

among those in control of the show: a loud, sarcast ic bul also pat ient director ,

who is having a love affair with both the young star let and his assis tant , and

who,

when try in g to control the chaos on stag e comp lains: "I'm sta r t i ng to know

what God fel t when he set put there in the darkness creat ing the world" (p. 376).

I low eve r, they do m an ag e to end the reh ea rsa l , and Lloyd can f inal ly sh ou t:

"C ur ta in "

After the in terval , the audience i s immedia te ly taken in by Frayn 's audaci ty :

Th e whole set ha s been turn ed th rou gh 180 de gre es ' and now, one mon th later ,

we ar e back s tage whi le the ac to rs and ac t re ss es are g e t t in g read y for an

af ternoon performance 21. Affa i rs have been developingbetween the members of

the company, and one of the sources of great comedy is to witness how the most

inn oce nt deed gl impse d by somebody w ho sudd enly pops in ha s a total ly different

m ean ing and i s the cause of endless rows and m isun der s tan din gs . Fray i s s t i ll

alluding to all possible levéis of fiction and ~reality, ' truth and deceit .

This second act is specially effective when both the action on the stage and in

the w ings becomes one . Th is happ ens , for exam ple , when in

N o t h i n g O n ,

Roger,

the young bus inessman, rea l izes there i s something s t range going on in tha t

house as th ings keep on appear ing and disappear ing, and pecul iar noises[3 | a re

heard a l l over the p lace ; in Noises

O ff

his shoe-laces have ju st been t ied tog eth er

by jea lo us Dot ty , thu s , when he m ake s h is en t ran ce , he fa l ls over and en ter s

N o t h i n g O n mut ter ing h is next l ine : "There ' s something evi l in th is house" (p .

454) , which, obviously, has different and deeper undertones now. Similar effeets

ar e achieve d in Act III. By now the aud ienc e knows qu ite well which are the

l ines ,

and the correc t exi t s and ent rances , therefore we enjoy the mis takes ,

cha ng es and im prov isa t ions the ac tors a r e forced to ma ke. This fea ture i s a l so

used to i ts utmost potent ial by having the s i l ly dumb blonde del ivering her l ines

ju st as the f i rs t t im e, unab le to dev iate at al l from the script , impe rvio us to al l the

ch an go s the oth ers ar e introd ucin g. Th e whole play has to go on in spi te of the

pro ble m s; even if objeets "move them selv es on the ir own two feet ," teleph on es ar e

wrenched from the wall , sardines seem to be al l over the place, and sheiks and

bu rg lar s m ul t ip ly w i thou t e ffor t -by the end the re are two prospective buy ers and

th re e th i eves , a l l a r r iv ing on cue , and de l iv e r in g the i r l i nes w i tho u t f au l t ,

r ega rd les s of the f ac t t ha t t hey keep on r ep ea t ing e ve ry t h in g . A c to r s and

act ress es fight wild ly no tw i ths ta nd ing the i r t i redn ess , dr un ke nn ess , rage and

jea lousy; forgot ten l ines are invented , props are d iscarded, cues are missed, and

the whole play becomes a frenzied race towards i ts end, as i f the whole company

believed that as long as the piece does not s top, nobody wil l not ice anything, and

the show wil l never be saved[4] . N o t h i n g O n ends wi th a joke on the sar din es

Mrs Claket t has kept cooking a l l through the p lay , Noises O ff could go on

forever.

Michael Frayn makes us laugh a t modern p lays , a t d i rec tors , s tage managers ,

actors and actresses, but we are also moved by the devotion with which al l of

them put the i r sk i l l s togethe r in order to créa te such a fasc ina t ing wor ld of

f iction. Th e whole perfo rma nce becom es an exc i t ing the atr ica l eve nt , with i ts

m isu nd ers tan din gs , v isual and au ra l jokes[5] , and ingen uou s use of props - the

co un tless p late s of sa rd in es , the thr ee bun che s of fiowers th at ar e nev er given to

t h e r i g h t p e r s o n , t h e t h r e a t e n i n g f i r e m a n ' s a x e , a n d th e d r u n k e n a c t o r ' s

192


5/13

inn um era b le bo t t l es of whisky- . Fu r th erm or e , the perfect sync hron iza t ion of

both play s , the ever inc rea sing speed of the farce , and th e f rant ic des pe rate f inale

make i t an excel lent piece to watch.

