ABSTRACT
Handono, Alyxia Sukmaadi. (2014). The Meaning of “the Chairs”According to the Old Man of Eugene Ionesco’s The Chairs. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University.
This study discusses The Chairs, a literary work written by a well – known absurdist playwright, Eugene Ionesco. This play tells about the old man and the old woman who live in absurd world. The old man, the main character in the story, has the experiences which are important to share. The experiences are compiled in a message. By hiring the orator, the old man wants to deliver that message to the universe.
The objective of the study is to find the meaning of “the chairs” according to the old man, the main character, of Eugene Ionesco’s The Chairs. There are two problems to answer in this study; (1) How is the old man, the main character of the play, portrayed? And (2) What is the meaning of “the chairs” according to the old man, the main character, of Eugene Ionesco’s The Chairs?
The primary data of this study are the script of the play itself. The secondary data are taken from related books, dictionaries, and the Internet. This study uses theories such as the theories of character, characterization, absurdity, existentialism, and symbol. To strengthen the analysis, the psychological approach is used.
There are two things that can be concluded after analyzing the play. First, the old man is portrayed as infantile, irresponsible, and absurd. Second, the meaning of the chairs is about the balance of life which is showed by the emptiness of life. The emptiness of life is the representative of the invisible guests and the chairs. The invisible guests are the old man’s experiences through all what he has done in the absurd world. Through his experiences, the old man’s point of view about absurd can be seen. The chairs show the mind of the old man. Mind is a thing the old man has as the consciousness to do all the things freely. He has to exist in his life to get the meaning of life because the world does not give the answer. He realizes the condition of his routine of life which is called absurd. To encounter the absurd, he commits suicide. However, suicide is a confession to declare that life is not worth living. His belief leads him to behave absurdly. In other words, absurdity is the characteristic of existentialism. Through this play, student can define themselves as human being. Therefore, this play can be implemented to English class because learning English is not only about learning grammar and reading, but also the moral value.
▸ Baca selengkapnya: what are the chairs and tables in that island made of
(2)ABSTRAK
Handono, Alyxia Sukmaadi. 2014. The Meaning of “the Chairs”According to the Old Man of Eugene Ionesco’s The Chairs. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University.
Studi ini membahas naskah drama The Chairs sebuah karya penulis yang terkenal absurd, Eugene Ionesco. Naskah ini menceritakan tentang kakek dan nenek yang hidup dalam dunia yang absurd. Si kakek yang menjadi tokoh utama mempunyai pengalaman berharga yang harus diceritakan. Pengalamannya dikumpulkan menjadi sebuah berita. Si kakek membayar si Pembicara untuk menceritakan beritanya kepada dunia.
Studi ini bertujuan menemukan arti dari kursi – kursi menurut si kakek, yang menjadi tokoh utama, dari naskah The Chairs karya Eugene Ionesco. Ada dua masalah di studi ini; (1) Bagaimana si kakek, tokoh utama, digambarkan? Dan (2) Apa arti dari kursi – kursi menurut si kakek, yang menjadi tokoh utama, dari naskah The Chairs karya Eugene Ionesco?
Sumber utama dari studi ini adalah naskah itu sendiri. Sumber tambahan diambil dari buku – buku yang berkaitan, kamus, dan internet. Studi ini menggunakan teori karakter, pengkarakterisasian, absurditas, eksistensialisme, dan simbol. Untuk memperkuat analisis, pendekatan psikologi digunakan.
