Iuliia Vorokhova

EAAS (LM-37)
Matricola: 2058573

Comparing or contrasting the dialogues and conversations in “The Empty Family” with
those in Albee’s “Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf” and Pinter’s “Ashes to Ashes”.

The role of dialogues and conversations in the literary text is of paramount importance since
it reflects the linguistic individuality of the character and, consequently, endows them with
personal traits (Abdugaffarova, 2021). While this definition may prompt the reader to analyse
any book, this paper will examine and compare verbal and non-verbal interactions in three texts
taken as parts of the Cross-Atlantic Art: English Literature course.
In Toibin’s “The Empty Family” communication takes the position at different levels, for
instance, “in the spirit of competition or cooperation” (Conan, 2020) that will be considered on
the example of the fourth story of the book “Two Women”. So, the reader gets to know Frances,
an Irish production designer (or rather the one who “dresses sets”) with a fearsome reputation for
“hard impatience” (TEF, 41), and the young lady Gabi, Frances’ assistant. From the very
beginning, there is tension between the women; their dialogues are short:
‘Can you drive?’
‘No.’
Moreover, they try to win this verbal battle by dominating one over the other in turn:
‘That’s what I always do.’
‘I know…I checked you out.’ (TEF, 42).
Gabi does not give in to Frances when she tries her best to show who is in charge here. At
the same time, the latter does not calm down either, although she knows that she is assisted by a
person who is sincerely interested in her work ([Gabi] “admired her” art (TEF, 42)); on the
contrary, Frances adds fuel to the fire, aggravating the conflict and emphasising her superiority:
she admits that she has lost all her manners in America and orders Gabi to bring her water
(TEF, 50), calling her “a young girl” (perhaps she implies her assistant’s inexperience and urges
her to respect the elders). The only thing that softens their unofficial battle is rare chuckles:
“They both laughed.” (TEF, 43). However, this fails to dampen the competitive spirit between
the women.
Another literary work where the storyline is built on rivalries in different contexts is Albee’s
play “Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?”. The pinnacle of his genre specificity lies in the
combination of the comic level with the tragic one in the tense dynamics of the play. In a satiric
form, a subtext layer appears, which reflects the appalling side of primary reality through
competition and the author's negative attitude towards it (Zinovieva, 2019). This can be observed
when one character loses their strength and another immediately takes the priority, moving from
a suppressed position to a dominant one. In the second act, the reader witnesses the strife
between Nick and George:
Nick: “I'd just better get her [Martha] off in a corner and mount her like a goddamn dog,
eh?”.
George, however, does not succumb to his pressure. He responds ironically and, at the same
time, menacingly, regaining power with harsh language:
“No, baby ... you almost think you're serious, and it scares the hell out of you.” (WAOVW,
114).
George also competes with his wife Martha, and although she is more potent than him in
verbal confrontation, he literally unties his hands and such words as ‘monster’, ‘kill’, ‘spoiled’,
‘dirty-minded’ and expression “satanic bitch” come out of his mouth (WAOVW, 101-157). The
narrative demonstrates that to have control over language is to run the development and
preservation of reality, whether it be truth or illusion (King, 2010). Following the turn-taking
approach in conversation is therefore central to George’s, Martha’s, and Nick’s struggle for
power and force.
Returning to Toibin and his “The Empty Family”, the transitional stage (from opposition to
mutual understanding and cooperation) is noticed in the relationship between the protagonist and
her taxi driver Ito. The narrator repeatedly emphasises that one of the reasons that contributes to
such interaction is silence and their pastime “without speaking” (TEF, 44). He is pleasant to
Frances, and she lets him into her personal space, the house, so that he looks after its condition
and maintains the garden. As she starts to earn more, she begins to pay them more. Moreover,
she leaves all her property to Ito and his family in a will. At some point, they become the most
important people to her (TEF, 45). Their dialogues will also seem monosyllabic to the reader, but
they identify a completely different kind of relationship. The characters have learned to read
each other's minds, even when brief (TEF, 55). It is this non-verbal exchange that paves the way
for collaboration.
Quite a different silence (and, as a result, its consequence) can be seen in the play “Ashes to
Ashes” written by one of the most influential dramatists of the Theatre of the Absurd, Harold
Pinter. Generally, his works are famous for the use of verbal minimalism and elliptical language
or even its absence that is to expose the hidden emotions or help the characters escape the
conversation. Silence as an integral part in Pinter's plays demonstrates his interest in the spatial
and visual dimension of the play as much as in the text (Scott, 1986). So, while reading, the
dominance of pause becomes as important for the reader as tense dialogue since it is pregnant
with strong unstated feelings. We see an attempt to change the subject at the expense of silence
when Devlin interrogates Rebecca to catch the image of a man who has put his hands round her
throat (AA, 1). Devlin asks too many questions, forcing her to answer, but she does not answer.
After a ‘silence’, Rebecca tells him: “By the way, I'm terribly upset” (AA, 7). This abrupt shift
makes the readers aware of the establishment of another type of relationship that has nothing to
do with competition and much less with cooperation. Various forms of violence have reduced
Rebecca to a sufferer and caused her melancholic ego to be wounded. Long silence takes her on
a hypnotic journey, during which Rebecca, probably, reaches a state of psychosis and then stops
reacting to Devlin's remarks. Now the relationship is one-sided, as the woman is already in
another dimension.
In “The Empty Family” though, as has been presented above, the interaction is always two-
sided, even if one of the interlocutors does not respond with words. In addition, as the language
of the protagonist and the narrative vocabulary change, so does the perception of the characters
by the reader. The contrast between the final scene in a Wicklow pub and the one from the
beginning at the hotel is obvious. The former evidently shows cooperation rather than rivalry
between the two women. Frances introduces herself as “Francie” (TEF, 60), endowing the
interlocutor and breaking the conditional boundary inherent in the dialogue of strangers. She
addresses Rachael by name, shortening the distance between them and sharing their common
loss. Even when Francie interrupts the other woman’s statement “I thought you lived...” with “I
do, Rachael”, it is not considered as an ill-mannered tone but as continuity of the conversation
which moves the story forward (Liternauts, 2015). The favourable intentions of both of them are
also evidenced by the frequent use of the personal pronoun ‘you’, the adverb “of course”, such
communicative verbs as ‘think’ or ‘talk’, et. (TEF, 60). Thus, this final dialogue through the
conversation between Rachael and Francie demonstrates the phenomenon of interpersonal
connectedness and, consequently, erases the former competitive hints.
Hence, the paper has taken into consideration the trajectories of conducting and maintaining
a conversation. In the example of three works, it has been found out that the same dialogue
model can personify and identify a character in different ways. In addition, it is common for
speech exchange to resort to a combination of verbal and non-verbal means of communication,
to create transitional stages, sometimes even moving characters away from each other and
depriving them of the opportunity to keep up the conversation.
 Bibliography:

