Drama

STEFANIE LETHBRIDGE AND JARMILA MILDORF:
Basics of English Studies:

An introductory course for students of
literary studies in English.
Developed at the English departments of the
Universities of Tübingen, Stuttgart and Freiburg
3. Drama
Table of Contents:
3.1. Text and Theatre ...................................................................................90

3.2. Information Flow ..............................................................................91
3.2.1 Amount and Detail of Information ....................................................91
3.2.2. Transmission of Information ..............................................................93
3.2.3. Perspective .............................................................................................94
3.2.3.1. Dramatic Irony ...................................................................................95
SO WHAT? .........................................................................................................96
3.3. Structure ..................................................................................................98
3.3.1. Story and Plot ........................................................................................98
3.3.2. Three Unities .........................................................................................98
3.3.3. Freytag’s Pyramid ..................................................................................99
3.3.4. Open and Closed Drama .................................................................. 101
3.4. Space ..................................................................................................... 102
3.4.1. Word Scenery ..................................................................................... 103
3.4.2. Setting and Characterisation ............................................................. 104
3.4.3. Symbolic Space ................................................................................... 104
SO WHAT? ...................................................................................................... 104
3.5. Time ...................................................................................................... 106
3.5.1. Succession and Simultaneity ............................................................. 107
3.5.2. Presentation of Temporal Frames ................................................... 107
3.5.3. Story-Time and Discourse-Time ..................................................... 108
3.5.3.1. Duration ........................................................................................... 108
3.5.3.2. Order ................................................................................................ 111
3.5.3.3. Frequency ........................................................................................ 112
SO WHAT? ...................................................................................................... 113
3.6. Characters ............................................................................................ 113
3.6.1. Major and Minor Characters ............................................................ 113
3.6.2. Character Complexity ........................................................................ 114
3.6.3. Character and Genre Conventions .................................................. 114
3.6.4. Contrasts and Correspondences ...................................................... 115
3.6.5. Character Constellations ................................................................... 116
3.6.6. Character Configurations .................................................................. 116
3.6.7. Techniques of Characterisation ....................................................... 117
SO WHAT? ...................................................................................................... 120
Basics of English Studies, Version 03/04, Drama 88

3.7. Types of Utterance in Drama ......................................................... 122
3.7.1. Monologue, Dialogue, Soliloquy ...................................................... 122
3.7.2. Asides ................................................................................................... 123
SO WHAT? ...................................................................................................... 123
3.7.3. Turn Allocation, Stichomythia, Repartee ...................................... 125
SO WHAT? ...................................................................................................... 126
3.7.4. The Significance of Wordplay in Drama ........................................ 129
3.8. Types of Stage .................................................................................... 130
3.8.1. Greek Classicism ................................................................................ 131
3.8.2. The Middle Ages ................................................................................ 131
3.8.3. Renaissance England ......................................................................... 132
3.8.4. Restoration Period ............................................................................. 132
3.8.5. Modern Times .................................................................................... 133
3.9. Dramatic Sub-Genres ....................................................................... 133
3.9.1. Types of Comedy ............................................................................... 133
3.9.2. Types of Tragedy ............................................................................... 134
SO WHAT? ...................................................................................................... 135
Bibliography: Drama ................................................................................ 138

3. Drama
3.1. Text and Theatre

Key terms:
When one deals with dramatic texts one has to bear in mind that drama • primary text
differs considerably from poetry or narrative in that it is usually written for • secondary text
• dramatis personae
the purpose of being performed on stage. Although plays exist which were
• multimedia elements
mainly written for a reading audience, dramatic texts are generally meant to
be transformed into another mode of presentation or medium: the theatre.
For this reason, dramatic texts even look different compared to
poetic or narrative texts. One distinguishes between the primary text, i.e.,
the main body of the play spoken by the characters, and secondary texts,
i.e., all the texts ‘surrounding’ or accompanying the main text: title,
dramatis personae, scene descriptions, stage directions for acting and
speaking, etc. Depending on whether one reads a play or watches it on
stage, one has different kinds of access to dramatic texts. As a reader, one
receives first-hand written information (if it is mentioned in the secondary
text) on what the characters look like, how they act and react in certain
situations, how they speak, what sort of setting forms the background to a
scene, etc. However, one also has to make a cognitive effort to imagine all
these features and interpret them for oneself. Stage performances, on the
other hand, are more or less ready-made instantiations of all these details. In
other words: at the theatre one is presented with a version of the play which
has already been interpreted by the director, actors, costume designers,
make-up artists and all the other members of theatre staff, who bring the
play to life. The difference, then, lies in divergent forms of perception.
While we can actually see and hear actors play certain characters on stage,
we first decipher a text about them when reading a play script and then at
best ‘see’ them in our mind’s eye and ‘hear’ their imaginary voices. Put
another way, stage performances offer a multi-sensory access to plays and
they can make use of multimedia elements such as music, sound effects,
lighting, stage props, etc., while reading is limited to the visual perception
and thus draws upon one primary medium: the play as text. This needs to
be kept in mind in discussions of dramatic texts, and the following
introduction to the analysis of drama is largely based on the idea that plays
are first and foremost written for the stage.
The main features one can look at when analysing drama are the following:
• information flow
• overall structure
• space
• time
• characters
• types of utterance in drama
• types of stage
• dramatic sub-genres

3.2. Information Flow
Key terms:
Since in drama there is usually no narrator who tells us what is going on in • communication
model drama
the story-world (except for narrator figures in the epic theatre and other • epic theatre
mediators, the audience has to gain information directly from what can be • alienation effect
seen and heard on stage. As far as the communication model for literary (estrangement effect)
texts is concerned (see Basic Concepts ch. 1.3.), it can be adapted for • chorus
communication in drama as follows: • perspective
• dramatic irony
PLAY
STORY-WORLD
author Character Character reader of Real

Real author of sec. secondary spectator
text text
Code/Message
In comparison with narrative texts, the plane of narrator/narratee is left

out, except for plays which deliberately employ narrative elements.
Information can be conveyed both linguistically in the characters’ speech,
for example, or non-linguistically as in stage props, costumes, the stage set,
etc. Questions that arise in this context are: How much information is
given, how is it conveyed and whose perspective is adopted?
3.2.1. Amount and Detail of Information
The question concerning the amount or detail of information given in a play

is particularly important at the beginning of plays where the audience
expects to learn something about the problem or conflict of the story, the
main characters and also the time and place of the scene. In other words,
the audience is informed about the ‘who’, ‘what’, ‘where’, ‘when’ and ‘why’
of the story at the beginning of plays. This is called the exposition.
Consider the first act of Shakespeare’s A Midsummer Night’s Dream. The
audience learns about where the play takes place (Athens and a nearby
forest) and it is introduced to all the characters in the play. Moreover, we
realise what the main conflicts are that will propel the plot (love triangle and
unrequited love for Helena, Hermia, Lysander and Demetrius). Different
variations of love immediately become obvious as the prominent topic in
this play. Thus, we are confronted with Theseus’ and Hippolyta’s mature

relationship, young love in Lysander and Hermia, and love sickness and
jealousy in Helena. The audience learns about Theseus’ and Hippolyta’s
approaching wedding and the workmen’s plan to rehearse a play for this
occasion, about Lysander’s and Hermia’s plan to elope and Helena’s
attempt to thwart their plan. Generally speaking, the audience is well-
prepared for what is to follow after watching the first act of A Midsummer
Night’s Dream. The audience is given answers to most of the wh-questions
and all that remains for viewers to wonder about is how the plot is going to
develop and what the results will be.
Sometimes, the information we get is not as detailed as that and leaves
us with a lot of questions. Consider the following excerpt from the first
scene of Edward Bond’s Saved:
LEN. This ain’ the bedroom.

PAM. Bed ain’ made.
LEN. Oo’s bothered?
PAM. It’s awful. ‘Ere’s nice.
LEN. Suit yourself. Yer don’t mind if I take me shoes off? (He kicks
them off.) No one ‘ome?
PAM. No.
LEN. Live on yer tod?
PAM. No.
LEN. O.
Pause. He sits back on the couch.
Yer all right? Come over ‘ere.
PAM. In a minit.
LEN. Wass yer name?
PAM. Yer ain’ arf nosey.
(Bond, Saved, 1)
The characters’ conversation strikes one as being rather brief and

uninformative. We are confronted with two characters who hardly seem to
know each other but apparently have agreed on a one-night stand. We can
conjecture that the scene takes place at Pam’s house and later in that scene
we are given a hint that she must be living with her parents but apart from
that, there is not much in the way of information. We do not really get to
know the characters, e.g., what they do, what they think, and even their
names are only abbreviations, which makes them more anonymous.
Although we can draw inferences about Len’s and Pam’s social background
from their speech style and vocabulary, their conversation as such is marked
by a lack of real communication. After watching the first scene, the
audience is left with a feeling of confusion: Who are these people? What do
they want? What is the story going to be about? One is left with the
impression that this is a very anonymous, unloving environment and that
the characters’ impoverished communication skills somehow reflect a
general emotional, educational and social poverty. This is reinforced by the
barrenness of the living-room presented in the stage directions as follows:
The living-room. The front and the two side walls make a triangle that slopes to a
door back centre.
Furniture: table down right, sofa left, TV set left front, armchair up right
centre, two chairs close to the table. Empty.

If one bears in mind that the empty stage is the first thing the audience sees,
it becomes clear that information is conveyed visually first before the
characters appear and start talking. This is obviously done on purpose to set
the spectators’ minds going.
3.2.2. Transmission of Information
Although in drama information is usually conveyed directly to the audience,

there are instances where a mediator comparable to the narrator (see ch.
2.5.) of a narrative text appears on stage. A theatrical movement where this
technique was newly adopted and widely used was the so-called epic
theatre, which goes back to the German playwright Bertolt Brecht and
developed as a reaction against the realistic theatrical tradition (Kesting
1989; Russo 1998). At the centre of Brecht’s poetics is the idea of alienating
the audience from the action presented on stage in order to impede people’s
emotional involvement in and identification with the characters and
conflicts of the story (alienation effect or estrangement effect). Instead,
spectators are expected to gain a critical distance and thus to be able to
judge rationally what is presented to them. Some of the ‘narrative’ elements
in this type of theatre are songs, banners and, most importantly, a narrator
who comments on the action. One must not forget that some of these
elements existed before. Thus, ancient Greek drama traditionally made use
of a chorus, i.e., a group of people situated on stage who throughout the
play commented on events and the characters’ actions. The chorus was also
used in later periods, notably the Renaissance period. A famous example
is the beginning of Shakespeare’s Henry V, where the chorus bids the
spectators to use their imagination to help create the play. Shakespeare’s
Romeo and Juliet also starts with a prologue spoken by a chorus (in the
Elizabethan theatre the chorus could be represented by only one actor):
Two households, both alike in dignity,

In fair Verona, where we lay our scene,
From ancient grudge break to new mutiny,
Where civil blood makes civil hands unclean.
From forth the fatal loins of these two foes
A pair of star-cross’d lovers take their life;
Whose misadventur’d piteous overthrows
Doth with their death bury their parents’ strife.
The fearful passage of their death-mark’d love,
And the continuance of their parents’ rage,
Which, but their children’s end, nought could remove,
Is now the two hours’ traffic of our stage;
The which if you with patient ears attend,
What here shall miss, our toil shall strive to mend.
(Romeo and Juliet, Prologue)
As far as information is concerned, the main function of this chorus is to

introduce the audience to the subsequent play. We learn something about
the setting, about the characters involved (although we are not given any
names yet) and about the tragic conflict. In actual fact we are already told
what the outcome of the story will be, so the focus right from the start is

not on the question ‘What is going to happen?’ but on ‘How is it going to
happen?’. However, the chorus does more than simply provide information.
The fact that the prologue is actually in sonnet form underlines the main
topic of this tragedy, love, and a tragic atmosphere is created by semantic
fields related to death, fate and fighting (“fatal loins”, “foes”, “star-
cross’d”, “death-mark’d”, “rage”, etc., see isotopy ch. 1.5.). At the same
time, the audience is invited to feel sympathetic towards the protagonists
(“piteous”, “fearful”), and they are reminded of the fact that what is
following is only a play (“two hours’ traffic of our stage”, “our toil”). One
can say that information is conveyed here in a rather condensed form and
the way this is done already anticipates features of the epic theatre, notably
the explicit emphasis on acting and performance.
3.2.3. Perspective
Introductory information and narrative-like commentary need not

necessarily be provided by a figure outside the actual play. In another of
Shakespeare’s plays, Richard III, for example, the main protagonist
frequently comments on the events and reveals his plans in speeches
spoken away from other characters (so-called asides, see ch. 3.7.2.). At the
very beginning of this history play, Richard, the Duke of Gloucester,
informs the audience about the current political situation and what he has
done to change it:
Now is the winter of our discontent

Made glorious summer by this son of York;
And all the clouds that lour’d upon our House
In the deep bosom of the ocean buried.
Now are our brows bound with victorious wreaths,
Our bruised arms hung up for monuments,
Our stern alarums change’d to merry meetings,
Our dreadful marches to delightful measures.
Grim-visag’d War hath smooth’d his wrinkled front:
And now, instead of mounting barbed steeds
To fright the souls of fearful adversaries,
He capers nimbly in a lady’s chamber,
To the lascivious pleasing of a lute.
[…]
Plots have I laid, inductions dangerous,
By drunken prophecies, libels, and dreams,
To set my brother Clarence and the King
In deadly hate, the one against the other:
And if King Edward be as true and just
As I am subtle, false, and treacherous,
This day should Clarence closely be mew’d up
About a prophecy, which says that ‘G’
Of Edward’s heirs the murderer shall be-
Dive, thoughts, down to my soul: here Clarence comes.
(Richard III, I, 1: 1-41)

Richard tells the audience about his dissatisfaction with the current
sovereign and he takes the audience into confidence as far as his plot
against his brother Clarence is concerned. Throughout the play, Richard
always comments on what happened or what his next plan is, which also
means that most of the play is presented from Richard’s perspective. This
is another important aspect to bear in mind when discussing the mediation
of information: Whose perspective is adopted? Are there characters in the
play whose views are expressed more clearly and more frequently than
others’? And finally, what function does this have? These questions are
reminiscent of the discussion of focalisation in narrative texts (ch. 2.5.2.).
In Richard III, for example, the undeniably vicious character of Richard is
slightly modified by the fact that we get to know this figure so well. We
learn that Richard is also tormented by his ugliness and we may thus be
inclined to take that as an excuse for his viciousness. At the same time, we
indirectly also become ‘partners-in-crime’, since we always know what will
happen next, while other characters are left in the dark. Thus, whether we
want it or not, we are taking sides with Richard to some extent, and the fact
that he is such a brilliant orator might even give us a gloating pleasure in his
cunning deeds and plots.
3.2.3.1. Dramatic Irony
The way information is conveyed to the audience and also how much
information is given can have a number of effects on the viewers and they
are thus important questions to ask in drama analysis. The discrepancy
between the audience’s and characters’ knowledge of certain information
can, for example, lead to dramatic irony. Thus, duplicities or puns can be
understood by the audience because they possess the necessary background
knowledge of events while the characters are ignorant and therefore lack
sufficient insight. Narrators in narrative texts often use irony in their
comments on characters, for example, and they can do that because they,
like the audience of a play, are outside the story-world and thus possess
knowledge which characters may not have.
In the play The Revenger’s Tragedy by Cyril Tourneur, one of Shakespeare’s
contemporaries, irony is created because the audience knows about
Vindice’s plans of revenge against the Duke, who poisoned Vindice’s
fiancée after she resisted his lecherous advances. Vindice dresses up the
skull of his dead lady and puts poison on it in order to kill the Duke, who in
turn expects to meet a young maiden for a secret rendezvous. Vindice’s
introduction of the putative young lady is highly ironic for the viewers since
they know what is hidden beneath the disguise:
A country lady, a little bashful at first,

