Social Class Distinction in The Great Gatsby

  

Assignment 

Name : Latta J. Baraiya 

Roll no : 11

Paper : The Twentieth Century Literature : 1900 to World War || 

Semester : M.A sem 2

Topic : Social Class Distinction in The Great Gatsby

Submitted to : Smt. S.B. Gardi Department of English MKBU 

Introduction 

“The Great Gatsby”, written by F. Scott Fitzgerald was published in 1975. Francis Scott KeyFitrzgerald, widely regarded as one of the greatest American writers of the           twentieth century, was born on September 24, 1896 in Saint Paul, Minnesota. A renowned American author of novels and short stories, Fitzgerald completed “The Great Gatsby” in 1924 as a rough draft. The novel is set in the Jazz Era of the 1900's in Long Island, New York. The novel recounts the appalling story of Jay Gatsby, an independent mogul, and his quest for Daisy Buchanan, a well off young lady whom he adored in his childhood. Unsuccessful when it was published, the book is currently viewed as an example of American fiction and has frequently been known as the Great American Novel. 

>>Narrative style of novel<<

The Great Gatsby is undoubtedly a repercussion of a miracle in manners that its underlying readers couldn't have envisioned. Very nearly 90 years after the fact, Gatsby is routinely named probably the best novel at any point written in English, and has yearly sold a huge number of duplicates worldwide. This thin novel of less than 50,000 words, an account of mystery dreamsand grandiose revels, of unexpected viciousness and steady jealousy, sparkles with a wizardry that readers have since a long time ago perceived. In any case, in the course of recent years,both The Great Gatsby and it’s author have been seeing a checked resurgence of interest.The book was also a defining moment in Fitzgerald literary profession since it was to improve his past works: he tried new strategies and demanded the curiosity of his endeavor: 

'I need to compose something new, something phenomenal and lovely and basic and 'complicatedly designed' 

(letter to Perkins, specialist at Scribner’s). To be sure, Fitzgerald committed a ton of care and thoughtfulness regarding pruning pointless sections and attempted to present altering strategies (actually like a producer) to re-mastermind his story in film arrangements. In The Great Gatsby, Fitzgerald's primary advancement was to present a first person narrator and protagonist whose awareness channels the story's occasions.

•Social Class Distinction in The Great Gatsby•

After World War I was over, many American writers began to write about the allure of modern life, as well as the great criticism towards materialism, Americans’ hypocrisy, public unconsciousness, and lack of appreciation for art. 1920s writers showed their talent in this widespread literary tradition, in which new sounds and rhythms emerged as well as innovations in style and form. Writers felt the need to respond to the evils and disappointments they saw in their environment and felt in their own world through art and literature. Fitzgerald is one of the writers who reflect the situation of America as well as he reflects love and human relationships. Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby portrays America after the first world war in the 1920s and sums up a critical portrait of class struggles and the disappointment in the American dream. It disintegrates society and its ideals then a gap develops between the poor and the rich as a result. Fitzgerald's work was based on social realism and The Great Gatsby is a novel that illuminates American culture in the 1920s and the values, beliefs and dreams of America at that time. The American dream can be interpreted differently for everyone. For some, the American dream is about freedom of class,race, or religion, and for others, choosing clothing, food, or what they want to be. 

“There is a general understanding by readers of The Great Gatsby that it is a commentary on the American Dream and not simply a documentary on the Jazz Age. It is a criticism of American experience not only of our manners, but of our basic historic attitude toward life. The theme of Gatsby is the withering of the American Dream. The dream is essentially anti-puritanical(to go from rags to riches and therefore from rejection to acceptance)” (Pidgeon 179). 

F. Scott Fitzgerald's 1925 tragic novel The Great Gatsby, represents differences between social classes clearly illustrated and are embodied by characters, each representing a different social class.