Ada dua hal yang dapat disimpulkan setelah menganalisis naskah. Pertama, si kakek digambarkan sebagai seorang yang kekanak – kanakan, tidak bertanggung jawab, dan absurd. Kedua, arti dari kursi – kursi adalah tentang keseimbangan hidup yang ditunjukkan dengan kekosongan hidup. Kekosongan hidup adalah representatif dari tamu tak kelihatan dan kursi – kursi. Tamu – tamu tak kelihatan adalah pengalaman – pengalaman dari apa yang telah si kakek perbuat. Melalui pengalaman – pengalamannya, pandangan si kakek akan absurditas dapat dilihat. Kursi – kursi menunjukkan pikiran si kakek. Pikiran adalah sesuatu yang dimiliki si kakek sebagai kesadaran akan kebebasannya bertindak. Dia harus hidup untuk mencari arti dari hidupnya karena dunia tidak menjawab arti dari hidup. Dia menyadari kondisi rutinitasnya yang dapat dikatakan sebagai absurditas. Untuk menghadapi absurditas, si kakek memilih bunuh diri. Walaupun demikian, bunuh diri adalah pengakuan jika hidup tidak berarti. Keyakinannya ini membawanya untuk bertindak absurd. Ini berarti bahwa absurditas adalah ciri dari eksistensialisme. Melalui naskah drama ini, mahasiswa dapat mengartikan dirinya sendiri sebagai manusia. Oleh karena itu, naskah drama ini dapat diterapkan di kelas Drama Bahasa Inggris karena belajar Bahasa Inggris tidak hanya belajar mengenai tata bahasadan membaca, tapi juga mengenai moral.
THE MEANING OF “THE CHAIRS” ACCORDING TO THE
OLD MAN
OF EUGENE IONESCO’S
THE CHAIRS
A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS
Presented as Partial Fullfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree
in English Language Education
By
Alyxia Sukmaadi Handono Student Number: 101214081
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA
i
THE MEANING OF “THE CHAIRS” ACCORDING TO THE
OLD MAN OF EUGENE IONESCO’S
THE CHAIRS
A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS
Presented as Partial Fullfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree
in English Language Education
By
Alyxia Sukmaadi Handono Student Number: 101214081
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA
iv
“Tuhan itu maha asyik”
vii ABSTRACT
Handono, Alyxia Sukmaadi. (2014). The Meaning of “the Chairs”According to the Old Man of Eugene Ionesco’s The Chairs. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University.
This study discusses The Chairs, a literary work written by a well – known absurdist playwright, Eugene Ionesco. This play tells about the old man and the old woman who live in absurd world. The old man, the main character in the story, has the experiences which are important to share. The experiences are compiled in a message. By hiring the orator, the old man wants to deliver that message to the universe.
The objective of the study is to find the meaning of “the chairs” according to the old man, the main character, of Eugene Ionesco’s The Chairs. There are two problems to answer in this study; (1) How is the old man, the main character of the play, portrayed? And (2) What is the meaning of “the chairs” according to the old man, the main character, of Eugene Ionesco’s The Chairs?
The primary data of this study are the script of the play itself. The secondary data are taken from related books, dictionaries, and the Internet. This study uses theories such as the theories of character, characterization, absurdity, existentialism, and symbol. To strengthen the analysis, the psychological approach is used.
There are two things that can be concluded after analyzing the play. First, the old man is portrayed as infantile, irresponsible, and absurd. Second, the meaning of the chairs is about the balance of life which is showed by the emptiness of life. The emptiness of life is the representative of the invisible guests and the chairs. The invisible guests are the old man’s experiences through all what he has done in the absurd world. Through his experiences, the old man’s point of view about absurd can be seen. The chairs show the mind of the old man. Mind is a thing the old man has as the consciousness to do all the things freely. He has to exist in his life to get the meaning of life because the world does not give the answer. He realizes the condition of his routine of life which is called absurd. To encounter the absurd, he commits suicide. However, suicide is a confession to declare that life is not worth living. His belief leads him to behave absurdly. In other words, absurdity is the characteristic of existentialism. Through this play, student can define themselves as human being. Therefore, this play can be implemented to English class because learning English is not only about learning grammar and reading, but also the moral value.
viii
ABSTRAK
Handono, Alyxia Sukmaadi. 2014. The Meaning of “the Chairs”According to the Old Man of Eugene Ionesco’s The Chairs. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University.
Studi ini membahas naskah drama The Chairs sebuah karya penulis yang terkenal absurd, Eugene Ionesco. Naskah ini menceritakan tentang kakek dan nenek yang hidup dalam dunia yang absurd. Si kakek yang menjadi tokoh utama mempunyai pengalaman berharga yang harus diceritakan. Pengalamannya dikumpulkan menjadi sebuah berita. Si kakek membayar si Pembicara untuk menceritakan beritanya kepada dunia.