As most of them are; but after the first kiss
My lord, the worst is past with them; your Grace
Knows now what you have to do;
Sh’as somewhat a grave look with her, but –
(The Revenger’s Tragedy, III, 3: 133-137)
The pun on ‘grave’ (referring both to the excavation to receive a corpse and
to the quality of being or looking serious) is very funny indeed, especially

since the Duke himself does not have the least suspicion that anything is
wrong here. The irony is pushed even further by the appearance of the
Duke’s wife and Spurio, his bastard son, who are secret lovers and who
made an appointment at the same place. They appear on stage while the
Duke is still in the process of dying and thus fully aware of their presence,
and they discuss possible ways of killing the Duke, albeit in a playful
manner, not knowing that the duke is dying at that very moment. The irony
becomes particularly poignant for the audience when Spurio and the
Duchess talk about poisoning and stabbing the Duke, which is exactly what
happened to the Duke just a minute before they appeared on stage. Thus,
the audience’s surplus of knowledge makes the scene incredibly ironic and
potentially funny.
In contrast to this, lack of vital information can lead to confusion
but it also contributes to a sense of suspense. As long as the audience is not
fully informed about characters, their motives, previous actions, etc., the
questions ‘How did all this happen?’, ‘What is going on here?’ and ‘What’s
going to happen next or in the end?’ become crucial.
SO WHAT?
Many plays employ the strategy of leaving the audience in the dark and it is
easy to understand why they do it: they try to keep people interested in the
play as long as possible. Detective plays typically use this device but other
examples of analytic drama can also be found. Peter Shaffer’s play Equus,
for instance, only reveals in a piecemeal fashion all the events that led up to
Alan’s blinding of the horses. The play tells the story of the teenager Alan,
who blinds six horses and subsequently undergoes psychotherapy. While
the viewers know right from the start ‘what’ happened, they do not have a
clue as to ‘how’ or ‘why’ it happened. This information is, like in a puzzle,
gradually pieced together through conversations between Alan and the
psychiatrist Dysart, Alan’s memories and his acting out of these memories
during his therapy. Thus, the audience is invited to speculate on possible
motives and reasons, and the play becomes highly psychological not only on
the level of the story-world but also on the level of the audience’s reception
of the play.
Lack of necessary information can also lead to surprises for the
audience, and this is often used in comedies to resolve confusions and
mixed-up identities. In Oscar Wilde’s The Importance of Being Earnest, for
example, the final scene reveals John (Jack) Worthing’s true identity. The
revelation, however, is further delayed by the fact that Jack mistakenly
assumes that Miss Prism must be his mother:
JACK [Rushing over to Miss Prism.] Is this the handbag, Miss Prism?
Examine it carefully before you speak. The happiness of more than one
life depends on your answer.
MISS PRISM [Calmly] It seems to be mine. […] I am delighted to have
it so unexpectedly restored to me. It has been a great inconvenience
being without it all these years.
JACK [In a pathetic voice.] Miss Prism, more is restored to you than this
handbag. I was the baby you placed in it.
MISS PRISM [Amazed] You?

JACK[Embracing her] Yes…mother!
MISS PRISM [Recoiling in indignant astonishment] Mr Worthing! I am
unmarried!
JACK Unmarried! I do not deny that is a serious blow. But after all,
who has the right to cast a stone against who has suffered? […] Mother,
I forgive you. [Tries to embrace her again.]
MISS PRISM [Still more indignant] Mr Worthing, there is some error.
[Pointing to Lady Bracknell.] There is the lady who can tell you who you
really are.
[…]
(The Importance of Being Earnest, III)
The audience’s knowledge of all the circumstances equals that of Jack. From
earlier conversations in the play the spectators know that he was raised as
an orphan by a rich gentleman after he had been found in a handbag in a
cloakroom of Victoria Station. Thus, as soon as Miss Prism relates how she
lost her handbag and, with it, a baby, the audience infers just like Jack that
this baby must have been him. Since no further hint is given that Miss
Prism is not Jack’s mother, Jack’s somewhat hasty conclusion that she must
be seems plausible. What makes this scene particularly funny is the way the
characters act and react on their ignorance or knowledge. Jack, wrongly
assuming he finally found his mother, becomes very affectionate and tries
to embrace Miss Prism. She, by contrast, reacts in a manner surprising to
the audience and to Jack: She is indignant and recoils from him. Her
explanation that she is unmarried increases suspense as this still does not
reveal the final truth about Jack’s origin but brings in another aspect highly
topical at the time: morality, which Jack comments on accordingly. Finally,
the puzzle is solved when Miss Prism points towards Lady Bracknell, who
then tells Jack that he is in fact the son of her sister and thus his friend’s,
Algernon’s, elder brother. All this comes as a surprise for both Jack and the
audience, and it is really funny since Jack had all along pretended to have an
imaginary brother.
The comedy is driven even further when Jack finds out that his real
name is Ernest. Coincidentally, this is also the name he had used as an alias
when he spent time in London, and his fiancée had declared categorically
that she could only marry someone with the name of Ernest. Thus,
everything falls into place for Jack and his problem of not being able to
marry Gwendolen is resolved. The fact that the truth about Jack’s real
identity is hidden both from Jack and the audience for so long creates
confusions right until the end and therefore contributes to numerous
misconceptions and comical encounters. Information flow thus becomes an
important device for propelling and complicating the plot, and it creates
suspense and surprise in the viewer.

3.2. Structure
3.2.1. Story and Plot Key terms:

• story
As with the study of narrative texts, one can distinguish between story and • plot
plot in drama. Story addresses an assumed chronological sequence of • plot-line
• linear / non-linear
events, while plot refers to the way events are causally and logically plots
connected (see Story and Plot in Prose ch. 2.2.). Furthermore, plots can • analytic drama
have various plot-lines, i.e., different elaborations of parts of the story
which are combined to form the entire plot.
Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, for example, is about the feud
between two families, the love between the two families’ children and their
tragic death. This is roughly the story of the play, which is related in the
prologue. The plot, by contrast, encompasses the causally linked sequence
of scenes presented on stage to tell the story: Thus we are presented with a
fighting scene between members of the two families whereby the underlying
conflict is shown. This is followed by Romeo’s expression of his love-
sickness and Benvolio’s idea to distract his friend by taking him to a party in
the house of the Capulets. Subsequently, the audience is introduced to the
Capulets, more specifically to Juliet and her mother, who wants to marry
her daughter off to some nobleman, etc. All these scenes, although they
seem to be unrelated at first glance, can be identified in retrospect as the
foundation for the emerging conflict. The story is developed in a minutely
choreographed plot, where the individual scenes combine and are logically
built up towards the crisis. Thus, plot refers to the actual logical
arrangement of events and actions used to explain ‘why’ something
happened, while ‘story’ simply designates the gist of ‘what’ happened in a
chronological order.
One might consider the distinction between story and plot futile at
times because for most people’s intuition a chronologically ordered
presentation of events also implies a causal link among the presented events
(see the discussion in 2.2.). Chronology would thus coincide with (logical)
linearity. Whichever way one wants to look at it, plots can always be either
linear or non-linear. Non-linear plots are more likely to confuse the
audience and they appear more frequently in modern and contemporary
drama, which often question ideas of logic and causality. Peter Shaffer’s play
Equus, for example, the story of Alan’s psychiatric therapy. It starts at the
end of the story and then presents events in reverse order (analytic form,
see also the category of order ch. 3.5.3.2.). Although the audience is in a way
invited to make connections among events in order to explain Alan’s
behaviour, the very process of establishing causality is questioned by the
rather loosely plotted structure of scenes.
3.3.2. Three Unities

Key terms:
Older plays traditionally aimed at conveying a sense of cohesiveness and • unity of plot
unity, and one of the classical poetic ‘laws’ to achieve this goal was the idea • unity of place
• unity of time
of the three unities: unity of plot, unity of place, and unity of time.
• mimesis
Although only the unity of plot is explicitly addressed in Aristotle’s Poetics • subplot
(1449b and 1451a), the other two unities are also often attributed to him
while, in reality, these concepts were postulated a lot later by the Italian

scholar Castelvetro in his commentary on Aristotle (1576). The unities
mean that a play should have only one single plot line, which ought to take
place in a single locale and within one day (one revolution of the sun). The
idea behind this is to make a plot more plausible, more true-to-life, and thus
to follow Aristotle’s concept of mimesis, i.e., the attempt to imitate or
reflect life as authentically as possible. If the audience watches a play whose
plot hardly has a longer time span than the actual viewing of the play, and if
the focus is on one problem only that is presented within one place, then it
is presumably easier for the viewers to succumb to the illusion of the play as
‘reality’ or at least something that could occur ‘like this’ in real life.
Many authors, however, disrespected the unities or adhered to only
some of them. Shakespeare’s The Tempest, for example, ostensibly follows
the rule of the unity of time (although it is entirely incredible that all the
actions presented there could possibly take place within three hours as is
stated in the text), and it adheres to some extent to the unity of place since
everything takes place on Prospero’s island (yet even there the characters
are dispersed all over the island to different places so that no real unity is
achieved). As far as the unity of plot is concerned, however, it becomes
clear that there are a number of minor plots which combine to form the
story of what happened to the King of Naples and his men after they were
ship-wrecked on the island. While the overarching plot that holds
everything together is Prospero’s ‘revenge’ on his brother, undertaken with
the help of the spirit, Ariel, other subplots emerge. Thus, there is the love
story between Ferdinand and Miranda, Antonio’s and Sebastian’s plan to kill
the king, and Caliban’s plan to become master of the island. The alternation
of scenes among the various subplots and places on the island contribute to
a sense of fast movement and speedy action, which, in turn, makes the play
more interesting to watch.
3.3.3. Freytag’s Pyramid

Key terms:
Another model frequently used to describe the overall structure of plays is • Freytag’s Pyramid
the so-called Freytag’s Pyramid. In his book Die Technik des Dramas • exposition
• complicating action
(Technique of the Drama 1863), the German journalist and writer, Gustav
• peripety
Freytag, described the classical five-act structure of plays in the shape of a • falling action
pyramid, and he attributed a particular function to each of the five acts. • catastrophe
Freytag’s Pyramid can be schematised like this: • dénouement

Freytag’s Pyramid:
Climax, Peripety
(“Peripetie”)
Complicating Falling Action

Action (“retardierendes
(“erregendes Moment”)
Moment”)
Introduction Catastrophe
(“Exposition”) (“Katastrophe”),
Dénouement
Act I Act II Act III Act IV Act V
Act I contains all introductory information and thus serves as exposition:

The main characters are introduced and, by presenting a conflict, the play
prepares the audience for the action in subsequent acts. To illustrate this
with an example: In the first act of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, the protagonist
Hamlet is introduced and he is confronted with the ghost of his dead father,
who informs him that King Claudius was responsible for his death. As a
consequence, Hamlet swears vengeance and the scene is thus set for the
following play.
The second act usually propels the plot by introducing further
circumstances or problems related to the main issue. The main conflict
starts to develop and characters are presented in greater detail. Thus,
Hamlet wavers between taking action and his doubts concerning the
apparition. The audience gets to know him as an introverted and
melancholic character. In addition, Hamlet puts on “an antic disposition”
(Hamlet, I, 5: 180), i.e., he pretends to be mad, in order to hide his plans
from the king.
In act III, the plot reaches its climax. A crisis occurs where the deed
is committed that will lead to the catastrophe, and this brings about a turn
(peripety) in the plot. Hamlet, by organising a play performed at court,
assures himself of the king’s guilt. In a state of frenzy, he accidentally kills
Polonius. The king realises the danger of the situation and decides to send
Hamlet to England and to have him killed on his way there.
The fourth act creates new tension in that it delays the final
catastrophe by further events. In Hamlet, the dramatic effect of the plot is
reinforced by a number of incidents: Polonius’ daughter, Ophelia, commits
suicide and her brother, Laertes, swears vengeance against Hamlet. He and
the king conspire to arrange a duel between Hamlet and Laertes. Having
escaped his murderers, Hamlet returns to court.
The fifth act finally offers a solution to the conflict presented in the
play. While tragedies end in a catastrophe, usually the death of the

protagonist, comedies are simply ‘resolved’ (traditionally in a wedding or
another type of festivity). A term that is applicable to both types of ending
is the French dénouement, which literally means the ‘unknotting’ of the
plot. In the final duel, Hamlet is killed by Laertes but before that he stabs
Laertes and wounds and poisons the king. The queen is poisoned by
mistake when she drinks from a cup intended for Hamlet.
3.3.4. Open and Closed Drama

Key-terms:
While traditional plays usually, albeit not exclusively, adhere to the five-act • closed structure
structure, modern plays have deliberately moved away from this rigid • open structure
• theatre of the absurd
format, partly because it is considered too artificial and restrictive and partly
• dramatic conventions
because many contemporary playwrights generally do not believe in • poetic justice
structure and order anymore (see poststructuralism, discussed in ch.
1.4.3.).
Another way to look at this is that traditional plays typically employ
a closed structure while most contemporary plays are open. The terms
‘open’ and ‘closed’ drama go back to the German literary critic, Volker
Klotz (1978), who distinguished between plays where the individual acts are
tightly connected and logically built on one another, finally leading to a clear
resolution of the plot (closed form), and plays where scenes only loosely
hang together and are even exchangeable at times and where the ending
does not really bring about any conclusive solution or result (compare also
open endings and closed endings in narrative texts ch. 2.8.2.3.).
Open plays typically also neglect the concept of the unities and are
thus rather free as far as their overall arrangement is concerned. An example
is Samuel Beckett’s famous play Waiting for Godot. Belonging to what is
classified as the theatre of the absurd, this play is premised on the
assumption that life is ultimately incomprehensible for mankind and that
consequently all our actions are somewhat futile. The two main characters,
the tramps Estragon and Vladimir, wait seemingly endlessly for the
appearance of a person named Godot and meanwhile dispute the place and
time of their appointment. While Estragon and Vladimir pass the time
talking in an almost random manner, employing funny repartees and word-
play, nothing really happens throughout the two acts of the play.
Significantly, each of the acts ends with the announcement of Godot’s
imminent appearance and the two characters’ decision to leave, and yet even
then nothing happens as is indicated in the stage directions: “They do not
move”. The audience is left in a puzzled state because what is presented on
stage does not really seem to make sense. There is no real plot in the sense
of a sequence of causally motivated actions, and there is hardly any
coherence. The play does not provide any information on preceding events
that could be relevant, e.g., with regard to that mysterious Godot (Who is
he? Why did Vladimir and Estragon make an appointment to see him?), and
it does not offer a conclusive ending since the audience does not know what
is going to happen (if anything) and what the actual point of this action is.
Hence, there is no linear structure or logical sequence which leads to a
closed ending but the play remains open and opaque on every imaginable
level: plot, characters, their language, etc.
The fact that some authors adhere to certain dramatic conventions
(see Poetics and Genre 1.4.2.), i.e. follow certain known practices and