I t m igh t be arg ue d t ha t i t i s noth ing but a s imple farce , but we couid rep ort th at

th is wa s ju s t wh at Michael Fr ay n wan ted to w ri te . A farce tha t would be the

ep i tom e of a l farces , a su m m ar y of a l l i t s c l ichés , typ es and s i tu at io ns , a hom age

to the ge nre and to the w orld of the th ea tre . Hesides , he a lso a t te m pt s " to show

som eth in g about the wor ld" which , in th i s par t icu la r case , the au th or h im se l f has

su m m ar ise d in the fol lowing term s:

The acto rs in No is es Off have f ixed the world by lear nin g roles and r eh ea rs i ng the i r respo nsos .

The f'ea r th a t ha un ls them i s th a t the un lea rned and u nreh earse d - the g rea t da rk chaos beh ind

the set , ins ide the heart and brain- wil l seep back on the s tage. The prepared words wil l vanish.

The p lanne d re sponse s wil l be inapp rop ia te . The i r pe r fo rmance wi ll b rea k down, and they wi ll

be le f't in f ron tofus naked and un ash am ed |6 | .

An d, as we have ju s t w itnessed , the gr ea t dark chaos f inal ly engulfs the s tag e.

Unlike Mr Frayn, who, so far , has used the world of the theatre in his plays jus t

th i s once , our nex t p la yw r igh t ha s mad e of th i s t ech ni qu e one of h i s m os t

success fu l and id iosyncra t ic ha l lmarks .

T h e R e a l T h in g

From the very be gin nin g one of Stop pard 's co nsta nt obsessions ha s been " the

the a t r ic a l i ty o f th ea t re " as he be l ieves tha t " the a t re i s no t l i t e ra tur e . I t' s an

e v e n t " | 7 j .

Th erefore i t i s not su rpr is in g th at very of ten he has pinpointed the

very na tu re of th ea tre by br ea kin g the ba rr i er s between f ic tion and ~real ' l ife,

and le t one me rge w ith the othe r before the dazzled eyes of a bew itched aud ienc e.

We can get involved in the pl ight of two Fl iza be tha n c ou rt ier s who only acq uire

the i r own persona l i ty when whi r led in to Shakespeare ' s

H a m l e t ,

as happened in

R o s e n c r a n t z a n d G u i l d e n s t e r n a r e D e a d (1966), or the dealings of two crit ics,

who are t rapped by the proceedings of the play they are about to review, as was

the case in

T h e R e a l I n s p e c t o r H o u n d

(1968), or the physical exercises of a

grou p of jug gle rs who rep res en t visual ly the acrob at ic phi losophic theo ries the

m ain cha ra cte r is concerned w ith in J u m p e r s (1972), or the basic pattern of

Wilde ' s

T h e I m p o r t a n c e o f B e in g K r n e st

tha t shapes a s tudy on a r t , l i t e ra ture

and polit ics in

T r a v e s t i e s

(1974), bu t prob ably on e of th e play s wh er e th is

opposition is more artfully exploited is in a piece whose core is precisely to find

The Rea l Thing .

T h e R e a l T h i n g ,

th at opened at Strand T he atr e on 16 No vem ber 1982, begin s

in Noel Coward fashion with Max discovering that Charlot te , h is wife , who is

supposed to have been on a bu sine ss t r ip to Sw itzer lan d, h as been unfai thful to

him ; his cool, ironic react ion m ak es her leave him. In th e second scene , we see

Char lo t te l iv ing wi th ano ther man , Henry , and we immedia te ly p resume he i s

the lover they ment ioned in the prev io us one . I low eve r , we soon d i sco ver

193


6/13

Sto ppa rd has chea ted us , as th is is the ' r e a l ' Ufe and th e f i rs t scene wa s only pa r t

of the piece I le nr y w rote for his actress-wife to play in . W ith gre at in ge nu i ty th e

au thor has des t royed our wel l roo ted conf idence , tha t makes us re ly on our

cap aci ty to disc ern be twee n w ha t is real and w ha t is not .

By choos ing a p l ayw r igh t , two ac to r s , two ac t r e s se s and a r eb e l - m ar t y r -

p la yw r igh t as the m ain char ac te rs in h i s new p lay , S toppard can jugg le w i th the

not ion of p lays -w i th in-p lays to i t s u tmo s t poss ib i l i t ie s . In Th e Rea l T hin g such

t e c h n i q u e a c q u i r e s n e w p o w e r , a s t h e a u t h o r i n t e r - l i n k s a s m a n y a s f o u r

differ ent pl ay s, by four different d ra m a ti st s, to give life to his own . Eac h one of

them adds a new layer to the cen t ra l core , and increases i t s meaning and dep th

by mi r ro r ing and commen t ing on t he i s sue s i t p r e sen t s -we migh t s ay t ha t

anyth ing of impor tance takes p lace a t l eas t twice in the p lay , and somet imes

even as many as th ree . Thus , fo r example , the scene in Henry ' s p iece - H o u s e o f

C a r d s , wi th which th e play begin s , ac qu ires only i ts full s i gn if ica nc e i f we

co m pa re i t to scene i ii in the "real" play -when A nnie w alks on Max-, an d to scen e

ix -when l l en ry d i s cove r s An n ie ' s adu l t e ry .