1. Abdugaffarova, G. (2021). Semantic and Stylistic aspects of literary dialogue. Academic

research in educational sciences, 2 (3), pp. 621-627.
2. Albee, E. (1962). Who is Afraid of Virginia Woolf? / Copyright, H. Wolff, New York,
1970, Library of Congress catalogue card number 62-17691.
3. Conan, C. (2016). Narration as Conversation: Patterns of Community-making in
Colm Tóibín’s The Empty Family / Journal of the Short Story in English, [Electronic
format], URL (Retrieved from http://journals.openedition.org/jsse/1485) / Access
date: 20.10.2022, pp. 6-8.
4. King, R. (2011). Power, struggle and control: An Analysis of turn-taking in Edward
Albee’s Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? / Leading Undergraduate Work in English
Studies, Volume 3, pp. 205-216.
5. Lopez, I. & Masco, T. (2015). Reasons for Using Dialogue in a Story / Liternauts,
Volume 5, pp.18-19.
6. Pinter, H. (1996). Ashes to Ashes / Comedy formatted by Cateragia for the
GTTEMPO website, 2016, Access date: 15.10.2022.
7. Scott, M. (1986). Introduction. In M. Scott (ed.), Harold Pinter, The Birthday Party,
The Caretaker, The Homecoming: a casebook / London: The Macmillan Press, pp. 9-
22.
8. Toibin, C. (2010). The Empty Family / Copyright, Penguin Books Ltd, Registered
Offices: 80 Strand, London, England.
9. Zinoveva, R. (2019). Playing Poetics of Edward Albee’s Drama “Who Is Afraid of
Virginia Woolf” / Scientific notes of the Oryol State University. Series: Humanities and
social sciences, (4 (85)), pp. 123-128.