traditions, and others do not, is obviously an interesting factor to consider
in drama analysis since this may give us a clue to certain ideological or
philosophical concepts or beliefs expressed in a play. Beckett’s Waiting for
Godot, for example, enacts the absurdity of human existence. Just as the plot
does not seem to move anywhere and the characters’ actions or rather,
inactivity, do not make sense, life comes across as purposeless and futile,
and the audience’s bewilderment in a way reflects mankind’s bewilderment
in view of an incomprehensible world. Plays with a closed structure, by
contrast, present life as comprehensible and events as causally connected.
Moreover, they suggest that problems are solvable and that there is a certain
order in the world which needs to be re-established if lost.
The fact that in many plays all the ‘baddies’, for example, are
punished in the end follows the principle of poetic justice, i.e., every
character who committed a crime or who has become guilty in some way or
another by breaking social or moral rules, has to suffer for this so that order
can be reinstalled. Needless to say that life is not necessarily like this and
yet, people often prefer closed endings since they give a feeling of
satisfaction (just consider the way most mainstream movies are structured
even today). If plays move away from the closed form, one then has to ask
why they do it and one should also consider the possible effect of certain
structures on the audience. Sometimes, for example, open forms with
loosely linked scenes rather than a tightly plotted five-act structure are used
to break up the illusion of the stage as life-world. Viewers are constantly
made aware of the play being a performance and they are thus expected to
have a more critical and distant look at what is presented to them. This can
be found in Bertolt Brecht and other authors such as Edward Bond, John
Arden and Howard Brenton.
3.4. Space
Key terms:
Space is an important element in drama since the stage itself also represents • realism
a space where action is presented. One must of course not forget that types • naturalism
• stage props
of stage have changed in the history of the theatre and that this has also
• word scenery
influenced the way plays were performed (see Types of Stage ch. 3.8.). The • symbolic space
analysis of places and settings in plays can help one get a better feel for
characters and their behaviour but also for the overall atmosphere. Plays
can differ significantly with regard to how space is presented and how much
information about space is offered. While in George Bernard Shaw’s plays
the secondary text provides detailed spatio-temporal descriptions, one finds
hardly anything in the way of secondary text in Shakespeare (see Gurr and
Ichikawa 2000).
The stage set quite literally ‘sets the scene’ for a play in that it
already conveys a certain tone, e.g., one of desolation and poverty or
mystery and secrecy. The fact that the description of the stage sets in the
secondary text is sometimes very detailed and sometimes hardly worth
mentioning is another crucial starting point for further analysis since that
can tell us something about more general functions of settings.
Actual productions frequently invent their own set, independent of
the information provided in a text. Thus, a very detailed set with lots of
stage props may simply be used to show off theatrical equipment. In
Victorian melodrama (see ch. 3.9.2.), for example, even horses were

brought on stage in order to make the ‘show’ more appealing but also to
demonstrate a theatre’s wealth and ability to provide expensive costumes,
background paintings, etc. A more detailed stage set also aims at creating an
illusion of realism, i.e., the scene presented on stage is meant to be as true-
to-life as possible and the audience is expected to succumb to that illusion.
At the same time, a detailed set draws attention to problems of an
individual’s milieu, for example, or background in general. This was
particularly important in naturalist writing, which was premised on the
idea that a person’s character and behaviour are largely determined by his or
her social context.
By contrast, if detail is missing in the presentation of the setting,
whether in the text or in production, that obviously also has a reason.
Sometimes, plays do not employ detailed settings because they do not aim
at presenting an individualised, personal background but a general scenario
that could be placed anywhere and affect anyone. The stage set in Beckett’s
Waiting for Godot, for example, is really bare: “A country road. A tree”. One
can argue that this minimal set highlights the characters’ uprootedness and
underlines the play’s focus on human existence in general.
3.4.1. Word Scenery
Since drama is multimedial, the visual aspect inevitably plays an important

role. The layout/overall appearance of the set is usually described in stage
directions or descriptions at the beginning of acts or scenes. Thus, all the
necessary stage props (i.e., properties used on stage such as furniture,
accessories, etc.) and possibly stage painting can be presented verbally in
secondary texts, which is then translated into an actual visualisation on
stage. One must not forget that directors are of course free to interpret
secondary texts in different ways and thus to create innovative renditions of
plays. An example is Richard Loncraine’s 1996 film version of
Shakespeare’s Richard III, where the play is set in the 1930s.
The set or, more precisely, what it is supposed to represent, can also be
conveyed in the characters’ speech. In Elizabethan times, for example,
where the set was rather bare with little stage props and no background
scenery, the spatio-temporal framework of a scene had to be provided by
characters’ references to it. The jester Trinculo in Shakespeare’s The Tempest,
for example, gives the following description of the island and the weather:
Here’s neither bush nor shrub to bear off any weather at all, and
another storm brewing; I hear it sing i’ the wind. Yond same black
cloud, yond huge one, looks like a foul bombard that would shed his
liquor. If it should thunder as it did before I know not where to hide my
head, yond same cloud cannot choose but fall by pailfuls.
(The Tempest, II, 2: 19-23)
While Elizabethan theatre goers could not actually ‘see’ a cloud on stage,
they were invited to imagine it in their mind’s eye. The setting was thus
created rhetorically as word scenery rather than by means of painted
canvas, stage props and artificial lighting (which was not common practice
until the Restoration period).

3.4.2. Setting and Characterisation
The setting can be used as a means of indirect characterisation. Thus, the

anonymity and unloving atmosphere among the characters in Edward
Bond’s play Saved is anticipated by and mirrored in the barrenness of the
stage set where only the most necessary pieces of furniture are presented
but nothing that would give Pam’s parents’ flat a more personal touch. The
characters in William Congreve’s The Way of the World, by comparison, are
implicitly characterised as high society because they meet in coffee-houses,
St. James’ Park and posh private salons. A close look at the setting can thus
contribute to a better understanding of the characters and their behaviour.
3.4.3. Symbolic Space
Another important factor to consider in this context is the interrelatedness

of setting and plot. Obviously, the plot of a play is never presented in a
vacuum but always against the background of a specific scenery and often
the setting corresponds with what is going on in the storyworld. Thus, the
storm at the beginning of Shakespeare’s The Tempest not only starts off the
play and functions as an effective background to the action but it also
reflects the ‘disorder’ in which the characters find themselves at the
beginning: Antonio unlawfully holds the position of his brother, Prospero;
Sebastian is willing to get rid of his brother, King Alonso, in order to take
his place; and the savage and deformed slave Caliban broods on revenge
against his self-appointed master, Prospero. The lack of peace and order in
the social world is thus analogous to chaos and destruction in the natural
world. Likewise, in Shakespeare’s King Lear, a storm signifies disorder when
King Lear’s daughters Goneril and Regan turn their father out of doors
although they had vowed their affection for him and had received their
share of the kingdom in return. In A Midsummer Night’s Dream, the secretive
and highly sexual atmosphere is underlined by the dark forest at midnight,
in which fog and darkness partly support but also thwart the characters’
secret plans and actions. One can say that rather than only functioning as a
background or creating a certain atmosphere, these spaces become
symbolic spaces as they point towards other levels of meaning in the text.
The setting can thus support the expression of the world view current at a
certain time or general philosophical, ethical or moral questions.
SO WHAT?
Nowadays, theatres are equipped with all sorts of sets, props and technical
machinery which allow for a wide range of audiovisual effects. When
analysing plays, it is therefore worthwhile asking to what extent the plays
actually make use of these devices and for what purpose. One important
question one can ask, for example, is whether space is presented in detail or
only in general terms. Consider the following introductory commentary
from Sean O’Casey’s Juno and the Paycock:
The living-room of a two-room tenancy occupied by the Boyle family in a tenement

house in Dublin. Left, a door leading to another part of the house; left of door a

window looking into the street; at back a dresser; farther to right at back, a window
looking into the back of the house. Between the window and the dresser is a picture of
the Virgin; below the picture, on a bracket, is a crimson bowl in which a floating
votive light is burning. Farther to the right is a small bed partly concealed by cretonne
hangings strung on a twine. To the right is the fireplace; near the fireplace is a door
leading to the other room. Beside the fireplace is a box containing coal. On the
mantelshelf is an alarm clock lying on its face. In a corner near the window looking
into the back is a galvanized bath. A table and some chairs. On the table are
breakfast things for one. A teapot is on the hob and a frying-pan stands inside the
fender. There are a few books on the dresser and one on the table. Leaning against
the dresser is a long-handled shovel – the kind invariably used by labourers when
turning concrete or mixing mortar. […]
What strikes one immediately is the minute precision with which the set is
organised. Not only do we get a great number of even small stage props
(picture, books, coal box, breakfast things, etc.) but their relative position to
one another is also exactly described. If one considers that this is the very
first scene the viewers see, it is almost as if they looked at a very detailed
and realistic picture of a working-class home. The shovel indicates the social
background of the people who live in the flat, and the fact that it is only a
two-room flat points towards their relative poverty. The setting tells us even
more about the family. Thus, we can conclude from the picture of the
Virgin Mary and the floating votive light that this must be a religious family
or at least a family which lives according to the Irish Catholic tradition.
Furthermore, we identify a potential discrepancy when we look at the
books. While the small number of books suggests on the one hand that the
people who live there are not highly educated, the fact that there are books
at all also indicates that at least someone in the family must be interested in
reading. The text itself continues by explaining who that person is, Mary,
and another member of the family, Johnny Boyle, is also introduced. We are
even given information on Mary’s inner conflict caused by her background
on the one hand and her knowledge of literature on the other hand. Just as
the first appearance of two of the characters blends in with a pictorial
presentation of the setting, Mary and Johnny also seem to ‘belong’ to or be
marked by that background. In other words: The naturalistic setting is used
as indirect characterisation and defines the characters’ conflicts or struggles.
Sometimes a bare stage indicates the play’s focus on the characters’ inner
lives and consciousness, and technical devices and stage props are mainly
used to emphasise or underline them. Consider the setting in Peter Shaffer’s
play Equus:
A square of wood set on a circle of wood.

The square resembles a railed boxing ring. The rail, also of wood, encloses three
sides. It is perforated on each side by an opening. Under the rail are a few vertical
slats, as if in a fence. On the downstage side there is no rail. The whole square is set
on ball bearings, so that by slight pressure from actors standing round it on the circle,
it can be made to turn round smoothly by hand.
On the square are set three little plain benches, also of wood. They are placed parallel
with the rail, against the slats, but can be moved out by the actors to stand at right
angles to them.

Set into the floor of the square, and flush with it, is a thin metal pole, about a yard
high. This can be raised out of the floor, to stand upright. It acts as a support for the
actor playing Nugget, when he is ridden.
In the area outside the circle stand benches. Two downstage left and right are curved
to accord with the circle. The left one is used by Dysart as a listening and observing
post when he is out of the square, and also by Alan as his hospital bed. The right
one is used by Alan’s parents, who sit side by side on it. (Viewpoint is from the
main body of the audience.)
Further benches stand upstage, and accommodate the other actors. All the cast of
Equus sits on stage the entire evening. They get up to perform their scenes, and return
when they are done to their places around the set. They are witnesses, assistants –
and especially a Chorus.
Upstage, forming a backdrop to the whole, are tiers of seats in the fashion of a
dissecting theatre, formed into two railed-off blocks, pierced by a central tunnel. In
these blocks sit members of the audience. During the play, Dysart addresses them
directly from time to time, as he addresses the main body of the theatre. No other
actor ever refers to them.
To left and right, downstage, stand two ladders on which are suspended horse masks.
The colour of all benches is olive green.
What strikes one immediately when looking at this stage set is that it does
not even try to be realistic. Whether scenes take place in Dysart’s practice,
in Alan’s home or in the stables, there is no furniture or other stage props
to indicate this. The horses are played by actors who simply put on horse
masks but this is done on stage so that the audience is reminded of the fact
that it is watching a play. The alternation of scenes is marked by the usage
of different parts of the stage (upstairs, downstairs) and time shifts become
noticeable through changing lights. The stage seems to be arranged like this
intentionally and one can ask why. First and foremost, the set lacks detail so
that attention can be drawn to the performance of the actors. Secondly,
what the actors perform is thus also moved to the centre, namely Alan’s
psychological development, his consciousness and memories. Put another
way, the focus is on mental processes rather than on social factors (although
they of course influence Alan’s development and are thus also brought on
stage, albeit symbolically and rhetorically rather than realistically).
Whatever explanation one comes up with, the first step is to note
that the stage and the represented setting usually have a purpose and one
then has to ask how they correlate with what is presented in the actual text,
to what extent they express concepts and ideas, etc.
3.5. Time
Time in drama can be considered from a variety of angles. One can, for
example, look at time as part of the play: How are references to time made
in the characters’ speech, the setting, stage directions, etc.? What is the
overall time span of the story? On the other hand, time is also a crucial
factor in the performance of a play: How long does the performance
actually take? Needless to say that the audiences’ perception of time can also
vary. Another question one can ask in this context is: Which general
concepts of time are expressed in and by a play?

3.5.1. Succession and Simultaneity
Key terms:
One of the first distinctions one can make is the one between succession • succession
and simultaneity. Events and actions can take place in one of two ways: • simultaneity
either one after another (successively) or all at the same time
(simultaneously). When these events are performed on stage, their
presentation in scenes will inevitably be successive while they may well be
simultaneous according to the internal time frame of the play.
Consider, for example, the plot of Shakespeare’s The Tempest. Given
the fact that the plot is supposed to last only three hours, one must presume
that the various subplots presenting the different groups of people
dispersed over the island must take place roughly at the same time: e.g.,
Caliban’s encounter with Trinculo and Stephano in Act II, scene 1 and
continued in III, 2 is likely to take place at the same time as Miranda’s and
Ferdinand’s conversation in III, 1, etc. A sense of simultaneity is created
here exactly because different plot-lines alternate in strings of immediately
successive scenes. On the other hand, if no other indication of divergent
time frames is given in the text, viewers normally automatically assume that
the events and actions presented in subsequent scenes are also successive in
their temporal order.
3.5.2. Presentation of Temporal Frames

Key terms:
There are a number of possibilities to create a temporal frame in drama. • temporal frames
Allusions to time can be made in the characters’ conversations; the exact • word painting
time of a scene can be provided in the stage directions; or certain stage
props like clocks and calendars or auditory devices such as church bells
ringing in the background can give the audience a clue about what time it is.
At the beginning of Hamlet, for example, when the guards see the ghost of
Hamlet’s father, the time is given in the guard’s account of the same
apparition during the previous night:
Last night of all,

When yond same star that’s westward from the pole,
Had made his course t’illume that part of heaven
Where now it burns, Marcellus and myself,
The bell then beating one –
(Shakespeare, Hamlet, I, 1: 38-42)
While in this instance, the exact time is expressed verbally by one of the
characters, the crowing of a cock offstage indicates the approaching daylight
later in that scene and causes the apparition to disappear. In scene 4 of the
same act, Hamlet himself is on guard in order to meet the ghost, and the
scene begins with the following short exchange between Hamlet and
Horatio:
Ham. The air bites shrewdly, it is very cold.

Hor. It is a nipping and an eager air.
Ham. What hour now?
Hor. I think it lacks of twelve.
(Hamlet, I, 4: 1-4)

This short dialogue not only conveys to the audience the time of night but it
also uses word painting to describe the weather conditions and the overall
atmosphere (“air bites”, “very cold”, “nipping”). Word painting means that
actors describe the scenery vividly and thus create or ‘paint’ a picture in the
viewers’ minds.
The third possibility of presenting time in the stage directions is
used in John Osborne’s Look Back in Anger, for example. The introductory
author commentary to each of the three acts in the secondary text gives
very short instructions concerning the time of the subsequent scenes: “Early
evening. April” (I, 1), “Two weeks later. Evening” (II,1), “The following
evening” (II, 2), “Several months later. A Sunday evening” (III, 1), “It is a
few minutes later” (III, 2). While a reading audience is thus fully informed
about the timing of the scenes, theatre goers have to infer it from the
context created through the characters’ interactions. The temporal gap
between acts two and three, for example, has to be inferred from the fact
that things have changed in Jimmy’s and Alison’s flat after Alison left, most
noticeably that Helena has taken up Alison’s place and is now the woman in
the house.
3.5.3. Story Time and Discourse Time
3.5.3.1. Duration
Key terms:
Another important distinction one needs to be made when analysing time in • played time
drama, namely between fictive story time or played time and real playing • playing time
• duration
time (see also story time and discourse time for narrative ch. 2.8.2.). While
• ellipsis
the played time or the time of the story in Osborne’s Look Back in Anger • speed-up / summary
encompasses several months, the play’s actual playing time (time it takes • slow-down / stretch
to stage the play) is approximately two hours. The playing time of a piece of • pause
drama of course always depends on the speed at which actors perform
individual scenes and can thus vary significantly from one performance to
another.
The fact that story time elapses from one scene to the next and
from act to act is indicated by the fall of the curtain in Osborne’s play.
Thus, quick curtains are used between scenes, while longer curtain pauses
occur between acts. Significantly, the length of curtain time is correlated
with the length of time that has been left out in the story: A quick curtain
suggests a short time span while normal breaks cover longer time spans of
the played time.
A gaps in the played time of a piece of drama is called ellipsis, i.e., one
leaves out bits of the story and thus speeds up the plot. Considering that
scenes usually present actions directly, one can assume that played time and
playing time usually coincide in drama. In other words: If characters are
presented talking to one another for, say, twenty minutes, then it will
normally take about twenty minutes for actors to perform this
‘conversation’. Discrepancies between the duration of played time and
playing time mostly concur with scenic breaks because it is difficult to
present them convincingly in the middle of an interaction. However, an
example of a speed-up or summary, i.e., a situation where the actual
playing time is shorter than the time span presented in the played

interaction, can be found for instance in Thomas Middleton’s and William
Rowley’s The Changeling. Beatrice, who fears that her lack of sexual
innocence could be discovered by her husband during their wedding night,
has arranged for her maid to take her place in the wedding bed and
anxiously awaits the maid’s return:
Enter Beatrice. A clock strikes one.