In

H o u s e o f C a r d s ,

Max can learn about his wife 's inf idel i ty and s t i l l be

am azin g ly wi t ty to con t inu é to expound ab out d ig i ta l w a tches , o r joke abo ut the

number of lovers his wife has -he gradual ly moves f rom one, to "I t ' s only two, is

i t? ,"

the n, " IIow do they a l l th re e get away a t the sam e t ime ? Do they w ork toge-

ther , l ike the Marx Bro thers? ," and , f ina l ly , "A s t r ing quar te t , you mean?" |8 ] .

Ilo w ev er, w hen he ha s to face the sam e ord eal in real l ife -scene i i i- , he can only

rea ct by ab us in g his wife with foul lan gu ag e, and ass au l t i ng her physica l ly . In

the second A ct -scene ix-, it is H en ry 's tu rn to deal w ith a s im ilar scene, and , once

ag ain , we real ize real life is qu i te dif ferent from f ic tion. His ran sa ck ing A nn ie 's

be lon ging s , h i s doggedly que s t ion ing her , and h i s a t te m p t to b la ck m ai l he r ,

differ to tally from wh at he wr ote in his play. Now , he does believ e "in me ss,

tea rs , p a in , se l f -abasem ent , lossof se l f- respec t , na ke dn ess" (p. 72) .

By point ing to this disassociat ion between a real and a f ic t i t ious exper ience is

S toppa rd imp ly ing t h a t t he t h ea t r e f a i ls to r ep ro duc e ou r a c tua l f e e l i ngs?

K n o w i n g t h e a u t h o r , t h e a n s w e r u n d o u b t e d l y i s : n o . I n a m u c h q u o t e d

i n t e r v i e w | 9 | S t o p p ar d d e sc ri be d h is w r i t i n g a s s e t t i n g a m b u s h e s for t h e a u d i e n c e

an d, to my m ind, th is is w ha t he is play ing a t he re . Bec ause, how do we know

w ha t the "re al ' reac t ion is? By now Stopp ard ha s shown us th at we can no t re ly

on ou r di sc er nm en t, in sce ne i we mad e a m is ta ke -i t wa s fiction, no t rea l l ife-, in

scene vi , we greenly repeated the mistake, only the other way round - this t ime i t

w as real l ife not f iction, th e first few lin es were only a jok e betw een b oth a eto rs-

and in scene x we fa l l in to the same t rap again: they are only rehears ing.

Fur thermore , S toppard has taken grea t ca re in s t ruc tur ing the th ree scenes ( i .e .

i, ii i and ix ) , e s ta b l i s h in g c lea r pa ra l le l i sm s be tween th em , unde rscor in g the i r

s im i la r i t i e s , and m ak ing the m sh in e as th ree d i f fe ren t face t s of the sam e jew el .

We conc lude th a t thea t re and l ife a re no th in g bu t ~ the sam e th ing . ' S topp ard

star ts scene i i i wi th a expl ic i t s tage direct ion in which he indicates that the two

se t t i n gs - t hose of s cene s i ii and i x- a r e " im m ed ia t e ly r e m in i s c en t o f t h e

beginning of scene i" (p . 35) , then he recurs to use some of the most s ignif icant

moments in Wes te rn dramaf lO] -as wi l l p resen t ly be seen- , and ends by hav ing

H en ry openin g An nie 's pr ese nt , af ter her t r ip to Sco t land, and f inding a ta r t á n

194


7/13

scarf, which a l once rem ind s us of the m in ia tu re Alp in a g ia ss bow , th a t

Char lo t te gave Max in H o u s e o f C a r d s af ter her pretended visi t to Switzerland.

Sto pp ard also conn ects the f irst scene to oth er different m om en ts in the play. For

example , Max 's searching of Char lo t te ' s be longings , looking for hcr passpor t , i s

repeated by Annie -scene iv- going through Henry ' s papéis , by Bi l ly , Char lo t te ' s

new boy friend, -se. vi i - in sea rch of her diap hr ag m , and by I le nry -sce ne ix-

trying to f ind a proof against Annie.