•Story of the novel•

The novel takes place on Long Island during the prohibition period when alcohol was illegal. The Great Gatsby is narrated from the perspective of Nick Carraway, a member of the middle class and cousin of Daisy Buchanan. When Nick decides to move to West Egg, LongIsland to learn about his business, he comes across Jay Gatsby. Gatsby fell in love with Daisy Buchanan but began to love her platonically because Gatsby belonged to the lower class and felt that he could not afford Daisy’s financial desires. This love caused him to change his destiny, he wanted to gain socioeconomic status and wealth in order to gain acceptance from the upper class. Gatsby became a millionaire in an illegal way, Gatsby's only desire in life is to be with Daisy Buchanan. But Daisy is married to Tom Buchanan. The life of the mysterious millionaire Gatsby, who in the foreground dares to mingle into the glamorous parties and glamorous realms for the woman he loves and the tragic events that happened to Gatsby are depicted, In the background, the fake lives of a small and wealthy minority of the 1920s, far from moral and sincerity are depicted. 

•Social Class Distinction in the Novel• 

Now I will talk about the social class distinction seen in the novel, the social and material differences between the classes are clearly stated in The Great Gatsby and differences are embodied by characters who each represent a different social class. When the relationship between the upper class and the lower class is demonstrated in the novel, the distinction between classes becomes noticeable. The 1920s were a difficult period due to the inequality of Americans’ income, increasing immigration and unemployment in the United States, and the events that took place. Besides, the recovery process of people started after World War I. Many people came to America in search of freedom, wealth and building a life of prosperity.

The Great Gatsby depicts in detail the cultural and class based changes that took place inAmerica during the 1920s and show us differences between both the imagined American dream and the real American dream by referring to the class distinction. Fitzgerald reveals how people ignore ethical and moral value when it comes to achieving rich status. 

Throughout The novel, the feeling of greed and the need for materialist substances were expressed. Each character degenerates with the desire to achieve the status they desire and give up values they believe in in the hope of being accepted by the classes. Fitzgerald accomplishes the American Dream but problematizes the American Dream by adding the illegal side to Gatsby's success. Gatsby's success depends on his failure to comply with society's rules. 

“In stressing the corruption at the heart of Gatsby’s dream, as well as exposing, in the revelation of Daisy’s character, the tawdriness of what the dream aspires to, Fitzgerald clearly intended fundamental criticism of the ‘American Dream’..”( Millgate 76). 

Although Gatsby pretends to be a gentleman and has a wealthy status, he does not have the same social status as the Buchanan. The difference is not how they behave like a gentleman or lady, but where they come from and their family background. 

“He went to her house, at first with other officers from Camp Taylor, then alone. It amazed him he had never been in such a beautiful house before” (Fitzgerald 139). 

Gatsby was shocked when on his first visit to Daisy’s home, Fitzgerald emphasized the difference in social class between them. Gatsby hides his past to be accepted from upper-class society and lies to be part of this class. “I was brought up in America but educated at Oxford because all my ancestors have been educated there for many years. It is a family tradition.” He looked at me sideways – and I knew why Jordan Baker had believed he was lying. He hurried the phrase “educated at Oxford” or swallowed it or choked on it as though it had bothered him before (Fitzgerald 65). Gatsby's narratives are actually a lie, and by telling these lies he confirms the social distinction between him and the Buchanan family. 

•Social Class Distinction in Today’s Time•

If we talk about class distinction in the 21st century, we see in many places, where people are insulted by their class and caste. If we talk about ancient India the classes were divided into four parts,

1. Brahmin

2. Kshatriya

3. Vaishya

4. Shudra

In this class; Brahmin and Kshtriya are considered upper class and Vaishya and Shudra are considered lower class. They all have their sub caste also. But they can’t transaction with other castes. In their sub caste there are also upper and lower classes. If we think in today’s time there were also class distinction in our country. In some villages there is also some rules for lower class people. Like, Dalit; theycalled as “ASPRUSHYA”, people even can’t touch them. People can’t transaction with them. There were also some places where people couldn't support inter-caste marriages, because of caste. They see caste each and every point. We see casteism in many organizations also. We see in many movies that there are parents who can not marry their daughters and sons in some class who are lower than their caste. Using that type of example the filmmaker wanted to change the mentality of people. But some people still can't understand it. We see some examples of fighting which is caused by caste. People kill somebody for caste and the issues of class. We find many examples of casteism in and around us. If i talk about my caste, in our caste there are two parts. Both are not used to transaction with each others. They do not allow to marry in each other. We see the class deviation as,

• Upper class

• Middle class 

• Lower class

There were big numbers of groups of lower class people in India. The upper class people have conflict with lower class people. They can not have transactions with lower and middle class people. 

