The Girardian Economy of Desire: "Old Times" Recaptured

Author(s): David Savran

Source: Theatre Journal, Vol. 34, No. 1 (Mar., 1982), pp. 40-54
Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3207274 .
Accessed: 22/06/2014 21:20

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Theatre Journal.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.77 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 21:20:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 The Girardian Economyof Desire:
Old Times Recaptured

David Savran

thepastis towelcomea truth

Recapturing toescape,
whichmostmenspendtheirlivestrying
thatone hasalwayscopiedOthers....
to recognize
- ReneGirard
In thelastchapterof The Rise and Fall ofthe Well-MadePlay JohnRussellTaylor
notes thatthe Pinterplay (althoughhe singlesout The BirthdayPartyhe could as
well be referringto Old Times) is essentiallya "well-madedrawing-roomdrama
completein everydetail, ... exceptthattheexpositionis leftout altogether.. "
He thengoes on to observehow thesimilaritybreaksdown, that"itis theprocess
thatinterestsPinter,theseriesof happenings,and not theprecisewhysand where-
fores.These are totallyincoherent,as necessarilytheyhave to be in so muchof life,
whereno explanationsare offeredand we mustmake thebestwe can ofit."The sim-
ilaritywhichTaylordescribesbetweenthePinterplay and thedrawing-room drama
suggeststhedebtthatPinterowes both to thewell-madeplay of Scribeand thepsy-
chologicaldrama of Ibsen.' For Taylor, however,the obvious structural,thematic
and linguisticaffinities
onlyserveto distinguishPinter'sworkfromthenineteenth-
centurytraditionout ofwhichitissuesand withwhichitbreaks.This ruptureis seen

David Savran is AssistantProfessorof Drama at the Universityof Regina, Canada.

1 JohnRussellTaylor, The Rise and Fall of the Well-Made-Play(New York: Hill and Wang, 1967), p.
163. Othercriticshave pointedto Pinter'suse of thetraditionalforms.Note, forexample,KatherineH.
Burkman'sobservationthat"Despitehis lack of certainkindsofexplicitinformation about hischaracters
and plot, in formPinteris notas farfromthewell-madeplay of Ibsenas manyofhisfellowabsurdists;he
is fondof curtainlinesand curtains,and he is ultimatelyconcernedwiththeshape bothof wordsand of
his entiredramaticworld." The Dramatic Worldof Harold Pinter:Its Basis in Ritual (Columbus: Ohio
StateUniversityPress,1971), pp. 7-8. Pinterhimselfhas acknowledged:"I regardmyselfas an old-fash-
ioned writer.I like to createcharacterand followa situationto itsend." 'Two People in a Room," The
New Yorker,February25, 1967, p. 36.

40

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.77 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 21:20:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
41 / GIRARDIANOLD TIMES

as beingprimarilymetaphysicalin origin:Pinterwithholdsthe expositionbecause

life itselfsuggestsno answers-the "whysand wherefores," remain,accordingto
Taylor, "totallyincoherent"and thereby,presumably,not subjectto analysis. At
thispointI take issue withTaylor'sevaluation.I believe thatthe"whysand where-
fores"can be understoodin reference to an underlyingstructurewhichformstheba-
sis forboth thewell-madeplay and thepsychologicaldrama. This underlying struc-
tureconsistsof a patternof imitativedesirewhichinformsPinter'sdrama as surely
as it does thatof Scribeand Ibsen. Our understanding of thismechanismwill allow
us to perceiveboth theextremelogic of theactionand thedeeperpointsof contact
betweenPinter'swork and thenineteenth-century tradition.This essay will analyze
thepatternsof imitativedesirein Pinter'sOld Timesand, throughthisanalysis,de-
terminetherelationshipbetweenPinter'sworkand both thewell-madeplay and the
psychologicaldrama.
My discussionof imitativedesirewill be based on the theoriesof Ren6 Girard,
whichhave becomean important forcein moderncriticism.2 In hisfirstmajorwork,
Deceit, Desire and the Novel, Girardexaminesat lengththe operationof imitative
or mimeticdesirein the nineteenth-century novel. Accordingto Girard,imitative
desiredescribesa triangularconfiguration in whicha subjectdesiresan object not
spontaneouslybut in imitationof a thirdparty,a mediatorwhose desirefor the
same objecthas givenit value in theeyes of thesubject.This latterhas surrendered
theprivilegeofchoosingtheobjectsofhis own desireand assignsthatprerogativeto
themediatorwho becomes,by virtueof thisconfiguration, his model and oftenhis
rival as well. For Girardthekey relationshiphereis not subject-objectbut subject-
mediatorsince "theimpulsetowardthe object is ultimatelyan impulsetowardthe
mediator. ." Girard'sobservationof the patternsof mimeticdesireis centered
around the...distinctionbetweenthoseworksof literaturewhichrevealtheimitative
nature of desire and those which conceal it. Among the formerhe numbersthe
worksof Stendhal,Proustand Dostoevsky,whichhe considers"novelistic"and in
directoppositionto thoseof Zola and Sartre(amongothers),whichhe designatesas
"romantic."4
Deceit, Desireand theNovel is an attemptat a systematicanalysisofwhatGirard
2 ReneGirard's
majorworksincludeDeceit,Desireand theNovel: Selfand Otherin LiteraryStructure,
trans.Yvonne Freccero(Baltimore:JohnsHopkins UniversityPress, 1965); Violence and the Sacred,
trans.PatrickGregory(Baltimore:JohnsHopkinsUniversityPress,1977); "To Double BusinessBound":
Essays on Literature,Mimesis,and Anthropology(Baltimore:JohnsHopkins UniversityPress, 1978);
Des chosescachies depuis la fondationdu monde(Paris: Grasset,1978). For a completebibliographysee
JosueV. Harari,ed., TextualStrategies:Perspectivesin Post-Structuralist
Criticism(Ithaca: CornellUni-
versityPress, 1979), pp. 434-5.
SGirard, Deceit, Desire and the Novel, p. 10.
4 The Frenchtitleof thework,Mensongeromantiqueet veriteromanesque,focuseson thisdistinction
betweenthe romantique(romantic)and the romanesque(novelistic).Girardhas used the two terms,
"withtheirsame radicaland different endings. . to conveysomethingof an essentialyetelusive,differ-
encebetweentheworkswhichpassivelyreflectand thosewhichactivelyreveal'mediated'desire."Deceit,
Desire and theNovel, footnote,p. 16. The oppositionbetweenrevelationand concealmentis centralnot
onlyto his workbut to Violenceand theSacred as well,in whichsacrificeis seen to be effective
onlyifits
real functionis concealed. For an introductionto thecontroversysurroundinghis work see Diacritics,
8:1, Spring1978, "The Work of Rene Girard,"especiallytheessay by Hayden White,"Ethnological'Lie'
and Mythical'Truth'" pp. 2-9.