The o th er thr ee dexterou s ly inser ted p lays are a lso used to com me nt on the

ma in one, an d to hig hlig ht the principa l them e. At a given m om ent in the piece -

scene iv- , Annie, who is going to play in Str inberg 's

M i s s J u l i e ,

r ehea r ses w i th

Henry the famous love scene, but "she reads without inflect ion," and when he

t r ie s to approch h er "she pus hes h im awa y." The scene not only comm ents on the

art i f icial i ty of love, but i t gives Henry the opportunity to expound on his inabil i ty

"to wri te love." "I t is ei ther chi ldish or i t ' s rude," he says "but i t never sounds as

th e re al th in g " (p. 40). At th is poin t Sto pp ard m oves from fiction to rea lity in a

very subtle way; Henry, t r iggered by the words in the rehearsed play, begins to

ponder about how to express love in f ict ion, from these theoret ical considerat ions,

he moves to confess his ' real ' love for Annie, but his tender avowal is cut in by

the bud as th e al ar m clock in his w ristw atch goe s off. As H e a rs h Ze ifma n

o b s e r v e s l l l ] ,

we immediately recal l a famous similar sound which also stopped

an oth er " thea t r ica l* s i tua t ion: the a la rm c lock a t the beg inn ing of

The Maids .

Later on in scene v, Henry reads from the play wri t ten by Brodie -a Marxist

so ld ier ja i led af ter t ry in g to se t f ire to the Cenotaph by k ind l ing the w re at h

deposi ted there- , and uses this third place as his spring-board to s tar t a wit ty and

br i l l ia nt speec h abou t real l i te ra tu re and trash l 121 - ironical ly enou gh he ha s to

admit that as long as his wife does not marry again he wil l not be able to wri te

" the rea l stuff. In scene vi, Billy and Annie repeat the first Unes of this play as a

gambit in his amorous approach to her; in scene x, they rehearse the play for the

te levis ión , surpr is ingly enough every t ime Stoppard succeeds in taking us by

su rp ris e, an d m ak in g us reco nside r our conception abo ut rea l i ty and f iction. Th is

very same effect is achieved by the fourth play enmeshed in T h e R e a l T h i n g ; I

am refer r ing to

'Tis a Pi ty She's a Whore

by Ford. A nnie play s in i t toge the r

with Bill and, both at the end of scene vi, and in scene viii , we notice that the

boundar ies be tween rea l i ty and ar t i f ic ia l i ty have been dramat ica l ly b lur red once

more; the lovers in the play are now becoming lovers in real l i fe , and Annie, l ike

Annabel la , i s a whore , an adul teress .

The play has then as its core the opposition "real l ife ' and "fiction' but, as has

become evident by now, the author means " the real thing' in al l aspeets of l i fe .

He tr ies to dis t ing uis h betw een real love and colonisat ion, real m usic and sh am ,

rea l l i te ra ture and t rash , rea l pol i t ics and propaganda, rea l sex and bio logy, rea l

self and our masks, and being real ly committed or only using a given system;

cha rac t er i s t i ca l ly he does not g ive the prec ise and unique answ er . Th e p lay h as

coiled and wound so often be tw een i ts own s ta tem en ts and co un ter -s ta te m en ts ,

has zigzagged with such ski lfulness between "the real ' and "the faked' that we

are left stil l looking for the real thing.

W hen wa tchin g the p lay we are im me dia te ly bewi tched by Stoppard ' s dazzl ing

verbal gam es , h is wi t ty puns and c lever jok es -we ar e on fam i l ia r gro un d- ,

195


8/13

however tho p lay soon rever t s to more sc r ious mat te rs , and , p rompted by thc

des i re to p rove the oppos i t ion be tw een re a l i ty and a r t i f i c ia l i ty , ba f f les th e

audience wi th the shocking audac i t i es i t runs in to when combin ing bo th wor lds .

In o t h e r i n s t a n e e s h e e v e n b o r e s t h e m w i t h t h e c o n v e r s a t i o n a l i t y a n d

shal lowness of the l ines , and, in spi te of a l l the ingenious gimmicks used, we

remain "pa infu l ly

1

unm ove d, unaffected by the au tho r 's c lev ern ess and ski l l . We

might say , paraphras ing h i s famous scene about the wooden c lubs and c r icke t

bal ls , that the bal l has only t ravel led a few feet and we are lef t wi th sore hands.

The re fo re ,


is pro bab ly one of th e very few p ieces in wh ich th e

use of a play -w ithin -a play does , in the end, work ag ain st i ts ge ne ral effect. Th e

co n t in uo us sh i f t i ng of t he ac t i on be tw ee n two d i f f e r en t l ev é i s o f f i c ti on

con t r ibu tes to a p rog ress ive d i s tan c ing and to a no tor ious es t ra ng em en t be tween

ac to rs and audien ce . Fo r tun a te ly th i s is no t the case wi th our nex t p lay .

