靜默力量中的掙扎：格斯之死的存在主義解析

Struggling in Silent Power： Gus’s Death from the

Perspective of Existentialism

MING Ming

（Anhui Vocational College of Defense Technology， Liuan， Anhui 237011）

Abstract Existentialism is one of the most representative trends of thought of philosophy in early 1990s， which probes people’s anxiety and alienation in an absurd and menacing world. Harold Pinter， 2005 Nobel Laureate for Literature， originated a style of play which is named “Pinteresque” for the reveal of human beings’ existence in universal ominous threat and absurdity. The paper explores Existentialism in one of Pinter’s famous play The Dumb Waiter and holds that Gus’s tragedy results from both external forces and internal choices.

Key words Existentialism， alienation， absurdity， choice

中圖分類號(hào)：I106 文獻(xiàn)標(biāo)識(shí)碼：A

Harold Pinter （1930-2008）， English playwright and actor， screenwriter， poet and the Nobel Prize laureate for Literature in 2005. He was one of the most influential English playwrights after World War Two. His plays reveal human beings’ anxioius and alienated existence in universal ominous threat and absurdity and were named after him as “Pinteresque” style. Harold Pinter is regarded as “the foremost representative of British drama in the second half of the 20th century”， as the Swedish Academy said， “Pinter restored theater to its basic elements： an enclosed space and unpredictable dialogue， where people are at the mercy of each other and pretense crumbles. With a minimum of plot， drama emerges from the power struggle and hide-and-seek of interlocution.” [1] The Dumb Waiter， a one-act play published in 1957is recognized as one of his representative works.

Existentialism is one of the most representative trends of thought of philosophy in early 1990s， which probes people’s anxiety and alienation in an absurd world. Existentialism emphasis the people’s existence and personal pursuit. It holds that an individual is a lonely painful existence. In The Dumb Waiter， two assassins， Gus and Ben are awaiting instructions for their next mission in a seedy basement below a caf After a long and boring waiting， the instruction turns out to be an elimination of Gus. How come Gus become the target of the assassination？ What has he done wrong？ What makes this tragedy. As the end is absurd and menacing， the whole play is full of anxiety and alienation in absurdity and menace， leaving the audience in a tightened meditation. The sense of anxiety and alienation is imbedded in the play by the playwright from two perspectives— from the supposed safest place， and from the rivalry between peers.

1 Anxiety and alienation in a supposed safest place

Normally， the hideout for professional killers keeps them safe and sound and makes them relaxed and at ease. Whereas， Gus and Ben seem quite upset and nervous in the basement. The basement is somehow haunted. The tank in the lavatory doesn’t work every time when it should， but recovered automatically and amazingly at the end when everybody is in tension and is easily thrilled at the slightest sound. Another weirdie is the threatening envelope coming from under the door. “There is nothing on it. Not a word.” except a dozen matches. The playwright doesn’t tell us who has it done and for what. Things just happen randomly， yet by this the effect is achieved—menace is ubiquitous： People are disturbed by irrational things； troubles knock by themselves； there is no tranquility and peace， even in an enclosed and secluded place.

What’s more， later when a serving-hatch， a dumb waiter， bringing notes of the food ordered from upstairs. The two professional killers， who ought to be sagacious and discreet， take orders from someone or something unknown so blindly. The playwright pushes the audience to the question that what kind of magic power slaves the villains and makes them so obedient and loyal， so devoted and pious？ It must be someone higher up， an unknown authority that frightens and governs them.

2 Anxiety and alienation between peers

John Donne said， “No one is an island.” We need friend and need to be friend of others. When the world and environment is dangerous and frightening， one tends to seek help and support from his friends or at least from partners. In this play， we see no friendship between Gus and Ben though they may have experienced a lot together. They are not compatible to each other. For example， there is a conflict or quarrel between Ben and Gus.

“Go and light it./ Light what？/ The kettle./ You mean the gas./ Who does？/ You do./ [his eyes narrowing] What do you mean， I mean the gas？/ Well， that’s what you mean， don’t you？ The gas./ [powerfully] If I say go and light the kettle I mean go and light the kettle./ How can you light a kettle？/ It’s a figure of speech！ Light the kettle. It’s a figure of speech.……Who’s the senior partner here， me or you？/ You.” [2]

Ben is quite autocratic. He refuses to admit the slightest error as a slip of the tongue. Any query of his deed is considered as a challenge to his authority， and thus intolerable. He can’t give a good explanation to his error or a parody of someone superior， so he borrows the power of his position to threaten his partner to stop the argument where he will soon be defeated if it goes on. He is sly， insidious and good at keeping a favorable situation for himself.