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.77 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 21:20:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
42 / TI,March1982

believes to be a basic structureunderlyingall fiction.Its strategicorientationis

firmlyrootedin the Structuralist projectof theformalizationof an "implicitor al-
ready half-explicit" systemwhich, Girard maintains,formsthe foundationnot
merely of literaturebut of cultureas well.sIn his laterworkshe extendsthisformal-
izationby inscribingit withinan anthropologicalframeworkand relatingit to the
practiceof sacrifice,as it figuresboth in literaryand non-literary texts.He has now
come to view sacrifice(or scapegoating)as "fundamental," as the"singlemechanism"
which"underliesnot only all mythologiesand ritualsbut thewhole of humancul-
ture.. In Violenceand theSacredGirardmakesextensiveuse ofGreekdramain
..6
his analysisof the operationof the sacrificialmechanismwhich,he demonstrates,
bothgivesformto tragedyand determinesitsfunctionwithinsociety.7Despite the
centralpositionthatdrama occupiesin Girard'sinterpretation of culture,he has not
discussed,except parenthetically(from the of
standpoint Deceit, Desire and the
Novel) the implications that his analysishas foran understanding
historical of the
development of nineteenth- and twentieth-century drama. This essay will attempt
thatexploration.
Girard'sexplanationof theetiologyof thenineteenth-century novel is based upon
his observationof social and politicalchangesin thelate eighteenth and earlynine-
teenthcenturies,in thedeterioration of thefeudalhierarchyand thesocial stratifica-
tionthatit had produced.This culturaltransformation did not, of course,engender
triangulardesirebut it did bringabout a changein itsquality.As Girardexplains,s
thekeymutationherelies in themovementfromexternalto internalmediation:the
mediatorhas moved much closer to the subjectand is now operatingin the same
sphereof action. He no longercontrolsthe subject'sdesirefromafar (as Amadis
does withDon Quixote) and insteadbecomeshisrival,theobstacleblockingtheful-
fillmentof his desires.It is no accidentthatthewell-madeplay arose as a pre-emi-
nentformduringthe period whichbore witnessto the transformation of external
into internalmediation.The Scribeanformulais clearlycenteredaround rivalry,
and themovementof theplotfollowstheprotagonists' jockeyingforpower. A play
suchas The Glass of Water(1840) revealsthepresenceof themediatorin theconflict
betweenBolingbrokeand theDuchess whichtakescenterstage.Thereis littleelse in
theplay to distractthespectatorfromconcentrating on thisrivalry,no presumption
of psychologicalcomplexity,no mysteriousdepthsof personalityto be sounded.
During the second half of the nineteenthcentury,Ibsen, the most notable of
Scribe'ssuccessors,makes the well-madeplay the envelope for a psychological
dramaby hidingthemimeticbasis fordesire.In Hedda Gabler (1890), forexample,
theheroine'sreawakenedpassion forEilertLovborgis in largeparttheresultof his
involvementwitha rival,Thea Elvsted,whose desireclearlyignitesHedda's. Here,
however,herrole as mediatorremainsconcealed to Thea - therivalryis veiled and

5 Girard,Deceit, Desireand theNovel, p. 3. Fora finediscussionof Structuralism

and Post-Structural-
ism and Girard'spositionrelativeto thesecriticalformations,see Harari, ed., TextualStrategies,pp.
17-31; 56-60.
6 Girard, Violenceand the Sacred, pp. 299-300.
7 Girard,Violence,pp. 68-88; 290-91.
8 Girard,Deceit, Desire and theNovel, pp. 9-10.

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.77 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 21:20:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
43 / GIRARDIANOLD TIMES