A C h o r u s of D i s a p p r o v a l

Like a l l Alan Ayckbourn ' s p rev ious works ,


was first

s taged a t the S tephen Joseph Thea t re - in - the-Round, Scarborough - the premiére

took p lace on May 22 , 1984-, and w as sub se qu en t ly t ra ns fe r re d to I


9/13

T his is the end of ~our' play, now A yckb ourn , in an exten ded f las hb ack wil l

disclose how Guy Jones carne to s ing, as Macheath, the leading f igure in the

opera , and why nobody acknowledges h im in h is t r iumph.

A s u s u a l A y c k b o u r n e x c e l s i n h i s c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n s , i n p r e s e n t i n g h i s

su bu rb an i te s and the i r pe t ty t rage dies . The p lay is cent red upon shy, easy-going,

ob l ig ing , d i ff iden t G uy Jo ne s , t he w idow er w ho w an t in g to s t a r t a new and

lookin gfor com pany decides to jo in an am at eu r opera t ic socie ty . He is the typica l

A yck bo urn ch ara cte rl 15| , a nobody -as Dafydd a ccu rate ly tel ls his wife ear ly in

the p lay- , who, due to h is mute acceptance and pass ive a t t i tude , d is rupts the

est ab l ish ed sy stem . He is not lasciviou s, greedy or sch em ing bu t , l ike al l gr ea t

hé ro es , he ha s a fa ta l f láw: he ca nn ot say *no. ' Due to th is un fo r tu na te

shor tcoming, he accepts the sexual advancements of two marr ied ladies , pro-

mises to enqui re about the p lans for expans ión the mul t i -na t ional company he

works for has, and informs the owner of the piece of land in quest ion, about the

p lo t ag a i ns t h im . H i s sexu a l exp lo i t s , and de f in i t ive pa r t i c ip a t io n in the

financial intr igue mirror his dizzy career in the operat ic society, as he zooms

from wa lk-on to the lead. But so mu ch success does not un fortu nate ly conclude

with ha pp ine ss. The fal l of his com pany m ea ns the end of his r ise, his good

for tune forsakes h im, and his k leptomania i s condemned by a unanimous chorus

of d isap prov al . As M ar t in H oyle has sum ma rised : "wi th the Ayckb ourn i rony, he

ends upd esp i se d , v il i f iedand m is t rus t ed" [16] .

A n othe r fe l ic i ti ous c rea t ion is m ad , ga r ru lou s , en th us ia s t i c , b ig -m outh ed

Dafydd a p Lle w ellyn . He is the direc tor who crie s: "I wish to God they w ere

profess iona ls . Th en I could sack them " |

17].

The courageous ar t is t who only loses

h ea rt w hen th ing s real ly begin to get out of control "T ryin g to do T h e

Beggar ' s

O p e r a

without a Macheath is a bi t of a non-star ter even for Peter Hrook" (p. 53) .

Th e hus ba nd w ho com plain s abo ut his wife: "She 's a bloody deep-freeze w om an"

(p . 53), u na w ar e of the fact tha t this very wom an is hav ing a very *hot ' sexual

re lat ion sh ip with the man he is confiding in.

As a lways in Ayckbourn , the p lay teems wi th moments of grea t humour ; they

s p r i n g f r o m s i t u a t i o n s , m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g s , s i m i l e s , r e p e t i t i o n s ,

exa gg era t io ns . . . a lw ays adv ancin g the p lo t and def in ing the ch ara c te rs . Th is i s

the case, for example, in the following exchange -here, we not only ~enjoy' the

cru de jok e, bu t also gain m ore insig ht into Dafydd's perso nali ty-:

Harina . . Is yo ur wife local?

IJafydd No ,dea re s t , he has n ' t g o t a wi fe . . .

Harina No?

G u y No she d i ed . . . she d icd , recent ly .

Harina O h . d e a r .

D a f y d d Oh de ar , I didn' t. know Iha t . Acciden t , wa s it?

G u y

No. Not rea l ly i t w as . .

( H e s e a r c h e s f or w o r d s )

D a f y d d D e l i b é r a t e . (He laugh s )

H a n n a ( K i e rc e ly ) Dafydd...

D a f y d d S o r r y . s o r r y .

1

do begyour pardon. I 'm sorry .Guy (p .22) .

197


10/13

All the o ther charac te rs a re a l so wel l con t ras led and easy recognizab le types ,

and, as could be expected in a play that is going lo be counterpointed by T h e

B eg ga r ' s O p e ra , women a r e pa r t í cu l a r ly we ll cha rac t e r i s ed . H ann ah L lewe l lyn

is the lyp ica l Ayckbo urn dow n- t rodden wi fe , who, l ike Be l ind a in S e a s o n ' s

G r e e t i n g s cra ve s for a l i t t le bi t of a t te nt io n and love. W hile Fay Hu bb ard play s

the role of the local s i re n, who l ikes ex pe r im en t ing sex ual ly w ith "an yt hin g a t

a l l . Well ,

1

supp ose if i t wa s exce ssively cr ue l or painful. . . I could draw th e l i ne "

(p .