Ben’s menacing power is not only embodied in the direct refutation， but also hidden in silent moment where he turned a deaf ear to Gus’s attempts to communication. For instance， when Gus is feeling low and boring， Ben just “turns/seize/ grab the paper” and be silent. When Gus asks some questions， Ben is angry and rude， calling Gus dirty names like “mutt”， “birk”， “maniac” and tell him to “stop jabbering” and “shut up”. Ben even “hit him viciously on the shoulder” to stop discussion concerning the boss.

Compared with Gus， Ben is more tactful and sophisticated. He never complaint about the job and boss， because he thinks it’s meaningless and dangerous to do so. He is content with the “finish and get paid” state of life. He is machine-like with no spiritual pursue or critical thinking. He doesn’t care whether there is a window on the wall or not to get a view.

The end of play is most menacing. Ben gets the instructions and mercilessly levels his revolver to the door， where he knows Gus will soon appear， because he has called Gus’s name twice to seduce him in. Shockingly， Gus stumbles in “stripped of his jacket， waistcoat， tie， holster and revolver.” It must be the boss who has this done. The boss is testing Ben by playing a game on him. The all-mighty boss knows Gus complaints so the latter becomes a dead meat. Maybe he is not sure whether Ben is absolute loyal as he appears to be. So he asks Ben to get rid of Gus and test Ben’s loyalty by the way. This is killing two birds with one stone. If Ben fails to prove his loyalty， the stripped Gus will give him a warning that the boss sees all and hears all and anyone who disobedient will perish. According to the logic of the insidious and cruel boss， cannibalism should be painful. However， the boss himself must feel menaced when he notices that Ben does it with no regret at all！ Ben must feel menaced when he understands the test on him. Gus， needless to say， must feel menaced when he realizes that authorities should never be challenged and complained about and that betrayal from a peer comes so natural and easy. Gus His tragedy results from both external force and internal choices. The external force is a silent power while the internal reason is his self-deception， anxiety and alienation with the other.

Why is Pinter so interested in showing absurd and menacing anxiety and alienation in this play？ First， “as a playwright with a Jewish background， Pinter is more sensitive than any other to the cruel consequence of the Second World War.” “In the post-WWII age， …God in the Bible was replaced by an arbitrary， silent power which drove human existence into chaos and absurdity. Instead of imposing the pangs of conscience， the new authoritative presence commanded murders and human depravities relentlessly， yet with unfeeling silence.” [3]Second， Pinter is deeply affected by Existentialism. According to existentialists，the universe is meaningless and absurd. Man is solitary in the world， unable to find anything to rely on，either within or outside of himself. Like Gus in The Dumb Waiter， human beings in the WWII age are alienated from truth. They exist only as tools and victims for the authorities to gain the latters’ interest. Resistance incurs only suppression or even execution， while obedience and silence are the ways to survive. There is no justice and reason in that chaotic world where people are fooled and trampled by powerful and menacing authorities.

References

[1] Paisley Dodds. Harold Pinter： Nobel-Winning Playwright Dies At 78 [Z]. 25.12.2008.

[2] Harold Pinter. The Caretaker and the Dumb Waiter [M].Grove Press，1994.

[3] Kazuyoshi OISHI. The Silence of Abraham’s God ： Harold Pinter’s The Dumb Waiter Revisited [J].Journal of The Open University of Japan No.25.

[4] 譚方黎.存在主義視角下的品特式荒誕戲劇《送菜升降機(jī)》[J].遼寧工業(yè)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)（社會(huì)科學(xué)版），2009.11（4）.

[5] 李剛.品特荒誕派戲劇中的現(xiàn)實(shí)主義探微[J].內(nèi)蒙古農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)（社會(huì)科學(xué)版），2006（3）.

[6] 鄭賢軍.簡(jiǎn)論品特的戲劇創(chuàng)作和思想特點(diǎn)[J].泉州師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)，2007.25（3）.