the path to destructionwhich it describeslies shroudedin Hedda's perceptivese-

crecy.The movementaroundwhichIbsen'sdramais structured involvesthegradual
revelationof "psychology"-past relationships,inheritedneuroses,personal idio-
syncrasies,familysecrets- not, however,thepresenceof themediatoras thedeter-
miningfactorin desire. The patternsof rivalry(and we see themeverywherein
Hedda Gabler) become increasingly submergedby these"psychological" details.As
thisoccurs,we see thestartling
growth of what Girard calls metaphysicaldesire,the
ontological sicknessfrom which theheroes of Proust,Dostoevsky,and Ibsensuffer,
thesense of alienation,"theanguishof one who is set apart,"in spiritualexilefrom
hisfellowmen.9AlthoughHedda, Rosmer,and Solnessare destroyedby metaphysi-
cal desire,thistoo remainsunacknowledgedand apparentlysubordinatedto natu-
ralisticpsychology.Theygo to theirdeaths"beautifully," withoutrevealingtheface
of the mediatoror the fatal patternsof desire, both mimeticand metaphysical,
whichhave determindtheiractions.
We commonlyspeak of psychologicaldrama as developingout of thewell-made
play, but we may now glimpsea fundamentaldifference betweenthe two forms.
The rivalryon whichboth structures are based appears in two completelydistinct
formulations:Scribe reveals the mimeticbasis of desirewhich Ibsen conceals. In
spiteof thisdifference,however,bothformsworkon thespectatorin similarways,
turninghiminto a kind of detectivewhose task is to piece togetherthereleasedin-
formationto arriveat an understanding of the truth,whichis always groundedin
thepast. In Old TimesPinterinvokesthesame patternsof response,thesame inves-
tigativeprocessthatthespectatormobilizeswhen viewinga psychologicaldrama.
We follow the developmentof Old Times trying,as we do withIbsen, to put to-
getherthepieces in a logical, systematicway, to unravelthemysterywhose truth,
we suspect,lies in thesame areas of "psychology" as thetruthof theIbsenproblem-
atic. In theend,however,Pinterdoes notallow us theease ofa familiarexplanation:
all thewhilethathe has beenleadingus on to unravelthepast,he frustrates us by re-
fusing verification.
Nowhereis Pinter'ssubversionof psychologicaldramamoreapparentthanin the
reversalin Old Timesof thetraditionalrelationshipbetweenpast and present.With
Ibsenthepast is a relativelyfixedcommodity:itprovidesthemotivesand directions
foraction,it createsa fieldof possibilityand closure,it initiatesand circumscribes
theplay'smovement.The past is somethingto be uncovered,so thatitmayfulfillits
promisein thepresent.In Old TimesPinterreversestheseprinciples.The past is no
longerfixed;it is no longera certitudebut a fabrication,a fictionwhichis moremu-
table thanthepresent.The patternof thepresentis theimmutableand theirrevoc-
able, thefixedset of actions,and thepast can neverbe morethana surmise,a hy-
pothesis,an inference.By constructing a past,by "remembering" old times,thechar-
actersmanipulateeach other,createtheplay's action (its present)and play out the
dynamicsof triangulardesire.lo

9 Girard,Deceit, p. 55.
10 In The MasterBuilder(1892) wherethepast is, to a largeextent,thefabrication
ofeach of thethree
major characters,Ibsen foreshadowsPinter.

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.77 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 21:20:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
44 / TJ,March1982

Amongdramascenteredaroundan erotictriangle,Old Timesis remarkableboth

forthepurityof thetriangularsituation(upon whichno outsideforceintrudes)and
forthe extremelysystematicway, as I shall demonstrate,in which it works itself
out. At firstglance, theaction of Old Timesmay appear irrationaland thecharac-
terserraticand impenetrable, particularlyin thesecond act. Whenseen as theprod-
uct of superimposition of two imitativetriangles,however,theactionbecomesboth
clearand comprehensible.The openingsequenceof thefirstact, a kindof prologue
whichprecedesAnna's entryintotheaction,immediately establishesone of thetwo
triangles(the second becomes apparent once Anna enters
the action). Rightfromthe
beginning of theplay, we witness thestrugglebetween two rivalsforthepossession
of Kate. This rivalryis theconsequenceof theoperationof thetwo imitativetrian-
gles: bothDeeley and Anna desireKate, but thisdesireforheris subordinate(as the
secondact clearlyreveals)to anotherdesireto possess,to conquertherivalor medi-
ator who stands between the subject (Deeley/Anna) and the object (Kate), and
whose desireservesas a model forthatof the othersubject.Deeley and Anna are
bothdesiringsubjectsand each is also theother'smediator,or rival,who copies the
other'sdesire.Thus we discernthe two superimposedtrianglesin whichthe other
(bothmodeland rival)bestowsworthon theobject:Kate is valued because theother
desiresher.This can be seenfromtheverybeginningof theplay whenDeeley'srela-
tionshipto Kate becomesvisibleonlyas Anna is revealedas a rival,as someonewho
has been close to Kate in thepast.
The superimposition of the two imitativetriangles,or double mediation(as Gir-
ard calls thedesign)inspirescontradictory attitudeson thepart of each subjectfor
themediator.On theone hand, thesubjectwill admirethemediatorsincehe allows
the mediatorto choose forhim what he will desire. (I use the masculinepronoun
hereonlyforthesake of convenience.)On theotherhand, themediatorwillalso fill
thesubjectwithresentment because he is theobstacleblockingtheful-
and.hostility
fillment of thesubject'sdesires.In double mediationthedesiresof subjectsintensify
reciprocallyas do thecontradictory emotionswhichwill urgeeach to throwhimself
at thefeetofhis mediator(whomhe worships)and at thesame timeloathehimas an
obstacle,and loathe theselfforworshipingand desiringto be (or being)themedia-
tor.This extremely unstablesituation,a dialecticofdesireand repulsion,willlead to
mimeticviolence (eitherphysicalor psychical)and ultimately,to reciprocaldeath
(eitherphysicalor spiritual).
One of themoststriking featuresofdouble mediationis thereversibility of there-
lationships,a symmetry reproducedon thesceniclevel in Old Times:in thesetsfor
bothacts Pintercalls for"A long windowup centre""1 whichis to be flankedby two
doors. At the beginningof the second act he notes: "The divans and armchairare
disposedin preciselythesame relationto each otheras thefurniture in thefirstact,
but in reversedpositions"(p. 47). Amid thesparenessof thesetting,in two symmet-
ricalrooms(in whichthefurniture is reversed)threecharactersare trappedin a net-
work of mediateddesirewhichwill destroythemall. Deeley and Anna are locked

11 Harold Pinter,Old Times(New York: Grove Press,1971), pp. 6 and 47. All further to this
references
work appear in the text.