Conclusion

In conclusion, Gatsby Fitzgerald shows the differences between the middle class and the upper class in the view of society in 1920s America by demonstrating the distinction between classes through characters. The Great Gatsby was written to express the hopes and dreams of the desired lifestyle of that era, as well as the cultural elements that led to the collapse of community. Throughout the book, concepts such as morality, love,relationships, and materialism are discussed in order to accurately reflect people's thoughts.Although the American dream sounds ambitious, Fitzgerald revealed the truth behind it and revealed that it was only about clashes between wealth and social classes. In this novel hypocrisy was exposed, the noble class was accused of falsehood. The hedonistic perspective of the Jazz Age was criticized. The Great Gatsby, where American myths were destroyed, and materialism was denigrated; It describes a nightmare rather than the American dream. Although the Great Gatsby is a tragic love story, Fitzgerald portrays the class diversity of that period as a satire and critique of the American dream. The conclusion that we readers draw is that one's achievement of his ideals and a respectable place cannot be achieved by material wealth. Honesty and dignity cannot be bought with money. 

Philosophical Themes of Waiting for Godot : Then and Now Comprehension

 

Assignment 

Name : Latta J. Baraiya 

Roll no : 11

Paper : The Twentieth Century Literature : From World War || to the End of the Century 

Semester : M.A sem 2

Topic : Philosophical Themes in Waiting For Godot : Then and Now Comprehension

Submitted to : Smt. S.B. Gardi Department of English MKBU 

Introduction 

In spite of the fact that humans have inhabited the Earth for centuries, they still know relatively little about the world that surrounds them. There are numerous questions left to be answered ranging from the ones focusing on the sense of existence, up to those raising the subject of the inevitability of death, and the reality that needs to be accepted is that some of them are bound to remain a mystery until the end of time. Certainly, people have always been looking for something to believe in, something that would convince them that life is not absurd in its purest form and that everything that happens has some sort of meaning. The 21st century proved to be of great importance as, after experiencing the damaging impact of war, the perception and values of the majority changed, making them question everything that they had faith in. This very alteration was later reflected in the works of many prominent artists, including those who were thought to be the representatives of the Theatre of the Absurd. Here we can discuss Beckett's Waiting for Godot and compare it with how they are perceived today.

•Samuel Buckett•

Buckett is an Irish playwright, a literary translator, a poet and a theatre director, born on April 13, 1906, into a protestant middle class family. His interest in foreign languages as well as his love for the French language led him to obtain his degree in 1927 in Trinity College in Dublin. There were many different factors that had a lasting impact on both Beckett, as well as his works and the experience of going through the Second World War was undoubtedly one of them. Furthermore, most of his life consisted of travelling which was a source of life-changing experiences to him and a peculiar way of distancing himself from the family problems that would continue to affect him throughout his life, eventually leading to his depression.

 

•Waiting For Godot : Plot overview•

Waiting for Godot is frequently described as a play in which 

“nothing happens”

The play itself is about two trumps: Vladimir (Didi) and Estragon (Gogo) who are waiting for the arrival of Mr. Godot. From time to time, they talk with each other, however their discussions are not very detailed and the only thing that they truly know is that they are waiting for Godot who might never arrive. There are also times when they want to leave but the pointless waiting is what makes them stay. Two trumps get to know two new characters: Pozzo and his Slave lucky who stay with them for a while and, as Pozzo engages in a conversation with Didi and Gogo, he tells them that he wants to sell Lucky, he also mistreats him in front of the two tramps and blames him for his state of mind. Lucky is later used for entertainment as he dances for them and, after losing his hat, he performs a monologue which sounds extremely academically although it is entwined with strange sounds. Pozzo gives a command to “think” and after they both depart, a boy messenger comes to Vladimir and Estragon to tell them that Godot will not arrive today, but surely will tomorrow. Vladimir asks some questions about Godot and when the boy leaves, they decide to leave, too, but they stay still. 

It can be stated that everything that happens in the first act is mirrored into the second one. Two trumps are again in the same place, Lucky and Pozzo appear again, with the difference that Pozzo is now blind and Lucky has become dumb. Pozzo does not react to his own name and he also does not recall meeting neither Vladimir nor Estragon and as the two exit, two trumps still keep waiting for Godot. The boy messenger appears again to once again convey a message that Godot will not appear, and just as Pozzo – he does not remember talking to Vladimir the other day. After the boy exits, Didi and Gogo consider committing a suicide but they have no possibility to do it without rope so, once again, they decide to leave, but they stay still.