BEATRICE: One struck, and yet she lies by’t – oh my fears!
This strumpet serves her own ends, ‘tis apparent now,
Devours the pleasure with a greedy appetite
And never minds my honour or my peace,
Makes havoc of my right; but she pays dearly for’t:
No trusting of her life with such a secret,
That cannot rule her blood to keep her promise.
Beside, I have some suspicion of her faith to me
Because I was suspected of my lord,
And it must come from her. – Hark by my horrors!
Another clock strikes two.
[Strikes two.]
(The Changeling, V, 1: 1-12)
A few lines further down, after a brief dialogue with De Flores, Beatrice
mentions the clock again: “List, oh my terrors! / Three struck by Saint
Sebastian’s!” (ibid, 66f). Although the time it takes for Beatrice to appear on
stage and to wait for her maid can hardly be longer than ten minutes in
actual performance, the time that elapses in the story is two hours. The
lapse of time is indicated in Beatrice’s speech as well as by the sound of a
clock offstage but this seems very artificial because Beatrice appears before
the audience for a much shorter time. The discrepancy between played time
and playing time is particularly conspicuous at the very beginning of this
scene, where Beatrice announces the striking of the next hour after only a
couple of minutes on stage. This scene clearly does not put an emphasis on
a realistic rendition of time but the focus is on Beatrice’s reaction to the
maid’s late arrival and her anxiousness lest her trick should be discovered.
Since drama employs other media than narrative texts and is performed
in real time, not all usages of time in narrative are possible in plays (compare
ch. 2.8.). Nevertheless, postmodernist plays in particular sometimes
experiment with different presentations of time. Techniques which can only
be adopted in modified form in drama are slow-down or stretch, where
the playing time is longer than the played time, and pause, where the play
continues while the story stops. One might argue that soliloquies where
characters discuss and reveal their inner psychological state or emotions are
similar to pauses since no real ‘action’ is observable and the development of
the story is put on hold, so to speak. However, if one considers that the
character’s talking to the audience or perhaps to himself is in a way also a
form of action that can be relevant for further actions, this argument does
not really hold. Consider the following example from Peter Shaffer’s Equus.
The psychologist Dysart in a way steps out of the story-world of the play
and addresses the audience:
Now he’s gone off to rest, leaving me alone with Equus. I can hear the
creature’s voice. It’s calling me out of the black cave of the Psyche. I

shove in my dim little torch, and there he stands – waiting for me. He
raises his matted head. He opens his great square teeth, and says –
[Mocking.] ‘Why? ... Why Me? … Why – ultimately – Me? … Do you
really imagine you can account for Me? … Poor Doctor Dysart!’
[He enters the square.]
Of course I’ve stared at such images before. Or been stared at by them,
whichever way you look at it. And weirdly often now with me the
feeling is that they are staring at us – that in some quite palpable way they
precede us. Meaningless but unsettling … In either case, this one is
alarming yet. It asks questions I’ve avoided all my professional life.
[Pause.] A child is born into a world of phenomena all equal in their
power to enslave. It sniffs – it sucks – it strokes its eyes over the whole
uncomfortable range. Suddenly one strikes. Why? Moments snap
together like magnets, forging a chain of shackles. Why? I can trace
them. I can even, with time, pull them apart again. But why at the start
they were ever magnetized at all – just those particular moments of
experience and no others – I don’t know. And nor does anyone else. Yet if I
don’t know – if I can never know that – then what am I doing here? I
don’t mean clinically doing or socially doing – I mean fundamentally!
These questions, these Whys, are fundamental – yet they have no place
in a consulting room. So then, do I? …This is the feeling more and
more with me – No Place. Displacement … ‘Account for me,’ says
staring Equus. ‘First account for Me! …’ I fancy this is more than
menopause.
(Equus, II, 22)
One could argue that, while Dysart reflects on his feelings about his work,
the story as such stops. However, if one considers Dysart’s inner
development as a psychiatrist, another vital part of the plot, and treats this
address to the audience as an integral element of the play’s communication
system, then the playing time of Dysart’s speech still coincides with its
played time. In other words: even where narrative elements are used in plays
and thus potentially facilitate narrative techniques of time presentation, the
overall scenic structure almost always counters that.
A stretch or slow-down could be realised if characters were to act in
slow-motion, e.g., in a pantomime or dumb show, similar to slow-motion
techniques in films. This, however, is not feasible for an entire play.
Manfred Pfister mentions in his book Das Drama (1997: 363) J.B. Priestley’s
play Time and the Conways, where the entire second act is used to present
Kay’s daydream, which, according to time references in the play, only lasts
for a few minutes. This slow-down is of course only recognisable through
overt hints in the surrounding plot, whereas the time of the actions
presented within the daydream perfectly corresponds with the time it takes
to perform them on stage. So, again, a real slow-down cannot actually be
achieved through the way the performance is acted out since actors cannot
really ‘slow down’ their acting (unless they play in slow motion) but it can
be suggested by means of linguistic cues or stage props indicating time
(clocks, etc.).

3.5.3.2. Order
Key terms:
Another aspect to look at when analysing time in drama (as well as • order
narrative) is the concept of order (see also Prose ch. 2.8.2.2.). How are • flashback (analepsis)
• flashforward
events ordered temporally? Does the temporal sequence of scenes (prolepsis)
correspond with the temporal order of events and actions in the presented • ab ovo beginning
story? Like narrative, drama can make use of flashback (analepsis) and • inmedias res
flashforward (prolepsis). In flashbacks, events from the past are mingled beginning
• in ultimas res
with the presentation of current events, while in flashforwards, future beginning
events are anticipated. While flashforwards are not as common since they
potentially threaten the build-up of the audience’s suspense (if we already
know what is going to happen, we can at best wonder how this ending is
brought about), flashbacks are frequently used in order to illustrate a
character’s memories or to explain the outcome of certain actions.
An example for a flashforward is the prologue in Shakespeare’s
Romeo and Juliet, where the audience is already told the gist of the subsequent
play. Examples of flashbacks can be found in Arthur Miller’s Death of a
Salesman, where the unemployed and desolate salesman Willy Loman
remembers his happy family life in the past. Flashbacks also occur
frequently in Peter Shaffer’s Equus, where they represent Alan’s
recollections of the events that led up to his blinding of the horses. Equus is
interesting in that a linear presentation of Alan’s therapy is juxtaposed with
a non-linear presentation of the story of his outrageous deed. Thus, the
play’s play with order and chronology invites the audience to view more
critically conventional notions of cause and effect, which is one of the
crucial themes of the play, e.g., when Dysart doubts his ability ever to get to
the heart of a strange obsession like Alan’s.
Three terms which are often used in the context of discussions of
chronology and order are the three basic types of beginnings: ab ovo, in
medias res and in ultimas res. These terms refer to the point of time of a
story at which a play sets in and they are thus closely related to the amount
of information viewers are offered at the beginning of a play:
• ab ovo: the play starts at the beginning of the story and provides all
the necessary background information concerning the characters,
their circumstances, conflicts, etc. (exposition)
• in medias res: the story starts somewhere in the middle and leaves
the viewer puzzled at first
• in ultimas res: the story begins with its actual outcome or ending
and then relates events in reverse order, thus drawing the audience’s
attention on the ‘how’ rather than the ‘what’ of the story. Plays
which use this method are called analytic plays.
While in narrative analysis, the terms ab ovo and in medias res are also used
to distinguish between beginnings where the reader is introduced to the plot
by means of preliminary information mostly conveyed by the narrator (ab
ovo) and beginnings where the reader is simply thrust into the action of the
narrative (in medias res, see also Prose ch. 2.8.2.3.), plays by definition
always already present the viewer with some action unless there is a
narrative-like mediator (chorus, commentator, etc.). Since in that sense plays
are usually always in medias res because they present viewers directly with
an interaction among characters, it might be more appropriate to use the

more narrow definition given above for drama, which is limited to the
timing of beginnings and does not focus so much on the mode of
presentation.
3.5.3.3. Frequency
Key terms:
Another facet of time worth analysing is the concept of frequency, i.e., how • frequency
often an event is presented. Although the categories proposed by Genette • singulative
• repetitive
for narrative texts are not directly applicable to drama, one can nevertheless
• iterative
identify similar structures. According to Genette, there are three possible
types of reference to an event (see Genette 1980):
• singulative: an event takes place once and is referred to once

• repetitive: an event takes place once but is referred to or presented
repeatedly
• iterative: an event takes place several times but is referred to in the
text only once
The singulative representation of events can be found whenever scenes in

a play contain single actions and these actions are represented once. This
mode is mostly found in linear plots where the main aim is to delineate the
development of a conflict. Traditional plays usually adopt this mode. Thus,
Cyril Tourneur’s The Revenger’s Tragedy, for example, presents its plot in fast-
moving actions where no scene replicates previous scenes.
Iterative telling occurs when characters refer to the same or similar
events that have already happened. The guards in Shakespeare’s Hamlet, for
example, discuss during their night shift what had happened during the
previous night and thus the apparition of the ghost is presented as repetitive
action.
An repetitive representation of events is more difficult to imagine
in drama since, strictly speaking, it would involve the same scene to be
played several times in exactly the same way. While a complete overlap of
scenes is not feasible as it would probably cause boredom, especially
modern plays frequently make use of the repetition of similar
events/interactions or parts of dialogues. A good example is Beckett’s
Waiting for Godot where Vladimir and Estragon repeat actions and verbal
exchanges throughout the play and where, most significantly, the two acts
are structured in parallel, culminating in the announcement of the imminent
appearance of Godot (who never shows up) and Vladimir’s and Estragon’s
inaction. John Osborne’s Look Back in Anger employs a similar strategy by
presenting the first and the third act in a similar fashion, the only difference
being that Alison has been replaced by Helena. This repetition of events
(Helena standing there in Jim’s shirt, ironing clothes, and Jim and Cliff
sitting in their arm-chairs) is obviously used to suggest that there is no real
change or development in Jim’s own life despite the fact that he constantly
rages against the establishment and against other people’s passivity.

SO WHAT?
As with the presentation of space, aspects of time are rarely presented for
their own sake but often imply further levels of meaning that might help
one interpret a text. Thus, time can also be symbolic and stand for larger
concepts. For example, Waiting for Godot’s modified version of iterative
action creates a sense of stagnation and lack of movement, which
corresponds with the more philosophical notion of people’s helplessness
and the purposelessness of life in general. Look Back in Anger, in a similar
vein, illustrates a cyclical notion of time and history whereby events recur
again and again. This ultimately also generates a sense of stagnation and, in
this particular case, underlines the protagonist’s lack of action. By contrast,
plays where the overall order is chronological and where the plot moves
through singulative representation of actions to a final conclusion suggest
progress and development and thus perhaps also a more positive and
optimistic image of mankind and history.
Different uses of time are of course also important for the creation
of certain effects on the audience. While non-chronological plots, for
example, can be confusing, they may also create suspense or challenge the
viewer’s ability to make connections between events. Furthermore, plays
which present a story in its chronological order draw attention to the final
outcome and thus are based on the question: ‘What happens next?’, whereas
plays with a non-chronological order, which might even anticipate the
ending, focus on the question: ‘How does everything happen?’
Detailed time presentations or, by contrast, a lack of detail may
point towards the importance or insignificance of time for a specific
storyline. In Shakespeare’s A Midsummer Night’s Dream, for example, the
timing of the scenes that take place in the forest during the night remains
rather fuzzy, thus underlining the characters’ changed sense of time and also
the timelessness of the fairy-world presented there.
3.6. Characters
3.6.1. Major and Minor Characters

Key terms:
Since drama presents us directly with scenes which are based on people’s • major characters
actions and interactions, characters play a dominant role in this genre and • minor characters
• eponymous hero
therefore deserve close attention. The characters in plays can generally be
divided into major characters and minor characters, depending on how
important they are for the plot. A good indicator as to whether a character
is major or minor is the amount of time and speech as well as presence on
stage he or she is allocated.
As a rule of thumb, major characters usually have a lot to say and
appear frequently throughout the play, while minor characters have less
presence or appear only marginally. Thus, for example, Hamlet is clearly the
main character or protagonist of Shakespeare’s famous tragedy as we can
infer from the fact that he appears in most scenes and is allocated a great
number of speeches and, what is more, since even his name appears in the
title (he is the eponymous hero). Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, by
contrast, are only minor characters because they are not as vitally important
for the plot and therefore appear only for a short period of time. However,

they become major characters in Tom Stoppard’s comical re-make of the
play, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead (1966), where the two attendants
are presented as bewildered witnesses and predestined victims.
Occasionally even virtually non-existent characters may be
important but this scenario is rather exceptional. An example can be found
in Beckett’s Waiting for Godot, where the action centres around the arrival of
the mysterious Godot, whose name even appears in the title of the play
although he never actually materialises on stage.
3.6.2. Character Complexity

Key terms:
Major characters are frequently, albeit not exclusively, multi-dimensional • multi-dimensional
character
and dynamic (round character) while minor characters often remain
• dynamic character
mono-dimensional and static (flat character, see Character Dimensions in • round character
narrative prose). Multi-dimensional characters display several (even • mono-dimensional
conflicting) character traits and are thus reasonably complex. They also tend character
to develop throughout the plot (hence, dynamic), though this is not • static character
• flat character
necessarily the case. Hamlet, for example, is marked by great intellectual and
• types
rhetorical power but he is also flawed to the extent that he is indecisive and • revenger type
passive. The audience learns a lot about his inner moral conflict, his • foil
wavering between whether to take revenge or not, and we see him in
different roles displaying different qualities: as prince and statesman, as son,
as Ophelia’s admirer, etc.
Mono-dimensional characters, on the other hand, can usually be
summarised by a single phrase or statement, i.e., they have only few
character traits and are generally merely types (see also ch. 2.4.3.).
Frequently, mono-dimensional characters are also static, i.e., they do not
develop or change during the play. Laertes, Ophelia’s brother, for example,
is not as complex as Hamlet. He can be described as a passionate, rash
youth who does not hesitate to take revenge when he hears about his
father’s and sister’s deaths. As a character, he corresponds to the
conventional revenger type, and part of the reason why he does not come
across as a complex figure is that we hardly get to know him. In the play,
Laertes functions as a foil for Hamlet since Hamlet’s indecisiveness and
thoughtfulness appear as more marked through the contrast between the
two young men.
3.6.3. Character and Genre Conventions