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.77 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 21:20:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
45 / GIRARDIANOLD TIMES

togetherin a struggle,an agon,12in whichonlysymmetrical and reactivemovement

is possible. Only at theveryend of theplay does theimpetuscome froma different
direction,fromKate, who, witha singleblow, putsan end to all movement.Act one
maps out the trianglesand exploresthe basic patternsof rivalry.The second act
bringsthe subject-mediators closer togetherand exposes the paradoxical and de-
structiveconsequencesof double mediation,as thefocusshiftsfromthesubject-ob-
jectrelationshipto thatbetweensubjectand mediator.This shiftrevealsthemimetic
basis fordesireand, in so doing,exposesthepatternswhichin Ibsenlie concealedin
"psychology."
The play begins as a fragment,in the gap betweena question and its answer.
Deeley asks Kate about Anna, tryingto discoverthe natureof theirrelationship,
past and present.At theend of thefirstsection,Deeley expressessurpriseat learning
thatKate and Anna once lived together("I knew you had sharedwithsomeone at
one time. . . [Pause] ButI didn'tknow itwas her"(p. 17). The firsttriangleis clearly
establishedin his prologueas Kate's apparentreluctanceto discussherrelationship
withAnna spursDeeley on in his questioning.The sectionendswithDeeley'sunder-
cuttingof theentirediscussion,"anyway,none of thismatters"(p. 17), a disparage-
mentwhichreproduces,in miniature,thebasic formof theplay. Pinteruses thede-
nial hereas a structuraldevice,both to shape individualsectionsand to roundout
the play as a whole withan extendedand absolute negation.This undercutting is
also one of themainweapons thatboth Deeley and Anna use in theirstruggle,par-
ticularlyin the firstact, in which it is more clearly defined- more a simple ri-
valry- thanin the second act.
The second sectionof theact, like thefirst,beginsin mediasres,startingprecipi-
touslyas the upstagelightscome up and Anna turnsand speaks. This scene is dis-
joined fromthefirst,bothby thesuddenlightingchangeand an impliedtimelapse:
dinnerhas intervened.Anna completesthe triangleas we see fromherfirstspeech
thatshe is tryingto pull Kate towardherand towardthepast whichshe bringswith
herso forcefully.Anna'sspeechalso changesthedynamicsof theplay. Afterthesty-
chomythicdialoguebetweenDeeley and Kate, Anna beginswitha tiradewhichjars
us withits rhythmand style.She speaks rapidlyand withgreatrhetoricalpower,
nearlyoverwhelmingDeeley. Almostimmediatelyafterwardshe draws our atten-
tion to her mannerof speakingand, implicitly,to thatof all thecharacters:
ANNA: No one who livedherewouldwantto go far.I wouldnotwantto go far,I
wouldbe afraidofgoingfar,lestwhenI returned
thehousewouldbe gone.
DEELEY: Lest?
ANNA: What?
DEELEY: The wordlest.Haven'thearditfora longtime.
[p. 19]

Deeley'sdrawingattentionto, and ridiculeof,Anna's speechoccurstwo moretimes

in thefirstact (pp. 26 and 41) and servesto focusour attentionon thecharacters'dif-

tousetheGreekwordagoninordertoindicate
12 I havechosen thehighly andrhetorical
formal nature
ofthestruggle and itsdivisionintoclearlydelineated
sequences.

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.77 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 21:20:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
46 / TI, March1982

ferentiationby theiruse oflanguage.Each has a distinctive

verbalstyle:Anna uses a
floridand extravagantlanguage;Deeley an unadorned,masculinestyleon whichhe
oftenelaborateswhimsically;and Kate a simple,laconic style,made up almosten-
tirelyof shortstatements.As in so manyof Pinter'splays, charactershereuse lan-
guage as a projectile.One is safe when one is speaking;l3oneclaims possession
throughspeechwhichis herea mode of action, the only way to recreatethepast,
and in so doing,to createthepresent.More clearly,however,thanin any otherof
Pinter'splays we perceivethatthe language thatthe charactersuse to do battleis
not, in fact,theirown but ratherthelanguageof others.The verbal stylesare not
originalbut stereotypical;theyare quoted, borrowed,as muchan imitationas the
desirewhichpromptsthem.
Thereare, in additionto particularways ofspeaking,a numberof otherantitheti-
cal characteristics
clusteredaround Anna and Deeley. With Anna are associated
Londonand activecitylife,an artisticsensibility,thepast or old times,and mostim-
her
portantly, identity as woman and herprivilegedpositionin Kate'slife("Shewas
myonly friend,"Kate says [p. 9]). oppositionto thesequalities,we see associated
In
withDeeley thecountryand a secludedlife,a straightforward and manlysensibility,
thepresent(theconvertedfarmhouseis, afterall, Deeley's), and mostimportantly,
his identityas man and husband to Kate.
Kate, as becomes immediatelyapparent,is characterizedvery differently from
eitherAnna or Deeley. She is most strikingin her silence,her refusalto become
otherthanobject,to be activelyinvolvedin thestruggletakingplace beforeher. She
remainsan observer,coolly lookingon, at once dispassionateand indecipherable.
This characterization
makeshera perfectobject of imitativedesirefortwo reasons.
First,her impassivityallows and encouragesher rivalsto projecttheirdesiresand
theirmemoriesonto her. Her silenceis a tacitacceptanceof theiractionsand vali-
dates both theirattemptsat possessionand theirstoriesabout the past. Secondly,
herdispassiontransforms herintoa kindoficon,or rather,disclosesa passivedivin-
itywhich,by definition,places her at a removefrommortals-Anna and Deeley.
Her utterunapproachabilityensuresthatneitherrival can possess her and, at the
same time,locks in the rivals,thatis, guaranteesthe continuationof the triangle.
Only at theend of theplay whenKate finallyacts,whichis to say, speaks,does she
changethe relationalconfiguration, althoughnot its symmetry.
In this firstagon Deeley and Anna attack indirectly,subtly,subtextually.The
projectof each is, simply,to defineKate as his/hersand thereis littleovertrivalry.
The sectionendswitha medleyoflyricsfromold popularsongsas Anna and Deeley
literallysing thepraisesof Kate. The singingitselfsoon becomes a contestas both
Anna and Deeley tryto get thelast word in. The fragments of song are interrupted
by pauses when a characteracceptsmomentary defeatand startsthecontestanew.
Boththeintentions of thecharactersand thepauses betweenthelinesserveto disori-
entthelyrics,thatis, liftthemout of contextin sucha way thattheromanticclich6s

13 See LawrenceI. Eilenberg,

"Rehearsalas CriticalMethod: Pinter'sOld Times,"Modern Drama, 18
(December1975), pp. 385-392.