35) , and shows w hat sex can do to a wom an, wh erea s Rebecca H un t ley -Pik e , a

r idiculous self -pi tying character , proves what the lack of i t can do to another one.

Tech nica l ly th e p lay i s a rnost ingenious cont r iva nce . As we have a l rea dy

mentioned, i t begins with the las t scene and then proceeds to develop an extended

f l a sh -back tha t expounds t he r ea son why nobody cong ra tú l a l e s Guy on h i s

m om ent of t r iu m ph . To have chosen T h e B e g g a r ' s O p e r a , as the piece to

cou nte rp o in t h i s own, is one of Ayck bourn ' s ach iev em ents . Th e songs f rom Gay ' s

pol i t ia l sa t i re become a most excel lent comment on a new piece; they ref lect and

mir ror exac t ly the even ts happening in the main ac t ion , and there fore deepen

a n d b r o a d e n i t s p a r t i c u l a r s u b j e c t , m a k i n g i t u n i v e r s a l . In A C h o r u s o f

D i s a p p r o v a l we no t on ly f ind the sexua l pass ions tha t ravaged the e igh teen th

cen tury o pera , bu t a l so the greed and cor rup t ion of i t s rascá i s . Ay ckb ourn ' s

ch ara c te rs p ro ve th a t even the qu ie t me m ber s of a jov ia l am at eu r opera t ic soc ie ty

may become fe roc ious sha rk s when it comes to land-dea ls . As Rona ld H ay m an

has remarked: " I t seems absurd to compare bo th p laywr igh ts bu t , l ike Brech t ,

A y c k b o u r n f in d s t h a t th e ra p a c i t y of G a y ' s h i g h w a y m e n a n d t h e d o u b l e

s tandards o f h i s respec tab le middle -c lass c i t i zens have prec i se equ iva len ts in

m ode rn socie ty . Ay ckb ourn 's sa t i r e , of cou rse , is gen t ler and mo re local than

Brecht 's" |181.

As could be expe cted, the play was received with gre at appl au se and ge ne ral

f a v o u r a b l e r e v i e w s . T h u s , for e x a m p l e , R o n a l d H a y m a n w r o t e in

P l a y s

I n t e r n a t i o n a l :

"One of h i s bes t p lays ye t . . . sp lendid ly en te r ta in ing even ing ,

with e no ugh lau gh ter in i t to cure a l l th e mo st cronic of dep ress ion s" | 19] , and

Sher idan Mor ley s ta ted in

P u n c h :

"It is in my view far and away the most suc-

cessful of his more recen t and bleak jou rn ey s into mid-l ife cr is is" [20 | . W hile

John Pe t e r summar i zed t he even t i n

T h e S u n d a y T i m e s

wi th these lauda tory

words:

The L ondun prem iére of 'Alan Ayc kbourn ' s A C h o r u s o f D i s a p p r o v a l is a major eve nt . Wh en I

saw í t in Scarbo rough las t ye ar I tho ug ht i t was sh arp ingeniou s and s l ight ly prun abl e . Now,

wi th the Nat ional ' s 24-cara t cas t , i t reveáis i t se l f as a ser ious comic masterpiece : br i l l iant ly

con s t ruc ted , ru th less ly ob serv ant , h i la r ious , and hard as na i l s l21 ].

Notwi th s t and ing t he se compl imen ta ry t e rms , A lan Ayckbourn ha s a l so had h i s

sh are of rec r im ina t ion s . Me has been accused of "w r i t ing too m uch ' |22] , and

often his plays ar e dism issed on the gro und s of bein g too t r iv ia l . To my m ind,

the se re se rv at i on s ar e of ten due lo a gen era l wilful refusal to recognize the d ep th,

t h e d a r k n e s s e m b e d d e d i n m u c h of h i s w o r k . H i s r e c u r r i n g t h e m e s a r e :

" ins ens i t iv i ty , ego ism, dom ineer ing a r roga nce , the joy lessn ess of middle -c lass

m a r r i a g e , t h e h o l l o w n e s s of s o c i a l a n d f a m i l y r i t u a l s , p a r e n t a l

198


11/13

misunders tanding, our repeated fa i lure as human beings to f ind ways of l iv ing

tog ethe r or com m un ica t in g wi th each o ther" [2 3] , and as ha s been pointed out

the se subjec ts sugg es t Ibsen, Checkhov and St r inb erg[2 4] . Lik e a new J a n e