 

•Waiting For Godot and philosophical themes of freedom, uncertainty and meaninglessness•

In the following section Beckettian view is to be contrasted with how those very themes are  perceived by people nowadays, pointing out some of the similarities as well as differences in the conducted analysis. 

 

Freedom

Although the characters seem to possess infinite freedom, one almost immediately comes to the realisation that, in this scenario, the notion of freedom is nothing but an illusion: the characters are technically free to do as they wish, but they choose to remain in the prison of their own making. Everyone is both stagnant as well as passive, and the specific trait which they share is their striking inability to act. Two trumps, the master and his slave, the messenger boy, all of the characters meet the same fate and there is no significance when it comes to their social status or age, as the master is no different than his slave. In fact, the paradox of this situation lies in the fact that the slave might be the one the closest to freedom than any of the other characters would ever be able to get, since he is the only one aware of his imprisonment. His position can be described as the most favourable one, as he does not need to take responsibility for any of his actions because he is told precisely what to do, unlike the rest. In this case, it can be stated that each of them is equal in terms of their enslavement for how Lucky's enslavement to Pozzo really differs from Vladimir and Gogo’s enslavement to their very concept of Godot? With this theoretical freedom there comes a confinement one cannot be truly free being tied to things, people, ideas or hopes. 

In this way, Vladimir and Estragon are tied to the unknown Mr. Godot around whom the lives of two trumps perpetually revolve, making waiting for him one of the reasons for their very imprisonment in spite of being free. Similarly, they are tied to the place in which they wait, even though they keep coming there without any certainty whatsoever that this is, in fact, the right place to wait for the mysterious man. Imprisoned by their hopes and the image of Godot created in their minds, they are willing to sacrifice their freedom once again for if he doesn’t come, they will come back the next day:

Vladimir: A - What are you insinuating? That we've come to the wrong place? 

Estragon: He should be here. 

Vladimir: He didn't say for sure he'd come. 

Estragon: And if he doesn't come? 

Vladimir: We'll come back tomorrow. 

•Freedom in Today's Context•

According to the Cambridge Dictionary, one of the most popular definitions of freedom is 

“the condition or right of being able or allowed to do, say, think, etc. whatever you want to, without being controlled or limited”. 

Nowadays, the nature of the concept of freedom can still be denoted as rather complex because theoretically humans are free to do as they wish, but since they are social animals their very actions need to be in accordance with what is expected of them. 

Today people are nothing but slaves to a system imposing certain behaviours on them, slaves to the expectations of others and also of visions which they created in their own heads. How can one know whether he is really free? Is it yet another paradox and an illusion in its purest form? It might seem that modern life and real freedom are thoroughly incompatible, since modern times are what makes us imprisoned. 

Uncertainty

An indisputable fact that should be mentioned is that the theme of uncertainty permeates the whole  play; apparently, not only the characters are overwhelmed by the incapacitating feeling that there is nothing that they can be certain of, but it also can be noticed in terms of action, setting, plot and time. The plot itself, apart from being almost non-existent, is yet another thing which contributes to strengthening the feeling of uncertainty, since one realises that a sequence of a cause and effect is an alien notion, indeed. Everything that happens is done either to pass the time or relieve the feeling of  boredom and the words mean nothing, as they do not correspond with actions of the characters. As  previously mentioned, the uncertainty also pertains to the characters themselves as, from the very  beginning, they make it obvious that they have no idea what they should be doing. For those reasons two vagabonds unendingly wait for Godot, hoping that he will provide them with some kind of certainty, making the whole act of waiting a peculiar metaphor of trying to find some meaning in life.  

Not only is it hard for the reader or the audience to find any information about the location, but the characters also have no idea whatsoever where they really are. In this connection, the question that arises is how can they be sure if they are precisely where they are supposed to be, since they do not  possess any knowledge about their current whereabouts? Uncertainty strikes everyone down from the very beginning, concerning not only significant but also trivial things.

Estragon: (despairingly). Ah! (Pause.) You're sure it was here?

Vladimir: What? 

Estragon: That we were to wait. 

Vladimir: He said by the tree. (They look at the tree.) Do you see any others? 