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.77 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 21:20:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
47 / GIRARDIANOLD TIMES

acquire verydifferentresonances.The hyperboliccontentof the popular song be-

comes a literaldescriptionof the characters'feelings:"Oh, how the ghost of you
clings"(p. 29).
In thisdrama of triangulardesire,thisclimacticsequencecan be seen in another
way, as a particularlyclearinstanceof thereplicationofdesire,of theway imitation
proliferates.In order to expresstheirfeelings,theirdesirewhichis itselfan imita-
tion, Anna and Deeley borrow the words, theemotions,thedesireof othersstill.
This sequence,one of themostmemorablein theplay, is so apt because itcarriesthe
imitationone stepfurther: it superimposestwo moretrianglesonto thetwo already
there.The medleyterminates in a "Silence"(p. 29), thefirstnotedin thescript.The
silenceis not a momentof stasisor restbut rathertheclimacticmomentof thefirst
agon, thatis, themomentof impasse.At thesame time,it servesas a transitionto a
second agon in whichDeeley and Anna will adopt a different strategy.
The second agon is the centralunit and the most symmetricalin the firstact,
whichis itselfsymmetrical, beginningand endingwitha dialoguebetweenKate and
each of her suitors.Betweenthe initialprologue and the finalflashbackare three
matchesor agons. This, the centralone, begins and ends with long speechesby
Deeley and Anna, respectively, whichdescribetheirseeingwithKate thefilmappro-
priatelytitledOdd Man Out. In thefirsthalfof thescene,Deeley is winningthecon-
testforKate. He tellsofhis allegedcourtshipand, in so doing,definesheras his. He
tellsof his meetingwiththeusherettes, an eventwhichprecipitatesa crudelysexual
approach to thewooing of Kate ("Thisis a truebluepick up" [p. 30]). His narrative
culminatesin a descriptionof theirfirstsexual encounter.Anna thenspeaks (in the
centerof thissection,in thecenterof thefirstact) to give us a keyto theplay, to re-
veal therelationshipbetweenthepast and thepresentas thecharactershave defined
it:
eventhoughtheymayneverhave happened.
Thereare somethingsone remembers
whichmayneverhavehappened
I remember
Therearethings butas I recallthemso they
takeplace.
[pp.31-321
Her revelationbringsabout a peripetyin theactionand fromthispointuntiltheend
of theact Anna appears to be winning.She describesa strangeencounterwhichshe
claims Kate had witha man (perhapsDeeley), a seriesof actionswhichAnna de-
scribesas havinghappened"onenight"and whichcome to pass again at theveryend
of theplay, onlyin a slightlydifferent order.Kate thenobjects,"youtalkofme as if
I were dead" (p. 34), a statementwhich is, as well, transformed at theend of the
play: "I remember you dead" (p. 71). The agon ends withAnna's responseto Deeley,
thedescriptionof herjourneywithKate "to some totallyunfamiliardistrictand, al-
mostalone, [to see] a wonderfulfilmcalled Odd Man Out. (Silence)"(p. 38). End of
thesecond match.
At thispoint in theplay, in the earlystagesof double mediation,thereremains
considerabledistancebetweenAnna and Deeley, thesubject-mediators who hereap-
pear simplyas rivalsforKate. The intensification of therivalryin thecourseof the
act is a naturalconsequenceof thesituation,as Girardexplains:"Double mediation
is a figureturnedin upon itself;desirecirculatesin it and feedson itsown substance.

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.77 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 21:20:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
48 / TI,March1982

Thus double mediationconstitutes

a veritable'generator'ofdesire.. ."14Each sub-
setsher or himselfup as an unwitting
ject-mediator reflectionof the other'sdesire.
Thus, the symmetryof the two storiesof Odd Man Out. Thus the followingex-
change:
ANNA: Yes,shecouldbe so . .. animated.
DEELEY: is no wordforit.Whenshesmiles. .. howcan I describe
Animated it?
ANNA: Hereyeslitup.
DEELEY: I couldn'thaveputitbetter
myself.
[pp.34-35]
Who is speaking?How are we to know? Is not thisassignmentof lines trulyarbi-
trary?Could we not just as well reversethe speakers,therebydemonstrating the
symmetry of desire?
The thirdagon beginsafterAnna's victoryand shows us the two subject-medi-
atorsmakingtheirfirsttentativemovementstowardeach other:each inquiresabout
the other'slife.Kate beginsto fade into thebackgroundand thefocussettlesmore
squarelyon theconflictbetweenDeeley and Anna. As Deeley feelsmorethreatened,
he ejaculatesapparentlynonsensicalstatements(themale strategies:curtness,open
aggression)to throwAnna offbalance. She responds,however,in genderby mov-
ing the action (the femalestrategies:insinuation,stealth)into her own enveloping
sphereof action,thepast,by creatinga flashbackintowhichshe retreatswithKate.
This actiontemporarily silencesDeeley althoughhe triesto bringthemback intothe
presentby reminding them of theirpositionin thatpresent:
KATE: Whatshallwedo then?
ANNA: Stayin. ShallI readto you?Wouldyoulikethat?
KATE: I don'tknow.
Pause
ANNA: Areyouhungry?
KATE: No.
Afterthatcasserole
DEELEY: Hungry?
[p.44]
They return,however,to theirpast, and the act ends as Kate retiresto take a
bath, leavingDeeley and Anna alone at theend of the act:
DEELEY stands lookingat ANNA.
ANNA turnsherheadtowardshim.
They look at each other.
[p. 46]
The lightsfade with the two rivals in tableau vivant, squared off. Kate's retreat
leaves thestageto thetwo subject-mediators who will,in thelatterstagesof double
mediation,graduallyapproach each other.As theydo, both theirrivalryand the
meta-psychological basis forthedramawillbe transformed intosomethingquitedif-
ferent.Theywillnow beginto act upon thecontradictions implicitin theirsituation;
theywill play out thedialecticof desireand repulsion,reverenceand malice.

14Girard,Deceit, p. 172-73.

