“In-Yer-Face Theatre is to the 1990s what absurdism was to the 1950s”
In the following paper, I’d like to investigate whether this statement is true or if both movements should be seen as two different theatre forms without any connection.
As a basis of my investigations serves Agnes M. Kitzler’s study about the influence of Absurdist Theatre on Contemporary In-Yer-Face Theatre (Kitzler, 2011) as well as Aleks Sierz’ book on In-Yer-Face-Theatre (Sierz, 2001) and Martin Esslin’s book on the Theatre of the Absurd (Esslin, 2001). I will mostly try to give a general overview about similarities and differences between absurdism and In-Yer-Face Theatre before I give distinct examples of Samuel Beckett’s play Endgame and Mark Ravenhill’s Shopping and F***ing and finally come to a conclusion if In-Yer-Face Theatre is to the 1990s what absurdism was to the 1950s or not.
I firmly believe that as this paper is limited to seven until eight pages it is more important to give a general overview which is more effective to answer the question whether both movements show similarities or not. However, I think it is important to undertake several aspects a closer examination in a broader study, which could be, for example, a bachelor thesis.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Theatre of the Absurd and In-Yer-Face Theatre: a Comparison
2.1. In-Yer-Face Theatre
2.2. Theatre of the Absurd
2.3. Comparing Absurdist Theatre and In-Yer-Face Theatre
3. Analysing Beckett’s Endgame and Ravenhill’s Shopping and F***ing
3.1. Characters conception
3.2. Language and dialogue
3.3. The expression of the body
4. Conclusion
Objectives and Topics
The primary objective of this paper is to examine the validity of the thesis stating that "In-Yer-Face Theatre is to the 1990s what absurdism was to the 1950s." By conducting a comparative analysis of Samuel Beckett’s Endgame and Mark Ravenhill’s Shopping and F***ing, the research explores whether these movements share fundamental structural and thematic commonalities or represent distinct theatrical phenomena.
- Comparative study of the Theatre of the Absurd and 1990s In-Yer-Face Theatre.
- Analysis of character conception, lack of background, and identity fragmentation.
- Investigation into the deconstruction of traditional language and dialogue.
- Exploration of the "expressive body" as a central site for meaning and staging.
- Evaluation of social criticism and the representation of the human condition.
Excerpt from the Book
3.2. Language and dialogue
Hamm: Apart from that, how do you feel?
Clov: I don’t complain.
Hamm: You feel normal?
Clov: I tell you I don’t complain!
Hamm: I feel a little queer. [Pause] Clov!
Clov: Yes. (Endgame:7)
This dialogue between Hamm and Clov in Endgame reveals the way how language and dialogue are represented in absurdist theatre. The sentences tend to be short, mostly they’re not longer than one line and the language used is simple and repetitive. The dialogue appears to imitate “a kind of colloquial small talk” (Kitzler, 2011:88). According to Kitzler everyday speech can be seen as “a basis for dramatic dialogue in absurdist theatre” (ibid.). She also claims that dialogues in In-Yer-Face Theatre are also regarding to “ordinary everyday conversation” but in a more realistic way. Sierz calls this kind of dialogue “curt television dialogue” (Sierz, 2002:243) which Kitzler then described as a dialogue which is “not meant to be in any way artful or sophisticated”. This characteristic of dialogues in In-Yer-Face Theatre can be seen in many examples in Shopping and F***ing, for example scene four, in which Mark is in Gary’s bedsit when Gary offers Mark some cocaine.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: The introduction outlines the research question regarding the parallels between 1950s absurdism and 1990s In-Yer-Face theatre, setting the framework for a comparative analysis of selected plays.
2. Theatre of the Absurd and In-Yer-Face Theatre: a Comparison: This chapter defines the core motives, aesthetic characteristics, and historical contexts of both movements, highlighting their shared departure from traditional theatrical conventions.
3. Analysing Beckett’s Endgame and Ravenhill’s Shopping and F***ing: This section provides a detailed structural analysis of the two plays, focusing specifically on character conception, dialogue patterns, and the theatrical use of the human body.
4. Conclusion: The final chapter synthesizes the findings, confirming that despite their differences, both movements employ similar stylistic ruptures to critique their respective societal conditions.
Keywords
In-Yer-Face Theatre, Theatre of the Absurd, Samuel Beckett, Mark Ravenhill, Endgame, Shopping and F***ing, Stagnation, Human Condition, Character Conception, Language Devaluation, Expressive Body, Social Criticism, 1950s, 1990s, Dramaturgy.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research paper?
The paper investigates the claim that the 1990s In-Yer-Face Theatre movement serves as the contemporary equivalent to the 1950s Theatre of the Absurd.
Which theatrical movements are compared?
The study provides a comparative analysis between the Theatre of the Absurd and the In-Yer-Face Theatre movement.
What is the primary research question?
The research seeks to determine whether these two theatre movements are fundamentally connected through shared stylistic approaches or if they represent entirely separate, unrelated forms of drama.
Which analytical methods are employed?
The author uses a structural and comparative analysis, focusing on characterization, dialogue function, and the representation of the body on stage.
What topics are discussed in the main body of the paper?
The main body examines character lack of history, the use of repetitive dialogue, and how physical disability and violence are staged as metaphors for the human condition.
Which specific plays are used as case studies?
The analysis is grounded in Samuel Beckett's Endgame and Mark Ravenhill's Shopping and F***ing.
How is the concept of the "body" treated in these plays?
The paper explores how both movements use the body as an "expressive entity," often through depicting dysfunction in the Absurdist plays or violent ruptures in In-Yer-Face theatre.
How does the author characterize the dialogue in both genres?
The author highlights that both genres reject sophisticated, artful language in favor of short, repetitive, or "curt" dialogue that mirrors themes of stagnation and social alienation.
What is the significance of the "repetitive patterns" mentioned in the text?
These patterns reflect the existential stagnation of the characters, where dialogue no longer serves to advance a plot or communicate meaningful information.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Anne Katrin Fack (Autor:in), 2017, The influence of absurdist theatre on in-yer-face theatre in the 1990’s as exemplified by Beckett’s "Endgame" and Ravenhill’s "Shopping and F***ing", München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/377541