Key terms:
Sometimes the quality of characters can also depend on the subgenre to • hamartia
which a play belongs because genres traditionally follow certain conventions • catharsis
even as far as the dramatis personae, i.e., the dramatic personnel, are
concerned. According to Aristotle’s Poetics, characters in tragedies have to
be of a high social rank so that their downfall in the end can be more tragic
(the higher they are, the lower they fall), while comedies typically employ
‘lower’ characters who need not be taken so seriously and can thus be made
fun of. Since tragedies deal with difficult conflicts and subject matters, tragic
heroes are usually complex. According to Aristotle, they are supposed to be
neither too good nor too bad but somewhere ‘in the middle’ (Aristotle,
1953: 1453a), which allows them to have some tragic ‘flaw’ (hamartia) that

ultimately causes their downfall. Since tragic heroes have almost ‘average’
characteristics and inner conflicts, the audience can identify more easily with
them, which is an important prerequisite for what Aristotle calls the effect
of catharsis (literally, a ‘cleansing’ of one’s feelings), i.e., the fact that one
can suffer with the hero, feel pity and fear, and through this strong
emotional involvement clarify one’s own state of mind and potentially
become a better human being (Aristotle 1953: 1450a, see Zapf 1991: 30-40
for a more detailed exploration of Aristotle’s concept). Comedies, by
contrast, deal with problems in a lighter manner and therefore do not
necessarily require complex figures. Furthermore, types are more
appropriate in comedies as their single qualities can be easily exaggerated
and thus subverted into laughable behaviour and actions. In A Midsummer
Night’s Dream, for example, the weaver Bottom, who foolishly thinks he can
be a great actor, is literally turned into an ass and thus becomes the
laughingstock of the play.
3.6.4. Contrast and Correspondences
Characters in plays can often be classified by way of contrast or

correspondences. In Middleton’s and Rowley’s The Changeling, for example,
the characters in the main plot and the ones of the subplot are exposed to
similar conflicts and problems and thus correspond with one another on
certain levels, while their reactions are very different and thus show the
contrasts between corresponding figures. Beatrice, the protagonist of the
main plot, and Isabella, Alibius’ wife in the subplot, are both restricted by
their social positions as wives and daughters. However, while Beatrice
oversteps the boundaries by having her suitor, Alonzo, killed in order to be
able to marry Alsemero, Isabella fulfils her role as faithful wife and does not
break the rules even when two suitors make advances to her. The themes of
sexuality and adultery play an important role in both plots, yet they are
pursued in different ways. While Beatrice commits adultery, albeit
somewhat involuntarily at first, Isabella resists the temptation and remains
virtuous. Sexuality is discussed with subterfuge and only implicitly in the
main plot and yet sexual encounters take place, whereas the same topic is
discussed in an open and bawdy manner in the subplot where ultimately
nothing happens.
The husbands in the two plot-lines can also be described in terms of
contrasts and correspondences. While Alsemero trusts his wife and does
not see what is really going on between her and De Flores (it is only
through hints by his friend that he starts to feel suspicious), Alibius is highly
suspicious of Isabella and for this reason does not allow her to receive any
visitors during his absence. Ironically, as the plot-lines unfold we learn that
Alibius’ suspicions are groundless since Isabella remains firm and faithful,
whereas Beatrice in a sense cheats on her husband even before they are
married.
By presenting corresponding characters in such a contrastive
manner, their individual characteristics are thrown into sharper relief and
certain qualities are highlighted with regard to the overall plot. We can say
that the characters in the subplot of The Changeling function as foils to the
characters in the main plot because they bring out more effectively the main

characters’ features (a foil is a piece of shiny metal put under gemstones to
increase their brightness).
3.6.5. Character Constellations Key terms:

• character constellation
Characters can also be classified according to their membership to certain • hero
• protagonist
groups of characters both across the entire play as well as in individual • antagonist
scenes. In other words, questions like ‘Who belongs to whom?’ and ‘Which
characters are friends or foes?’ are also essential in drama analysis. If one
considers the overall structure of the play and groups of characters therein,
one deals with the constellation of the dramatic personnel. Constellations
can be based on sympathies and antipathies among characters, on how they
act and react to one another, etc. Usually, one can make the distinction
between heroes and their enemies or protagonists and antagonists, and
one can find characters who collaborate and support one another, while
others fight or plot against each other. Obviously, character constellation is
a dynamic concept since sympathies/antipathies can change and groups of
people can also change. On stage, groups can be presented symbolically by
certain distinctive stage props or costumes and also through their gestures
and relative spatial position to one another. In the following picture from a
lay performance of Sharman MacDonald’s After Juliet, the opposing
members of the Houses of Capulet and Montague can be identified by the
fact that they appear in differently coloured spotlights (green and red
respectively), and by their final positioning in the play, which already marks
their newly aroused antagonism: They have picked up their swords and face
one another, ready for a new fight.
3.6.6. Character Configurations

Key terms:
In contrast to character constellation, the term configuration denotes the • character
configurations
sequential presentation of different characters together on stage.
Configurations thus change whenever characters exit or enter the stage. In
the first scene of Shakespeare’s Richard III, for example, Richard appears on
stage alone first, followed by the entrance of his brother Clarence and
Brakenbury with a guard of men, after whose exit Richard is on his own
again before Lord Hastings joins him. Before the first scene closes, Lord
Hastings exits and Richard remains once again alone on stage.
Configurations typically underlie the overall structure of scenes but,
as the example of Richard III shows, configurations can even change within
scenes. Configurations are important to the extent that they show up groups

and developments among groups of characters, which, in turn, is essential
for the development of the plot. In Richard III, Richard’s frequent
appearances alone on stage already reveal him as a loner and an outsider but
also as a cunning schemer, whose interactions with other characters are thus
unravelled to be false and underhanded.
3.6.7. Techniques of Characterisation

Key terms:
Characters in drama are characterised using various techniques of • authorial
characterisation
characterisation. Generally speaking, one can distinguish between
• figural
characterisations made by the author in the play’s secondary text (authorial) characterisation
or by characters in the play (figural), and whether these characterisations • self-characterisation
are made directly (explicitly) or indirectly (implicitly). Another distinction • dialect
can be made between self-characterisation and characterisation through • sociolect
• telling name
others (see also characterisation techniques in narrative prose ch. 2.4.1.).
The way these different forms of characterisation can be accomplished in
plays can be schematised as follows:
authorial figural
explicit descriptions of characters’ descriptions
characters in author of and comments on
commentary or stage other characters; also
directions; telling names self-characterisation
implicit correspondences and physical appearance,
contrasts; indirectly gesture and facial
characterising names expressions (body
language); masks and
costumes; stage props,
setting; behaviour;
voice; language (style,
register, dialect, etc.);
topics one discusses
Of course, the characterisation of figures usually works on several levels and

combines a number of these techniques.
An example of an explicit authorial characterisation can be found in
John Osborne’s Look Back in Anger, where the author provides a detailed
description of Jimmy in the introductory secondary text:
• JIMMY is a tall, thin young man about twenty-five, wearing a very worn
tweed jacket and flannels. Clouds of smoke fill the room from the pipe
he is smoking. He is a disconcerting mixture of sincerity and cheerful
malice, of tenderness and freebooting cruelty; restless, importunate, full
of pride, a combination which alienates the sensitive and insensitive
alike. Blistering honesty, or apparent honesty, like his, makes few
friends. To many he may seem sensitive to the point of vulgarity. To
others, he is simply a loud-mouth. To be as vehement as he is is to be
almost non-committal. (Osborne, Look Back in Anger)

Since this explicit authorial characterisation is obviously not available for
viewers in a theatre, Jimmy has to be characterised implicitly through the
audio-visual channel, i.e., in his interactions with the other characters, the
things he talks about, the way he talks, etc. One means of indirect
characterisation is already provided in Jimmy’s physical appearance. The
fact that he contrasts sharply with Cliff (tall and slender versus short and big
boned) suggests to the audience that he might be different in terms of
personality as well. The two men’s divergent characters are most visible in
the way they interact, however, and in their respective behaviour towards
Jimmy’s wife, Alison:
JIMMY Why do I do this every Sunday? Even the book reviews

seem to be the same as last week’s. Different books – same
reviews. Have you finished that one yet?
CLIFF Not yet.
JIMMY I’ve just read three whole columns on the English Novel.
Half of it’s in French. Do the Sunday papers make you feel
ignorant?
CLIFF Not ‘arf.
JIMMY Well, you are ignorant. You’re just a peasant. [To Alison.]
What about you? You’re not a peasant are you?
ALISON [absently.] What’s that?
JIMMY I said do the papers make you feel you’re not so brilliant
after all?
ALISON Oh – I haven’t read them yet.
JIMMY I didn’t ask you that. I said –
CLIFF Leave the poor girlie alone. She’s busy.
JIMMY Well, she can talk, can’t she? You can talk, can’t you? You
can express an opinion. Or does the White Woman’s Burden
make it impossible to think?
ALISON I’m sorry. I wasn’t listening properly.
JIMMY You bet you weren’t listening. Old Porter talks, and
everyone turns over and goes to sleep. And Mrs. Porter gets
‘em all going with the first yawn.
CLIFF Leave her alone I said.
JIMMY [shouting]. All right, dear. Go back to sleep. It was only me
talking. You know? Talking? Remember? I’m sorry.
CLIFF Stop yelling. I’m trying to read.
JIMMY Why do you bother? You can’t understand a word of it.
CLIFF Uh huh.
JIMMY You’re too ignorant.
CLIFF Yes, and uneducated. Now shut up, will you? (ibid.)
In this introductory scene the audience already forms an impression of

Jimmy as an almost unbearable, angry, young man because he insults his
friend and tries to provoke his wife by making derogatory comments about
her parents. The fact that he even starts shouting at Alison shows his ill-
temper and that he generally seems to be badly-behaved. By contrast, Cliff
tries to ignore Jimmy’s attacks as far as possible in order to avoid further
conflicts, and he protects Alison. While Jimmy criticises and humiliates his
wife, Cliff shows through his words and gestures that he cares for her.
Thus, he asks her to stop ironing and to relax from her household chores:

CLIFF […] [Puts out his hand to Alison.] How are you, dullin’?
ALISON All right thank you, dear.
CLIFF [grasping her hand]. Why don’t you leave all that, and sit down
for a bit? You look tired.
ALISON [smiling]. I haven’t much more to do.
CLIFF [kisses her hand, and puts her fingers in his mouth]. She’s a
beautiful girl, isn’t she?
His gestures and body language show Cliff as an openly affectionate

character. This character trait, which is conveyed in an implicit figural
technique of characterisation here, again contrasts with Jimmy’s behaviour
and thus brings Jimmy’s lack of loving kindness into sharper relief.
The outward appearance of characters is often used as an implicit
means of characterisation. Melodramatic plays, for example, generally
present the ‘goodies’ as fair and good-looking, while ‘baddies’ are of dark
complexion, wearing moustaches, etc.
In Shakespeare’s The Tempest, this device is also used for the
characterisation of Caliban. Caliban is an extremely ugly creature, which
already signifies the evil traits in his character. Furthermore, Caliban’s
language reveals him as ambiguous. While he speaks verse and is generally a
capable rhetorician, his speech is also marked by frequent swearing, insults,
vulgar and ungrammatical expressions. Thus he says to Prospero: “All the
charms/ Of Sycorax, toads, beetles, bats, light on you!” (The Tempest, I, 2:
398f) and later: “You taught me language, and my profit on’t/ Is I know
how to curse. The red plague rid you/ For learning me your language!”
(ibid: 424-426). Caliban’s evil character traits are also implicitly revealed to
the audience when Prospero relates how Caliban tried to rape his daughter,
Miranda, and when Caliban tries to inveigle Stephano and Trinculo into
usurping the island. This example shows that dramatic figures can be
characterised in a number of ways and that the audience is usually given
several signals or cues concerning the personality of characters: gesture,
behaviour, looks, etc.
Dramatic language is another important means of indirect
characterisation in plays. Characters are presented to the audience through
what they say and how they say it, their verbal interactions with others and
the discrepancies between their talk and their actions. In an actual
performance, an actor’s voice and tone thus also play a major role for how
the audience perceives the played character. This can also be seen in plays
where dialect or specific sociolects are used. Dialect indicates what region
or geographical area one comes from, while sociolect refers to linguistic
features which give away one’s social status and membership in a social
group. An example is Sean O’Casey’s Juno and the Paycock where the
characters speak with a broad Irish accent and use a lot of local
colloquialisms (even the title already employs accent: ‘paycock’ instead of
‘peacock’). Their language immediately categorises the characters as
members of a lower social class and it also underlines one of the major
themes of the play: patriotism.
Sometimes, character traits can already be anticipated by a
character’s name. So-called telling names, for example, explicitly state the
quality of a character (e.g., figures like Vice, Good-Deeds, Everyman,
Knowledge, Beauty, etc. in the Medieval morality plays), or they refer to

characters’ typical behaviour. Thus, some of the characters in Congreve’s
The Way of the World are identified as specific types through their names:
Fainall = ‘feigns all’, Mirabell = ‘admirable’ and also ‘admirer of female
beauty’, Witwoud = ‘would be witty’, and Millamant = ‘has a thousand
lovers’.
SO WHAT?
Characters represent one of the most important analytical categories in

drama since they carry the plot. In other words: there cannot be a play
without characters. Characters’ interactions trigger and move the plot, and
their various relationships to one another form the basis for conflicts and
dynamic processes. A lot of the terms used for techniques of
characterisation in narrative are also applicable in drama but one needs to
be aware of fundamental differences related to the different medium. When
we read a novel, for example, the narrator often describes characters which
we then have to imagine and bring to life in our mind’s eye. While this
exists in drama to the extent that we often find stage directions or
introductory comments in the secondary text, characters in actual
performances are always already interpretations of stage directors and actors
who bring characters to life for us. Our view of characters in staged plays is
thus inevitably influenced by the way an actor looks, how he speaks, how he
acts out his role, etc. Other influential factors can be costumes and make-
up, the overall setting in which a character is presented, etc.
Consider in what ways the different realisations of Hamlet in the
following pictures can potentially change the viewers’ attitudes towards the
character:
[Photo1: Laurence Olivier as Hamlet after he killed Polonius]
The first photo shows Hamlet played by Laurence Olivier in the 1948 film
version of the play (photo from Dent (1948) found on
http://www.murphsplace.com/olivier/hamlet2.html) [Dent, Alan (1948).
Hamlet – The Film and the Play. London: World Film Publications.]. The
costume and the set in general try to render the scene as authentically as
possible, i.e., this production aims at a realistic presentation of the play.
Hamlet is dressed in traditional costume, a courtly outfit which displays his
social rank and dignity. He wears a highly ornate doublet, jewellery and
stockings as would befit a mighty prince. His posture is upright, only his
head stoops slightly towards Polonius who lies dead at Hamlet’s feet.
Hamlet’s facial expression is serious and his eyes are fixed on the dead
body. This expression suits the tragic circumstances of Polonius’ death, but
it also underlines Hamlet’s shock when he discovers that it was not the king
he killed but Polonius. Hamlet’s face does not display sadness, however. It
is as though Hamlet was wearing a mask behind which he hides his
emotions. He seems to perceive Polonius’ death as an unfortunate, but
inevitable, event imposed on him by fate. At the same time, Hamlet’s facial
expression reveals his serious and melancholic character. Generally
speaking, one can say that Hamlet’s character appears as dignified through
the princely costume and Olivier’s body language.
[Photo 2: Pyjama Hamlet with Rosenkrantz and Guildenstern]
The second photo shows a modern version of Hamlet (“Shakespeare in