Estragon: What is it? 

Vladimir: I don't know. A willow.

 •Uncertainty in Today's Context• 

Invariably, the uncertainty is as ubiquitous as ever, making many people question their choices, their existence, as well as the things they believe in. Uncertainty pertains to each area of life, since nothing is ever certain. In spite of the technological progress which enabled us to get to know some of the secrets of our planet and our lives, there are still many issues which remain shrouded in mystery. 

It could come across as foolish to state that there is anything that one can be truly certain of, for even the course of events of the following day is a mystery yet to be revealed. Life is filled with uncertainty and there is nothing that can be done but to learn how to live with it, while not letting it affect one’s well-being. Nowadays, the uncertainty in general takes its toll especially on people’s mental health, frequently being one of the main reasons for depression, anxiety and panic attacks. There are countless threats awaiting around each corner, ranging from the threat of a nuclear war, going through climate change, up to pandemic. Just as in Beckett’s world human beings today also cannot be freed from this feeling and the reaction can be denoted as similar when it comes to the matter of experiencing it. 

Nothingness

It can be stated that Waiting for Godot is an ideal example of a play in which the theme of nothingness is of great significance and is fantastically reflected in terms of both, content and form. Undeniably, throughout the whole play, one gets the impression that nothing happens and characters are incapable of taking any action which keeps them in the claws of nothingness. Nevertheless, another paradox which appears is that nothing enables the creation of everything. Since in Beckett’s point of view both form and content should be complementary, in this very play they are both built on the sense of nothingness. While taking a closer look at other components, it becomes clear that creation of each character only strengthens the idea of the ‘nothingness’ being the source of creation. For setting, characters, themes, dialogues and even specific patterns of behaviour or activities are being ruled by nothingness which  prevails in the life of a human being. The life of characters is empty, they do nothing except for waiting and talking about things which are meaningless, just to pass their time. Not only is there no plot, no information about the characters, about the place in which they stay, but there is also a general lack of communication between the characters.

It cannot be called into question that nothingness, meaninglessness and repetitiveness are all strictly connected and they simply complement each other. And so it happens, that meaningless events ruled by nothingness are being repeated by being mirrored from the first, to the second act. Vladimir and Estragon are in the same place, discussing committing suicide, engaging in meaningless conversations, meeting Pozzo and Lucky, receiving an identical message from the messenger boy and, most importantly, repeating their empty words about leaving the place, while they stand still. Two trumps are utterly  paralysed by their inability to move, depriving themselves of a chance to give meaning to their words and, finally, take an action. 

1st act: 

ESTRAGON: Well, shall we go? 

VLADIMIR: Yes, let's go. They do not move.  

2nd act: 

Vladimir: Well? Shall we go? 

Estragon: Yes, let's go. They do not move. 

•Nothingness In Today's Time• 

Taking a closer look at the notions of nothingness, meaninglessness and repetitiveness is there a  place for any of those in the 21st century? In the world of Waiting for Godot, all of them seem to be unavoidable as they constantly keep on affecting the lives of characters on a daily basis making them miserable, which can be contrasted with what the modern world has to offer today. It seems that nowadays to find a meaning becomes a paramount goal to be achieved in life. Thanks to positive psychology becoming omnipresent and easily accessible, everyone is now able to deepen their knowledge about human nature, how to find the meaning to their existence and make their lives meaningful as well. As can be noticed, the modern approach wants one to believe in his strength and countless possibilities waiting for him. A modern human being should have some hope and put an end to habits which might contribute to bringing themselves down. 

Apparently, there is no place for meaninglessness, especially if one wants to lead a truly happy life and create his own meaning. Interestingly, when it comes to the scientific perception of the notion of nothingness, it proves that nothing indeed, can create everything - for even atoms creating the atomic matter are mostly empty spaces. Nothingness obtains a thoroughly new meaning and can be perceived in a brand new way as it  becomes a source of creation which is in a state of constant change, reminding everyone of its impermanence as it comes and goes. For this very reason Lawrence Krauss, an American-Canadian

physicist says that 

“nothing is the most important part of the universe”. 