Austen , he i s in teres ted in showing Hhe fo l l ies and nonsense ' of the middle

c lasse s , in p i l lor ing the i r m an ne rs and socia l conven t ions . His obse rvat ion of the

m inu t i ae o f hu m an re l a t ionsh ips in gene ra l , and of the dead ly s t rugg le be tw een

husband and wife in par t icular , i s accura te , sharp and to the point , and i t should

be noticed that , in every new play, i t is becoming darker , and more and more

le tha l ly acc ura te . And a l thou gh the tone i s th a t of i r repre ss ib le la ug hte r and

f a r c i c a l h u m o u r , t h e s c a t h i n g s a t i r e , t h e w r y i r o n y , t h e s e r i o u s n e s s a n d

trag ico me dy of ev ery day l ife is also pres en t in al l his work s.

We might say tha t Alan Ayckbourn has succeeded in depic t ing the un-heroic

t ragicom edy of our mo notonous life wi th grea t prec iseness , and , as Pe ter Ha l l

foresees: "In 100 years ' t ime, when he 's been forgiven for being successful , people

wil l read his plays as an accurate ref lect ion of English l i fe in the 1960s, 70s and

80s. They rep rese n t a ve ry im por tan t docum ent" [25].

Th is has been our an alys is of the use of an o íd techniq ue by thr ee mo dern

pla yw rig hts . We conclude tha t , even if in the case of


it did not

prove to be al together sat isfactory, in the other two instances, the possibi l i ty of

us ing the s tage to ref lec t i t s own charac ter i s t ics and to comment on i t s very es-

s e nc e e n h a n c e d th e t h e a t r i c a l i t y of t h e w h o l e e x p e r i e n c e . T h e b o u n d a r i e s

between f ic t ion and rea l i ty are dramat ica l ly b lur red , and, once more , we admit

th a t" the w hole wor ld i s a s tage . '

N O T A S

1. Michael Frayn, Moisés O ff (Plays : One) (London: Me thuen, 1985) , p . 366 . Al l f 'u r ther pa ge

ref 'erences wil l be ci ted in my t ex t .

2. In th is pa r t ic ula r aspe ct ( i .e . hav ing the ac tors per form aga in the p lay) , Michael F ra yn , as

Ka the r in e W or th po in t s ou t , ha s p robab ly t ak en " a t i p f rom B eck e t t ' s P l a y as wel l as f rom

Pi rand e l lo . " " Pa rce and M r Frayn , " M o d e r n D r a m a , X X V I , 1 (March 19831,47-59.

3.

N o i s e s i sa l l F ray n l e ts h is ac to r s u t t e r backs t ag e . In pe r í 'e c t s i len t mo v ies t r a d i t i on , ac to r s can on ly

expres s t he i r pas s ions t h rough ge s tu re s , l ooks, mime . . . , and the wh o le pe r fo rm anc e beco me s a

wonderful ly ex hi l ara t in g exper ience underscored by i t s per f ' ec tsynchroniza t ion w i th the o the r p lay .

199


12/13

4 .

The au tho r h imse l f has s a id abou t No i se s Off tha t the p lay "a t te m pls to spot l ig ht the f ront t ha t

people pul up a l l the t ime and th e fac t th a t the y wi l l do an y th in g so long as they ke ep up

appea rances . " Quo ted by Pe t e r Kemp in

T h e T i m e s L i te r a r y S u p p l e m e n t ,

5.3.82.

5 .

As J . R. Tay lor pra is es "when eve n the o ldes t one in the book, abo ut the ca c t us so m eon e i s

inevi ta bly going to s i to n , can be mi lked for so much gen uino lau ght er , som ething m ust be going on

spec t acu la r ly r i gh t . " Pla ys and P layers , (Ap r i l 1982) ,p .24 .

6. See In t rodu ct ion to the v olume - I ' l ays : One- publ i shed by M ethue n, p . x í i .

7 . Quoted by Tim Brasse l l when in terviewed by Melwyn Bragg in "The South Bank Show," LWT,

bro adc as t on 26 No vem ber 197 8. C i ted in Tim Brasse l l , T o m S t o p p a r d : A n A s s e s m e n t (London:

MacMil lan , 1985) .

8 . Tom S toppa rd , The Rea l Thing (Londo n, Fa ber & Fa be r, 1986), p. 14. All furth er pag e refere nces

will be cited in my text.

9 . "A m bus hes for the A udience: Tow ards a High Comedy of Ideas ," (Tom Stopp ard in terview ed by

Roger Hudson, Cather ine I tz in and Simón Truss ler ) , T h e a t e r Q u a r t e r l y , IV, 14 (1974). Re prin ted

in N e w T h e a t r e V o i c e s o f th e S e v e n t i e s. e d . Simón T russ ler (London: M ethuen , 1981 ) ,pp . 58-69 .