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.77 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 21:20:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
49 / GIRARDIANOLD TIMES

The second act opens withthenew settingI have describedabove whichso well
representstheprocessof triangulardesire:a point-by-point oppositionbetweentwo
symmetrical and oppositefigures.The basic scenicarrangement remainsunchanged
while withinthatthe positioningof thefurniture is reversed.The symmetry of the
reversalis disturbedby the placementof Anna (the characterhiddensilentlyin
shadow at thebeginningof thefirstact) alone on stageat thebeginningof thesec-
ond. Her appearanceheresignalsthebeginningof thebreakdownof theneat trian-
gularconfigurations and strictformaldivisionsof thefirstact. Beyondtheopening
sequence,thedialoguebetweenDeeley and Anna, thesecond act does not have the
precisedemarcationsof thefirst.As thecontradictions inherentin thesituationbe-
come moreexplicit,thesimplerivalrybreaksdown, or rather,is transformed into
somethingelse. The transformation beginsin thefirstand onlyreallyself-contained
unitin the act, in which thelast dyad is explored,Anna-Deeley.This scene intro-
duces a new motifwhichwill bringtheaction (and thedouble mediation)to a cli-
max: a past relationshipbetweenAnna and Deeley. The new motiffulfills themove-
mentimpliedin theinitialsituationand is, in fact,itsperfectlylogicalconsequence.
The exposureofthemediator,thetransference ofdesirefromobjectto rival,demon-
stratestheprocessby whichthemimeticbasis fortriangulardesireis revealed;for,
as Girardexplains,"The objectis onlya meansof reachingthemediator.The desire
is aimedat themediator'sbeing."'5The onlyway to perceivethedisplacementwhich
occursin thesecondact is by appeal to therationalityoftriangulardesirewhichnat-
urallyeffectsthistransformation.
Deeley beginsto transform Anna into an object of desire.He explainsat length
how he knewAnna in thepast, yearsbefore,how he metherat theWayfarersTav-
ern,how he wentto a partywithher,and how he sat gazingup herskirt.Anna re-
mainsunmovedhoweverby Deeley's "sad story"(p. 52) and then,aftera "Silence,"
returnsthesubjectof theconversationto Kate, who is takinga bath. Anna'schange
of subjectis onlya temporary expedient,however.The metamorphosis ofdesirehas
begun. The presence of themediatorsis beingexposed. Kate thenenters,and Deeley
and Anna repeattheirmusicalpaean, now singing,significantly, They Can't Take
ThatAway FromMe, but thistimewithoutthepauses. The singingis no longera
contest,and the lines follow as rehearsed,smoothly,sequentially,"perfunctorily"
(p. 58): Anna and Deeley are actingtogether.The object of desirewhich had set
themagainsteach othernow bringsthemtogether.This harmonysignalsthechange
in directionas the two subject-mediators approach each other.
Kate, now in herbathrobe,deliversherlongestspeechin theplay, thusfar(p. 59),
whichemphasizesherdistancefrombothAnna and Deeley. She speaks of wanting
to visit the East, and we are struckby her almost Orientaldetachment.Afteran-
otherflashback,whichDeeley interrupts, Kate remainssilentas theothertwo again
struggleforpower,forpossession,fortherightto definethepast. The permutations
becomemorecomplex,therolesof thewomen,interchangeable. At thesame time,
theconflictand thedesirewhichengenderstheinterchange becomeexplicitlysexual

15Girard,Deceit, p. 53.

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.77 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 21:20:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
50 / TJ,March1982

and the unmediatedrivalrymore intense(Deeley's masculine,openly aggressive;

Anna'sfeminine, coy). The delineationofrolesbeginsto breakdown
surreptitiously
as imitativedesire,theessenceofcontagion,blursall boundaries.Deeley wrylyper-
ceives the conjugal natureof the relationshipbetweenKate and Anna ("Sounds a
perfectmarriage"[p. 66]) fromwhichhe is, ofcourse,excluded.His jealousyleads to
thefirstoutbreakof emotionalviolenceas he voices his feelingsin themostangry
speechin theplay, while expressinghis supposed concernforAnna's husband.
DEELEY: forall that,a kindofelegancewe knownothing
. . . Waiting about,a slim-bel-
liedCoted'Azurthing weknowabsolutely nothing about,a lobsterandlobster
sauceideologywe knowfuckall about,thelongest legsintheworld,themost
phenomenally softvoices.I canhearthemnow.I meanlet'sputiton thetable,I
havemyeyeon a number ofpulses,pulsesall aroundtheglobe,deprivations
and insults,whyshouldI wastevaluablespacelistening to two-
KATE: (Swiftly.)Ifyoudon'tlikeitgo.
[p. 67]

His wrath inspiresKate's ultimatumwhich momentarilyparalyzes Deeley: "Go?

Wherecan I go?" (p. 67). And indeed,thereis no place to go. The frontdoor is non-
operationaldramatically,exitfromthesituation,fromthenetworkofdesire,impos-
sible.
Aftera slightpause, Anna attemptsto rescuethesituationas she explainsthatshe
"came here not to disruptbut to celebrate"(p. 68). However, immediatelyafter
calmingDeeley she resuscitatestherivalryby explaininghow she knewKate before
Deeley did, how she discoveredKate. This assertionis crucialinsofaras it demon-
stratesconclusivelytheuse of thepast in double mediation.For,as Girardexplains,
each subject-mediator "imitatestheotherwhileclaimingthathis own desireis prior
The linkbetweentriangulardesireand "old times"is not at all arbi-
and previous.""16
trary.In triangulardesirethepast is notmerelyone way, amongothers,of defining
possession,but thedefinitiveone. BothAnna and Deeley play theirtrump:theylay
claim to the originof desire.On the one hand, Anna assertsherpriority:
I foundher.Shegrewtoknowwonderful people,through I tookherto
myintroduction.
cafes,almostprivateones,whereartists
andwriters actorscollected.
and sometimes
[p. 69]
She was theoriginallover;she discoveredKate. Deeley, on theotherhand,proceeds
he destroysthetriangle.He deniesAnna's priorityby mergingthe
quitedifferently:
two women, by claimingseduction of them both. He remembersonce having
broughtAnna a cup of coffeeon theway to a party.He tellsKate that,as theysat in
the cafe,

shewas you,saidlittle,so little.Maybeshewas you.Maybeitwas you,

She thought
withme. Sayinglittle,so little.
havingcoffee
[p. 69]
Deeley's claim, whichrendersAnna's assertionabsurd,bringsthe triangleto its
possible development- to a completereversal.This momentin whichthe
furthest
two women are mergedis thepivotal pointafterwhichtheyexchangeplaces. Now
16Girard,Deceit, p. 99.

