Ionesco's "The Lesson": A Literary Work of Theatre of the Absurd & a Portrayal of Status and Control

THEATRE OF THE ABSURD: A GLANCE
Theatre of the absurd is the most popular movement of the anti-realistic drama, including the name of Irish-born playwright Samuel Beckett and French playwrights Eugene Ionesco, Jean Genet, British dramatist Harold Pinter, and American Edward Albee (Barnet et al., 1963:569). Those dramatists’ works evoke the absurd by abandoning logical form, character and dialogue together with realistic illusion (Baldick, 1990:__). They employ silence, absence and incoherence. Martin Esslin, the scholar who proposed the term ‘Theatre of the absurd’, emphasises the ways in which they all explore kinds of il/logic and non/character, actionless plot and indeterminate setting (Pope, 2002:194), especially when compared to the form of well-made play like Sophocles’ Oedipus Rex. In Oedipus Rex the plot and the setting is linear and clearly defined. Meanwhile in theatre of the absurd, the plot is cyclical, which ends in the same way that it began. Theatre of the absurdist plays suggests the despair of the authors which is communicated by grotesque humour, verbal nonsense, and fantastic happenings instead of using direct statement (Barnet et al., 1963:569).
In short, theatre of the absurd employs cyclical plot, indeterminate setting, and illogical, sometimes bizarre, characters. It employs stifling, meaningless language and illogical, isolating situations to emphasize human incapabilities.

IONESCO’S THE LESSON: A REVIEW
One of Ionesco’s well-known plays is La Leçon (The Lesson). Set on the office of the old professor in France, this play presents three main characters: the maid, aged 45 to 50, the professor, aged 50-60, and the young pupil, aged 18. In the beginning of the play, the young pupil is eager to learn and she dominates the professor with her confidence and youth, but as the story develops she is getting meek and vulnerable. Even more she is suffering from the professor’s voice and explanation, such as toothache, earache, headache and eyes ache. The maid, Marie, always warns the professor about his “health” and calamity that might happen. Unfortunately the professor, instead of listening to his maid, ignores her every time she warns him:
MAID: All right, Professor, all right. But you can’t say that I didn’t warn you! …
MAID: Don’t get into such a state, sir, you know where it’ll end! You’re going to go too far, you’re going to go too far.
PROFESSOR: I’ll be able to stop in time.
MAID: That’s what you always say. I only wish I could see it.
PUPIL: I’ve got a toothache.
MAID: You see, it’s starting, that’s the symptom!
PROFESSOR: What symptom? Explain yourself! What do you mean?
PUPIL (in a spiritless voice): Yes, what do you mean? I’ve got a toothache.
MAID: The final symptom! The chief symptom!

The maid warns him when the professor explains about philology, and again, the professor ignores her:
PROFESSOR: … The elements of linguistics and of comparative philology…
MAID: No, Professor, no! … You mustn’t do that!
PROFESSOR: Marie, you’re going too far!
MAID: Professor, especially not philology, philology leads to calamity…
PUPIL (astonished): To calamity? (Smiling a little stupidly) That’s hard to believe.
PROFESSOR (to THE MAID): That’s enough now! Get out of here!

The maid also warns the professor again when he starts asking about ‘knife’ in different languages, but the maid is already tired to warn him:
MAID: You see, it’s starting, that’s the symptom!
……
MAID: The final symptom! The chief symptom!
PROFESSOR: Stupid! stupid! stupid! (THE MAID starts to exit) Don’t go away like that! I called you to help me find the Spanish, neo-Spanish, Portuguese, French, Oriental, Romanian, Sardanapali, Latin and Spanish knives.
MAID (severely): Don’t ask me. (She exits)

In the end of the play, the professor kills the pupil with an imaginative knife and with the help of his maid he could get rid of her corpse and then the stage is set again with another young pupil who is ready for the lesson.
This play employs a lot of repeated scenes and sometimes those scenes don’t influence the progress of the play, and the end of the play is set again as how the play began.

IONESCO’S THE LESSON AS A LITERARY WORK OF THEATRE OF THE ABSURD
A. Illogical Things Seen from its Cyclical Plot, Repetitive Scenes and Illogical Characters of the Professor and the Pupil
Compared to the conventional plays like Sophocles’ Oedipus Rex, Ionesco’s The Lesson has cyclical plot. The former has linear plot, in which the structure is clearly presented: there is exposition, generating circumstances, climax and solution. On the other hand, theatre of the absurd has cyclical plot, in which there is no clear distinction between how the story ends and how the story began. Or one might claim that cyclical plot here means there is an unfinished problem in the story, it is beyond our reach since we could do nothing to help to solve the problem. This can be found in the play The Lesson. In the end of the play, the professor kills the young pupil.
Since the beginning of the play until the end, the problem presented is not clear to follow: what is actually the problem? One might guess that the professor is an insane person, but this leads to the question whether there are any evidences to prove that the professor is insane or not. Other thought might emerge: the pupil is very stupid. Then this also leads to the question if there are any evidences from the play which support this idea. Another which might emerge also: what happen to them, the professor and the young pupil, which are considered (in our mind) as clever people, so that they discussed and argued repetitively about things which are ridiculous. Repeatedly they discussed and argued silly things: about subtraction and philology in a very illogical way. Furthermore, from their ‘deep’ discussion we can see another illogical thing. Those are seen when the young pupil suddenly becomes very stupid in subtraction meanwhile she is very excellent in addition and multiplication, and the explanation from the professor about philology does not make sense, this is seen from the dialogue below:
PROFESSOR: …… The differences can scarcely be recognized by people who are not aware of them. Thus, all the words of all the languages…
PUPIL: Uh, yes? … I’ve got a toothache.
PROFESSSOR: Let’s continue … are always the same, just as all the suffixes, all the prefixes, all the terminations, all the roots…
……
PUPIL: I’ve got a toothache.
PROFESSOR: Let’s continue… I said: Let’s continue. Take now the word “front”. Have you taken it?
PUPIL: Yes, yes, I’ve got it. My teeth, my teeth…
PROFESSOR: The word “front” is the root of “frontispiece.” It is also to be found in “affronted.” “Ispiece” is the suffix, and “af” the prefix. They are so called because they do not change. They don’t want to.
……
PUPIL: Uhh… I should say in French: the roses of my grandmother are…?
PROFESSOR: As yellow as my grandfather who was Asiatic…
PUPIL: Oh well, one would say, in French, I believe, the roses… of my … how do you say “grandmother” in French?
PROFESSOR: In French? Grandmother.
PUPIL: The roses of my grandmother are as yellow – in French, is it “yellow”?
PROFESSOR: Yes, of course!

Another thing is the repetitive scenes which show that the pupil gets a toothache, headache, earache, and eyes ache. Every time the pupil complains, the professor ignores her. Meanwhile, the maid always warns the professor every time the pupil complains about her aches that the symptom already started, but the professor always ignores her warnings.
This play employs a lot of repetitive scenes and cyclical plot, of which we could do nothing to solve it. In other words, there is an unfinished problem. Besides, the problem presented in the play is not clear enough, and in addition, the characters involved have no clear feature and bizarre. The only feature clearly seen is that the characters in this play have the feature of commedia dell arte: stupid master and clever servant. Therefore, this play is considered as comic tragedy.

B. Illogical Things seen from the Imaginary Objects
Things which are imaginary in the play are: imaginary knife, imaginary piece of chalk, and imaginary blackboard. Imaginary knife appears when the professor starts to explain about ‘knife’ in different languages. Imaginary piece of chalk and imaginary blackboard are “visible” when the professor explains about subtractions using objects.
These imaginative objects create illogical things in the play. One example is seen from the imaginative knife. How could the pupil die because of the ‘knife’ while the ‘knife’ employed here is imaginative, as seen from the scene:
(They are both standing, THE PROFESSOR still brandishes his invisible knife, nearly beside himself, as he circles around her in a sort of scalp dance… THE PUPIL stands facing the audience, then recoils in the direction of the window, sickly, languid, victimized.)
……
PROFESSOR (changing his voice): Pay attention… Don’t break my window… the knife kills…
PUPIL (in a weak voice): Yes, yes… the knife kills?
PROFESSOR (striking THE PUPIL with a very spectacular blow of the knife): Aaah! That’ll teach you!

(THE PUPIL also cries “Aaah!” then falls, flopping in an immodest position onto a chair which, as though by chance, is near the window. The murderer and his victim shout “Aaah!” at the same moment. After the first blow of the knife, THE PUPIL flops onto the chair, her legs spread wide and hanging over both sides of the chair. THE PROFESSOR remains standing in front of her, his back to the audience. After the first blow, he strikes her dead with a second slash of the knife, from bottom to top. After that blow a noticeable convulsion shakes his whole body.)
PROFESSOR (winded, mumbling): Bitch… Oh, that’s good, that does me good… Ah! Ah! I’m exhausted… …… (…… He gets up, looks at the knife in his hand, looks at the young girl, then as though he were waking up, in a panic): What have I done! What’s going to happen to me now! What’s going to happen! Oh! Dear! Oh dear, I’m in trouble! Young lady, young lady, get up! (He is agitated, still holding onto the invisible knife, which he doesn’t know what to do with.) Come now, young lady, the lesson is over… you may go… you can pay another time… Oh! She is dead… dea-ead… And by my knife… She is dea-ead… It’s terrible. ……
……

From this explanation, it is clear that The Lesson employ imaginative objects in order to strengthen its illogicality.

IONESCO’S THE LESSON AS A PORTRAYAL OF STATUS AND CONTROL
The story in Ionesco’s The Lesson in my opinion is a portrayal of nowadays status versus control. In specific terms the ‘professor’ is associated as the cleverest and the highest. Unfortunately, in this play the professor is, in my opinion, insane. His explanation does not make sense at all when he explains about philology. Besides, from the progress of the play, the professor underestimates the pupil, who is clever, eager and enthusiastic to learn. It seems bizarre when they discussed the subtraction the pupil suddenly becomes stupid, while in fact she is very clever in multiplication.
From this play, I can see a portrayal of status and control as seen in Indonesia. I’m not sure whether this phenomenon also happens in other nations. Many ‘professors’ underestimate their ‘pupils’ and consider them as people who are ignorant, too much confident and always to parade their knowledge. Meanwhile, the ‘professor’ himself, in fact, does not make sense and ignorant, too. This is seen from his explanation in philology and how he ignores his maid every time she warns him. In the end, the ‘professor’ kills the ‘pupil’ with his imaginative knife. This kind of phenomenon is also seen in Indonesia. One might remember the advertisement of a cigarette which employs a long memorable phrase: Belum tua, belum boleh bicara. In the advertisement, there is a beautiful young liaison officer who is responsible to guide some tourists. Every time she starts to describe the tourism resorts they are visiting, the tourists pretend to sleep. Meanwhile when the old driver replaces her place as a guide, the tourists listen to him intently. This advertisement reminds me to the ‘professor’ in Indonesia, it might be the senior citizens, cleverer people, those who have power or higher status, and those who have the characteristics as a ‘professor’, who are considered trustworthy and well-experienced. Others who are called as the ‘pupil’, are not considered trustworthy, therefore they are not allowed to speak. Whenever the ‘pupil’ speaks, people will not listen to her/him and they (the ‘pupil’) will be considered as inexperienced. This phenomenon keeps on happening, keeps on being unsolved, and we can do nothing about it.

CONCLUSION
Theatre of the Absurd is a term used to identify plays which usually employ illogical situations, unconventional dialogue, and minimal plots to express the apparent absurdity of human existence. The term absurd in the 1940s is used in recognition of their inability to find any rational explanation for human life. It is understood as the fundamentally meaningless situation of humans in a confusing, hostile, and indifferent world. Therefore, theatre of the absurd is actually a reflection of our life. It is a reflection in which the cyclical plot takes place in our daily life, and in which there are a lot of unfinished problems which, at the moment, we can not solve yet. This is seen in Ionesco’s The Lesson.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Baldick, Chris. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Literary Terms. New York: Oxford University Press. 1990
Barnet, Sylvan., Morton Berman, William Burto, An Introduction to Literature. 2nd Edition. Toronto: Little, Brown and Company (Inc.). 1963
Barry, Peter. Beginning Theory: An Introduction to Literary and Cultural Theory. New York: Manchester University Press. 2002
Pope, Rob. The English Studies Book: An Introduction to Language, Literature and Culture. 2nd Edition. New York: Routledge. 2002
Microsoft Encarta Premium 2006