Performance”, photo by Joe Cocks Studio, Stratford-upon-Avon, 1989,
found on http://www.geocities.com/markaround/html/stagepics.htm). In
the scene depicted here, Hamlet talks to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern.
While the two attendants are dressed in formal contemporary suits, Hamlet
is wearing pyjamas. Hamlet’s outfit, which is not normally acceptable in
public because it belongs to people’s private and even intimate spheres,
already signals to the audience that something must be wrong with him. In a
way, Hamlet’s madness is epitomised by his inappropriate and somewhat
slovenly dress. This interpretation takes into account and even surpasses the
original text where Ophelia also comments on Hamlet’s changed
appearance: “with his doublet all unbrac’d,/ No hat upon his head, his
stockings foul’d,/ Ungarter’d and down-gyved to his ankle” (Hamlet, II, 1:
78-80). In addition to the ‘costume’, Hamlet’s facial expression represents
‘madness’, yet in a different way from the first photo. Hamlet grins while he
is shaking both Rosencrantz’ and Guildenstern’s hands, thereby expressing
mockery and foolish madness rather than melancholy or serious
derangement. Of course this suits the occasion, as Hamlet pokes fun at the
two attendants who were sent by the King to find out what is wrong with
the prince. At the same time, however, Hamlet is generally portrayed as less
dignified than in the first photo, and the stage set also trivialises the conflict
by placing it in a present-day and indeed, everyday, context. One has the
impression that tragic heroes in the traditional sense are simply no longer
possible in our modern day and age.
This example shows that the audience’s perception of a play’s
character largely depends on the way the character is interpreted by the
actor, director, make-up artists, costume designers, etc. Costumes as well as

facial expressions and gestures but also the stage set already convey or
emphasise certain character traits and create an atmosphere. For this reason,
different productions of a play can lead to divergent results.
3.7. Types of Utterance in Drama Key terms:

• pragmatic function of
language
Dramatic language is modelled on real-life conversations among people, and • poetic function of
yet, when one watches a play, one also has to consider the differences language
between real talk and drama talk. Dramatic language is ultimately always • monologue
constructed or ‘made up’ and it often serves several purposes. On the level • dialogue
• soliloquy
of the story-world of a play, language can of course assume all the
• aside
pragmatic functions that can be found in real-life conversations, too: e.g., • ad spectatores
to ensure mutual understanding and to convey information, to persuade or • turn allocation
influence someone, to relate one’s experiences or signal emotions, etc. • stichomythia
However, dramatic language is often rhetorical and poetic, i.e., it uses • repartee
language in ways which differ from standard usage in order to draw • wit
• wordplay
attention to its artistic nature (see Language in Literature ch. 1.6.). When
analysing dramatic texts, one ought to have a closer look at the various
forms of utterance available for drama.
3.7.1. Monologue, Dialogue, Soliloquy
In drama, in contrast to narrative, characters typically talk to one another

and the entire plot is carried by and conveyed through their verbal
interactions. Language in drama can generally be presented either as
monologue or dialogue. Monologue means that only one character speaks
while dialogue always requires two or more participants. A special form of
monologue, where no other person is present on stage beside the speaker, is
called soliloquy. Soliloquies occur frequently in Richard III for example,
where Richard often remains alone on stage and talks about his secret plans.
Soliloquies are mainly used to present a character in more detail and also on
a more personal level. In other words: Characters are able to ‘speak their
mind’ in soliloquies. That characters explain their feelings, motives, etc. on
stage appears unnatural from a real-life standpoint but this is necessary in
plays because it would otherwise be very difficult to convey thoughts, for
example. In narrative texts, by contrast, thoughts can be presented directly
through techniques such as interior monologue or free indirect discourse
(see ch. 2.7.). Consider the famous soliloquy from Hamlet:
To be, or not to be, that is the question:

Whether ‘tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles
And by opposing end them. To die – to sleep,
No more; and by a sleep to say we end
The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to: ‘tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish’d. To die, to sleep;
To sleep, perchance to dream – ay, there’s the rub:
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come,

When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause – there’s the respect
That makes calamity of so long life.
[…]
Thus conscience does make cowards of us all,
And thus the native hue of resolution
Is sicklied o’er with the pale cast of thought,
And enterprises of great pitch and moment
With this regard their currents turn awry
And lose the name of action. Soft you now,
The fair Ophelia! Nymph, in thy orisons
Be all my sins remember’d.
(Hamlet, III, 1: 56-88)
As soon as Ophelia enters the stage (“Soft you now,/ The fair Ophelia”,
line 86f), Hamlet’s speech is technically no longer a soliloquy. Critics often
refer to it simply as monologue, as this is the more general term. In case of
a monologue, other characters can be present on stage, either overhearing
the speech of the person talking or even being directly addressed by him or
her. The main point is that one person holds the floor for a lengthy period
of time. Hamlet’s soliloquy reveals his inner conflict to the audience. We
learn that he wavers between taking action and remaining passive. The fact
that he contemplates the miseries of life, death and the possibility of suicide
shows him as a melancholic, almost depressed character. At the same time,
his speech is profound and philosophical, and thus Hamlet comes across as
thoughtful and intellectual. This example illustrates one of the main
functions of language in drama, namely the indirect characterisation of
figures.
3.7.2. Asides
Another special form of speech in drama is the so-called aside. Asides are
spoken away from other characters, and a character either speaks aside to
himself, secretively to (an)other character(s) or to the audience (ad
spectatores). It is conspicuous that plays of the Elizabethan Age make
significantly more use of asides than modern plays, for example. One of the
reasons certainly has to do with the shape of the stage. The apron stage,
which was surrounded by the audience on three sides, makes asides more
effective since the actor who speaks, inevitably faces part of the audience,
while our modern proscenium stage does not really lend itself to asides as
the vicinity between actors and audience is missing. Asides are an important
device because they channel extra information past other characters directly
to the audience. Thus, spectators are in a way taken into confidence and
they often become ‘partners-in-crime’, so to speak, because they ultimately
know more than some of the figures on stage (see Information Flow ch.
3.2.).
SO WHAT?
Dramatic language is multi-faceted and fulfils a number of functions within

a play. As a consequence it can have various effects on the audience.

Consider, for example, the way asides are employed in Cyril Tourneur’s The
Revenger’s Tragedy. After the discovery of the Duke’s dead body, the various
characters react differently and express this in asides:
LUSSURIOSO: Behold, behold, my lords!

The Duke my father’s murdered by a vassal
That owes this habit and here left disguised.
[Enter DUCHESS and SPURIO.]
DUCHESS My lord and husband!
[FIRST NOBLE] Reverend Majesty.
[SECOND NOBLE] I have seen these clothes often attending on him.
VINDICE [aside] That nobleman has been i’th’country, for he does not
lie.
SUPERVACUO [aside] Learn of our mother, let’s dissemble too.
I am glad he’s vanished; so I hope are you.
AMBITIOSO [aside] Ay, you may take my word for’t.
SPURIO [aside] Old dad dead?
I, one of his cast sins, will send the fates
Most hearty commendations by his own son;
I’ll tug in the new stream till strength be done.
[…]
HIPPOLITO [aside] Brother, how happy is our vengeance!
VINDICE [aside] Why, it hits
Past the apprehension of indifferent wits.
LUSSURIOSO My lord, let post-horse be sent
Into all places to entrap the villain.
VINDICE [aside] Post-horse! Ha, ha!
NOBLE My lord, we’re something bold to know our duty:
Your father’s accidentally departed;
The titles that were due to him meet you.
LUSSURIOSO Meet me? I’m not at leisure my good lord,
I’ve many griefs to dispatch out o’the’way.
[Aside] Welcome, sweet titles. – Talk to me, my lords,
Of sepulchres and mighty emperors’ bones;
That’s thought for me.
VINDICE [aside] So, one may see by this
How foreign markets go:
Courtiers have feet o’th’nines, and tongues o’th’twelves,
They flatter dukes and dukes flatter themselves.
(The Revenger’s Tragedy, V, 1: 105-148)
Asides are used to such an extent here that they make the entire plot with
the characters’ secrets and hidden thoughts almost farcical. The asides in
this excerpt are spoken both to other characters as when Ambitioso and
Supervacuo talk to one another aside from the others (lines 111-113), and
to oneself, e.g., when Lussurioso expresses his secret joy about the Duke’s
death because that means he will accede to the throne (line 143). The asides
provide further information, e.g., concerning Spurio’s plan to kill the new
Duke (lines 114-117), but mostly they are used here to reveal the different
characters’ double standards and hidden agendas. None of the Duke’s sons
is really sad about his death, which is finally commented on by Vindice in
another aside (lines 145-148).

Furthermore, the asides also clarify groups of characters who share
their respective secrets: Supervacuo and Ambitioso and Vindice and
Hippolito. Vindice’s and Hippolito’s asides are often ironic because they
actually committed the crime and now revel in their success. This example
shows that a linguistic device such as an aside can serve various purposes
and needs to be analysed in context.
When asides are used in an extraordinarily extensive way, as is the case in
the Revenger’s Tragedy, one may also ask why this is done. Although the aside
was a common technique in Elizabethan and Jacobean drama, its
application is undoubtedly exaggerated in Tourneur’s tragedy. Occasionally,
one forms the impression that the characters speak nearly as much aside as
they speak openly to other characters. As a result, the aside as an artificial
theatrical device is highlighted and brought to the viewer’s attention, which
in turn potentially ridicules contemporary conventions. The audience not
only becomes aware of the characters’ secret thoughts but it is also fully
conscious of the fact that what it watches is simply a play that has been
‘constructed’ following traditional conventions. In a sense, the play thus
pokes fun at itself and adds an unexpected layer of humour to a genre
which originally was not meant to be humorous at all (revenge tragedy)
3.7.3. Turn Allocation, Stichomythia, Repartee
In comparison to monologues and asides, dialogue is by far the most

frequently used type of speech in drama. In analysing dialogue, one can look
at turn-taking and the allocation of turns to different speakers, e.g., how
many lines is each character’s turn? Do some characters have longer turns
than others and, if so, why? One can also analyse how often a character gets
the chance to speak through the entire play and whether he or she is
interrupted by others or not. For an example consider the excerpt from
John Osborne’s Look Back in Anger in the So What section below.
A special type of turn allocation occurs when speaker’s alternating turns
are of one line each. This is called stichomythia and is often, albeit not
exclusively, used in contexts where characters compete or disagree with one
another. In the following excerpt from Richard III, Richard tries to persuade
Elizabeth to woo her daughter on his behalf:
KING RICHARD Infer fair England’s peace by this alliance.

ELIZABETH Which she shall purchase with still-lasting war.
KING RICHARD Tell her the King, that may command, entreats.
ELIZABETH That, at her hands, which the King’s King forbids.
KING RICHARD Say she shall be a high and mighty queen.
ELIZABETH To vail the title, as her mother doth.
KING RICHARD Say I will love her everlastingly.
ELIZABETH But how long shall that title ‘ever’ last?
KING RICHARD Sweetly in force, until her fair life’s end.
ELZABETH But how long fairly shall her sweet life last?
KING RICHARD As long as heaven and nature lengthens it.
ELIZABETH As long as hell and Richard likes of it.
KING RICHARD Say I, her sovereign, am her subject low.
ELIZABETH But she, your subject, loathes such sovereignty.
KING RICHARD Be eloquent in my behalf to her.

ELIZABETH An honest tale speeds best being plainly told.
KING RICHARD Then plainly to her tell my loving tale.
ELIZABETH Plain and not honest is too harsh a style.
KING RICHARD Your reasons are too shallow and too quick.
[…]
(Richard III, IV, 4: 343-361)
This dialogue is marked by repartees, i.e., quick responses given in order to

top remarks of another speaker or to use them to one’s own advantage. The
repartees in this example express Elizabeth’s doubts and counter-
arguments. The fact that stichomythia is used here underlines the
argumentative character of this conversation. In a sense, Richard and
Elizabeth compete rhetorically: Richard in order to persuade Elizabeth and
Elizabeth in order to resist Richard’s persuasive devices. Through the quick
turn-taking mechanism, the dialogue also appears livelier and in itself
represents fast action.
This is reinforced by a number of word plays and rhetorical figures
which use the repetition of words and sounds and thus demonstrate how
tightly connected the individual turns are and that each turn immediately
responds to the previous one: “everlastingly” – “ever last” (349f); figura
etymologica: “sweetly” – “sweet” (351f), “fair” – “fairly” (351f),
“sovereign” – “sovereignty” (356f); parallelism: “As long as…/ As long
as…” (353f); assonance: “low”, “loathes” (356f); chiasmus: “An honest
tale speeds best being plainly told. / Then plainly to her tell my loving tale”
(358f).
SO WHAT?
The distribution and amount of turns speakers are allocated in plays is an

important feature to investigate in drama. Let us have a look at the
following excerpt from John Osborne’s Look Back in Anger, where Jimmy
starts to rage after Alison has told him she wants to go to church with her
friend, Helena:
JIMMY: You’re doing what?

Silence.
Have you gone out of your mind or something? (To Helena.) You’re
determined to win her, aren’t you? So it’s come to this now! How
feeble can you get? (His rage mounting within.) When I think of what I
did, what I endured, to get you out –
ALISON: (recognising an onslaught on the way, starts to panic). Oh
yes, we all know what you did for me! You rescued me from the
wicked clutches of my family, and all my friends! I’d still be rotting
away at home, if you hadn’t ridden up on your charger, and carried me
off!
The wild note in her voice has re-assured him. His anger cools and hardens. His
voice is quite calm when he speaks.
JIMMY: The funny thing is, you know, I really did have to ride up on
a white charger – off white, really. Mummy locked her up in their
eight bedroomed castle, didn’t she? There is no limit to what the
middle-aged mummy will do in the holy crusade against ruffians like

me. Mummy and I took one quick look at each other, and, from then
on, the age of chivalry was dead. I knew that, to protect her innocent
young, she wouldn’t hesitate to cheat, lie, bully, and blackmail.
Threatened with me, a young man without money, background or
even looks, she’d bellow like a rhinoceros in labour – enough to make
every male rhino for miles turn white, and pledge himself to celibacy.
But even I under-estimated her strength. Mummy may look over-fed
and a bit flabby on the outside, but don’t let that well-bred guzzler
fool you. Underneath all that, she’s armour plated –
[…]
All so that I shan’t carry off her daughter on that poor old charger of
mine, all tricked out and caparisoned in discredited passions and
ideals! The old grey mare that actually once led the charge against the
old order – well, she certainly ain’t what she used to be. It was all she
could do to carry me, but your weight (to Alison) was too much for
her. She just dropped dead on the way.
CLIFF: (quietly). Don’t let’s brawl, boyo. It won’t do any good.[…]
(Look Back in Anger, II, 1)
Alison, anticipating Jimmy’s criticism, at first interrupts him. This is typical

of arguments, especially when people are emotional in that situation. Then,
however, Jimmy takes over again and his turn is significantly longer than
anyone else’s in this scene (although it is even abbreviated here!). On the
one hand, this indicates Jimmy’s open and unrestrained rage, and on the
other hand it signals to the audience that he is the dominant character in
this scene. In fact, Jimmy is allocated most turns in the play and his turns
are the longest on average, which demonstrates even on a linguistic level
that he domineers not only over his wife but also his friends.
At the same time, one can recognise a discrepancy between Jimmy’s
talk and his actions. While he shouts all the time and criticises everyone, he
does not really manage to change anything in his own life. Verbally more
than active, he remains disappointingly passive as far as his personal
circumstances are concerned and thus involuntarily conveys a sense of
failure to the audience. The imagery Jimmy uses in his speech underlines
this discrepancy. With a touch of self-irony, Jimmy draws upon the
semantic field of chivalry and romance, thereby implicitly claiming for
himself the role of a hero who had to ‘rescue’ Alison from her
overpowering mother: “carry off her daughter”. The motorbike is
affectionately likened to an “old grey mare”, which had “led the charge
against the old order”. Jimmy’s ‘fight’ against the establishment is evoked in
this image, and Alison is indirectly blamed for the fact that all this ‘heroism’
is over now: “but your weight […] was too much for her”. Alison’s mother
is downgraded by a rhetorically adept comparison with the animal world
and derogatory references to her physical appearance: “to protect her
innocent young”, “she’d bellow like a rhinoceros in labour”, “over-fed”,
“flabby”, “well-bred guzzler”.
Jimmy’s rage finds an outlet in lengthy speeches whose main
purpose is to insult and provoke people. While his seemingly confident way
of speaking conveys an illusion of being in the right, the audience soon
realises that all this anger probably covers a feeling of vulnerability in Jimmy
and a sense of dissatisfaction with himself. From an objective, outside point