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.77 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 21:20:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
51 / GIRARDIANOLD TIMES

Kate, forthefirsttime,takestheinitiativeand acts. She asks Deeley, "Whatdo you

thinkattractedher to you?" (p. 70) and in doing so takes over Anna's role of out-
sider,examiner.Meanwhile,Anna adopts Kate's characteristic pose of silencewhile
watchingKate explainhow Anna fellin love withDeeley. Afterherlongestinterval
of silencein theplay Anna speaks to confirmthecompletereversalwhichhas taken
place:

DEELEY: ButI was crass,wasn'tI, lookingup herskirt?

KATE: That'snotcrass.
DEELEY: Ifit was herskirt.Ifit was her.
ANNA: yourlook . .. verywell. I
(Coldly.) Oh, itwas myskirt.It was me. I remember
youwell.
remember
[p.71]
conclusivelyfromobject
The trianglehas been reversed:desirehas been transferred
to mediator.ForDeeley, Anna has replacedKate. ForAnna, Kate too is dislodgedas
Anna now turnsherattentionto Deeley ("I rememberyou well").At thispointKate
turnsto Anna and withtwo sentencesdestroysthetriangleutterly:"ButI remember
you. I rememberyou dead" (p. 71).
Kate thenbeginsthelast and longestspeechin theplay in whichshe givesherper-
spectiveon the past and deliversher versionof the relationshipswith Anna and
Deeley. She describesAnna'sdeath,her"facescrawledwithdirt"(p. 72) and hersub-
sequentreplacementby Deeley whom she bringsintotheroom and who appropri-
ates Anna's bed. She tellshow, one night,he lay in Anna's bed expectingher to be
"sexuallyforthcoming" and how she "dugabout in thewindowbox. .. and plastered
his face withdirt,"further him withAnna.
identifying

He wouldnotletmedirty hisface,orsmudge letme.He suggested

it,hewouldn't a wed-
dinginstead,and a changeofenvironment.
Slightpause
Neither
mattered.
Pause
He askedmeonce,at aboutthattime,whohadsleptinthatbedbefore
him.I toldhimno
one. No one at all.
[p. 73]

Her denial of Anna'sveryexistence("no one at all") becomes,now throughtheiden-

tificationof Anna with Deeley, equally a negationof Deeley. She destroysthem
both by wipingout theirexistence,renderingthem,even whileon stage,immobile,
inoperative.The triangleis demolished,symmetrically, as is the possibilityof any
desirablerelationship.
Kate'sfinalspeechis followedby a longsilenceand a sectionofpantomimeduring
whichAnna retiresto thedivan and Deeley is rejecteddefinitively by both women.
Finallyhe too returnsto his armchair.Each characteris now totallyalone; each has
become fixed,permanently isolated,an objecton stageratherthanan agent,an in-
animatedbody. Each characteris locked in a death-in-lifewhichis thelogical con-

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.77 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 21:20:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
52 / TI,March1982

clusion to thegame of desirein which theyhave all takenpart and in which they
have lost everything.
All thepermutations have been exploredand thesebodies re-
main "stuckon thestage,"17 absorbed in a livingdeath.
In Old Times Pinterallows his charactersno understanding.They can salvage
nothingfromthe spectacle. Double mediationwill always end in death and will
transporttheplayersintowhat Girarddescribesas "theworld of a deathwhichthe
absence of all movement,of all quivering,has made completeand definitive.""18The
movementin theplay, throughtheworkingout ofdouble mediation,is towardsan-
nihilation.The tableauvivantof death-in-life, in whichthecharactersare locked,is
permanent.In thefinalmomentsof theplay Pinterprovidesus witha theatricalrep-
resentationof thateternity.Justbeforetheblackoutwe see theconfiguration frozen
in a blindingflashof light,justas a flashbulbfreezesitssubjectforan instantas the
camera recordsthe image.
Lightsup fullsharply.Verybright.
DEELEY inarmchair.
ANNA lyingon divan.
KATE sittingon divan
[p. 75]
This tableau, throughthesuddenglareof thestagelights,becomesfixedas muchas
any stageimage(in essence,fleeting)maybe. It gathersup threeseparatepastsintoa
stillshot, a coup de theatre:the eventsdescribedin the play as havingonce hap-
pened, theplay's own action whichonly now becomes a past, and the form'sown
past, thehistoryof thewell-madeplay itself.
In Old Timesmimesishas been thecrucialfactorboth fortheworkingout of the
patternsof desireand fortheaudience'sexperienceof thedrama. Forwhatelse is the
use of a so-calledtraditionaldramaticformbut theinscription of thespectatorsinto
a mimeticfield?All thewhilethatPinterhas been showingus thedestructive conse-
quencesof mediateddesire,he has playedupon our own mimeticdesire,by coaxing
us to imitate(initiallyat least) theset of responseswe mobilizewhenviewinga con-
ventionalpsychologicaldrama. As we have seen, the mimeticrivalryin the play
producesonlydestruction.Can we not now observethesame end to theplay's for-
mal imitation?The appropriationof a traditionalformhas functionednot as an act
of homagebut of destruction:theformhas been subvertedby beingclearedof the
psychologicalaccretions.In thissense,Taylor'sobservationof Pinter'swithholding
of explanationsis accurate.The "whysand wherefores," althoughby no means"to-
tallyincoherent," are not completelyrevealed.Our examinationof theworkingsof
mediateddesirehas providedus withan understanding of theextremely logical de-
velopmentof theactionbut itdoes notallow us to glimpsethemetaphysicalcompo-
nentpreciselybecause ithas beenexcised.We see onlyitsconsequences,thedestruc-
tion of imitateddesireand imitatedform.