Since nothingness does not have to be associated with a negative force affecting one’s life, it is worth to cast some light on how it might contribute to improving people’s lives today. While Vladimir and Estragon were tormented by nothingness and doing nothing, nowadays people frequently find themselves in need to find a way out from their daily problems, exhausting routines and there are times when doing nothing makes it possible for them to take a breath and completely reprogramme their thoughts. Doing nothing was proven to decrease stress levels, clear mind, increase productivity and most importantly discover what makes one truly happy. While repetitiveness is still present today and might bring out virtually the same emotions as it did in the case of two trumps, these days many hold onto it as it provides them with some kind of security which they need in the world, where everyone lives in a pace so fast that changes are often traded for stability.

Conclusion

Waiting for Godot, along with many other absurd plays, such as Endgame (1957) or Happy Days (1961), reflected not only the peculiar views of their authors, but also the philosophy which had a lasting impact on the points of view of many. A thing that needs to be accepted is that the mystery of existence as well as the fears connected with it will never truly leave one’s side and will also never cease to affect him. While analysing the philosophy of existentialism it becomes obvious that human’s existence Indeed, might be absurd in its purest form and although the philosophy offers different solutions which could greatly facilitate dealing with this problem even if to some extent, the crushing weight of one’s existence invariably complicates any attempts to overcome it. Since there is no possibility to bring an end to the surrounding absurd as it is irreversibly linked with the human experience, a man has no choice but to simply accept it and although such a vision might come across as a truly disheartening one, it has a potential to become the greatest weapon that one might possess just as it is proved through many approaches nowadays. This very weapon has a potential of bringing one closer to happiness, as with the desired approach, he will not perceive the situation he finds himself in as an utter defeat, but in spite of knowing that meaninglessness is staring right into his eyes, he might truly begin to live through acceptance, making his own attempt to find the meaning and taking the fight. 

Drama of twentieth century

 

Assignment 

Name : Latta J. Baraiya 

Roll no : 11

Paper : History of English Literature - From 1900 to 2000

Semester : M.A sem 2

Topic : Drama of the twentieth  century

Submitted to : Smt. S.B. Gardi Department of English MKBU 

Introduction 

“Over time the desire to unsettle, to shock, even to alienate the audience became one hallmark of modern drama.” (Greenblatt 5)

Twentieth Century British theatre is commonly believed to have started in Dublin, Ireland with the foundation of the Irish Literary Theater by William B. Yeats, Lady Gregory, and J.M. Synge. (Greenblatt 1843) Their purpose was to provide a specifically Celtic and Irish venue that produced works that “stage[d] the deeper emotions of Ireland.” (The Abbey’s) The playwrights of the Irish Literary Theater (which later became the Abbey Theater, as it is known today) were part of the literary revival and included: Sean O’Casey, J.M. Synge, W.B. Yeats, Lady Gregory and Edward Martyn, to name a few. 

The early twentieth century denoted the split between ‘frocks and frills’ drama and serious works, following in the footsteps of many other European countries. 

“In Britain the impact of these continental innovations was delayed by a conservative theatre establishment until the late 1950s and 1960s when they converged with the counter-cultural revolution to transform the nature of English language theatre.” 

The West End, England’s Broadway, tended to produce the musical comedies and well-made plays, while smaller theatres and Irish venues took a new direction. The new direction was political, satirical, and rebellious. Common themes in the new early 20th century drama were political, reflecting the unease or rebellion of the workers against the state, philosophical, delving into the who and why of human life and existence, and revolutionary, exploring the themes of colonization and loss of territory. They explored common societal business practices (conditions of factories), new political ideologies (socialism), or the rise of a repressed sector of the population (women). Industrialization also had an impact on Twentieth century drama, resulting in plays lamenting the alienation of humans in an increasingly mechanical world. 

Trends

∆Realism and Myth :-

Sigmund Freud inspired an interest in myth and dreams as playwrights became familiar with his studies of psychoanalysis. Along with the help of Carl Jung, the two psychiatrists influenced playwrights to incorporate myths into their plays. This integration allowed for new opportunities for playwrights to increase the boundaries of realism within their writing. As playwrights started to use myths in their writing, a “poetic form of realism” was created. This form of realism deals with truths that are widespread amongst all humans, bolstered by Carl Jung’s idea of the collective unconscious.

