Power and Gender Politics in the Homecoming - Pinter free essay sample

There has been speculation over whether Pinter’s later plays are a departure from the more metaphorical explorations of power to being more openly political, or whether his plays have been political from the beginning. This progression from the metaphorical power games can be seen in â€Å"The Homecoming†, written in 1967, and â€Å"One for the road†, written in 1984. In the exposition of â€Å"The Homecoming† the play could be mistaken as apolitical but its exploration of gender politics makes it broadly political. The gender conflict in â€Å"The Homecoming† is presented mainly through patriarchal power. The character of Max uses verbal violence in order to dominate those around him. Max: â€Å"We’ve had a stinking pox-ridden slut. † Max uses blunt and forceful language in order to gain dominance over Ruth, the only female in the play. These obscenities are repeated throughout the play and are representative of Max’s assumed superiority over women. This is evident in his attitude towards his wife who he refers to as a â€Å"bitch†. However this continues degradation of women could be seen as a defensive device as he struggles to cope with another strong-willed character. He sees Ruth in particular as a threat as she is an outsider and does to conform to the rules that he and his family adhere to. Every character in â€Å"The Homecoming† has their designated male characteristic, e. g. Joey represents male power. When Ruth arrives she doesn’t settle into the expected role as she is not the timid female that he seems used to. His words are deliberately chosen in order to cause offence and are an attempt to drive any threats to his position in the house away. The character of Lenny is used to explore manipulation as a form of power. Ruth: â€Å"How did you know she was diseased? † Lenny: â€Å"I decided she was. † Lenny, from the moment he meets Ruth, attempts to establish a dominant position with his two stories of aggressive behaviour towards women. However he only resorts to these after Ruth’s refusal to ‘touch his hand’. He believes that having physical contact with her will put him in control but her rebuttal causes him to resort to another technique. Unlike Max, Lenny is able to oscillate on his approach depending on the situation meaning he is not as flustered as Max becomes. In retaliation to her rejection he tries to shock and undermine her confidence. He does this by boasting of his violent nature but conceals the horror of it in simple stories. His reference to a woman â€Å"falling apart with the pox† connotes that his desire for power is learned from his father, who also uses â€Å"disease† to undermine those around him. These demonstrations of power are an examination of the way power can manifest itself. There is a clash in patriarchal power between the two male lead characters, Max and Lenny. This seems to originate from their growing competitiveness and Max’s fear of being replaced by Lenny, his son. In the opening scenes of the play Max attempts to gain control over Lenny by lecturing him about horse racing but Lenny, as the more intelligent, changes the subject and manipulates the situation to his advantage. He attacks Max on the territory of his domestic role in the house. Max unconsciously acknowledges his inferiority by referring to himself as a â€Å"lousy father†. Since his wife’s death Max seems to have taken the domestic, and what they see as female, role. At the denouement Lenny is depicted as the victor, standing over Max who is lying on the floor. In â€Å"The Homecoming† the characters live in a comfortable chaos where each of the characters are designated superiority in one aspect of male power. However their joint desire to dominate one another causes clashes which creates a dramatic presentation of patriarchal power. Pinter’s shift from his metaphorical plays to his political plays was a riposte to the human atrocities that were happening around him. These atrocities evidently had a profound effect on him and this is undoubtedly the incentive behind his step into political commentary. His later plays differ from his earlier ones in their absence of theatrical seduction and the loss of metaphorical political overtures. However both, his early and later plays, are filled with ambiguity especially surrounding their geo-political context. The presence of Ruth in â€Å"The Homecoming† serves as a catalyst that destroys the family dynamic and it is the enigma behind the dominant force, male or female, that drives the play. However in â€Å"One for the Road† there is never any doubt as to who is the superior character. A ruthless aspect of patriarchal power is characterized in the protagonist, Nicholas. This is comparable to his early plays where male dominance has played a significant part. Pinter’s desire to comment on real life atrocities creates a terrifying character and reveals the consequences of those â€Å"drunk† on power. The use of language is a powerful tool in â€Å"One for the road† as it is employed to create ambiguity as well as a form of torture. â€Å"Do you think I’m mad? My mother did. Perhaps the most effective use of language to torment his victims is Nicolas’ disregard for outside authority. His ‘God complex is what makes him most dangerous as it clearly illustrates his loss of control. The statement about his mother shows disregard for criticisms, especially from women, which is confirmed in his disbelief of everything Gila says. H is declaration that â€Å"God speaks through him† is disturbing as it reveals his delusional mindset and raises the question as to whether in order to torture people you have to be dissociate with reality or if it is a consequence. Pinter seems to combine Max and Lenny in order to create a more terrifying character in â€Å"One for the Road. † Nicolas remains for the most part calm which is disconcerting to both the audience and his victims. However a more apt description of his volatile nature is the image of him â€Å"coiled like a puma. † He, in accordance with his ‘God complex’, provides the â€Å"inferior† characters with a chance to â€Å"take the correct stance† as illustrated when he orders Victor to ‘stand up, sit down’. He appears to be playing with his victims and manipulating them, leaving them confused and distressed. He claims to be â€Å"scrupulous about language† and yet confesses to be â€Å"chatty† With monologues filled with hypocrisy and hyperbole we are shown that his character is as â€Å"ambiguous† as the setting. His personification of the patriarchal power displayed in â€Å"The Homecoming† connotes the idea that his reality could mirror some of Lenny’s fantasy, adding credit to the theory that his agenda has been political all along.