of view, Jimmy’s life can be considered a failure. He has not achieved any of
his lofty aims.
Occasionally, even the lack of language can be significant. Silence,
which can sometimes hardly be borne in real-life conversations, appears as
particularly marked in plays, especially when it lasts for a lengthy time. In
the final scene of Edward Bond’s Saved, the characters move and act but do
not say a word:
The living-room.
PAM sits on the couch. She reads the Radio Times.
MARY takes things from the table and goes out. Pause. She comes back. She goes
to the table. She collects the plates. She goes out.
Pause. The door opens. HARRY comes in. He goes to the table and opens the
drawer. He searches in it.
PAM turns a page.
MARY comes in. She goes to the table and picks up the last things on it. She goes
out.
HARRY’S jacket is draped on the back of the chair by the table. He searches in the
pockets.
PAM turns a page:
There is a loud bang (off).
Silence.
HARRY turns to the table and searches in the drawer.
MARY comes in. She wipes the table top with a damp cloth.
There is a loud bang (off).
MARY goes out.
[…]
(Saved, 13)
The scene continues like this right until the end without the characters
talking to one another. This final scene is the culmination point of a play in
which lack of communication and educational as well as emotional poverty
constitute central themes. In a way, the silence is indicative of the
characters’ lack of a real relationship, and ultimately of the senselessness of
their lives. This is best brought home to the audience by means of a lasting
silence, which seems oppressive and yet inevitable.
At the same time, life is shown to continue, no matter what
happens. Even the outrageous and incredibly violent murder of Pam’s baby
by means of stoning has not really had a significant impact on either Pam’s
or her family’s life. The message one gets is that nothing can be done or
changed. Language or better, the lack of language, thus becomes symbolic
and has wider implications for our understanding of a society where cultural
and emotional deprivation engenders violence.
In Edward Bond’s own words, the ending can even be considered
optimistic since at least one person, Len, does seem to care: “The play ends
in a silent social stalemate, but if the spectator thinks this is pessimistic that
is because he has not learned to clutch at straws. […] The gesture of turning
the other cheek is often the gesture of refusing to look facts in the face –
but this is not true of Len. He lives with people at their worst and most
hopeless (that is the point of the final scene) and does not turn away from
them. I cannot imagine an optimism more tenacious, disciplined or honest
than his” (Saved, Author’s Note). In fact, it is Len who continuously breaks

the silence of the final scene by banging on the chair in order to fix it and,
significantly enough, he is given the only line in the entire scene when he
instructs Pam to fetch his hammer. The attempt to fix the chair can be
interpreted as a final attempt at ‘fixing’ these people’s family life.
3.7.4. The Significance of Wordplay in Drama
The play with language entertains spectators and at the same time attracts
and sustains their attention. Consider the way Polonius introduces to the
King and Queen his explanation for Hamlet’s ‘madness’:
Madam, I swear I use no art at all.

That he is mad ‘tis true; ‘tis true ‘tis pity;
And pity ‘tis ‘tis true. A foolish figure-
But farewell it, for I will use no art.
Mad let us grant him then. And now remains
That we find out the cause of this effect,
Or rather say the cause of this defect,
For this effect defective comes by cause.
Thus it remains; and the remainder thus:
[…]
(Hamlet, II, 2: 96-104)
By constantly juxtaposing and repeating words, Polonius attempts to display

his ‘cleverness’ because he believes to have found out the cause for
Hamlet’s madness, namely Hamlet’s interest in Ophelia, Polonius’ daughter.
This play with sound patterns and words catches the audience’s attention
because it deviates from normal uses of language. At the same time, it is
entertaining, especially since the audience knows that Polonius’ assumption
is wrong and Ophelia is not the reason for Hamlet’s madness. Thus, rather
than appearing as clever, Polonius comes across as a fool who even uses a
fool’s language (although real fools were traditionally considered wise men
who indirectly told the truth and held up a mirror to society through their
playful language).
A special type of wordplay is the so-called pun, where words are used
which are the same or at least similar in sound and spelling (homonyms)
but differ in meaning. Oscar Wilde’s play The Importance of Being Earnest, for
example, centres on the pun on the name Ernest and the adjective ‘earnest’,
which denotes the character trait of being sincere and serious.
Puns were also very common in Elizabethan plays and they were used
both for comical and serious effects. Consider, for example, Hamlet’s
advice to Polonius concerning his daughter Ophelia:
Let her not walk i’th’sun. Conception is a blessing,

But as your daughter may conceive – friend, look
To’t. [...]
(Hamlet, II, 2: 184-186)
When Hamlet warns Polonius not to let his daughter “walk in the sun”, this
can mean quite literally that she should not walk outside, e.g., in public
places, but if one considers that the sun in Elizabethan times was also used

as a royal emblem, the sentence can be read as an indirect warning not to let
Ophelia come near Hamlet himself. Another pun is used with the words
“conception” and “conceive”, which on the one hand refer to the
formation of ideas and hence are positive (“blessing”) but on the other
hand also mean that a woman becomes pregnant, which was not desirable
for an unmarried woman. Thus, Hamlet implicitly advises Polonius to take
care of his daughter lest she should lose her innocence and consequently
her good reputation. The puns, albeit funny at first glance, convey a serious
message.
Another concept to be mentioned in the context of play with
language is wit. The idea of wit, which combines humour and intellect,
plays a significant role in the so-called comedy of manners. Wit is
expressed in brief verbal expressions which are intentionally contrived to
create a comic surprise. It was particularly popular in plays of the
Restoration Period, and the most well-known examples are William
Wycherley’s The Country Wife (1675) and William Congreve’s The Way of the
World (1700).
Another author famous for his witty plays is the late nineteenth-century
writer Oscar Wilde. Consider the following brief excerpt from his play The
Importance of Being Earnest:
LADY BRACKNELL Good afternoon, dear Algernon, I hope you are

behaving very well.
ALGERNON I’m feeling very well, Aunt Augusta.
LADY BRACKNELL That’s not quite the same thing. In fact the two
things rarely go together. [Sees Jack and bows to him with icy coldness.]
ALGERNON [To Gwendolen] Dear me, you are smart!
GWENDOLEN I am always smart! Aren’t I, Mr Worthing?
JACK You’re quite perfect, Miss Fairfax.
GWENDOLEN Oh! I hope I am not that. It would leave no room for
developments, and I intend to develop in many directions.
(The Importance of Being Earnest, I)
This short verbal exchange where four of the characters greet one another
abounds in witty remarks and comments, which are meant to display the
speakers’ cleverness. Lady Bracknell, for example, signals with her reply to
Algernon that she is a knowledgeable woman, who has had some
experience of the world. Gwendolen’s reply to Jack’s compliment shows her
coquetry. She is fully aware of her effect on Jack and plays with her
attractiveness. While language here portrays society and its behavioural
codes at large, it also gives an indirect characterisation of individual
characters.
3.8. Types of Stage Key terms:

• amphitheatre
• mystery play
Drama, just like the other genres, has undergone significant changes in its • morality play
historical development. This is partly attributable to the fact that stage types • apron stage
have also changed and have thus required different forms of acting. Let us • proscenium stage /
have a look at the various stage forms throughout history (based on Pfister picture frame stage
1997: 41-45):

3.8.1. Greek Classicism
Plays in ancient Greece were staged in amphitheatres, which were marked

by a round stage about three quarters surrounded by the audience. Since
amphitheatres were very large and could hold great masses of people (up to
25,000), the actors could hardly be seen from far back, and for this reason,
acting included speaking in a loud, declamatory voice, wearing masks and
symbolical costumes and acting with large gestures.
The chorus was a vital part of ancient drama. It had the function of
commenting on the play as well as giving warning and advice to characters.
The stage scenery was neutral and was accompanied by the real landscape
surrounding the amphitheatre. Plays were performed in broad daylight,
which also made it impossible to create an illusion of ‘real life’ on stage, at
least for night scenes. That was not intended anyway. Ancient Greek drama
was originally performed on special occasions like religious ceremonies, and
it thus had a more ritual, symbolic and also didactic purpose. Another
interesting fact to know is that the audience in ancient Greece consisted
only of free men, i.e., slaves and women were excluded.
3.8.2. The Middle Ages:
Medieval plays were primarily performed during religious festivities

(mystery plays, morality plays). They were staged on wagons, which
stopped somewhere in the market place and were entirely surrounded by
the audience. The close vicinity between actors and audience has to account
for a way of acting which combined serious renditions of the topic in
question with stand-up comedy and funny or bawdy scenes, depending on
the taste of the audience. Actors took into account the everyday experiences
of their viewers and there was much more interaction between audience and
actors than nowadays. The lack of clear boundaries between stage and
audience again impeded the creation of a realistic illusion, which was also
not intended.

3.8.3. Renaissance England:
The Elizabethan stage was typically found in public theatres, i.e., plays were
no longer performed outside. However, the Elizabethan theatre was still an
open-air theatre as the lack of artificial lighting made daylight necessary for
performances. An exception was the Blackfriars theatre, which was indoors
and lit by candlelight. Theatre groups were now professional and sponsored
by wealthy aristocrats. Groups which were not under anybody’s patronage
were considered disreputable vagabonds.
The stage was surrounded by the audience on three sides and there
was still a close vicinity between audience and actors. The most common
stage form in Renaissance England was the apron stage which was
surrounded by the audience on three sides. This meant that actors could not
possibly ignore their viewers, and theatrical devices such as asides and
monologues ad spectatores were an integral part of the communication
system. The stage set was reasonably barren while costumes could be very
elaborate. Since performances took place in broad daylight, the audience
had to imagine scenes set at night, for example, and respective information
had to be conveyed rhetorically in the characters’ speeches (word scenery).
As there was barely any scenery, scenes could change very quickly with
people entering and exiting. The three unities were thus frequently not
strictly adhered to in Elizabethan drama. The Elizabethan theatre could
hold up to 2,000 people, and the audience was rather heterogeneous,
consisting of people from different social backgrounds. Plays of that period
thus typically combine various subject matters and modes (e.g., tragic and
comical) because they attempted to appeal to as wide an audience as
possible.
3.8.4. Restoration Period:
Theatres of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries were considerably

smaller than the Elizabethan theatre (they held around 500 people), and
performances took place in closed rooms with artificial lighting. In contrast
to modern theatres where the audience sits in the dark, the audience in the
Restoration period was seated in a fully illuminated room. One must bear in
mind that people of the higher social class were also interested in presenting
themselves in public, and attending a play offered just such an opportunity.
Because of the lighting arrangement, the division between audience and
actors was thus not as clear-cut as today. Plays had the status of a cultural
event, and the audience was more homogeneous than in earlier periods,
belonging primarily to higher social classes. While the stage was closed in by
a decorative frame and the distance between audience and actors was thus
enlarged, there was still room for interaction by means of a minor stage
jutting out into the auditorium. Furthermore, there was no curtain so that
changes of scene had to take place on stage in front of the audience.
Restoration plays thus still did not aim at creating a sense of realism but
they presented an idealised, highly stylised image of scenery, characters,
language and subject matter.

3.8.5. Modern Times:
The stage of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries is called proscenium

stage or picture frame stage because it is shaped in such a way that the
audience watches the play as it would regard a picture: The ramp clearly
separates actors and audience, and the curtain underlines this division.
Furthermore, while the stage is illuminated during the performance, the
auditorium remains dark, which also turns the audience into an anonymous
mass. Since the audience is thus not disturbed from watching the play and
can fully concentrate on the action on stage, it becomes easier to create an
illusion of real life in plays. Furthermore, the scenery is now often elaborate
and as true-to-life as possible thanks to new technologies and more detailed
stage props.
While many modern plays aim at creating the illusion of a story-
world ‘as it could be in real life’ and acting conventions follow this dictum
accordingly, there have also been a great number of theatrical movements
which counter exactly this realism. However, the modern stage form has
not been able to fully accommodate to the needs of more experimental
plays (e.g., the epic theatre), nor to older plays such as those of ancient
Greece or the Elizabethan Age simply because the overall stage conventions
diverge too much. For this reason, we find nowadays a wide range of
different types of stage alongside the proscenium stage of conventional
theatres.
3.9. Dramatic Sub-genres

Ever since Aristotle’s Poetics, one distinguishes at least between two sub- Key terms:
genres of drama: comedy and tragedy (see also Genre ch.1.4.2.). While • high comedy
• low comedy
comedy typically aims at entertaining the audience and making it laugh by • romantic comedy
reassuring them that no disaster will occur and that the outcome of possible • satiric comedy
conflicts will be positive for the characters involved, tragedy tries to raise • comedy of manners
the audience’s concern, to confront viewers with serious action and • farce
conflicts, which typically end in a catastrophe (usually involving the death of • commedia dell’arte
• comedy of humours
the protagonist and possibly others). Both comedy and tragedy have, in the
• melodrama
course of literary history, developed further sub-genres of which the • Senecan tragedy
following list provides only an initial overview. • revenge tragedy
• dumb show
• play-within-the-play
3.9.1. Types of Comedy • domestic tragedy
(bourgeois tragedy)
• anti-hero
Sometimes, scholars distinguish between high comedy, which appeals to • tragicomedy
the intellect (comedy of ideas) and has a serious purpose (for example, to
criticise), and low comedy, where greater emphasis is placed on situation
comedy, slapstick and farce. There are further sub-genres of comedy:
Romantic Comedy:
A pair of lovers and their struggle to come together is usually at the centre
of romantic comedy. Romantic comedies also involve some extraordinary
circumstances, e.g., magic, dreams, the fairy-world, etc. Examples are
Shakespeare’s A Midsummer Night’s Dream or As You Like It.

