There is a certain equivocation on the level of typically the Absurd
“I've invited an individual . in order to make clear to you, ” states the Old Man inside The Bar stools, “that the particular individual”—that character of this self spawned by often the Enlightenment—“and the man or woman happen to be one and the similar. ” That established, he admits that a instant later, “I am not necessarily myself. Me a further. I am this one inside the other” (145). About the do it yourself, to be sure, there was initially a certain equivocation on the stage of typically the Silly, from Beckett's tramp requiring that the very little messenger through Godot not come tonight and point out that he never ever saw him to the fight about the doorbell in The Balding Soprano. “Experience teaches you, ” tells Mrs. Jackson in some sort of fit associated with anger, “that even when 1 listens to the doorbell band the idea is because there is usually certainly not anyone there” (23), like there ended up virtually no one to be there, zero person or even person, nothing at all resembling a new self applied. Connected with course, we don't own to believe her, no more than we think Derrida as well as Deleuze or maybe the brand-new orthodoxy involving dispersed subjectivity, that this self is no more than liability of identities elided into language. For inside the utter untenability, untenable as utterance, the self is also liable to be taken on belief. “This day when you looked at oneself in the mirror, anyone didn't see yourself, ” says Mrs. Martin to Mister. Martin, who will be undeterred by that. “That's mainly because I wasn't presently there however, ” he tells (36). Exactly how curious that is, how wondering the idea is, we somehow assume we exist.
As intended for the lifestyle of some sort of “work of art” within our demystifying period, in case artwork has not already been completely divested of privilege, this continues to be relegated to be able to the status connected with one other kind of “discourse, ” while (with the canon in jeopardy too) typically the beauty has been turned into an antiaesthetic. One particular might think that Ionesco was there in move forward with his notion of a antiplay, using to it is metonymic hat, certainly not this kind of, that, certainly not that, this kind of, words dropping, sliding, decaying with imprecision, the clear play with the signifiers: epigrams, puns, évidence, suppositions, deductions, pleonasms plus paradoxes, coarse, proverbs, fables, the repertoire of prosody, or around a vertigo of absurdity and nonsensical iterations, a eruption of mere écrit, plosives, fricatives, a cataclysm of glottals or, in the screaming choral climax with the Bald Soprano, with a staccato of cockatoos, “cascades of cacas” (40) careening over the stage. Or perhaps because the Professor demands via the University student in The Lesson, sounds estimated fully with all the drive connected with her voice, such as that diva of performance art, Diamanda Galas, not sparing often the vocal wires, but producing some sort of virtual weapon of those. Or the particular sounds warming inside their sensation—“‘Butterfly, ’ ‘Eureka, ’ ‘Trafalgar, ’ ‘Papaya’”—above surrounding atmosphere, “so that they could soar without danger of dropping on deaf head, that are, ” as in the duro vibration connected with the bourgeois audience (Brecht's culinary theater), “veritable voids, tombs of sonorities, ” to be awakened, whenever, by way of an accelerating merger of words, syllables, sentences, in “purely irrational assemblages of sound, ” an assault of sound, “denuded of all sense” (62–63).
Mania obsessive, cruel like he / she becomes, what typically the Professor is apparently defining, via the crescendo involving intimidation, is not only this apotheosis of an antiplay, yet a kind of alternative theater or one more form of fine art. Without a doubt, he might be conveying, “from that dizzying and elusive perspective in which usually every truth is lost, ” what Artaud tries for you to reimagine, in associated the Orphic tricks to the alchemical theater, its “complete, sonorous, streaming realization, ”6 such as well as certain experimental situations of the 60s, turned on by means of Artaud's cruelty, its faith-based project, which came, just like the return of the repressed, at the exhilarating crest of the theater of the Silly. As a result, in the time of the Surviving Theater and Dionysus throughout 69, or Orghast on Persepolis, we saw performing artists (the word “actor” shunted apart, tainted like “the author” by conventional drama) pitilessly expelling air from lungs, or caressingly above the expressive cords, which, similar to Artaud's incantatory murmurs surrounding this time or, in the Balinese episode, the “flights of elytra, [the] rustling of branches, ”7 or maybe, in the brutalizing euphoria with the Professor's lyric imagining, “like harps or foliage within the wind, will instantly shake, agitate, vibrate, vibrate, vibrate or ovulate, as well as fricate or jostle against 1 another, or sibilate, sibilate, positioning everything in movement, often the uvula, the language, the palate, the teeth, ” and as an individual might still find that today (back inside a acting class) along with routines in the tradition via Grotowski to Suzuki (tempered by the Linklater method) the particular polymorphous perversity regarding it all: “Finally often the words come out connected with the nasal area, the oral cavity, the pores, painting alongside with them all this internal organs we have named, torn up by the moth, in a potent, majestic flight, … labials, dentals, palatals, and other individuals, some caressing some unhealthy and violent” (62–64). And several, too, expressing “all the perverse possibilities of the particular mind, ” as Artaud says with the contagious revelation of the Plague8—the contamination there, if not the particular revelation, in Ionesco's This Chairs, with “a negative smell from … at standstill water” under the windowpane and, with mosquitos being released (113), the unrelieved stench of the pathos associated with “all that's gone straight down the drain” (116).