17 See "HaroldPinter:An Interview"

(withLawrenceM. Bensky),in Pinter:A Collectionof CriticalEs-
says, editedby ArthurGanz (EnglewoodCliffs,N.J.: Prentice-Hall,1972), pp. 23.
18 Girard,Deceit, p. 287.

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.77 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 21:20:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
53 / GIRARDIANOLD TIMES

Pinter'sfailureto reveala metaphysicalbasis formimeticdesireleads theplay to

an endingwhichat firstglanceis strikinglydifferentfromthatof a Crimeand Pun-
ishmentor Remembranceof ThingsPast. As Girardexplains,19suchnovelsend with
a conversion(of Raskolnikov,of Marcel) whichis nothingmorenorless thana tri-
umphover metaphysicaldesire.The hero renounceshis mediatorand becomes re-
conciledbothwithhimselfand withtheworld. In dramathisrenunciationoccursin
plays such as The Winter'sTale whereLeontes'conversion,in itsexplicitlyreligious
formulation, correspondsto theconversionof theheroof thenovel. Nothingwould
appear more differentfromthisendingthanthefinaltableauof Old Times.Here we
are facedwithneitherreligiousinsightnorany apparentvictorybutwiththespecta-
cle of failure.The fatethatthe threecharactersin Old Timessufferis theresultof
theirplayingout of the patternsof desire.But because the metaphysicalbasis has
been withheldand the motiveserased, thepatternappears to be imposedon them
fromwithout.The charactersthemselvesare, to a certainextent,pawns in a game
whichtheplaywrighthas played withthemand throughthem.Here we are in the
presenceofwhat BertStatescalls a patternplot,a formwhich"throwstheemphasis
offthe individualcharacteronto generalcharacter,onto 'condition,'and onto the
processby which characteris victimized.It is a formof epidemic:all realitysuc-
cumbsto it."20In Old Timesthe"psychology" of theindividualhas beenreplacedby
theworkingout of the "patterns" of mediateddesire.
The victimizationof characterin Old Times,theineluctablemovementtoward
destruction,does not mark a returnto the romantiquedrama of Ibsen but leads,
ironically,to thesame triumphas thatexperiencedby thehero of theromanesque
novel. In Pinterthereare no heroes to be converted,only thelucid spectacleof a
failurewhichpasses as evidenceof theplaywright'sown victoryover the"roman-
tic" illusions which had become associated with the formhe has appropriated.
Pinter'suse of the patternsof mimeticdesire to lead his characterstoward de-
struction,his withholdingof the reasons for theirdefeat,and his refusalto ran-
som themfromtheirisolation are all indicationsof the ironywhich suffusesthe
play uniformally.This ironybecomes, in turn,themark of theplaywright'sown
distancefromthe action, his "detachment,"as States calls it,21 which is, like the
conversionof the hero of the novel, the product of a renunciation.Pinter'sdis-
tance fromthe action is not a measure of his scientificobservationof characters
and situationsbut rathertheresultof his renunciationof the"psychology"which
had become historicallytied to the drawing-roomdrama. Pinter'sformalappro-
priation,his passing throughthe formin order to rejectthe ideology associated
withit (like Chekhov's subversionof melodrama),giveshimthesame detachment
fromhis work thatMarcel knows only at theend of The Past Recaptured,in the
illuminationwhich enables him to write. The renunciationwhich Marcel experi-
ences througha meditationon thepast, Pinterpresentsto us throughhis own re-
flectionson old times.In both cases, a liberationis achievedfromthemensonges

19Girard,Deceit,
pp. 290-314.
20 Bert
O. States,Ironyand Drama: A Poetics (Ithaca: CornellUniversityPress, 1971), p. 117.
21
States,p. 133.

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.77 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 21:20:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
54 / TI,March1982

romantiques,the romanticlies which had become absorbed into the traditional

forms;in both cases, a destructiontakes place whichbecomes, ironically,a clev-
erly"well-made"play.
Conclusion
At thispoint,we can extendGirard'sobservationsby notingthatmoderndrama,
whicheschewsbothnarrativeformand traditionalhero,breakswitha romanticide-
ologynotthroughtheconversionofcharactersbutratherby thesubversionof tradi-
tional form.The highlydialecticalnatureof moderndrama makes identification
nearlyimpossibleso thatrenunciationbecomes visible in theform,thatis, in the
play of ironyto which all the charactersare subjectedand which,in turn,is the
mark of the playwright'sown distancefromhis work. Pinter'ssubversionof the
well-madeplay, like Chekhov'sundercutting of melodrama,is themarkof thisre-
nunciationwhichthespectator,inscribedwithintheformalmimesis,is now allowed
to experience,but only throughapprehensionof totalform.

May 1982: Theme Issue

INSURGENCY IN AMERICAN THEATRE
The May 1982 issue of TJwill be devoted to the themeof insurgencyin
AmericanTheatre. The followingarticleswill span the historyof that in-
surgency.
BarnardHewitt MargaretFlemingin ChickeringHall: The FirstLittle
Theatrein America?
BruceA. McConachie H. J.Conway'sDramatizationof UncleTom'sCabin:
A PreviouslyUnpublishedLetter
Gary A. Richardson Bouicault'sThe Octoroon and AmericanLaw
StuartHecht Social and ArtisticIntegration:The Emergenceof
Hull-HouseTheatre
JudithL. Stephens WhyMarry?:The "New Woman" of 1918
AlbertWertheim The McCarthyEra and the AmericanTheatre
RichardJ.Altenbaugh ProletarianDrama: An Educational Tool of the
AmericanLabor College Movement
Michael C. O'Neill Historyas DramaticPresent:ArthurL. Kopit'sIndians
Sandra L. Richards NegativeForcesand PositiveNon-Entities:Image of
Women in theDramas of AmiriBaraka
BarryB. Witham Images of America:Wilson,Weller,and Horowitz

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.77 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 21:20:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions