MASARYK UNIVERSITY OF BRNO

FACULTY OF EDUCATION

Bachelor thesis

Brno 2014

Tomáš Kvítek
 Masaryk University
Faculty of Education
Department of English Language and Literature

Peter Shaffer’s Amadeus and The Royal Hunt

of the Sun

Bachelor Thesis

Brno 2014

Supervisor: Written by:

Mgr. Lucie Podroužková, Ph.D. Tomáš Kvítek

2
Anotace

Hlavním záměrem této bakalářské práce je analyzovat postavy Wolfganga Mozarta, Antonia
Salieriho a Francisca Pizarra ve dvou divadelních hrách významného anglického dramatika a
scénáristy Petera Shaffera, jehož díla Amadeus a Královský Hon na Slunce významně přispěly
do britského kulturního dědictví. Úvodní část představuje Petera Shaffera v kontextu
postmoderního britského divadla, a následně zmiňuje hry, které byly adaptovány pro české
divadlo. Primárně však tato práce zkoumá osobnostní charakteristiky hlavních protagonistů,
jejich postoje a myšlenky z hlediska jejich sociálního a kulturního zázemí. Práce také kriticky
nahlíží na dobu imperialismu z hlediska postmodernismu v kontextu těchto her.

Annotation

The main objectives of this thesis is to analyse the characters of Wolfgang Mozart, Antonio
Salieri and Fancisco Pizarro in two plays written by an eminent English playwright and
screenwriter Peter Shaffer whose masterpieces Amadeus and The Royal Hunt of The Sun have
significantly contributed to British cultural heritage. The introductory part places Peter
Shaffer in the context of post-modern British theatre and subsequently, introduces those of his
plays that have been adapted for Czech theatres. Primarily, however, it examines the
protagonists’ personal characteristics, their attitudes and thoughts within a perception of their
social and cultural background. It also conducts a critical look into the era of imperialism
from the perspective of post-modernism within the context of the plays.

Klíčová slova

Divadlo postmodernismu, české divadlo, Amadeus, fikce, ironie, dialog, průměrnost, postava
Salieriho, postava Mozarta, zrada, žárlivost, zavedená etiketa, rivalita, touha, společnost,
individualismus, kolektivismus, význam Boha, kontext, kolonialismus, imperialismus

Key words

Postmodern theatre, Czech theatre, Amadeus, fiction, irony, dialogue, mediocrity, character
of Salieri, character of Mozart, betrayal, jealousy, well-established etiquette, rivalry, desire,
society, individualism, collectivism, meaning of God, context, colonialism, imperialism
3
Declaration

Hereby I declare that I have compiled this thesis on my own and all the sources of
information used in the thesis are listed in the references.

Brno, 19 April 2014 ………………………………

Tomáš Kvítek

4
Acknowledgements

I would like to thank to my supervisor Mgr. Lucie Podroužková, Ph.D. for her valuable
comments, inspiring and positive attitude.

5
Table of Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.1. Introduction to Peter Shaffer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.2. The plays in the context of postmodern British theatre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.3. Peter Shaffer in the context of the Czech theatre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2. Introduction to Amadeus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.1. Facts and fiction in Amadeus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.2. What the author says about the play . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3. The meaning of irony in Amadeus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
4. The role of dialogue in Amadeus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5. The characters of Salieri and Mozart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
6. The role of dual male characters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
7. The social issue and religion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
7.1. The characters in the context of a modern society . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
7.2. High and low-context society . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
7.3. The setting into unfamiliar environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
7.4. The meaning of God . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
8. The plays in the context of postmodernism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
8.1. The postmodern view of cultural dominance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
8.2. The Royal Hunt of the Sun and Joseph Conrad’s Marlow . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
8.3. The colonizers versus the colonized . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
8.4. The role of the hero . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
8.5. Shaffer’s plays in the context of Edward Said’s critical thinking . . . . . . . 46
9. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Works cited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

6
 1. Introduction
This thesis tries to conduct a research into two plays by the British postmodern playwright
Peter Shaffer Amadeus and The Royal Hunt of the Sun. It especially focuses on analysing the
characteristic features and possible motifs of the main protagonists, and it further integrates
the plays into the concept of postmodernism with the perspective of sovereignty and
dominance of one culture over other cultures. Whereas many theatre-conscious people are
familiar with the play Amadeus, which has gained popularity owing to the film adaptation by
the director Milos Forman, only some know the name which stands behind this masterpiece.
For the purpose of the contextual comprehension I have decided to include a brief
biographical survey of the playwright’s life and career in my paper.

1.1. Introduction to Peter Shaffer

Peter Shaffer is still an active English playwright and screenwriter of numerous award-
winning plays, several of which have been filmed. He is an internationally recognized and
highly acclaimed writer of contemporary British theatre. His work has been consistently
performed over fifty years on commercial, metropolitan, professional and amateur stages
worldwide.

Shaffer was born to a Jewish family in 1926 in Liverpool as a twin to his brother, playwright
Anthony Shaffer. Educated in Liverpool and later in London he subsequently gained a
scholarship to Trinity College in Cambridge, where he studied history. During the Second
World War he spent three years working at a coal mine and this experience gave him
“enormous sympathy and feeling of outrage in contemplating how a lot of people had to
spend their lives” (Kavanagh 5). Simultaneously he embarked on a commencing career as a
writer of detective stories together with his brother, the first of the three novels The Woman in
the Wardrobe, published in 1951 under a pseudonym ‘Peter Anthony’. Asked later why he
was reluctant to publish the story under his real name Peter Shaffer responded: “I had a sense
that I wasn't going to continue as a detective writer [...] I just felt that I would rather reserve
whatever writing I did of a more serious nature for my own name” (Kavanagh 5).

The following year Shaffer left England to live and work in New York where he seemed to be
drifting from one job to another including a salesman in a department store, a bookseller and a
librarian in the New York Public Library. Feeling a little hopelessly, Shaffer was gaining

7
courage to start a career as a full-time writer. He had to, however, overcome his father’s
conviction that proper work involved a serious profession and writing was considered
something like an interest. As a result Shaffer commented: “I denied myself the pleasure of
writing plays for a very long time” (Kavanagh 5). Although in no interview has Shaffer
admitted the resentment about his father’s attitude, it might be assumed that the motif of
dominant fathers that impose their visions on their adolescent sons that appears in his plays
(in the characters including Stanley Harrington, Frank Strang and Leopold Mozart) has its
origins here.

When he returned back to England in 1954 he began to work for the music publishers Boosey
and Hawkes. By then he, however had realized that if did not commence a career as a writer
immediately he would never do. He resigned his job and decided to “live now on my literary
wits” (Kavanagh 6). Living on small money as a literary critic and allowance from his father,
he began to write in earnest and soon was rewarded for his efforts by the sale of his television
play The Salty Land to ITV. Within following two years he got his another detective novel
published and sold his plays to BBC television and radio. This period in Shaffer’s life can be
regarded as time when his career as a playwright was in progress.

1.2. The plays in the context of postmodern British theatre

This part of my thesis introduces Peter Shaffer in the context of British post-modern theatre.
A suitable source elaborating this topic appears to be the publication Peter Shaffer: Theatre
and Drama by Madeleine MacMurraugh-Kavanagh who had the chance the meet the author
personally in London in autumn 1996 and with whom she spared the time on series of
interviews discussing his work (xiii).

The author highlights Shaffer’s control over dramatic dialogue and a verbal skilfulness that
remained one of his stylistic features. His dramatic plot “satisfies the hunger for crafted
dialogue that leaves his audience craving for more” (Kavanagh1). According to the author,
Shaffer’s contribution to the contemporary theatre lies mainly in his insistence to follow the
principles of well-made play where structure and development are central concerns of the
writer. His plays are, in addition, upgraded with an integration of musical sensibility, which
the playwright reveals in a statement “I like plays to be like fugues – all the themes should
come together in the end” (Kavanagh 2).

8
Another dramatic technique that pleases the audience in theatres is Shaffer’s ability to weave
a convincing story that involves the audience in dramatic suspense, human identification and
complexity of conflicts. The playwright is fully aware that story-telling is central to the
dramatist's art, stating “It is my object to tell tales; to conjure up the spectres of horror and
happiness [...] to perturb and make gasp: to please and make laugh: to surprise” (Kavanagh 2).
It is, therefore, the grip of the audience that serves with the artistic experience of unforgettable
performance. Furthermore, the integration of satire and irony appears natural to Shaffer’s
style, which I develop later in my thesis.

All these aspects of Shaffer’s dramatic narration seem to contribute to the fact that his
writings move easily between theatre, paper edition, cinema and television as media the
author respects automatically. Shaffer’s story-telling is, however, rejecting easy and
comfortable expectations the audiences may have from his work and confuses their
preconceptions. He takes a dramatic risk, and challenges their attitudes with unexpected
dramatic moments or rather unfamiliar themes.

Apart from ‘dramatic craft’ Shaffer handles strong theatrical intuition. Although his
masterpieces have been presented in different media, he is above all a playwright for theatre,
an environment where his writings acquire the right meaning as stated by Shaffer’s desire to
“make theatre, to make something that could only happen on stage” (Kavanagh 3). The
author states the importance of the psychological and emotional effects, writing:

With the ability to utilize every resource available to him in this arena
(lighting, music, choreography, communal atmosphere, and so on),
Shaffer involves his audience imaginatively in his drama where
metaphor, allusion and illusion prevail. For this playwright, it is not
enough that the audience should respond purely intellectually to his
work; it is his desire that they should be caught up in, and surrender
to, the magic and the mystery that differentiates live theatre from any
other dramatic experience (Kavanagh 3)

Before showing on stage, Shaffer had to prepare the platform as to become respected
playwright in academic (theatrical) world. Shaffer’s early plays assigned him to a position
where he could launch himself into theatrical arena which he had always considered to be his

9
fertile land. These early works made in 1950s included themes on social realism, though, in
Balance of Terror, a story about a cold war espionage, Shaffer demonstrated his ability to
come up with an attractive genre. Also his second play The Salt Land, a classical tragedy
constructed on the events of modern Israel, was regarded as an interesting attempt preparing
the path for his later work. Apart from the expansion of dramatic writing, this was also the
time of media boom, and radio and television provided a training ground to these young
dramatists where they gained experience before they embarked on theatre production. This
time could be considered as the ‘real’ start of Peter Shaffer’s career as a dramatic writer
(Kavanagh 6).

All these areas of Shaffer’s dramatic component help to understand the popularity of his plays
over such a long time. Simultaneously, this success goes hand to hand with negative,
especially certain British critics’ reviews adopting a suspicious stance on intellectual
hollowness and tendency to intrude on the audience. As a result, there have been voices
accusing Shaffer of superficiality and ‘popularism’.

Moreover, his success has been attributed to the directors, namely John Dexter, with
indications that these theatrical masters have continuously concealed the weaknesses of the
plays. The playwright has also been charged with blinding the audience with conceitedness
and abuse of the historical facts (Kavanagh 3).

This antipathy has further grown into split between the audience who enthusiastically
appreciated the dramatist and the critics who hastily depreciated them. The situation has
evolved to the degree that any admiration of the playwright has been considered by these
critics as blind following a misguided mass deceived by rhetoric and stage effects. In addition
to this, the author implies that since Shaffer’s plays lack the ‘political’ motif, compering to
authors like David Hare or Howard Brenton, the critics have withheld their approbation as if
politics should be the critical ‘standard’ by which all else is measured. Generally speaking,
Kavanagh critically views the suspicious atmosphere of any commercial success in Great
Britain and implies that this is the reason why Shaffer may have received less critical
reactions in The United States. For Shaffer himself, however, popular success simply means
that “the problems one has tried to solve have in some ways been solved', and 'validation' has
resulted” (Kavanagh 4).

However the author stands up for Peter Shaffer, she does not argue that there are no weak
elements in his plays referring to the failure of The Battle of Shrivings as the author’s first

10
commercial flop. Shaffer then alerted to the 'danger in my work of theme dictating event',
while “a strong impulse to compose rhetorical dialogue was beginning to freeze my characters
into theoretical attitudes” (Kavanagh 4). Concerning the critical reviews, however, it is the
audiences in the theatre what finally maters to the playwright rather than newspapers or
journals. Shaffer comments that his drama is written “for the public”, and is realized “with the
public” (Kavanagh 5)

The comprehension of Shaffer’s work in the context of postmodern theatre lies in the fact that
he is introduced as one of the authors who deliberately broke the established well-made play
rules and turned to more expansive approach of dramatization (Elsom 96).

Shaffer’s success came in 1958 with his well-made play Five Fingers Exercise concerning
various emotional conflicts in a household environment and focuses on bourgeoisie country
house of a middle-class society. This play was successfully staged in London’s West End and
the author proved to be capable of writing high-quality plays according to the standards of the
mid-fifties drawing a dramatic link with a construction of ‘well-made’ dialogues and
naturalistic form (Elsom 96). It opened in London under the direction of John Gielgud and
won the Evening Standard Drama Award.

Although this dramatic piece established Shaffer’s name in the commercial sector, British
critics mostly warmly approved but at the same time labelled Shaffer a 'Tory Playwright, an
Establishment Dramatist, a Normal Worker” (Kavanagh 7) which the author strictly objected
and took him a long time to shake it off. Nevertheless, the play had over six hundred
performances which, according to Oleg Kerensky, a contemporary ballet critic and performer
(“The Independent”) “constitutes an extremely long run for a serious drama” (Kavanagh 6).
When Five Finger Exercise moved to New York in 1959, it was equally well received and
landed Shaffer the New York Drama Critics' Circle Award for Best Foreign Play.

The masterpiece of the Five Finger Exercises was followed with a number of short plays with
varying success including The Private Ear and The Public Eye that opened in London in 1962
and in New York one year later. Shaffer was not satisfied with these standards and broke
away from well-made play to tackle historical subject on an epic scale in his play The Royal
Hunt of the Sun (Elsom 97).

The play is featured by a narrator, an old man who recalls his past of being a member of
Spanish mercenaries undergoing the conquest of the Inca Empire in Peru. The breakthrough

11
advancement did not lie as much in the flashback-like narration that could help to bridge the
awkward passages on the stage as it did in “a kind of total theatre, involving not only words
but rites, mimes, masks and magics” (Elsom 97). “The text cries for illustration. It is a
director’s piece, a pantomimist’s piece, a musician’s piece, a designer’s piece and, of course,
an actor’s piece, also as much as it is an author’s.” (Shaffer “Preface to The Royal Hunt”)
John Elsom points out that Shaffer in his play showed his ability to absorb some Brechtian
and Antonin Artaud’s techniques demanded a theatre of mime, ritual and inarticulate cries
(97). He also preserved the well-made play dramatic features of definite crisis, and strong
conflicts between two characters that represent opposing forces of morality and ethical codes
and rejected traditional naturalism. The crisis in Shaffer’s plays is represented by the conquest
of one side over the other with, in an addition of ‘romantic’ attitudes that usually prevail, at
least on an emotional level. “Atahuallpa might be killed, but Pizarro the cynic suffered the
more prolonged and terrible fate” (Elsom 98). Madeleine Kavanagh in her publication
expresses the feeling of the audience that witnessed an unexpected ‘intellectual spectacle’
distinct from any other Shaffer’s previous plays.

1.3. Peter Shaffer in the context of the Czech theatre

Peter Shaffer has not only been a prominent figure on the British and American stage but
several of his plays has also been translated into Czech language and adapted for the Czech
theatres. Undoubtedly, the most publicly favoured is Amadeus which might be caused by two
relevant aspects that dominate.

First of all, the Milos Forman’s film adaptation premiered in 1985 significantly contributed to
the success of the play on stage and second, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart himself is
domesticated with the Czech cultural environment, mainly due to his personal visits to both
Prague and Brno where he, as an eleven-year-old boy, performed in Reduta Theatre Brno.

Amadeus was first staged in the Czech theatres in 1982, in the translation by Martin Hilský,
and was enthusiastically applauded by the audience (Divadelní ústav). It was three years after
its premiere in London where it won Evening Standard Award for Best Play. Brand new
adaptation of the play can be seen in Husa na Provazku Theatre in Brno.

If Amadeus has been noticed by the Czech public with excitement it seems to be of much less
attraction with Shaffer’s earlier play The Royal Hunt of the Sun, which was performed in

12
London National Theatre over decades and represented a breakthrough in British postmodern
theatre. Therefore, it appears surprising that there were at all three adaptations of the play
since its premiere in The State Theatre in Brno in 1967 in the translation by Jiri Mucha.

According to the critic and editor of Literarni Noviny Vladimir Hulec who reviewed the last
adaptation in Vinohradske Theatre in 1999, the play arrangement was burdened with
heaviness and appeared too descriptive and fossilized (Hulec). From my point of view the
failure of having the play withdrawn from the stage may lie in unwillingness to disengage
from the Shaffer’s concept of ‘total theatre’ and stubborn insistence on theatrical ideas valid
in the sixties of the twentieth century.

Among other Shaffer’s plays which have had appreciable position on the Czech theatre stage
ranks a psychological drama Equues, which was also adapted for Mestske Divadlo Brno in
2008 in translation of Ivo T. Havlu. The comeback of this play was introduced in London
West End in 2007 after over thirty years, and promised to be one of the hottest tickets of that
season. The outstanding rating of the play in cultural reviews in London may have had a
significant impact on its revival in the Czech theatres the following year. On the other hand,
Shaffer’s crucial masterpiece Five Finger Exercise, which was the stepping stone into his
professional career, has not been translated into Czech even though it would deserve more
attention.

Among other plays translated into Czech language and performed on the Czech stages belong
Black Comedy, successfully staged since 1968, The Public Eye, with its last adaptation in
2009 or Lettice and Lovage, a comedy first introduced in 1990. Certainly, the number of
Shaffer’s adaptations for the Czech theatres is dependable on the commercial success in their
mother country as well as the dramatists’ ‘skill and will’ to ‘coat’ the plays into a new form
according to the principles of modern theatre of the twenty-first century.

13
 2. Introduction to Amadeus

This part conducts research into the personal characteristics of the main protagonists Salieri
and Mozart, their attitudes and thoughts within a perception of their social and cultural
background. It also comprises the author’s fictional personal view on the historical events.

The Peter Shaffer’s play Amadeus is primarily an extraordinary look into the mind of the
Viennese Court composer Antonio Salieri. Although, the masterpiece is titled after the
Salzburg born composer Wolfgang Mozart, it is a character of Salieri who guides the reader
or spectator throughout the play. It reveals the diametrical difference in both protagonists’
personalities, their lifestyle, sense for responsibility and the rivalry of two composers.

Subconsciously, the play can serve as a guideline to understand and evaluate the time of the
social and philosophical changes coming up with the movement of Enlightenment that had
shaken the structure of well-established sets of rules.

This is achieved by imposing the non-conform, distracted manners of Mozart’s character that,
under the ponderousness of given circumstances, intrude the established etiquette. Mozart
represents the undermining of this etiquette on one hand and conservative Salieri absolute
rejection of such a destruction of orders on the other. What’s more, the thick walls of
pomposity are being cracked by an exceptionally talented but annoyingly childish individual,
which is regarded as something utterly unacceptable. To understand better the message of this
Shaffer’s play, it is necessary to look closer into the protagonists’ characteristics, their mental
transformations towards the end of the play and distinguish between the author’s fiction and
reality.

2.1. Facts and fiction in Amadeus

As some audience have the tendency to compare the characters, invented by the author,
entirely with their real models, it is advised to be clarified, that Shaffer employed Mozart and
Salieri with fictional personalities. The characters are fabricated from a blend of imaginative
and factual features. Shaffer took some historically known facts with lapses from other
sources, for instance Mozart’s correspondence and Pushkin’s drama Mozart and Salieri, first
performed in 1832 and integrated them in the play (Shaffer “Longman” xiii). Together they

14
make an essence of the drama with a determined purpose to emphasise the style of the
characters’ behaviour, their mental processes and ambitions.

A number of narrative details have found their way into

Amadeus composer, for instance, his envy of the careless
ease with which Mozart can write music of unarguable
genius, finally, his decision – while pretending to be the
younger man’s friend – to engineer his destruction. (Shaffer
“Longman” xiii)

In the play, the author intentionally exaggerates Mozart’s speech with rhyming, affectionately
childish language in order to put it in a contrast with his geniality. His frequent quotes like
“telling selling me that my uncle curbuncle” or “today the letter setter from my Papa Ha! Ha!”
(Shaffer “Longman” xv) only underline the Mozart’s resistance to accept the moral concept of
those days. As mentioned in the Introduction to the play Amadeus, Peter Shaffer was inspired,
among other things, by Mozart's correspondence with his cousin Anna Marie Thekla, in
which he occasionally employs rhymed, playful style of a language with a number of faecal
vocabulary and sexual allusions (Longman xv). By applying this characteristic and unique
expressional device in the play, Shaffer seasoned Mozart's behaviour and manners of speech
with the pure intention to withdraw an acquired urge of idealizing geniuses as people with
exquisite taste and behaviour.

Therefore, both the reader and the spectator should be aware of the fact that the fictional
arrangements help to run the story in a more dramatic way and, secondly, highlight the irony
of life and mental changes that both protagonists experience. Some audience, nevertheless,
responded negatively to such a radical intervention to their concept of Mozart, since they did
not want to accept a Mozart as a fictional dramatic character that giggles dottily towards them
from the stage (Shaffer, Hilský 35).

2.2. What the author says about Amadeus

Martin Hilský, who translated Amadeus for the Czech stages comments on the character of
Salieri as a person with his own emptiness, which he, due to his above-average intelligence,
diagnoses accurately and that makes him a wicked mischief not hesitating to use his position
and power to destroy Mozart. He further adds that the worst punishment for Salieri is the

15
realization that Mozart is immortal. The most worrisome paradox of the Shaffer’s play,
however, lies in the fact that his Salieri is also immortal. He is here among us. A piece of him
lives on in every human slights, in every malice, every foul trick and envy in every human
incompetence, pettiness and crookedness (Shaffer 8).

Shaffer himself recalls that during his work on the character of Salieri
for Amadeus the mysterious silhouette that appears in the play, in his
eyes became every day more tangible. Masked, its back against the
house of the eighteenth century, in a narrow street at night, an
obsessed creature now ready, on the contrary, to possess and
dominate. The creature born from the legend of the grey messenger,
finally in Shaffer’s mind not only boded proximity of death but
something even worse. It was envy that stood as a guard in front of the
genius’ house: a gloomy icon and pathetic at the same time, a symbol
of destructive jealousy, rivalry in the arts. (Shaffer 13)

In the Preface to Amadeus Peter Shaffer writes about how the main character of Antonio
Salieri was being rewritten and completed for several times before being brought to its finish
form. For instance, the figure of the Phantom lurking under the windows of Mozart’s
apartment was originally written for one of Salieri's servants named Greybig (Longman
xxvii). Gradually, the author merged this figure with the process of mental changes and rising
madness of Salieri’s personality and logically combined the two characters into one. As a
result, Salieri's obsession to destroy Mozart is even more emphasized because the death and
jealousy assume their physical appearance.

Similarly, the character of Mozart was twice redone and adapted specifically for the purpose
of a stage arrangement. In particular, Peter Shaffer eliminated Mozart's boorish vulgarity of
speech, in comparison to the original version and highlighted the ambivalent relationship to
his father. In his Introduction to the play the author also underlines that the physicality,
rawness and directness of the Mozart character can be best experienced by the spectators
watching the theatre performance (Longman xii): “Amadeus is, after all, to be brought to
physical life in a space which has to be animated afresh each time of playing, by the vibration
of the actors and by those of the spectators” (Longman xi). Intentionally, it depends on the
audience and their perception of the character that gives the play a definite meaning. Each

16
person holds the right to interpret Mozart’s behaviour at one’s own will, which features the
drama with certain diversity.

3. The meaning of irony in Amadeus

The play is by all means full of irony. Antonio Salieri as the designer of Mozart’s gradual
mental and professional decline becomes himself mentally broken and for thirty years, after
Mozart’s death, has been facing a process of self-destruction. If he blames God for breaking
the treaty at the beginning of the play, he blames himself for the tragedy he has caused at the
end. The rumours of the assassination spread among the Viennese make Salieri tie to Mozart’s
name closer than ever before. What’s more, they ensure him immortality as Salieri expresses
in his desperate call:

After today, whenever men speak Mozart’s name with love, they will
speak mine with loathing! As his name grows in the world so will
mine – if not in fame, then in infamy. I’m going to be immortal after
all! – And He is powerless to prevent it! . . . (He laughs harshly.) So,
Signore – see now if Man is mocked! (Shaffer “Amadeus” 100)

The play is intertwined with several aspects symbolizing ‘the end of good times’ and the
beginning of times of change and difficulties that shall intrude the life of Antonio Salieri
before long.

Such a turning point in Salieri’s formation occurs, in particular, in the scene of the March of
Welcome played by Salieri accompanying Mozart to the Imperial court of the Schonbrunn
Palace. Mozart is personified to ‘upgrade’ Salieri’s March, shortly after his arrival in Vienna.
By this clownish roguishness Mozart openly manifests that the composition and the whole
Salieri’s music production alike are of average feats. Additionally, he escalates his public act
by replaying the March over and over, finally stopping at the fourth beat claiming: “It does
not really work that Fourth, does it? Let’s try the Third above” . . . (Amadeus 27). Mozart
obviously does it with a joy, with attributes of a grotesque using his unique, disarming
comments in order to insult the ‘old cattivo’.1

For Salieri this humiliation seems to be totally devastating, rude gesture, which has far-
reaching consequences for further development of their relationship. Ashamed, Salieri

17
realizes his loss. This passage is, ironically enough, used later in Mozart's Marriage of
Figaro,2 specifically in the aria in which Figaro warns Cherub that “now is the time to forget
the joys and benefits of the past and look forward to coming woes” (Shaffer “Longman” xix).

Shaffer in the play uses passages of music as a medium through which he decodes the figure
of Antonio Salieri. More ironic elements in the characters of Mozart and Salieri occur in the
processing of their way of communication. While Mozart, a composer of divine music, is
conferred a language of a ‘teenage brat’, Salieri, a composer of average talent, is featured with
long philosophical monologues nearly as if he was reciting poetry. The passage in which
Salieri expresses his anger and betrayal that God perpetrated on him, is an explicit example.

Grazie tanti! You put into me perception of the Imcomparable –

which men never know! – then ensured that I would know myself
forever mediocre. (His voice gains power.) Why? . . . What is my
fault? . . . (Shaffer “Longman” xxiii)

As the play proceeds, Salieri takes Mozart under his wings and serves more or less as his
surrogate father: he promises his intercession at the Imperial Court to help Mozart in his
misery, offers support and friendship (yet bogus one) and performs as a companion whom
Mozart may entrust at any time. It is the matter of unravelling whether desperate Mozart is
able to recognize the meanness in Salieri’s treatment to him, or is already so hopelessly ill that
he blindly receives any message of hope he is being delivered. My interpretation is that he is
aware of the abuse, but is not left any other choice. Who else, after all, shall he appeal to in
such a non-prospective state, after all his fellows have turned their backs to him and assumed
a reserved stance?

4. The role of dialogue in Amadeus

Throughout the play, the dialogues between Mozart and Salieri are limited practically to a
mutual exchange of single-sentenced utterances. Both are extraordinary musicians of their
time and, theoretically, expected to discuss their experience in composing music and share
new musical forms. Nevertheless, these attributes are not present in Shaffer´s Amadeus since
both composers possess totally different expressions of interpersonal communication. Only
shallowly Salieri commands respect, in fact his affection is a disguise which serves for the
purpose to discriminate and corrupt Mozart’s eccentric exhibitions. Neurotic, impatient and
18
eager Mozart is familiar with the settled, conventional Italian music and he neither seems to
exhibit any signs of interest to Salieri´s music productions, nor has he the will of being
fawning like Salieri is over the Emperor. By no means does he want to show a respect to
Salieri’s work, for Mozart so boring and feeble. It results in the fact that their communication
is limited to small talks with a hint of sarcasm and insults.

Mozart is being accused of using exaggerated gestures and engaging unscrupulous and
sarcastic language within short after he appears on the scene. “ MOZART: Majesty! Your
Majesty’s humble slave! Let me kiss your royal hand a hundred thousand times! He kisses it
greedily, over and over, until its owner withdraws it with embarrassment.” (Shaffer
“Amadeus” 22-23) This way, however, he clearly reflects the speech of the representatives
around His Majesty themselves, a language full of 'chittero - chattero' Italian terms, French
expressions and mutilation of standard German. Primarily, it is the form of the noble
communicative utterance that appears to Mozart as unbearable. At the same time, his self-
presentation draws a caricature of the society that is obviously not ready to receive immediate
signals of their own ridiculousness. He appears too direct in opinions and stiff in attitudes to
be admitted by the Viennese aristocracy, too bright and unaffected to attend any pseudo-
sophisticated discussions about music, as well as dangerously disarming to be within a
company with anyone willing to talk to him (Shaffer “Longman” xvi). Especially Salieri sees
his rival as a freak of nature, addressing him a Creature by which he deprives him of any
human virtues.

Shit-talking Mozart’ he may be to the outraged Salieri, but he is also a

fresh breeze blowing through the rarified atmosphere of the salons and
opera houses. Though he can match the pseudo-sophisticated foreign talk
of the courties, he is more obviously at home with the nursery games and
the homely Austrianism he shares with his ‘botty-smacking wife’. He is a
straight talker: forthright in his attitudes, downright in his opinions,
careless over aggravating others, oblivious of the offence he causes –
unlike Salieri or Strack or van Swieten with their discreet reserve.
(Shaffer “Longman” xvi)

Aware of his uniqueness, Mozart offers himself as a selling article, not bound to anyone, even
to God himself as Salieri is. He is just the son of one Kapellmeister3 from a small town of

19
Salzburg yet the creator of divine music, the Magic Flute as Salieri states in his analogy of
Mozart’s music.

Mozart’s clash with so-called enlightened society of his day raises some
important issues. He cannot, after all, help being either who or what he is:
unvarnished son of a small-town Kapellmeister – yes – but also (to use
Salieri’s words) ‘a voice of God’, the Magic Flute through whom is
breathed a music so sublime that it cannot fail to survive in a world where
most else must inevitably pass away. He cannot be the one without being
the other – but that does not stop society demanding that he should.
(Shaffer “Longman” xvii)

It ought to be, however, considered that Mozart's manners of public presentation, physical
appearance and even his music comprise secondary elements in the drama. The prime, covert
purpose is to shape the character of Salieri, moving from reserved refinement, over the first
shock of meeting with Mozart's compositions to the humiliation and degradation of his own
musical patterns. His post as Court Composer and whole life work suddenly suffer a loss on
their importance and towards the end his existence obtains a rough expression of a crushed,
poor fellow, a portrayal of a pitiful old man on the verge of death. Mozart’s attributes are, on
the other hand, like a light that illuminates the shadowy stereotypes and Salieri’s hypocrisy.

5. The characters of Salieri and Mozart

It is the character of Antonio Salieri that guides the play and is the mast of the dramatic
climax. He steers the wheel of his and Mozart’s destiny and sets familiar environment thanks
to the technique of flashback through which Shaffer allows Salieri to share his inner processes
with the audience or reader in the form of a number of monologues (Shaffer “Longman”
xxiv).

Since the very beginning of the play Salieri reveals the heaviness of his thoughts, providing
the audience with the opportunity to browse through his conscience and understand the way
he behaves. He is very agile in negotiating with the Viennese aristocracy, in his soliloquy,
however, reveals his desires and reproach that makes him more intelligible. In his rococo style
outfit he presents a serious, respectful and rather pompous court composer, but the misery and
burden he drags behind has been growing in dimensions as the play is progressing.
20
 This is now the very last hour of my life. You must understand me.
Not forgive. I do not seek forgiveness. I was a good man, as the world
calls good. What use was it to me? Goodness could not make me a
good composer. Goodness could not make me a good composer. Was
Mozart good? . . . Goodness is nothing in the furnace of art. (Shaffer
“Amadeus” 52)

Salieri appears to take on a role of a theatrical performer, an illusionist manipulating with

others and giving an impression of reality. He is, in fact, a covert figure disguised in a mask of
pretence, desperately fighting for the values he deserves. Mozart, on the other hand, presents
himself naturally, effortlessly. It is somewhat like a concept of a theatre in the theatre under
Salieri’s conducting. Despite the freakiness of a man dressed into an attire of a schemer,
Salieri remains very human and natural, and ought to be treated with a respect of a man who
experiences betrayal and behaves accordingly. Mentally despondent, he becomes an agent
interrogating his venticellos, a gossip collector, but primarily, a victim of his jealousy.

From the beginning of the play Salieri acts as a God’s servant. Since he has made an
agreement with God and is bound to Him as his debtor, he promises to fulfil the God’s will by
composing the best music ever. For the exchange he requires a post of the most respected
composer. Salieri has to face a challenge in the personality of young Mozart, which he is
incapable to deal with. As a representative of conformity and conservatism, he is far from the
acceptance of any innovative thoughts and relies purely on God’s will to impose geniality on
him. Since no response comes, he feels betrayed and jealous. The voice of God, the ‘Magic
Flute’ is not his own but is produced by the childish, disrespectful Mozart. Confused, Salieri
does not understand the point that such a foolish, crazy, unwitty boy has been gifted a talent
of God, whereas him, highly-regarded, reputable composer is supposed to become reconciled
to the average. As a resolution of his mental processes he begins to trace Mozart the pace to
death by a moral assassin. Salieri is sly but he is also a cultivated representative of a high
class society, and by this respect he is managing his revenge as by no means can he get his
reputation destroyed. Nevertheless, the prime purpose of Salieri’s revenge is not to remove
Mozart as such as it is the retribution to God through Mozart’s existence (Shaffer “Longman”
xvii).

21
 On that dreadful Night of the Manuscripts my life acquired a terrible
and thrilling purpose. The blocking of Go in one of his purest
manifestations. I had the power. God needed Mozart to let himself
into the world. And Mozart needed me to get worldly advancement.
So it would be a battle to the end – and Mozart was the battleground.
(Shaffer “Amadeus” 52)

The appearance of the phantom raises a schizophrenic-like split of Salieri’s personality and
further develops the dramatic turn in the play. The first Salieri's half is unctuous, slimy,
imposing a favour to Mozart, it is pretence of being a close friend and helpful companion to
turn to in times of troubles, and on whom the increasingly desperate Mozart can rely and find
a support in. The mastery of Shaffer's dramatization is fully realized in revealing Salieri´s
second role in the form of the mysterious phantom. It may well be regarded as Salieri´s
metamorphosis from a human being into a cold, abstract, bloodless illusion, a dark side of
Mozart´s soul, his silent reproach. This portrayal of abstractness fits the character of Salieri
with a new dimension. His jealousy steps out of a Salieri composer and takes a form of a
disguised figure. Envy lurking beneath the windows of Mozart´s apartment, snooping around
the dark streets of classicist Vienna. Salieri's envy is inventive, creative, constantly emerging
new ways of self-realization, yet it is obviously much more pitiful than all Mozart's miserable
life. Therefore, it is the matter of consideration how would Mozart behave being in Salieri’s
position (Shaffer “Longman” xvi).

Mozart ought to be viewed as the character of a supplementary importance in the play. He is

the victim of Salieri’s cruel ambitions, and is in a complete contrary to Salieri by all respects.
A childish nonconformist possessing a very crazy, insane-like manners, absent-minded by
nature, yet gifted an extra aspect which Salieri is shortened of. Having Mozart coated
deliberately in the crust of madness, Shaffer sets a dramatic contrast in order to oppose the
serious pompousness which characterizes his rival. Mozart by his attitude breaks the well-
established orders of the Enlightenment era and the etiquette constrained to face the arrogance
of Viennese citizens, as expressed in the Introduction to the play:

22
 Mozart’s clash with the so-called enlightened society of his day
raises some important issues. He cannot, after all, help being
either who or what he is: unvarnished son of a small- town
Kapellmeister – yes – but also (to use Salieri’s words) ‘a voice of
God’, the Magic Flute through whom is breathed a music so
sublime that it cannot fail to survive in a world where most else
must inevitably pass away. He cannot be the one without being
the other – but that does not stop society demanding that he
should. (Shaffer “Longman” xvii)

Being more or less under Salieri’s supervision, Mozart’s pace through the play is fully
dependent on Salieri’s own manoeuvres. Since they are introduced to each other, Mozart has
been embodied in a role of a puppet with a very limited space of self-employment which is
supported by his ruffled wig and foolish discourse he possesses. He sets a mirror to the
members of aristocracy which irritates them, thus Mozart is sentenced to remain a
misunderstood outsider. Despite the tragic disharmony in both protagonists’ characters they
still bear some kind of similarity - it is their need to speak through music. Neither handles the
ability to balance their consciousness other way but exposing their music. Salieri exploits
Mozart’s talent in the planned assassination, which approaches slowly and sneakily.

The scene in which Salieri is relaxing in an upholstered armchair, sophisticatedly relishing

delicious confections of sorbetti-caramelli and crema al mascarpone in the Baroness
Waldstadten’s library depicts the discreetness of Salieri’s and the playfulness of Mozart’s
characters. This theatrical spectacle serves a load of comical performances within a moment
the two gentlemen appear in the room. Salieri, a loyal attendant to the Austrian Emperor in
contrast to Mozart who presents himself as a cat - a hunting animal romping around the
room. He is frisky and playful and indulges his spontaneity. Such a stark contrast in the
presentations of both composers emphasizes the ratio of total inconsistencies and character
contradictions.

MOZART. I’m going to pounce-bounce! I’m going to scrunch-munch!

I’m going to chewpoo my little mouse-wouse! I’m going to tear her to
bits with my paws-claws!

23
 CONSTANZE. No!

MOZART. Paws-claws,

paws-claws,
paws-claws! OHH! . . .

He falls on her. She screams.

SALIERI. (to Audience) Before I could rise, it had become difficult to

do so. (Shaffer “Amadeus” 16-17)

Mozart is portrayed in a perspective of a mentally immature individual, but the more he

reveals his style of self-presentation, the deeper feelings of delusion and manipulation he
gives. If I state earlier in my thesis that Salieri manipulates with people, the same could be
claimed about Mozart. He deliberately provokes by his outfit appearance, especially his
ruffled-wig style and exaggeratedly fitted clothing in which he representatively appears on
formal occasions. His cues and comments are straightforwardly accurate, free from any
flowery curls, and without an exception they hit the point. He is fully conscious of where and
how to hurt Salieri’s peacockery and has an ingenious skill to humiliate his rival in public.
Mozart proves his brightness and readiness which he manages effectively against Salieri. He
is far too agile and alert rather than infantile as he appears to be.

The manipulative tendency represents a significant theme directing the destiny of both
characters. In Amadeus the motif is rather explicitly expressed by the relationship between
Mozart and Constanze Weber. His ‘hanky-panky’ flirting with his expectant wife is like
running blood into his veins and her sexual appetite is the dominant factor in their mutual
attachment. At the same time it is also the only escape from the misery they go through. In
contrast, Salieri has voluntarily renounced all sexual intrigue or even hints of physical
attraction of his music students in exchange for a covenant with God. He abides by the
celibacy, yet only until he finds to have been betrayed, and it is Constanze who becomes his
first victim of extortion and manipulation. The hunger for revenge fights in him with decrease
of dignity. Finally, being offered her body, Salieri refuses, disgusted begins to realize his
moral destruction, an act of humiliation.

Commonly, in both plays the sexual conflicts are expressed by a rape in the territories: in
Vienna it is Mozart abused by the aristocratic institutionalism and opportunism, in The Royal
Hunt of the Sun it is the rape of one country by another.

24
 6. The role of dual male characters

One of the distinctive features involved in Shaffer’s plays is a pair of male characters
somehow dependent on one another. In Amadeus, these are represented by the two rivals of
Mozart and Salieri whose fates are mutually intertwined and bound to each other. Similar
principle functions in the relationship between the conqueror Pizarro and the Inca chief
Atahuallpa in The Royal Hunt of The Sun. This act of mutual interconnection introduces to the
phenomenon of realizing one’s own life destiny through the character of the other. Salieri sees
his mediocrity only through the glasses which Mozart lends him on. This has a harmful effect
on Salieri, which drives him to the brink of madness and a denial of his own beliefs.
Purposely, Salieri is willing to identify with Mozart’s inner processes in order to poison him
mentally. As a result, he only realizes his vain plea to God for gifting geniality. “Had I in fact
been simply taken by surprise that the filthy creature could write music at all? . . . Suddenly I
felt immensely cheered! I would seek him out and welcome him myself to Vienna!” (Shaffer
“Amadeus” 21). Pizarro experiences awakening under the King’s influence and feels
enlightened by the Sun he was questing. Their different natural spirits and mutual rivalry,
however, lead them to death.

The relationships identified in Shaffer’s plays are thus established on rivalry between two
counterparts coming from different cultural or social backgrounds, which are explicitly
revealed. Despite the fact, that these rivals possess different mentality and perception of life,
they are in a certain mutual physical interdependence. For instance, the first time Salieri hears
Mozart´s music, he becomes eager and later obsessed with the young Austrian to the extent of
being present at every of Mozart´s performances, overwhelmed by the heavenly tones
penetrating his ears. He realizes that the ladder of his life priorities has crumbled even though
he still bears his post of adored Court Composer. Never more does he feel any satisfaction

The theory of two rival personalities has been elaborately analysed by a French-born,
American literary critic and philosopher of social science René Girard in his fundamental
concept ‘mimetic desire’ (“René Girard” IEP). And his theory has been applied on Shaffer’s
establishing of pair-character model (Block 57). Girard’s theory is based on the mechanism of
imitation other people’s desire, which may lead to conflicts and rivalry. The author further
explains that imitating someone else’s desire may end up in desiring for the same thing and
consequently, such individuals become rivals as they reach for identical objects. Therefore, by
25
‘mimesis’ or ‘mimetic’, Girard implies negative imitative aspects of rivalry (“René Girard”
IEP). His concept of an instinctive response (mimetic desire) is an applicable parallel to both
Salieri and Mozart in Amadeus and Pizarro and Atahuallpa in The Royal Hunt of the Sun. In
the latter, the analysis of young Martin supply evidence that he tries to behave in the manner
of his idol Pizarro who desires to capture the Sun-God Atahuallpa. The King of Incas, whom
Pizarro envies, acts contradictory - as his rival but also as his son. Pizarro earlier in the play
before he meets the Inca chief confides his unfulfilled desire of having a son to De Soto:
PIZARRO: “Time cheats us all the way. Children, yes – having children goes some steps of
defeating it. Nothing else. It would have been good to have a son.” (Shaffer “The Royal Hunt”
31) Atahuallpa, aged thirty three, seems to be the compensation. Simultaneously, Pizarro,
although a rebel, envies young Martin’s chivalric virtues and his sense of binding to ‘sacred
objects’ like the soldier’s sward (Block 63). Pizarro feels isolated and desire-free admitting
that “if I could find the place where it [the sun] sinks to rest for the night, I’d find the source
of life, like the beginning of a river.” (Shaffer “The Royal Hunt” 32)

The ‘mimetic desire’ is explicit when he eventually captures Atahuallpa, including his dignity
and natural grace – virtues that are the subjects of imitation and desire. The Inca chief
represents the goal Pizarro has promised himself to achieve. As the play proceeds to its
climax, Pizarro, aged over sixty, sees in Atahuallpa a hope to transcend time, a force that he
cannot master and that becomes the source of envy (Block 64).

Pizarro. You will die soon and you do not believe in your God. That is
way you tremble and keep no word. Believe in me. I will give you a
word and fill you with joy. For you I will do a great thing. I will
swallow death and spit it out of me. (Shaffer 76)

In Amadeus, the self-destructive effects are even more explicit from the early pages of the
play, owing to the flashback narrative structure, similarly employed in The Royal Hunt of the
Sun. Girard’s ‘mimetic desire’ is framed in Salieri’s confession of envy to young Mozart,
which becomes timeless and limitless obsession supplying the effects of deadly rivalry.
Listening to the Adagio from the Serenade for Thirteen Wind Instruments, Salieri begins to
experience pain (Block 66):

26
 . . . What is this pain? What is this need in the sound? Forever
unfulfillable yet fulfilling him who hears it, utterly. Is it Your need?
Can it be Yours? . . . I was suddenly frightened. It seemed to me I had
heard a voice of God—and that it issued from a creature whose own
voice I had also heard—and it was the voice of an obscene child!
(Shaffer “Amadeus” 19-20)

The role of rivalry and desire takes on absolute terms, which is apparent later on when the
play unfolds. Even at Mozart’s death, Salieri still does not stop chasing his rival and
experiences feelings that blend both desire and fear (Block 67):

God does not love you, Amadeus. God does not love! He can only
use! . . . He cares nothing for who He uses: nothing for who He
denies! . . . You are no use to Him any more. You’re too weak, too
sick! He has finished with you! All you can do now is die! He’ll find
another instrument! He won’t even remember you! . . . Die, Amadeus!
Die, I beg you, die! . . . Leave me alone, ti imploro! Leave me alone at
last! Leave me alone! (Shaffer “Amadeus” 93)

The depth of Salieri’s desire, sense of inadequacy and guilt, however, is not fully realized
until the moments after Mozart’s death. His soliloquy when he recalls the past years of
punishment, in terms of unsatisfied desire, reminds of Pizarro’s quest for a lasting fame.
Salieri triggers the rumour that he was responsible for Mozart’s death “I did it
deliberately!” . . . (Shaffer “Amadeus” 100) because “Mozart’s music would sound
everywhere—and mine in no place on the earth.” (Shaffer “Amadeus” 99) According to the
scheme of Girard’s theory, Salieri’s call for a scandal reveals the nature of his envy. As a
result he is becoming self-destructive because he cannot measure neither to Mozart nor God
(Block 67).

. . . And slowly I understood the nature of God’s punishment.

(Directly, to the audience) What had I asked for in that Church as a
boy? Was it not Fame? Well, now I had it! I was to become quite
simply the most famous musician in Europe! . . . I was to be bricked
up in Fame! Buried in Fame! . . . Embalmed in Fame - but for work I
knew to be absolutely worthless! . . . (Shaffer “Amadeus” 98)

27
.

Regarding the prospect of rivalry, Salieri makes an enormous effort to be better than his
opponent realizing, that only the ruin of Mozart can satisfy his needs. SALIERI: “And now –
Gracious Ladies! Obliging Gentlemen! I present to you – for one performance only – my last
composition, entitled The Death of Mozart, or Did I do it? . . . dedicated to Posterity on this –
the last night of my life!” (Shaffer “Amadeus” 9)

It is said that in case our neighbour comes into possession of some property, people usually
choose from two options. Either they make any effort to prevent the neighbour from
presenting it in public as a result of envy, or they supply Salieri choses the second option
according to which he decides to compose “an opera that will amaze the world” (Shaffer
‘Amadeus” 28). He finds out, however, that it is of no effect at all, since whenever exposed
to Mozart’s arias, he is humbly confirmed of his mediocrity. Consequently, Salieri ends up in
choosing the former option that becomes fatal to him. On the contrary, Mozart feels self-
confident about his musical compositions and stands obstinately in his defence. He does not
tolerate the slightest criticism of his work, and should such one ever come he rejects with
uncompromising retort. ROSENBERG. “Write it over” . . . MOZART. “Not when the music is
perfect! Not when it’s absolutely perfect as it is!”. . . (Shaffer “Amadeus” 64) From his audience he
expects to be praised since only such a feedback is admissible.

7. The social issue and religion

Shaffer’s work involves a scheme of an individual who should submit to opinions and
sentiments of the majority. This aspect of forcible adaptability can be also seen in other
Shaffer´s plays like Five Finger Exercise represented by the character of Walter Langer, a
young German tutor to the Harringtons´ daughter Pamela, or in Shriving, in which the
bohemian spirit of Mark Askelton soon breaks into a savage confrontation with the other
members of the Cotswold home of Sir Gideon, especially with his own son. The common
desire of Mozart, followed by Salieri as well as Pizarro is to make every effort to attain
‘higher values’ through rivalry. Therefore they are doomed to failure, misunderstood or
unwilling to understand. Progressively, they deal with the destiny of becoming solitary
outsiders and loners.

28
Initially, Shaffer introduces Mozart as a confident young man, an adolescent who dares to
conquer the Imperial Court of Vienna (the same way that Pizarro is trying to reach for the
Sun) in order to gain recognition. Mozart possesses a role of an eccentric stirring public´s
attention by every single word he says and deed he does. He presents a youth who revolts
against the rigidness of the society and its musical taste, represented by Antonio Salieri.
Aware of his musical gifts and Salieri’s limitedness, he craves for new aesthetic and musical
forms which would appeal to the Viennese aristocracy for its established conservatism.
Shaffer progressively uncovers Mozart’s mental degradation by setting him in a contrast with
his own self: To the end of the play Mozart is a man defeated, deceived, misunderstood and
expelled. A poor boy who pleads the Viennese elite for living, gradually dependent on Salieri
´s 'benefits’ in the form of interceding with His Majesty Josef II for Mozart´s economic
survival. Fully ‘tamed’ and rejected, Mozart is deprived of the rival’s competitiveness yet
until the last moment of his life determined to get recognized. Salieri is sponging on Mozart´s
collapse, like any society feeds on somebody else´s failure. Peter Shaffer in Amadeus sets the
handle of a scale, a life balance based on the theory that making one successful means that
somebody else must go bankrupt.

The play Amadeus is certainly not built on the single idea of a well-spirited evil genius of
Mozart versus average-gifted Salieri. In no respect are Peter Shaffer´s characters so
superficially appealing. Salieri, for instance, deserves to be accompanied with a certain
feeling of a pity and forgiveness. As the play progresses, a tendency to accept his retaliation
for his rival’s impudence emerges and his sufferings are justified. Salieri’s responses are on
the whole natural as they would be to any ambitious human being, and his behaviour is one of
the aspects that make the play timeless. For this reason Salieri’s character is dramatically
more interesting than Mozart’s.

In the scene in which he confides his motives and feelings of betrayal over the past years, he
appeals to be shown a piece of respect. After all, why should he, a respected, sophisticated
and distinguished composer in the imperial court, suffer from feelings of imperfection and
humiliation? For the sake of one ‘childish brat’ from Salzburg? Peter Shaffer further explains:

Of course Salieri commits a stupid sin – and I do not mean his persecution
of Mozart. He demands a God he can understand. What artist would do that?
He says, in effect, ‘Let me dip my net into the unfathomable well, and bring
up shining creatures hitherto unseen!’ But he also says, ‘Let me see the

29
 bottom of this well: it is my right as a man! I object to the darkness wherein
the connections of beauty are formed.’ As well object to the dark of the
womb! Confronted by divine mystery, he says merely, ‘How dare you?’ A
fool, you say. And yet he also has his right. All he wanted was to serve. To
be owned by the Absolute. We need an answer for his torment. True he is
condemned to chew forever the cud of his own poisonous sense of fairness –
but yet who would dare say a sense of fairness is dispensable? (Longman ix)

Poor social or emotional background (Pizarro had been a pig herdsman for twenty-four years)
or weak relationships with their closest family relatives (Mozart and the conflict with his
father on the issue of his marriage with Constanze Weber and consequent refusal of Leopold
Mozart to bless such a non-perspective relationship) are reflected in the way of dealing with
the subsequent challenge. Peter Shaffer introduces a psychological analysis of his characters,
their uncertainty and postponement in making decisions. Pizarro, for instance, faces a
dilemma when he must choose between Atahuallpa’s sacrifice and his promise to make the
Inca chief a free man. ATAHUALLPA: (Violently.) You gave a word! PIZARRO: And I will keep
it. Only not now. Not today. ATAHUALLPA: When? PIZARRO: Soon (Shaffer “The Royal
Hunt” 62).

The hero is, afterwards, forced to take full responsibility for the situation, but due to the heavy
pressure of the circumstance he must face, he turns to be indecisive and false. Mozart gives an
impression of a failure that at a crucial moment of making a life decision sides with the party
that serves little benefits: his marriage to Constanze Weber opposes his father’s ideas, he loses
his prime supporter Baron von Swietten. His mincing behaviour makes things worse and
Mozart tardily approaches the misery that eventually afflicts him at the end of his young life.
The very presentation of himself to the Court of Emperor Joseph II is filled with a sense of
otherness, unconventionality and violation of the rules that results in his condemnation by the
majority and hostility leading to his total loneliness. Similarly, Pizarro finds himself
indecisive whether to link his fate with the chief of Incas and that way to face the phenomena
of converting to a new God, or remain loyal to his party, meaning to voluntarily and forever
deprive himself of the opportunity to experience the new challenge.

ATAHUALLPA. First you must take my priest power

PIZARRO. (Quietly.) Oh, no! you go or not as you choose, but I take
nothing more in this world. . .

30
 . . . A long silence. The lights are now fading round them.

PIZARRO. What must I do? (Shaffer “The Royal Hunt” 77)

7.1. The characters in the context of a modern society

The timelessness of Shaffer´s Amadeus and The Royal Hunt arises when the contexts of the
plays are confronted with nowadays' processes of thoughts, not so different from those of
Antonio Salieri´s or Pizarro’s times. The plays are also about individual thinking facing
collective obedience and loyalty. They demonstrate the power of a crowd, in Amadeus
represented by the Viennese aristocracy, which manipulates with those standing aside like
Mozart.

From the principle of social power it could be assumed that as in any historical era, similarly
in the twenty-first century a crowd follows regulations and norms imposed by the majority of
population representing mediocrity. It results in a principle that such mediocrity is the driving
force in the society. Salieri in Amadeus represents explicitly this commercial majority,
pretentious yet undemanding taste of upper and middle social classes, portrayed by the
Imperial court and the bourgeoisie, pampering their loyal supporters - average and non-
innovative manufacturers of art. In the event that this comfort is disturbed from the outside, an
effect of a certain shock occurs and the stiffness vibrates. Mozart is gifted higher artistic
dispositions and his intrusion is perceived as hostile. He is subsequently labelled as an
outlander, incompetent bungler of music and contemporary tastes. SALIERI: “Music which
makes one aware too much of the virtuosity of the composer”. (Shaffer 31) Mozart is denied
and his music is eventually awarded and recognized posthumously by the generation arising
of new musical circles.

The role of a particular individual character is supposed to be perceived as a reflection of the

whole society in the given context and setting. Salieri himself personifies a society featured
with envy and gossiping, a society which compromises, is selfish, enhances those holding a
position of representatives of distinguished etiquette and discredits any individuals breaking
such decorum. Vienna of those days represents a strongly conservative mechanism in which
such a man like Mozart in Amadeus is not accepted and is supposed to be expelled from the
intimacy of these social circles. The conservatism is expressed by the Emperor of Austria who
seems shaken after having been performed The Abduction from the Seraglio4 conducted by
Mozart. His upcoming comments release the hint of certain aloofness: ''There you are. It’s

31
clever. It’s German. It’s a quality work. And there are simply too many notes. Do you see?''
(Shaffer 30) By these words, Josef II accurately reflects the limits that are well-established
and viable for the ponderous audience of the Imperial Court. Shaffer introduces a society
formed by conventions and which assumes a role of a judge determining what matters are
appropriate and acceptable. It acts as a prosecutor who wants Mozart to plead guilty. A
society which ranks, constraints, judges. At the same time it behaves greedily and cowardly.

The Vienna of Amadeus is a far from satisfactory place. Capital of a

sprawling empire, temple of culture, centre of musical world, it is at
the same time riddled with hypocrisy and self-interest. It is ruled by an
emperor whose tastes in music, tough boyishly enthusiastic, are
decidedly superficial, whose court and kapelle (with the single and
ironic exception of Salieri himself) are entirely incapable of
recognizing true genius – a shortcoming shared by the citizens of
Vienna at large. (Shaffer “Longman” xvi)

Neoclassical Vienna represents a giant organism, which is being fed by a spectrum of various
musicians, composers, artists and social elite. It is a panopticum with an open exhibition of
music, German and Italian opera, theatre and organized entertainment. It is also a bureaucratic
apparatus inciting its citizens to gossip and spy, “capital of a sprawling empire, temple of
culture, centre of the musical world, it is at the same time riddled with hypocrisy and self-
interest.” (Shaffer “Longman” xv) Like a parasite which drains energy from its breadwinners,
Mozart becomes the victim of the process of social assault in Vienna. The ever insatiable
monster does not manage to master its instinct and literally sucks from Mozart the last
remnants of his blood. The same frolic that Mozart exposes with Constanze in the library of
Baroness Waldstadten (with a hidden presence of horrified Salieri) is being imposed on
Mozart by the Viennese. He is trapped by the society, which acts as a cat getting its mouse
exhausted to death, and in a certain point he loses too energy to cope with life.

In The Royal Hunt of the Sun the scheme of manipulative power is also employed in the
characters’ mentality. Pizarro, who possesses chivalric spirit and charm is swirled into the
coming event as a symbol of strength, courage and determination, but he is also handled and
manipulated by representatives of the 'higher' spiritual society represented by the
missionaries. He is supposed to give up his personal will for the sake of his companions.

ESTETE. Perverse man, what is Atahuallpa to you?

32
 PIZARRO: Someone I promised Life.

ESTETE: Promised Life? You quaint. The sort of chivalry idea you
pretend to despise. If you want to be an absolute king, my man, you
must learn to act out of personal will. Break your word just because
you gave it. Till then, you’re only a pig-man trying to cope his betters.
(Shaffer “The Royal Hunt” 71)

Pizarro stands in a social clash. On one hand, he retains his Spanish virtues, on the other hand,
he absorbs the principles of the ‘savage’ being gradually involved in a sort of a philosophical
confrontation with the new divinity. Face to face the new spirituality he re-evaluates his life,
standing between the shine of the gold at the dusk of his life and the shine of the Sun
embodied in Atahuallpa. He appears overwhelmed by the philosophy of the Inca chief and his
mental inferiority makes him show respect and appreciation to his newly gained relationship
to Atahuallpa, who generously offers Pizarro a solution in his spiritual emptiness. “Take my
word. Take my peace. I will put water to your wound, old man. Believe.” (Shaffer “The Royal
Hunt” 77)

Shaffer implies the clash between worship and a kind of codification explicitly when . . .
“Francisco Pizarro casts off his Carlos the Fifth. Go and tell him.” (Shaffer, “The Royal
Hunt” 70) Pizarro is impressed by the Inca’s free will and a sense of freedom without any
external intervention and thus breaks away from his companions. He is overwhelmed by the
spirituality of the place and the same time he realizes his mediocrity and mental emptiness.

Human aspects are of superior relevance towards the end of the play. Pizarro seems
manipulated and confused. Through the massacre of the Indians he simultaneously kills his
own faith, becomes mentally naked and bestial, spiritually empty. Obviously, the
superficiality and materialistic values of one society are presented here, alongside with its
greed and opportunism, a vision of its own enrichment and destruction of anything that defies
convention, therefore it is regarded as unacceptable, incompatible object of reformation or
disgrace.

7.2. High and low-context society

33
Pizarro represents an individualistic perspective of life, which is common to most of the
nations of Western Europe that once set out in the purpose of exploring the new continent of
America. There, they were gradually settling down and began establishing a new cultural
movement of white Spanish settlers, for whom a sense of highly civilized background and
superiority over other cultures was the hallmark.

Bird cries fill the forest.

PIZARRO: Listen to them. There’s the world. The eagle rips the condor;
the condor rips the crow. And the crow would blind all the eagles in
the sky if once it had the beak to do it. The clothed hunt the naked; the
legitimates hunt the bastards, and put down the word Gentleman to
blot up the blood . . . (Shaffer “The Royal Hunt” 17)

Pizarro therefore depicts the fundamental principles of Western civilization characterized by

reaching for its own success and commitment to Christian values at the cost of destroying the
established virtues and philosophies that had been ingrained there long before the import of
Western European style of living. He is a solitary man who works firmly to fulfil his duty
drifted by conviction of his leadership abilities as a conqueror. He is stubborn and determined
to undergo the enterprise in order to become recognized and gain the benefits which would
also give him a sense of satisfaction. He recruits his companions as servants because only
through them he could touch the height of glory and fulfil his long-time lasting dreams.

From my point of view, Peter Shaffer seems to present the character of Pizarro as a newly
recognised class society of future generations of Americans who will soon impose new social
rules on the natives, and gradually displace the native culture to the edge of general interest. It
is a European society of new colonizers, fast expanding and intrusive movement in the lands
of southern and northern American continent.

Pizarro, when surrounded by the Incas, finds himself under enormous pressure, dealing with a
threat of possible defeat. He takes into a resolute action in order to preserve his freedom by
gaining control over the Incas. His manners comprise a strong sense of individualism featured
by taking the risk, whether it leads to success or failure. At the same time he sees failure as a
lack of will and effort and denies defeat that brings long suffering and unhappiness, which is
not natural for further human existence. He measures the proportions of achievement within

34
an individual, the limit of success is not ascribed to the agency of government or to fate
(Stewart, Bennett). If such a society finds itself in danger or under pressure of adverse
external circumstances, it ought to put all the strength and energy into the effort of getting out
of such a situation. By this crucial intervention Pizarro accomplishes a turning point in the
development of further events. Within the single intrusion he manages to exterminate one of
the old traditions of indigenous cultures. From the episode of the massacre can be learnt the
author’s dramatic perception of establishing new orders of white western culture for the price
of exterminating long-established traditions and norms. I integrate the topic of one culture
superiority from the perspective of postcolonial theory later in my thesis.

For the dramatic purposes the climax of the massacre scene serves as a stimulus for
development and mental change of Pizarro’s personality. From a social point of view his
character might represent low-context culture (DeVito) which has difficulty finding an
appropriate communicative channel with the members of other cultures. Since the Spaniards
lack shared knowledge with the Incas, Pizarro places emphasis on explicit explanations and
less on personal relationships. He also does not assume the local landmarks of the territory,
which he feels difficult to familiarize with.

Atahuallpa, on the other hand, represents a culture of collectivism. The first position in the
scale of values belongs to welfare, consistency and firm community of his tribe. The destiny
of the Inca nation is guided by higher power, and every event that occurs is the will of God. In
his behaviour a sense for plurality can be recognized. Pizarro is mistakenly seen as a deputy to
God in Atahuallpa’s eyes, because only a man with divine spirits coming in peace is
considered to be an equal partner to negotiate with. As a representative of high-context culture
he lays stress on personal relationship and oral agreement (DeVito).

ATAHUALLPA. He lied to me. He is not a God. I came for blessing. He

sharpened his knives on the shoulders of my servants. I have no word
for him whose word is evil. (Shaffer, “The Royal Hunt” 49)

Shaffer’s Pizarro and consequently Mozart too prefer individuals to inclination to the group. It
is not Pizarro, but his companions who mark the natives as barbarians, pagans or savages. The
captured Atahuallpa still sustains his post to be titled as the Lord or the King, however
subordinate he becomes under the heaviness of the circumstancies he faces. In his book

35
Orientalism Edward Said claims that many thinkers of colonialism realized humanity in large
collective terms or very abstractly rather than discussing individuals. As a result there are
artificial entities rooted in populism divided into Arabs, Hindus or Jews. (154)

Shaffer sets the social context between the institutionalized power represented by Pizarro and
the true freedom of the Inca chief. It aids in establishing a social communication between the
conquerors and the high-context culture characterized by a strong emotional attachment to the
society, dedication to faith, spiritual maturity and patience in decision making. (DeVito)
Shaffer avoids direct confrontation in communicating between the two leaders and rather
turns to more ritual, spiritual language that would fit with the theory of ‘total theatre’ on the
stage.

Atahuallpa relies on nonverbal cues and his language is featured with gestures and mimic
expressions that promote the rituality in the dialogues. Because of the prior knowledge of his
people and the land, the shared information does not have to be explicitly stated (DeVito) . . .
“When he moves or speaks, it is always with the consciousness of his divine origin, his sacred
function and his absolute power. “ (Shaffer, “The Royal Hunt” 41-42) By these gestures the
Inca also manifests his free will of worshiping the Sun and the contempt for the will of the
group and normative standards.

When the difference in the communication is not understood, misunderstandings between

these two cultures can occur. The directness of the low-context culture may appear insulting
or insensitive in the eyes of high-context culture and vice versa. The collective
communicative characteristic might prove vague or dishonest in its reluctance when engaged
in communication in which low-context society would act openly and directly (DeVito).

7.3. The setting into unfamiliar environment

One of the dramatic features that characterize several Shaffer’s plays is setting the main
protagonists into unfamiliar and new environments: Mozart arrives in Vienna, Pizarro
conquers Peru, Alan Strang in Equus undergoes a therapy at psychiatric clinic, Walter Langer
in Five Finger Exercise stays with his hosting family in Suffolk. This parallel, in Amadeus
and The Royal Hunt of the Sun particularly, has the psychological effect on both Francisco
Pizarro and Mozart. As they are newcomers, they need to identify with the social and moral
conditions and explore their territories.

36
Both protagonists are hunters for success and public recognition. Pizarro comes to Peru
primarily to commit robbery and make a fortune, his enrichment is eventually not as material
as it is moral. Beyond the glitter of the gold retained by the Inca tribe for centuries, he finally
finds his self-awareness and higher moral principles. Towards the end of the play Pizarro
experiences his gradual moral purification by means of accepting the fact that in such a distant
land there can be other religions apart from Christianity and that Atahuallpa can serve as a
representative of the deity in his country.

But Christ’s to be the only one, is that it? What if it’s possible, here in
a land beyond all maps and scholars, guarded by mountains up to the
sky, that there were true Gods on earth, creators of true peace?
(Shaffer, “The Royal Hunt” 75)

Pizarro himself abandons Christian faith in exchange for the newly gained spirituality that
promises to fill him with joy. This appears as a contradictory act regarding the background he
comes from. He receives and accepts multilateral interpretation of representatives of Gods in
the world and a function of a different social system. He subsequently feels confused,
mentally fragile, but, perhaps for the first time in his life, genuine. The audience are involved
to witness a formation of Pizarro´s character, a transformation from a greedy hunter for his
prey into the prey itself. Just as Mozart is finally caught up in the networks of Vienna
conventions, so Pizarro surrenders to the local divine values. Both of them practically failed
in their primary purpose.

Edward Said emphasises mutual influence according to which it should be assumed that not
only the colonizers influenced the natives but they were also themselves influenced by the
culture of the colonized. In other words, the environment significantly contributes to the
shape of one’s personality (Culture 133).

The Spaniards intend to deprive the Indians of their cultural heritage in order to gain
sovereignty over the land. Said in his book implies an obsession of bringing the treasures of
the colonized lands to Europe and get them displayed in the public eyes in museums. He talks
about imperialistic act of geographical violence in terms of exploration of the lands, their
excavation and bringing under control at the expense of losing territories of the natives to the
new-comers. The geographical identity was somehow disturbed during the presence of the
colonizing outsiders. He underlines the movement of general observation of the localities to
specific transformations of the lands (Culture 195).

37
As for Shaffer, this seems to be a relevant subject since he donates an essential part of Act I -
The Hunt to geographical exploration before the conquerors are confronted with the Incas. To
emphasize the importance of the geographical change, he allows Pizarro to settle (comfort)
his consciousness by recalling his hopeless days back home in Spain and in Italy when he
served army. Pizarro, disappointed by the deal in his homeland, tries to bring his images of
successful career abroad.

Said, in continuity of this aspect, refers to Crosby’s Ecological Imperialism in which the
author claims that Europeans began to change the local habitat wherever they moved. The
reason was to transform the territories into images they had brought with them from their
homeland. The change of agriculture, crops and ecological system caused environmental
imbalance and dislocation for the natives. The introduction of a new political system was only
logical consequence. Furthermore, a project of long-standing territorial possession was
supposed to make the land profitable and in the same time integrated with external rules. Said
further refers to Neil Smith’s book Uneven Development in which the results of such an
integration are described , namely an unequally developed landscapes sharing poverty with
wealth and urbanization with agricultural diminishment. If the colonized locations served for
the outsiders’ purposes then the natives felt necessity to imagine, seek or discover ‘second’
land (Culture 271-272).

Said then introduces the final process of transformation during which the colonial space must
be transformed sufficiently not to appear foreign to the imperial eye. He refers to Brien Friel’s
play Translation in which the author says that “In such a process the colonized is typically
[supposed to be] passive and spoken for, does not control its own representation but is
represented in accordance with a hegemonic impulse by which it is constructed as a stable and
unitary entity” (Culture 273).

7.4. The meaning of God

The dramatic structure in most Shaffer’s plays is supplied with the motifs of God and multiple
varieties of Gods that establish the moral conflict between the characters. For instance,
Pizarro in The Royal Hunt embarks on an economic expedition but the subject of the play
turns into questing for a particular kind of God represented by Atahuallpa. The theme of
divinity triggers the conflict in the plays and serves as a communicative platform that

38
catalyses streams of thoughts. The protagonists deliver messages to their Gods but are
answered only by silence. The monologues afterward return upon the speakers and their
memories uncovering the crucial fragments of their lives and the soliloquies presented by
Pizarro in The Royal Hunt and Salieri in Amadeus signalize the climax in the plays. The
‘silent God’ stimulates the crisis of the characters while they remain spiritually isolated
(Shaffer, Hilský 37).

I did not live on earth to be His joke for eternity. I have one trick left
me – see how he deals with this! (Confidentially, to Audience) All this
week I have been shouting out about murder. You heard me
yourselves – do you remember? (Shaffer “Amadeus” 99)

Religious conception is prominent throughout Shaffer’s work. Despite the compelling settings
in different times and environments, the masterpieces are common in exploration of search for
Gods, the attempt to make a contact with them and the crisis when the protagonists elude
them. Shaffer sets a clash between Catholic and Pagan divinity and different religious visions
of the world which is intensified by the massacre of the Inca tribe. The Inca chief personifies
an embodiment of God that he eventually loses. Again, Shaffer imposes his dramatic form a
silent God that the Inca King renounces by the act of baptism. There is no response from
above, and coming to his death by burning at the stake, Atahuallpa is divested of the
possibility to follow the pathway to his God-Sun and undergo the process of reincarnation.

The Royal Hunt of the Sun is simply divided into Act 1 The Hunt and Act 2 The Kill the
former extending the motifs of long-lasting search for God and the latter, ironically, its
murder when is finally found. Pizarro is a desperate man who has lost a trust in his own
religion and feels attracted by the worship of the Inca rites. He becomes spiritually – and
literally, by the rope in one part of the play – bound to Atahuallpa, but he is not able to
maintain the union (de Ituarte 70).

PIZARRO. Yes. Yes . . . yes. (Bitterly.) How clever. He’s understood

everything I’ve said to him these awful months – all the secret pain
he’s heard – and this is his revenge. This futile joke. How he must
hate me. (Tightening the rope.) Oh, yes, you cunning bastard! Look
Martin – behold, my God. I’ve got the Sun on my string! I can make it

39
 rise: (He pulls the Inca’s arm up) – or set! He throws the INCA to his
knees. (Shaffer, “The Royal Hunt” 76)

What attracts him to the Inca is the latter’s composure and mental balance rather than his
beliefs. Pizarro is a solitaire and despises organised religions: “Dungballs to all churches that
are or ever could be! How I hate you . . . (Shaffer “The Royal Hunt” 71), yet he is seeking a
sort of release from his inner turmoil and, fascinated by the Inca King’s harmony and
assertion “I need no one”( Shaffer “The Royal Hunt” 61) is impressed even more and nearly
seems to be convinced about the Inca’s sacred power. He further explains “He has some
meaning for me, this Man-God. An immortal man in whom all his people live completely. He
has an answer for time” (Shaffer “The Royal Hunt” 45). In turn, Atahuallpa willingly extends
his personal embrace to the conquistador . . . “Believe in me. I will give you a word and fill
you with joy. For you I will do a great thing. I will swallow death and spit it out of me.”
(Shaffer “The Royal Hunt” 76). Should Pizarro feel tempted to believe in the act of
reincarnation it is not that the pagan religion is more reasonable than the Christian, but it lies
in the fascination by the completeness of the Inca’s personality (de Ituarte 70).

PIZARRO. It’s the only way to give life meaning! To blast out of time
and live forever, us, in our own persons. This is the law: die in despair
or be a God yourself!... Look at him: always so calm as if the teeth of
life never bit him… or the teeth of death. What if it was really true,
Martin? That I’ve gone God-hunting and caught one. A being who can
renew his life over and over? (Shaffer “The Royal Hunt” 75)

As noticed in the introductory part of this thesis, Shaffer allows his human individuals defy
God’s superiority despite the personal loss they eventually suffer. Salieri bears the sign of
biblical Cain, as portrayed in the Old Testament. Cain murdered his younger brother Abel
under the weight of grievance and jealousy because God rejected his sacrificial gift, which
was not worthy enough and accepted only the offering from Cain’s brother Abel. Cain, filled
with a feeling of injustice, killed his brother. As a verdict, God signed Cain and let him
wander the world as a homeless drifter (“Genesis 4”). This biblical resemblance forms Salieri
into a sort of a mysterious creature. He pleaded God to be exceptional, but kept gifting him
with assets of average values. He killed his ‘Abel’ and till the end of his life served
punishment in the form of remorse, despair and semi-madness

40
 8. The plays in the context of postmodernism

This part of my thesis tries to integrate Shaffer’s writing into the context of the postmodern
conceptual perception of colonial and post-colonial era, and to explore how the plays
contribute to the Eurocentric consideration of subordinating other nations by the applied law
of mental sovereignty. The motif of one culture dominance emerges in both Shaffer’s plays,
Amadeus and The Royal Hunt of the Sun. and my effort is to integrate this motif in the
concept of post-colonial culture.

8.1. The postmodern view of cultural dominance

From the perspective of colonialism developing in the sixteenth century, the prevailing
objective of The Royal Hunt of the Sun appears to be a criticism of how one nation is
becoming subordinate to the dominance of another. The beginning of European colonization,
expanding far beyond the other continents’ boundaries, included westernizing the savage
nations on the basis of white civilization maturity. This motif can be assumed from Shaffer’s
play which is set in Peru, conquered by Spanish missionary. It can also well reflect similar
expansive practices of the British Empire, which once happened to be the most extended
representative of imperialism until as late as the end of nineteenth century.

The consequence of colonization and the impact on the native peoples’ lives is dealt
thoroughly by Edward W. Said in his works. His book Culture and imperialism develops the
general patterns of the relationship between the modern metropolitan West and its overseas
territories in writings by significant British authors of Victorian epoch. His highly critical
writing proves a parallel with Shaffer’s inclination to depict European efforts towards ruling
distant lands and peoples as well as

the stereotypes about ‘the African (or Indian or Irish or Jamaican or

Chinese) mind’, the notions about bringing civilization to primitive or
barbaric peoples, the disturbingly familiar ideas about flogging or
death or extended punishment being required when ‘they’ misbehaved
or became rebellious, because ‘they’ mainly understood force of

41
 violence best, ‘they’ were not like ‘us’, and for that reason deserved to
be ruled. (Culture xi, xii)

8.2. The Royal Hunt of the Sun and Joseph Conrad’s Marlow

Two main factors were associated with the era of colonization and later decolonization: the
general worldwide pattern of imperial culture and historical experience of resistance against
empire (Said “Culture” xii). The deeper is Pizarro getting into the native, savage territory, the
more he is becoming overwhelmed by the surrounding wildness and the more uncertain and
indecisive impression he gives.

Such narrative features are held in Culture and Imperialism referring to Joseph Conrad’s
novel The Heart of Darkness. Conrad wrote his novel between 1898 and 1899, times that
symbolized a maturity of the British Empire imperialistic politics worldwide, including
Africa, where this novel is set. The main character Marlow, then, according to Said’s theory,
acts as an imperialist representative exploring deep in the heart of the black continent – the
‘darkness’ that becomes subordinate to the dominance of a European nation (Said “Culture”
32).

The story is set on the deck of a boat running down the river Congo, continuously leaving a
civilized world familiar with European way of living and steaming towards an unknown,
unexplored, mysterious, dark destination. Therefore, the river itself symbolizes a link between
the ‘lightness’, meaning fully colonized and civilized lands, and the ‘darkness’, native and
savage world that seems inaccessible to imperialistic intentions. The point is to show the
imperial mastery of white Europeans over black Africans, the civilization over the primitive.
The resemblance between Marlow’s adventurous voyage and Pizarro’s mission in Peru lies in
the fact that both are overwhelmed by the circumstance they face and both reassess the
purpose of their journey.

Pizarro represents Spanish royal demands but he could as well represent the British, thus his
‘hunt for the Sun’ is just as relevant for imperialism of the British Empire, which was said
that the sun never set on, since it spanned as far as the other side of the world hemisphere.
Therefore, Shaffer’s criticism of imperialism may have allowed him to highlight western
world intentions that the ever-present darkness in Peru, or wherever else, could be

42
illuminated, the light could be brought to the dark places and peoples by employing western
schemes of life by a will or power (Said “Culture” 33).

8.3. The colonizers versus the colonized

I would like to aim at what the objects of criticism in Shaffer’s Royal Hunt are. According to
Said’s theory, colonialism is consequence of the practice and attitude of dominating centres to
rule distant territories, meaning the implanting of settlement in the lands (Culture 8). Shaffer
introduces the attempt of domination by implementation of Christianity in non-Christian
world. The mission of the conquest is lead in uncompromised visions of turning the savage
natives into civilized society regardless of their cultural and historical background. Shaffer
emphasizes the unscrupulous selfishness and ruthlessness impelled by sick ideology through
which ‘the only truth’ and ‘the only right thoughts’ are delivered to the West Indian people.
Furthermore, the vocabulary addressing the colonized nation is loaded with words and
concepts such as “the land of Anti-Christ”, “Show them rigour!” and “pagan dust” (Shaffer
“The Royal Hunt”) which, according to Said, are ideological formations carrying a message
that certain territories and people ‘require’ domination (Culture 8).

Said, on the other hand, refers to an idea propagated by J.R. Seeley that some of the initial
overseas territories were acquired ‘absentmindedly’, without any imperialistic concepts, but is
very doubtful about this idea as it does not account for the persistence and systematized
acquisition and administration of these empires (Culture 9). Then it is a matter of
consideration whether Pizarro is a sole representative of colonial criticism or just an absent-
minded explorer whose expansive adventures were not framed into structural concepts until
later era of imperialism. He, therefore, can be perceived as a primitive anti-hero with
personal ambitions to reach the heights of his life career or as the initiator of the colonization
process which was later adopted and domesticated by the British.

Especially the communication between Pizarro and Atahuallpa reminds the practises the
British colonizers employed in their overseas lands. Those included a certain respect to the
native authorities and maintaining the intro-political agenda by the colonized. This progress in
colonization was beneficial for both sides since it had been assumed that only the citizens who
were culturally rooted to their territory could successfully manage the economy. This
mechanism originated the common sense of the natives who remained in the colonies since

43
the very first days. Concerning with the colonialist practices and imperialist ideology Said
points out that despite the bitterness and humiliations of the experience, many native people
believe they gained benefits in terms of liberal ideas, national self-consciousness and
technological goods that over passed time made imperialism more humanized. In the post-
colonial era they also deal better with the difficulties in the newly independent states (Culture
18).

From the post-modernist point of view the book caricatures Westerners rethinking of the
colonization era, questioning the process of decolonization. It implies that western
democracies feel a state of ingratitude since it was ‘them’ who provided ‘the others’ with
order and stability that ‘they’ (the others) have lost and who had been given progress and
modernization.

Said, referring to Rushdie’s The Satan Verses gives space to the theoretical thinking of some
Third World intellectuals who claim that most of the present barbarities, tyrannies and
degradations are ascribed to their own native histories before colonialism (Culture 23). That
seems to contrast with Shaffer’s depiction of the West Indian social system (which can be
referred to any colonized society) as harmonic and disciplined, with its people faithful to their
chief.

Shaffer addresses the conflict between men’s free will and the will of the group. While the
Inca worships his Sun-God freely, the Spaniards worship the King Carlos V and European
traditions as if they were law. Shaffer depicts the conflict between “separate worship and
codification” (The Royal Hunt vii). Atahuallpa is presented as a man who stands alone
without the need of any attachment to socializing power or institution. He represents the value
of being self and independent of any external control. Shaffer tends to back the native
concepts strongly and structures the colonizers as undisciplined, argumentative, untruthful
flaws who get overwhelmed by the impact of the manners and way of thinking of the
colonized (de Ituarte 71):

ATAHUALLPA. All your pictures are of prisons and chains.

DE NIZZA. All life is chains. We are chained to food, and fire in the
winter. To innocence lost but its memory unlost. And to needing each
other.

ATAHUALLPA. I need no one. (Shaffer “The Royal Hunt” 49-50)

44
The Spaniards are intruders who gain superiority by employing a violent assault using western
arsenal of weapons along with a scheme of institutions that demonstrate the western advanced
social maturity. Shaffer deals with the greediness of the colonizers and the institutionalized
patterns of western thinking, in his play represented Christianity imposed on the West Indians
in Peru. He may share similar perspective of the pro-imperialistic role of Victorian novel
with Said who in his Culture and Imperialism discusses the contribution of novelists,
especially British novelists, to the process of colonization.

He considers that “the novel as a cultural artefact of bourgeois society and imperialism are
unthinkable without each other”. Literally he claims that

Of all the major literary forms, the novel is the most recent, its
emergence the most datable, its occurrence the most Western, its
normative pattern of social authority the most structured. Imperialism
and the novel fortified each other to such a degree that it is impossible,
I would argue, to read one without in some way dealing with the
other. (Culture 84)

8.4. The role of the hero

The impact of the novel is in its form containing regulated plot mechanism and system of
social reference with its institutions of bourgeois society, authorities and power. The hero or
heroine is allowed adventures in which end he or she will touch his or her limits, the authors
reveal where they direct and what they can become. Such a hero or heroine therefore
experiences death as he or she by virtue of overflowing energy do not fit into the orderly
scheme of things or they stabilize usually in the form of marriage or confirmed identity (Said
“Culture”.84). Shaffer allows Pizarro to question the established orders of western civilization
and even more, he lets him convert to ‘the others’ side. Pizarro dies humbled, ashamed with a
silent reproach, not as a hero of his own adventures, but rather as an old, betrayed and soul-
broken man run out of energy. The promise he has been given by Atahuallpa is not fulfilled
and when the Inca King dies Pizarro faces the bare truth of human death rather than spiritual
divinity and resurrection.

PIZARRO. Cheat! You’ve cheated me! Cheat…

45
 For a moment his old body is racked with sobs, then, surprised, he
feels tears on his cheek. He examines them. The sunlight brightens on
his head.

What’s this? What is it? In all your life you never made one of these, I
know, and I not till this minute. Look (He kneels to show the dead
Inca.) Ah, no. You have no eyes for me now, Atahuallpa: they are
dusty balls of amber I can tap on. You have no peace for me,
Atahuallpa: the birds still scream in your forest. You have no joy for
me, Atahuallpa, my boy: the only joy is in death. I lived between two
hates: I die between two darks: blind eyes and a blind sky. (Shaffer
“The Royal Hunt” 79)

8.5. Shaffer’s plays in the context of Edward Said’s critical thinking

Concerning British postmodern theatre, this post-colonial consideration of imperialism and

colonialism is relevant in order to fully grasp Shaffer’s characters and the message they
deliver to future generations. Detailed research into the colonial epoch is conducted in
Edward Said’s another book Orientalism. Said, born as Palestinian living in the United States,
stands on the pendulum between Near/Middle East and Western world. Assumed of both
lifestyle and thinking of the colonized and the colonizers, Said demonstrates practices of new-
comers expanding into culturally diverse backgrounds and the consequence of such
movements.

His ideas support better understanding of Shaffer’s characters, acting in specific time eras
since not only Pizarro but also Mozart ought to be perceived as intruders in well-settled
political and cultural regime. Seemingly unrelated to the topic of this thesis, I have found in
the book many parallels between Said’s critical view and Shaffer’s message being reproduced
through the utterance of his figures.

Regarding, for instance, the topic of the characters in the land, the significance of such a
territory settled by the natives involves the relationship between knowledge and geography.
The author refers to Claude Lévi-Strauss’ theory called A science of the concrete in which he
explains the assignment of primitive tribes to a definite place, function and importance of
every fauna and flora species living in the immediate environment. This theory is based on the

46
fact that even though not all the knowledge of the species has its practical use, the point is that
it provides mind with order that is achieved by taking notes of everything around and the
mind is aware of, and thus give the things their role in the environment (Said “Orientalism”
53).

It may reveal the ambiguity of the Sun in Shaffer’s The Royal Hunt, as the symbol carries
different message to either, the Inca tribe and the missionaries. Pizarro reaches for the ‘heart’
of Peru, initially represented by the golden treasure - the ‘Sun’ from the title of Shaffer’s play,
and which is later substituted by the ‘heart’ (or the ‘Sun’) of Atahuallpa’s personality and
grace. The Inca’s Sun is rather spiritual, whereas the glitter of the gold might function as a
symbol of ‘illumination’ the tribe with a new ideology. The final motif of the sun lies in the
Incas’ bloodshed resembling the sunset Pizarro observes by the dusk.

PIZARRO . . . Where does the sun rest at night?

DE SOTO. Nowhere. It’s a heavenly body set by God to move round

the earth in perpetual motion.

PIZARRO. How do you know this?

DE SOTO. All Europe knows it.

PIZARRO. What if they were wrong? If it settled here each evening,

somewhere in those great mountains, like a God laid down to sleep?
To a savage mind it must make a fine God. I myself can’t fix anything
nearer to a thought of worship than standing at dawn and watching it
fill the world. Like coming of something eternal, against going flesh . .
. (Shaffer “The Royal Hunt” 32-33).

Concerning the geographical distinction Said argues that some objects are made up only in
people’s mind and appear only in a fictional reality, concerning especially the creation of
boundaries between lands and their surroundings arbitrarily, and the consequent addressing
‘us’, and those living beyond ‘them’. Again he points out that such formulation is engaged by
the outsiders and does not require the ‘barbarians’ to acknowledge the distinction between
familiar ‘ours’ and unfamiliar ‘theirs’ because the barbaric people are supposed to follow the
boundaries accordingly (Orientalism 54).

47
It is regarded as natural that all cultures impose corrections on others by the principle of
changing the ‘raw reality’ into ‘units of knowledge’. This conversion is historically natural as
different cultures have always inclined to impose transformations on other cultures, turning
them into what they should be like for the benefits of the receiver. What, however, western
colonizers practiced was regarding the colonized cultures as aspects of their own history.
Some German Romantics, for example, considered Indian religion as essentially an Oriental
version of Germano-Christian pantheism (Said “Orientalism” 67). Other pre-romantic and
romantic artists, on the other hand, believed that all cultures were organically coherent, bound
together by a spirit or national ideas which the outsider could “penetrate only by an act of
historical sympathy” (Said “Orientalism” 118) as, for instance, Mozart did in his The Magic
Flute in which Masonic codes intermingle with visions of Orient (Said “Orientalism” 118).

Said in Afterward to 1995 Printing of his book Orientalism considers a post-modern

explanation for current world scene and attempts of cultural and political comprehension
(meaning world scene of the nineties of the twentieth century). He assumes that people again
tend to return to nationalism and theories of radical distinction between different cultures and
civilizations, which the author regards as “a falsely all-inclusive” (330). As an example of
this theory he introduces a publication called Clash of civilizations by Professor Samuel
Huntington of Harvard University based on the premise that, for instance, Western and
Islamic civilizations among others were mainly interested in fending off one another (Said
“Orientalism” 348). Edward Said reckons his theory as ridiculous since modern realization
that cultures are hybrid and heterogeneous is taken for granted and universally acknowledged.
He argues that cultures and civilizations are interrelated and interdependent as to claim their
individuality.

How can one speak today of “Western civilization” except as in large

measure an ideological fiction, implying a sort of detached superiority
for a handful of values and ideas, none of which has much meaning
outside the history of conquest, immigration, travel and the mingling
of peoples that gave the Western nations their present mixed
identities? (Orientalism 349)

Finally, the author summarizes the purpose and message of his book, which has relevantly
supported this thesis and helped to see the identities of Shaffer’s characters from extensive

48
perspective, in a paragraph in which he explicitly comments against theories of separation of
cultures and peoples:

And this was one of the implied messages of Orientalism, that any
attempt to force cultures and peoples into separate and distinct breeds
or essences exposes not only the misrepresentations and falsifications
that ensue, but also the way in which understanding is complicit with
the power to produce such things as the “Orient” or the “West.”
(Orientalism 349)

49
 9. Conclusion

The purpose of my thesis was to analyse the characters featuring the plays Amadeus and The
Royal Hunt of the Sun in the concept of postmodernism and to introduce the personality of
Peter Shaffer as a significant representative of the British postmodern theatre.

The introductory part is dedicated to the comprehensive overview of the playwright’s career
in order to awaken the general awareness about the author and his work. It briefly summarizes
the years before his career as a serious writer began, and the following times of his early plays
when he began to be recognized publicly and in theatrical circles. It further examines his
dramatic style of writing, the technique of story-telling and supplying it to the audience. One
of the characteristics of Shaffer’s writing is the skill to establish dual conflict guiding the
audience throughout the play and to provide an unexpected turn in the climax. For a long time
Shaffer remained faithful to the traditional concept of well-made play, which he stepped out
from by completion The Royal Hunt of the Sun.

Subsequently, I introduce the author within a context of the Czech theatre since the
adaptations of his several comedies and plays, especially Amadeus and recently presented
Equus, occupy an important position in the Czech theatrical environment.

In the main part of the thesis I analyse the characters of Mozart and Salieri and the conflict
between the two composers established on their different personalities and opposing attitudes
to life. In Amadeus the mutual rivalry is brought into ad absurdum and proves the Shaffer’s
quality in dealing with human mediocrity and natural spirit. Partly based on fictional
imagination and partly on historical facts, the story appears very realistic, which the author
explains in the Introduction to The Play Amadeus. Both plays rely on religious motif and the
condemnation of God as the mast of the stories leading the characters to moral purification
but also to tragic conclusion. Both Salieri and Pizarro are, however, supposed to be viewed
not only as the catalysts of human tragedy but, above all, as ‘normal’ human beings whose
moral processes identify with our own. They are victims of their jealousy and frustration
whilst Mozart and Atahuallpa respectively, represent the confessors through which they
blame God for passivity.

The technique of double male characters employed by Shaffer sets the model of confrontation
with the rivalry the protagonists have to stand face to face. One tends to imitate the desire of
50
the other, which leads to raising the conflict in the plays. Since both crave for the identical
object, they commit to achieving the same goal, which seems to be the core issue in Shaffer’s
two-role-character plays. Salieri envies Mozart’s geniality and gifted dispositions same as
Pizarro envies the young Martin’s virtues and the Inca chief’s natural grace and dignity.

The social issue is expressed by the way of thinking of individualists who rage against the law
of well-established etiquette and social manners. This motif appears not only in Amadeus in
the character of Mozart entering Vienna full of envy, gossips and bureaucracy, but also in
other Shaffer’s plays. Pizarro is a solitary man who confronts the collective establishment of
the Incas and turns his desire for materialistic fortune to questing for spirituality. Walter
Langer in one of the earlier Shaffer’s plays Five Finger Exercise is swirled into the affairs of
the hosting Harrington’s family and becomes a victim of manipulation, and Mark Askelon in
Shrivings acts as an intruder breaking the settled rules of Gideon Petrie’s community.

These are the strengths in Shaffer’s dramatic approach that might reflect his personal
experience from his early writing career, when his own father discouraged the young author
from further development as a playwright. Shaffer’s characters fight for their free will by
which the author expresses his negative attitude to the manipulative tendency of any
institutionalized power.

The dramatic structure of the plays is weaved from fibres of religious conception. The
characters examine many crisis while they are losing their faith or they are searching for new
divinity. Since they are not given any response from God, they keep lamenting over the fate
and suffer moral injustice. Shaffer, on the one hand, allows his Salieri and Pizarro call on the
superior institution, but at the same time he notifies that the only response they can expect is
silence.

From the perspective of postmodern critical thinking, Peter Shaffer appears to demonstrate the
concept of subordinating one nation by another. Educated in the British history, the author
might introduce the underway of British colonial movement in his play The Royal Hunt of the
Sun, in which he explicitly reveals the domination of Western culture over a foreign territory.
He might express his criticism towards the intention of western imperialism to illuminate the
‘dark’ countries far beyond the boundaries of European lands, and support the resistance of
the natives. The symbol of illumination is represented by the Sun in the play that first
symbolizes the bloodshed of the Inca tribe when Pizarro refers to the sunset over the Peru

51
territory, next it is the symbol of the gold that the Spaniards are searching for, and finally, the
Sun-God of the Inca King that eventually becomes the main goal of the royal hunt.

Shaffer’s thorough blending of fiction and historical study materials seems to be a lucky
combination that supplies both plays with a firm dramatic framework and allows to portray
the tragedy of human maliciousness, social greediness and falseness. The plays conduct into
the protagonists’ personal characteristics, their attitudes and thoughts which the audience
seem to identify with. Peter Shaffer’s research into people’s mentality appears to be the core
point of the successful performance of his plays on worldwide stages.

52
Notes
1 cattivo: (Italian) nasty, bad.

2 The Marriage of Figaro: Mozart’s opera La Nozze di Figaro was first performed in Vienna
in 1786. ‘Non piu andrai’ is an aria in the first actin which Figaro tells the page Cherubino,
who is about to be sent off to join the army, that he must get used to the idea of putting the
pleasures and advantages of his present way of life behind him. The march-like character of
the piece is very in keeping with the context in which it is heard. The introduction of the tune
at this particular point in the play serves as an ironic warning to Salieri that his way of life is
about to be rudely changed.

3 Kapellmeister: originally the term kapelle was used to describe the entire musical staff
(including clergy, singers, instrumentalists) employed in a royal chapel. Later, it came to
mean any organized group of musicians employed at court. The Kapellmeister was the
director or conductor of a kapelle.

4 The Abduction from the Seraglio: Mozart’s opera Die Entfuhrung aus dem Serail was first
performed on 16 July 1782.

53
 Works cited

 Shaffer, Peter. Amadeus. Harlow, Essex: Longman Group, 1984. Print.

 Shaffer, Peter. Amadeus: a play. Rev. ed. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1981.
Print.
 Shaffer, Peter. Amadeus: čtvrtá premiéra padesáté třetí sezóny 1997/1998. Brno:
Městské divadlo, 1997
 Shaffer, Peter. Three plays. London: Penguin Books, 1976. Print.
 Trussler, Simon. Peter Shaffer: The royal hunt of the sun. London: British Council,
1973. Print.
 Shaffer, Peter. The royal hunt of the sun: a play concerning the conquest of
Peru. London: Hamish Hamilton, 1964. Print.
 Said, W. Edward. Orientalism. London: Penguin Books, 1995. Print.
 Said, W. Edward. Culture and imperialism. London: Vintage, 1994. Print.
 Elsom, John. Post-war British theatre. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd, 1979.
Print.
 Ituarte, de Maite. “The royal hunt of the sun: Peter Shaffer and the quest for God.”
http://rua.ua.es/. Web. 15 Feb 2014
 MacMurraugh-Kavanagh, Madeleine. “Peter Shaffer: Theatre and drama.”
http:/palgraveconnect.com. Web. 10 Mar 2014
 Block, Ed. “The plays of Peter Shaffer and the mimetic of René Girard.”
https://journals.ku.edu. Web. 10 Mar 2014
 Andrade, Gabriel. “René Girard.” The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ISSN
2161-0002, http://www.iep.utm.edu/. Web. 17 Mar 2014
 DeVito, Joseph. “Interpersonal messages.”
https://moodlnka.ped.muni.cz/mod/book/view. Web. 15 Feb 2014
 “Cain and Abel.” Holy Bible, New international version. Biblica, Inc., 2011. Web. 20
Dec 2013
 Hulec, Vladimír. “Královským honem na slunce postupuje vinohradské divadlo proti
proudu času.” http://kultura.idnes.cz/. Web. 20 Dec 2013
 “Peter Shaffer.” Divadelní ústav. Web. 18 Mar 2014

54
Abstract

This thesis comprises analytical research into the characters of Wolfgang Mozart, Antonio
Salieri and Fancisco Pizarro in the plays Amadeus and The Royal Hunt of the Sun written by
an eminent English playwright and screenwriter Peter Shaffer. It further integrates these plays
into the concept of postmodernism.

The introductory part sets Peter Shaffer in the context of postmodern British theatre and
subsequently, introduces those of his plays that have been adapted for the Czech theatres.
Primarily, however, it examines the protagonists’ personal characteristics, their attitudes and
thoughts within a perception of their social and cultural background. It develops the topic of
social individualism and collectivism represented by the protagonists, the context of high and
low society and communicative devices they handle.

It also places an emphasis on the role of God as one of the main motifs that Shaffer employs
in his plays by means of allowing his characters to release their desires through a quest for
divinity. Furthermore, Shaffer’s dramatic technique of dual male rivalry reflects the tendency
of the society to imitate other people’s desires as the matter of moral compensation.

The final part conducts a critical look into the era of imperialism from the perspective of
postmodernism within the context of the plays.

55
56