∆Poetic Realism :-

Much of the poetic realism that was written during the beginning of the twentieth century focused on the portrayals of Irish peasant life. John Millington Synge, W.B. Yeats, and Lady Gregory were but a few writers to use poetic realism. Their portrayal of peasant life was often unappealing and many audiences reacted cruelly. Many plays that are poetically realistic often have unpleasant themes running through them, such as lust between a son and his step-mother or the murder of a baby to “prove” love. These plays used myths as a surrogate for real life in order to allow the audience to live the unpleasant plot without completely connecting to it.

∆Women :-

The female characters progressed from the downtrodden, useless woman to an empowered, emancipated woman. They were used to to pose subversive questions about the social order. Many female characters portray the author’s masculine attitudes about women and their place in society. As time passed, though, females began to gain empowerment. G.B. Shaw became one of the first English playwrights to follow Ibsen’s influence and create roles of real women. Mrs. Warren, Major Barbara, and Pygmalion all have strong female leads. Women first started voting in 1918. Later in the century, females (and males) were both subjected to the alienation of society and routinely were not given names to suggest to the audience the character’s worth within the play.

∆Political Theatre and War :-

Political theatre uses the theatre to represent 

“how a social or political order uses its power to ‘represent’ others coercively.” 

It uses live performances and often shows the power of politics through “demeaning and limiting” prejudices. Political theatre often represents many different types of groups that are often stereotyped “women, gay men, lesbians, ethnic and racial groups, [and] the poor.” Political theatre is used to express one’s political ideas. Agitprop, a popular form of political theatre, even had its roots in the 1930s women’s rights movement. Propaganda played a big role in political theater, whether it be in support of a war or in opposition of political schemes, theater played a big role in influencing the public. 

The wars also affected the early theatre of the twentieth century. The consternation before WWI produced the Dada movement, the predecessor to Surrealism and Expressionism. 

Types of Modern Drama

∆Realism :-

Realism, in theater, was meant to be a direct observation of human behavior. It began as a way to make theater more useful to society, a way to hold a mirror up to society. Because of this thrust towards the “real” playwrights started using more contemporary settings, backgrounds and characters. Where plays in the past had, for the most part, used mythological or stereotypical characters, now they involved the lower class, the poor, the rich; they involved all genders, classes and races. One of the main contributors to this style was Henrik Ibsen.

∆Social Realism :-

Social Realism began showing up in plays during the 1930s. This realism had a political conscience behind it because the world was in a depression. These plays painted a harsh picture of rural poverty. The drama began to aim at showing governments the penalties of unrestrained capitalism and the depressions that lax economies created. One of the main contributors to this style was G.B. Shaw.

∆Avant Garde Theatre :-

“Dramatic truth couldn’t be found in the tangibleness of realistic drama, but in symbols, images, legends, myths, fantasies, and dreams” (Klaus)

∆Absurdist Drama :-

Absurdist Drama was existentialist theatre which put a direct perception of a mode of being above all abstract considerations. It was also essentially a poetic, lyrical theatre for the expression of intuitions of being through movement, situations and concrete imagery. Language was generally downplayed. (Barnet) Symbolism, Dadaism and their offspring, Surrealism, Theatre of Cruelty, and Expressionism all fall into this category.

∆Dadaism :-

Dadaism, or Dada, was a reaction against WWI. Like many of the movements, Dada included writing, painting and poetry as well as theatre. Many Dadaists wrote manifestos detailing their beliefs, which normally outlined their disgust in colonialism and nationalism and tried to be the opposite of the the current aesthetics and values. The more Dada offended, the better. It was considered to be (by Dadaists), the ‘anti-art’. It rejected the values of society and turned everything on its head, preferring to disgust and offend.

∆Symbolism/Aestheticism :-

In England, Symbolism was also known as Aestheticism. A very stylized format of drama, wherein dreams and fantasies were common plot devices, Aestheticism was used by numerous playwrights from Yeats to Pinter. The staging was highly stylized, usually using minimal set pieces and vague blocking. While the playwrights who could be considered Aestheticists lived and worked at the beginning of the century, it influenced all of the following styles.

∆Surrealism :-

Like Aestheticism, Surrealism has its base in the mystical. It developed the physicality of theatre and downplayed words, hoping to influence its audiences through action. Other common characteristics of surreal plays are unexpected comparisons and surprise. The most famous British playwright in the 20s surrealist style is Samuel Beckett. Theatre of Cruelty is a subset of surrealism and was motivated by an idea of Antonin Artaud. It argues the idea that theatre is a “representational medium” and tried to bring current ideas and experiences to the audience through participation and “ritualistic theater experiments.” Artaud thought that theatre should present and represent equally. This type of theatre relies deeply on metaphors and rarely included a description of how it could be performed.

∆Expressionism :-

The term ‘Expressionism’ was first coined in Germany in 1911. Expressionism also had its hey-day during the 20s although it had two distinct branches. The branches had characters speaking in short, direct sentences or in long, lyrical expanses. This type of theatre usually did not name the characters and spent much time lamenting the present and warning against the future. Spiritual awakenings and episodic structures were also fairly common.

∆Epic Theatre :-

Epic theater was created by Bertold Brecht who rejected realistic theatre. He found that such plays were too picture-perfect. Epic Theatre is based on Greek Epic poetry. There are dramatic illusions such as

 

“stark, harsh lighting, blank stages, placards announcing changes of scenes, bands playing music onstage, and long, discomfiting pauses” 

(Jacobus). 

Brecht believed that drama should be made within its audiences and he thought that Epic Theatre drama would reinforce the realities that people were facing rather than challenge them. Epic Theatre helped to preserve the social issues that they portrayed. 

Famous Plays 

Probably the most famous plays of the theater of the absurd are Eugene Ionesco's Bald Soprano (1950) and Samuel Beckett's Waiting for Godot (1953). The sources of the theater of the absurd are diverse; they can be found in the tenets of surrealism, Dadaism, and existentialism, in the traditions of the music hall, vaudeville, and burlesque; and in the films of Charlie Chaplin and Buster Keaton. Playwrights whose works can be roughly classed as belonging to the theater of the absurd are Jean Genet (French), Max Frisch and Friedrich Durrenmatt (Swiss), Fernando Arrabal (Spanish), and the early plays of Edward Albee (American). The pessimism and despair of the 20th cent. also found expression in the existentialist dramas of Jean-Paul Sartre, in the realistic and symbolic dramas of Arthur Miller, Tennessee Williams, and Jean Anouilh, and in the surrealist plays of Jean Cocteau.

Somewhat similar to the theater of the absurd is the so-called theater of cruelty, derived from the ideas of Antonin Artaud, who, writing in the 1930s, foresaw a drama that would assault its audience with movement and sound, producing a visceral rather than an intellectual reaction. After the violence of World War II and the subsequent threat of the atomic bomb, his approach seemed particularly appropriate to many playwrights. Elements of the theater of cruelty can be found in the brilliantly abusive language of John Osborne's Look Back in Anger (1956) and Edward Albee's Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (1962), in the ritualistic aspects of some of Genet's plays, in the masked utterances and enigmatic silences of Harold Pinter's comedies of menace, and in the orgiastic abandon of Julian Beck's Paradise Now! (1968), it was fully expressed in Peter Brook's production of Peter Weiss's Marat/Sade (1964).

During the last third of the 20th cent. a few continental European dramatists, such as Dario Fo in Italy and Heiner Muller in Germany, stand out in the theater world. However, for the most part, the countries of the continent saw an emphasis on creative trends in directing rather than a flowering of new plays. In the United States and England, however, many dramatists old and new continued to flourish, with numerous plays of the later decades of the 20th cent. (and the early 21st cent.) echoing the trends of the years preceding them.

Realism in a number of guises psychological, social, and political continued to be a force in such British works as David Storey's Home (1971), Sir Alan Ayckbourn's Norman Conquests trilogy (1974), and David Hare's Amy's View (1998), in such Irish dramas as Brian Friel's Dancing at Lughnasa (1990) and Martin McDonagh's 1990s Leenane trilogy, and in such American plays as Jason Miller's That Championship Season (1972), Lanford Wilson's Talley's Folly (1979), and John Guare's Six Degrees of Separation (1990). In keeping with the tenor of the times, many of these and other works of the period were marked by elements of wit, irony, and satire. 

Conclusion 

Throughout the century realism, naturalism, and symbolism (and various combinations of these) continued to inform important plays. Among the many 20th-century playwrights who have written what can be broadly termed naturalist dramas are Gerhart Hauptmann (German), John Galsworthy (English), John Millington Synge and Sean O'Casey (Irish), and Eugene O'Neill, Clifford Odets, and Lillian Hellman (American).