Cameron Tragesser

THEA 319
Dr. Tyler Smith
April 23, 2015
Oh Dad, Poor Dad and 1950s America
For most of America, and indeed, the world, the years after World War II
were wrought with confusion and irony. While struggling with the aftermath of the
Holocaust, the ongoing Cold War, and the advent of nuclear armament, the world
also saw the evolution of spaceflight, the advancement of civil rights, and the rise
of feminism. Such events, however, were not unrelated, but, in fact, were
contingent on each other. The dichotomy of realism and absurdism in Arthur
Kopits Oh Dad, Poor Dad Mamas Hung You in the Closet and Im Feelin So
Sad is a representation of the tension felt in America during the 1950s; struggling
with the constructs of identity in the home and as a nation.
The term Theatre of the Absurd was first coined by Martin Esslin in 1960.
Some might say that Theatre of the Absurd was a direct response to the
condition of the world after World War II. Some of the so-called founders of this
type of theatre include Eugene Ionesco, Samuel Becket, and Jean Genet. With
its roots in existentialism, these playwrights saw Theatre of the Absurd as the
only choice left to them in the wake of the atrocities of World War II and the rise
of totalitarianism (Theatre of the Absurd). Most of these works have a single
underlying theme; that the quest for meaning in a world without clear morality is
futile.
Theatre of the Absurd sought to break the traditional conventions of
realistic theatre. Firstly, the plays generally had no linear plot. It is often uncear

whether the action is meant to represent a dream world of nightmares or real

happeningsWithin the same scene the action may switch from nightmarish
poetry of high emotions to pure knock-about farce or cabaret (Esslin 7). Take,
for instance, Becketts Waiting for Godot, whose characters seem to be in a
never-ending cycle of waiting for something that will clearly never happen (yet
another example of the futility of human existence). These plays often had
dialogue that was nonsensical or even downright unintelligible. Ionescos The
Bald Soprano began its life as a simple French to English translation exercise,
which eventually became the dialogue for his characters. Characters in these
plays are defined ambiguously, often with no clear motive or social stance.
Again, in Waiting for Godot, the characters of Pozzo and Lucky switch roles of
slave and master, sophisticated and thoughtless. Many times the dialogue from
a specific character seems to go directly against the actions of the character
onstage. Sometimes, these plays broke the fourth wall, a practice borrowed from
Brechtian Epic Theatre. Another interesting practice of Theatre of the Absurd is
characters that seem witless or clownish. While, for centuries, plays
incorporated these types of characters, such as mimus and stupidus in greek
plays, Shakespearian drama, and Comedie dellarte, Theatre of the absurd
places these characters in the fore-front of the action (Theatre of the Absurd).
All of these characteristics create a result similar to Brechts Verfremdungseffekt,
where the audience is prevented from empathizing or identifying with the
characters. However, the Verfremdungseffekt and the effect created by Theatre
of the Absurd are slightly different. Brecht used this effect as a way to ensure,

whether successful or not, that the audience would not identify with the
characters so as to form some sort of political or philosophical opinion. Absurdist
Theatre, however, sought to remove any sense from the action of the play and
actually kept audiences from recognizing a specific argument. Martin Esslin
states that Above all, everything that happens seems to be beyond rational
motivation, happening at random or through the demented caprice of an
unaccountable idiot face.