10.

In a mo st in tere s t in g s tudy of the p lay , Hersh Zei fman h as accura te ly pointed to the s igni f icant

fac t tha t the p lay s tar t s wi th Char lo t te - in H o u s e o f C a r d s - s la m m ing the f ront door and m ak ing

Max 's pyra mid of card s col lapse , thu s reproducing v isual ly the bre aki ng up of the i r re la t ion ship , and

aü ud ing to ano th e r sh a t t e r ed ma r r i ag e a s we l l , and to ano th e r f amous door - s l am, t ha t of Nora ' s a t t he

end of Dol l ' s House -we shou ld a l so r eme mb er he re t ha t a t a g iven m om en t Deb b ie , H en ry ' s

da ug ht er , ca l i s h im "Hen ry Ibsen" - ; ano the r l i te rary reference i s Max 's proof of An nie ' s inf ide li ty : a

handk erchief . See He rsh Zeifman, "Comedy of'Ambush: Tom Stop pard ' s The Rea l Thing , M o dern

D r a m a , XX VI , 2 (Ju ne 19831,139-149.

11 .

Her sh Ze i fman , ib id , p. 145.

12.

The m em ora ble im age used by Henry to expla in to Annie the d if ference be tw een good and bad

w ri t in g i s one of the bes t m om ents in the p lay: "This th ing he re . . . i s for h i t t in g cr icket ba l l s wi th . If

you ge t i t r igh t , the cr icket ba l l wi l l t rav el two hund red yar ds in four seconds . . . W ha t we are t ry ing

to do is to write cricket bats , so that when we throw up an idea and give i t a l i t t le knock, i t

migh t . . .t rave l .. .No w w ha t we've got here is a lum p of wood . . . and if you hi t th e ball with i t , the ball

wi l l t rav el ab ou t ten fee t and you wil l drop the ba t and danc e about sho ut ing 'Ouch ' wi th your ha nd s

s tuck in to your ar m pi ts . " (p .52). For an in te l l ig ent ana lys is of th is scene see Thom as R. W hi ta ker ,

T o m S t o p p a r d (London: MacMillan, 1983), p. 165.

13.

As he to Id Ian Watsu n in 1980:" I 'd love to conqu er the Ol iv ier . I th ink i t ' i s 'poss ib le tod o a m ode rn

play the re and I th ink i t ' i s ' poss ib le to do a mo dern comedy the re ." Ian Watson, C o n v e r s a t i o n w i t h

A y c k b o u r n (London: MacDonald F utu ra Ltd . , 1981) , p . 159.

14. She r idan M or ley , P u n c h , 14.8.8 5, p. 47 .

2


13/13

15.

We had a l read y m et h im/her , l'or exa mp le , in W a y U p s t r e a m -Alis ta ir- , A b s u r d P e r s o n

S i n g u l a r -Eva- , in H e d r o o m F a r c e -Nicky-.

16. M a r t i n H o y l e , P l a y s a n d P l a y e r s , N o. 385 (O ctober 1985) , p . 30.

17.

A l a n A y c k b o u r n ,


(London: Sa m ue l Fren ch, 1985) , p . 47. All f 'ur ther

page references will be cited in my Lext.

18.

R o n a ld H a y m a n , P l a y s , ( S e p t e m b e r 1 9 8 5 ), 1,2,26.

19. R on a ld H a y m a n , ib id . , p. 26.

2 0 . S h e r i d a n M o r l e y , P u n c h , 14.8.85, p . 47 .

2 1 .

J o h n P e t e r ,

T h e S u n d a y T i m e s ,

4 .8 .1985.

2 2 . As Pe le r H a l l has a l re ady warn ed h im: " if you d idn ' t wr i te so much , they 'd rea l i se you a re qu i te

g o o d " Q u o te d b y I a n W a t s o n . o p . cit . , p. 172.

2 3 . M ichael Bil l in gton , A l a n A y c k b o u r n (London: Ma cM il lan ,1983) ,p . 170 .

2 4 .

n 1980 , the au th or exp la ine d the new a im he had se t himself: "I w an t to move fur the r into th e

Ch ekho vian f íe ld, exp lor ing a t t i tu de s to de a th , lone l iness , e tc . - them es no t genera l ly d ea l t wi th in

con iedy ." l an W atson , op c i t . , p . 129 .

2 5 . Quoted by Michae l Church , "Shakespeare o f the South Bank ," T h e S u n d a y T i m e s ,

1.6.1986,

pp.

41-42 .

201

Documents

Plays Within Plays