Satiric Comedy:
Satiric comedy has a critical purpose. It usually attacks philosophical notions
or political practices as well as general deviations from social norms by
ridiculing characters. In other words: the aim is not to make people ‘laugh
with’ the characters but ‘laugh at’ them. An early writer of satirical comedies
was Aristophanes (450-385 BC), later examples include Ben Jonson’s
Volpone and The Alchemists.
Comedy of Manners:
The comedy of manners is also satirical in its outlook and it takes the
artificial and sophisticated behaviour of the higher social classes under
closer scrutiny. The plot usually revolves around love or some sort of
amorous intrigue and the language is marked by witty repartees and
cynicism. Ancient representatives of this form of comedy are Terence and
Plautus, and the form reached its peak with the Restoration comedies of
William Wycherley and William Congreve.
Farce:
The farce typically provokes viewers to hearty laughter. It presents highly
exaggerated and caricatured types of characters and often has an unlikely
plot. Farces employ sexual mix-ups, verbal humour and physical comedy,
and they formed a central part of the Italian commedia dell’arte. In
English plays, farce usually appears as episodes in larger comical pieces, e.g.,
in Shakespeare’s The Taming of the Shrew.
Comedy of Humours:
Ben Jonson developed the comedy of humours, which is based on the
assumption that a person’s character or temperament is determined by the
predominance of one of four humours (i.e., body liquids): blood (=
sanguine), phlegm (= phlegmatic), yellow bile (= choleric), black bile (=
melancholic). In the comedy of humours, characters are marked by one of
these predispositions which cause their eccentricity or distorted personality.
An example is Ben Jonson’s Every Man in His Humour.
Melodrama:
Melodrama is a type of stage play which became popular in the 19th century.
It mixes romantic or sensational plots with musical elements. Later, the
musical elements were no longer considered essential. Melodrama aims at a
violent appeal to audience emotions and usually has a happy ending.
3.9.2. Types of Tragedy
Senecan Tragedy:
A precursor of tragic drama were the tragedies by the Roman poet Seneca
(4 BC – 65 AD). His tragedies were recited rather than staged but they
became a model for English playwrights entailing the five-act structure, a
complex plot and an elevated style of dialogue.
Revenge Tragedy / Tragedy of Blood:

This type of tragedy represented a popular genre in the Elizabethan Age
and made extensive use of certain elements of the Senecan tragedy such as

murder, revenge, mutilations and ghosts. Typical examples of this sub-genre
are Christopher Marlowe’s The Jew of Malta, Shakespeare’s Titus Andronicus
and Thomas Kyd’s The Spanish Tragedy. These plays were written in verse
and, following Aristotelian poetics, the main characters were of a high social
rank (the higher they are, the lower they fall). Apart from dealing with
violent subject matters, these plays conventionally made use of dumb
shows or play-within-the-play, that is a play performed as part of the plot
of the play as for example ‘The Mousetrap’ which is performed in Hamlet,
and feigned or real madness in some of the characters.
Domestic / Bourgeois Tragedy:

In line with a changing social system where the middle class gained
increasing importance and power, tragedies from the 18th century onward
shifted their focus to protagonists from the middle or lower classes and
were written in prose. The protagonist typically suffers a domestic disaster
which is intended to arouse empathy rather than pity and fear in the
audience. An example is George Lillo’s The London Merchant: or, The History of
George Barnwell (1731).
Modern tragedies such as Arthur Miller’s The Death of a Salesman
(1949) follow largely the new conventions set forth by the domestic tragedy
(common conflict, common characters, prose) and a number of
contemporary plays have exchanged the tragic hero for an anti-hero, who
does not display the dignity and courage of a traditional hero but is passive,
petty and ineffectual. Other dramas resuscitate elements of ancient tragedies
such as the chorus and verse, e.g., T.S. Eliot’s The Murder in the Cathedral
(1935).
Tragicomedy:
The boundaries of genres are often blurred in drama and occasionally they
lead to the emergence of new sub-genres, e.g., the tragicomedy.
Tragicomedies, as the name suggests, intermingle conventions concerning
plot, character and subject matter derived from both tragedy and comedy.
Thus, characters of both high and low social rank can be mixed as in
Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice (1600), or a serious conflict, which is
likely to end in disaster, suddenly reaches a happy ending because of some
unforeseen circumstances as in John Fletcher’s The Faithful Shepherdess
(c.1609). Plays with multiple plots which combine tragedy in one plot and
comedy in the other are also occasionally referred to as tragicomedies (e.g.,
Thomas Middleton’s and William Rowley’s The Changeling, 1622).
SO WHAT?
Let us consider Cyril Tourneur’s The Revenger’s Tragedy (c.1607). The title as
such already allocates the play to a specific genre, the so-called revenge
tragedy, but when one reads the play one is often struck by the mixture of
tragedy and comedy. Act III, Scene 5 offers a particularly poignant example.
In this scene, Vindice carefully prepares and eventually executes his revenge
on the lecherous Duke who killed Vindice’s fiancée because she resisted his
advances. In a rhetorically powerful speech, Vindice philosophises about
the transience of life and hence the pointlessness of giving up morality for
pleasure:

Does the silk-worm expend her yellow labours
For thee? For thee does she undo herself?
Are lordships sold to maintain ladyships
For the poor benefit of a bewitching minute?
[…]
Does every proud and self-affecting dame
Camphor her face for this, and grieve her Maker
In sinful baths of milk, – when many an infant starves
For her superfluous outside, – all for this?
The topic and rhetoric is reminiscent of Hamlet’s philosophical

contemplations but this serious tone is not maintained throughout the
scene. When Vindice disguises the skull of his dead fiancée, for example, he
addresses ‘her’ as follows:
Madam, his grace will not be absent long.

Secret? Ne’er doubt us madam; ‘twill be worth
Three velvet gowns to your ladyship. Known?
Few ladies respect that disgrace, a poor thin shell!
‘Tis the best grace you have to do it well;
I’ll save your hand that labour, I’ll unmask you.
Vindice appears to be almost mad. He seems to be carried away by the idea

that his time of revenge is finally approaching. At the same time, he takes
pleasure in ‘staging’ the Duke’s death and he makes a number of comments
during the scene which create irony for the spectators who, unlike the
Duke, know exactly what is going on (dramatic irony, see ch. 3.2.3.1.). Thus,
he puns on the “grave look” (II, 5: 137) of the “bashful” lady (III, 5:133),
which is absolutely hilarious for the audience. Playing with words is a typical
feature of the language style in comedies as it offers a lightness of tone
which contrasts with the heroic and serious style of tragic speeches
(wordplay can also be used in serious contexts, however, see ch. 3.7.4.).
Vindice’s brother, Hippolito, also uses a playful tone when he says:
Yet ‘tis no wonder, now I think again,

To have a lady stoop to a duke, that stoops unto his men.
‘Tis common to be common through the world,
And there’s more private common shadowing vices
Than those who are known both by their names and prices.
The repetition of “stoop” and “common” reminds one of the language of

comedies where witty remarks are often clad in puns. Scene 5 reaches its
climax when the Duke kisses the skull and is thus poisoned. The Duke’s
first reaction is surprise: “Oh, what’s this? Oh!” (III, 5: 160). Depending on
how this line is spoken, it can be very amusing.
The same applies to the way the Duke dies. First of all, it takes an
unusually long time and, apart from a few short phrases, the Duke is only
able to utter “oh” every once in a while. There is no moving speech, and the

Duke’s death lacks the dignity of other tragic deaths. Quite on the contrary,
Vindice and Hippolito even further downgrade the Duke by stamping on
him sadistically and by making jokes on the Duke’s lament: “My teeth are
eaten out” (III, 5: 160), meaning ‘I am dying’. “Hadst any left?” (ibid.),
Vindice asks back, and Hippolito remarks: “I think but few” (III, 5: 161).
Finally, Vindice becomes impatient because the Duke is still alive and he
says: “What! Is not thy tongue eaten out yet?” (III, 5: 190). This kind of
wordplay deflates a fundamentally tragic event and presents it in an almost
humorous manner. Scenes like this thus appear, especially to a modern
audience, more like a farce or parody than tragedy. Of course this very
much depends on how a director chooses to stage this play. The Revenger’s
Tragedy can easily be performed in a comical manner because there is great
comical potential in the way the subject matter is rendered linguistically and
plot-wise.
Tourneur’s play is not exceptional for its time. A number of plays in
the Elizabethan and Jacobean period somehow waver between being
comedies or tragedies, and difficulties in classifying plays as ‘either/or’
already induced contemporary authors to speak about their plays as
tragicomedies (e.g., John Fletcher in the preface to his play The Faithful
Shepherdess). This shows that generic terms are somewhat arbitrary and
dependent on culturally defined conventions, which one needs to know in
order to be able to discuss plays appropriately in their context.

Bibliography: Drama
Primary Texts:
Shakespeare, William. 1994. Complete Works. Ed. Peter Alexander. Glasgow:

HarperCollins.
Beckett, Samuel. 1965. Waiting for Godot: A Tragicomedy in Two Acts.
London/Boston: Faber.
Bond, Edward. 1965. Saved. London: Methuen.
Congreve, William. 1971 [1700]. The Way of the World. Ed. Brian Gibbons.
London: Ernest Benn.
Shakespeare, William. 1981. King Richard III. Ed. Anthony Hammond.
Arden Edition. London/New York: Routledge.
Wilde, Oscar. 1994. Complete Works. Ed. Merlin Holland. Glasgow:
HarperCollins.
Shakespeare, William. 1982. Hamlet. Ed. Harold Jenkins. Arden Edition.
London: Methuen.
O’Casey, Sean. 1994. Three Plays: Juno and the Paycock, The Shadow of a Gunman,
The Plough and the Stars. London: Macmillan Papermac.
Osborne, John. 1957. Look Back in Anger. A Play in Three Acts.
London/Boston: Faber.
Salgado, Gamini, ed. 1965. Three Jacobean Tragedies. Harmondsworth:
Penguin.
Shaffer, Peter. 1974. Equus. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Secondary Sources:
Asmuth, Bernard. 1997. Einführung in die Dramenanalyse. Stuttgart: Metzler.

Banham, Martin, ed. 1995. The Cambridge Guide to Theatre. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Bevington, David. 1996. “‘But We Are Spirits of Another Sort’: The Dark
Side of Love and Magic in A Midsummer Night’s Dream.” New
Casebooks. A Midsummer Night’s Dream. Ed. Richard Dutton.
Basingstoke/London: Macmillan: 24-35.
Berry, Ralph. 1985. Shakespeare and the Awareness of the Audience. London:
Macmillan.
Bradbrook, Muriel C. 1963. The Growth and Structure of Elizabethan Comedy.
Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Bradbrook, Muriel C. 1980. Themes and Conventions of Elizabethan Tragedy.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brooke, Nicholas. 1979. Horrid Laughter in Jacobean Tragedy. London: Open
Books.
Brown, John Russell, ed. 1995. The Oxford Illustrated History of Theatre.
Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
Corrigan, Robert W. 1992. The World of Theatre. Madison: Brown and
Benchmark.
Erzgräber, Willi 1994. “Shakespeares Hamlet als Rachetragödie.” Freiburger
Universitätsblätter 125.3: 7-20.
Esslin, Martin. 1974. The Theatre of the Absurd. London: Methuen.
Esslin, Martin. 1977. An Anatomy of Drama. New York: Hill and Wang.

Fielitz, Sonja. 1995. “Grundfragen der Dramenanalyse.” Handbuch Englisch
als Fremdsprache. Ed. Rüdiger Ahrens. Berlin: Erich Schmidt. 309-
313.
Fielitz, Sonja. 1999. Drama: Text und Theater. Berlin: Cornelsen.
Gianakaris, Constantine John. 1977. “Theatre of the Mind in Miller,
Osborne and Shaffer.” Renascence 30.1: 33-41.
Goetsch, Paul. 1992. Bauformen des modernen englischen und amerikanischen
Dramas. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
Goetsch, Paul. 1996. “Die Grenzen der Macht: Prosperos dialogisches
Verhalten in The Tempest.” Dialogische Strukturen. Dialogic Structures.
Festschrift für Willi Erzgräber zum 70. Geburtstag. Ed. Thomas Kühn
und Ursula Schaefer. Tübingen: Gunter Narr: 69-88.
Goldstone, Herbert. 1982. Coping with Vulnerability: The Achievement of John
Osborne. New York: University of America Press.
Gurr, Andrew. 1996. The Shakespearian Playing Companies. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Gurr, Andrew and Mariko Ichikawa. 2000. Staging in Shakespeare’s Theatres.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hartnoll, Phyllis and Peter Found, eds. 1996. The Concise Oxford Companion to
the Theatre. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hirst, David L., ed. 1985. Edward Bond. New York: Grove Press.
Kaufmann, Ralph James, ed. 1961. Elizabethan Drama: Modern Essays in
Criticism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kesting, Marianne. 1989. Das epische Theater: Zur Struktur des modernen Dramas.
Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.
Klotz, Volker. 1999. Geschlossene und offene Form im Drama. München: Carl
Hanser.
Krieger, Elliot. 1996. “A Midsummer Night’s Dream.” New Casebooks. A
Midsummer Night’s Dream. Ed. Richard Dutton. Basingstoke/London:
Macmillan: 38-60.
Krieger, Gottfried. 1998. “Dramentheorie und Methoden der
Dramenanalyse.” Literaturwissenschaftliche Theorien, Modelle und
Methoden. Eine Einführung. Ed. Ansgar Nünning. Trier:
Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier. 69-92.
McAlindon, Thomas. 1986. English Renaissance Tragedy. Basingstoke:
Macmillan.
Müller, Klaus-Peter. 1993. Englische Theater der Gegenwart. Geschichte(n) und
Strukturen. Tübingen: Narr.
Pfister, Manfred. 2001. Das Drama. Theorie und Analyse. München: Fink.
Platz-Waury, Elke. 1999. Drama und Theater: Eine Einführung. Tübingen:
Gunter Narr.
Plett, Heinrich F. 1982. Englisches Drama von Beckett bis Bond. München: Fink.
Richmond, Hugh M. 1989. King Richard III. Manchester/New York:
Manchester University Press.
Rose, Mark 1993. “Hamlet and the Shape of Revenge.” Shakespeare’s Middle
Tragedies. A Collection of Critical Essays. Ed. David Young. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall: 7-17.
Russo, Anna. 1998. Wege des epischen Theaters. Bertold Brecht und Dario Fo.
Stuttgart: Metzler.
Schabert, Ina, ed. 2000. Shakespeare-Handbuch. Die Zeit. Der Mensch. Das Werk.
Die Nachwelt. Stuttgart: Kröner.

Stamm, Rudolf. 1954. Shakespeare’s Word-Scenery. Zürich: Polygraphischer
Verlag.
Suerbaum, Ulrich. 1996. Shakespeares Dramen. Tübingen/Basel: Francke
Verlag.
Tomarken, Edward, ed. 1997. As You Like It from 1600 to the Present: Critical
Essays. New York/London: Garland.
Trussler, Simon. 1969. John Osborne. Harlow: Longman.
Trussler, Simon, ed. 2000. The Cambridge Illustrated History of British Theatre.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Drama

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Drama

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Drama

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

STEFANIE LETHBRIDGE AND JARMILA MILDORF:

Basics of English Studies:

3.1. Text and Theatre ...................................................................................90

Basics of English Studies, Version 03/04, Drama 88

Bibliography: Drama ................................................................................ 138

Basics of English Studies, Version 03/04, Drama 89

3.1. Text and Theatre

Basics of English Studies, Version 03/04, Drama 90

author Character Character reader of Real

In comparison with narrative texts, the plane of narrator/narratee is left

3.2.1. Amount and Detail of Information

The question concerning the amount or detail of information given in a play

Basics of English Studies, Version 03/04, Drama 91

LEN. This ain’ the bedroom.

The characters’ conversation strikes one as being rather brief and

Basics of English Studies, Version 03/04, Drama 92

3.2.2. Transmission of Information

Although in drama information is usually conveyed directly to the audience,

Two households, both alike in dignity,

As far as information is concerned, the main function of this chorus is to

Basics of English Studies, Version 03/04, Drama 93

Introductory information and narrative-like commentary need not

Now is the winter of our discontent

Basics of English Studies, Version 03/04, Drama 94

3.2.3.1. Dramatic Irony

A country lady, a little bashful at first,

Basics of English Studies, Version 03/04, Drama 95

Basics of English Studies, Version 03/04, Drama 96

Basics of English Studies, Version 03/04, Drama 97

3.2.1. Story and Plot Key terms:

3.3.2. Three Unities

Basics of English Studies, Version 03/04, Drama 98

3.3.3. Freytag’s Pyramid

Basics of English Studies, Version 03/04, Drama 99

Complicating Falling Action

Act I Act II Act III Act IV Act V

Act I contains all introductory information and thus serves as exposition:

Basics of English Studies, Version 03/04, Drama 100

3.3.4. Open and Closed Drama

Basics of English Studies, Version 03/04, Drama 101

Basics of English Studies, Version 03/04, Drama 102

3.4.1. Word Scenery

Since drama is multimedial, the visual aspect inevitably plays an important

Basics of English Studies, Version 03/04, Drama 103

The setting can be used as a means of indirect characterisation. Thus, the

3.4.3. Symbolic Space

Another important factor to consider in this context is the interrelatedness

The living-room of a two-room tenancy occupied by the Boyle family in a tenement

Basics of English Studies, Version 03/04, Drama 104

A square of wood set on a circle of wood.

Basics of English Studies, Version 03/04, Drama 105

Basics of English Studies, Version 03/04, Drama 106

3.5.2. Presentation of Temporal Frames

Last night of all,

Ham. The air bites shrewdly, it is very cold.

Basics of English Studies, Version 03/04, Drama 107

3.5.3. Story Time and Discourse Time

Basics of English Studies, Version 03/04, Drama 108

Enter Beatrice. A clock strikes one.