1. Is there any note of hope for Pegeen Mike at the end of the play?
2. Is the play deliberately provocative in its depiction of a rural Irish community?
3. How does our knowledge of the furore surrounding the dramatisation of this play affect our reading of the play? Does the furore say more about the playgoers or the playwright?
4. Is stereotyping in drama always a negative and reductive practice?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I don't think that there many signs of hope for Pegeen or for that matter the towns people. In the beginning of the play she is upset about having to be in the pub all alone. She complains, "It's a queer father'd be leaving me lonesome these twelve hours of dark, and I piling the turf with the dogs barking, and the calves mooing, and my own teeth rattling with the fear." then when Christy comes there is a sense of hope because everyone including her is so engaged with his ability to tell his story. She falls in love with him, but once they all find out Christy is a liar she betrays him they tie him up and burn him and she refuses to untie him. In the end when Christy leaves with his father, Shawn thinks that its some miracle that has worked out for the two of them so that they can get married. She covers her ears and throws a shawl over head crying, "Oh my grief, I've lost him surely. I've lost the only Playboy of the Western World." There is little or no hope for her because she has lost this man that she loved partly because she betrayed them i think she may blame herself. Furthermore it is evident from the play that her life along with all the towns people will return to the monotonous life that they are used to. The people and Pegeen are attached to the exciting stories of Chirsty, to hero they see him as in the beginning, but it is clear that once he is gone their lives will return just how they were before, Peegan will still be the bar-maid and it seems at this point she is not able to accept the lose of Christy of who she was so attached to.
Is the play deliberately provocative in its depiction of a rural Irish community?
I think the play is deliberately provocative. I first came into contact with this play when it was staged in the Abbey and within the first ten minutes, all I could wonder is how strange the townspeoples' reactions were to the news of this murderer in town. It seemed so unnatural and strange. If that happened in any society nowadays, everyone would lock up their doors and ring the Gardai.
However, in this play the locals are more interested in enjoying his story than in condemning the patricide. The depiction in this play of the Irish community as welcoming is also presenting them as gullible, stupid even.
It's reported that the reason for the riots outside the Abbey when this play was first performed on Jan 26 1907 was specifically because of Synge's depiction of the Irish community. Firstly, their acceptance of this patricide - an unforgivable sin in the eyes of society - and secondly, the perceived slight on Irish virtue as three girls come on stage in their underwear. In both these instances, Synge is portraying a silly Irish rural community with no morals. Synge must have known that it would provoke violent reactions from its conservative audience - I seriously doubt he would not have understood the effect it would have.
Perhaps part of the plays genius is in its daring. As Synge wrote himself through the character of Michael Flaherty, "A daring fellow is the jewel of the world...."
I would be inclined to see Synge's representation of the Irish community as a political statement of the overall Irish public at that time. No wonder there were riots!
Post a Comment