Studi ini bertujuan menemukan arti dari kursi – kursi menurut si kakek, yang menjadi tokoh utama, dari naskah The Chairs karya Eugene Ionesco. Ada dua masalah di studi ini; (1) Bagaimana si kakek, tokoh utama, digambarkan? Dan (2) Apa arti dari kursi – kursi menurut si kakek, yang menjadi tokoh utama, dari naskah The Chairs karya Eugene Ionesco?
Sumber utama dari studi ini adalah naskah itu sendiri. Sumber tambahan diambil dari buku – buku yang berkaitan, kamus, dan internet. Studi ini menggunakan teori karakter, pengkarakterisasian, absurditas, eksistensialisme, dan simbol. Untuk memperkuat analisis, pendekatan psikologi digunakan.
Ada dua hal yang dapat disimpulkan setelah menganalisis naskah. Pertama, si kakek digambarkan sebagai seorang yang kekanak – kanakan, tidak bertanggung jawab, dan absurd. Kedua, arti dari kursi – kursi adalah tentang keseimbangan hidup yang ditunjukkan dengan kekosongan hidup. Kekosongan hidup adalah representatif dari tamu tak kelihatan dan kursi – kursi. Tamu – tamu tak kelihatan adalah pengalaman – pengalaman dari apa yang telah si kakek perbuat. Melalui pengalaman – pengalamannya, pandangan si kakek akan absurditas dapat dilihat. Kursi – kursi menunjukkan pikiran si kakek. Pikiran adalah sesuatu yang dimiliki si kakek sebagai kesadaran akan kebebasannya bertindak. Dia harus hidup untuk mencari arti dari hidupnya karena dunia tidak menjawab arti dari hidup. Dia menyadari kondisi rutinitasnya yang dapat dikatakan sebagai absurditas. Untuk menghadapi absurditas, si kakek memilih bunuh diri. Walaupun demikian, bunuh diri adalah pengakuan jika hidup tidak berarti. Keyakinannya ini membawanya untuk bertindak absurd. Ini berarti bahwa absurditas adalah ciri dari eksistensialisme. Melalui naskah drama ini, mahasiswa dapat mengartikan dirinya sendiri sebagai manusia. Oleh karena itu, naskah drama ini dapat diterapkan di kelas Drama Bahasa Inggris karena belajar Bahasa Inggris tidak hanya belajar mengenai tata bahasadan membaca, tapi juga mengenai moral.
ix
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all, I would like to praise the Lord, Jesus Christ for giving me the right time in finishing all these things. This is the sign of His helpful presence in my life. He is the one absorbed God.
My greatest gratitude is addressed to my sponsor, Dr. Ant. Herujiyanto, M.A. for guiding me in finishing my thesis. I thank his patience, advice, and support in helping me in any situation. I appreciate every encouragement that he gave to me.
I would like to thank all PBI lecturers for their help in improving my English skill. Moreover, I also thank for Mbak Danik for her administration help.
I dedicate my gratitude to my father in heaven, Ir. Handono, MS., for his endless love through everything he gave to me. Moreover, I am thankful to my mother, Dra. Danar Adiati, for her hardworking that always inspires me to do so. I am really grateful to be their only child.
I thank all my incredible friends in PBI USD 2010. I thank them for being a home and family for me. I also thank all my friends in PBI class B for the chance to learn about life through Breaktime, EWD, EAD, and Play. I also would like to thank Teater Seriboe Djendela for sharing everything and helping me in finding the meaning of life through many plays I joined.
I also thank Elizabeth Giovanni, Chrisilia Cahyani, Damasus Bagus Wahyu, Hendy Adrian, and Edwin Gandawijaya for being my fabulous friends in coloring my life.
x
I would like to give my appreciation to those whose names cannot be mentioned one by one who helped me finish this thesis. May God always be with them.
xi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
TITLE PAGE ... i
APPROVAL PAGES ... ii
DEDICATION PAGE ... iv
STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY ... v
PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI ... vi
ABSTRACT ... vii
ABSTRAK ... viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS ... xi
LIST OF APPENDICES ... xiv
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION 1 A. Background of the Study ... 1
B. Objective of the Study ... 5
C. Problem Formulation ... 5
D. Benefits of the Study ... 5
E. Definition of Terms ... 5
CHAPTER II. THEORY OF RELATED LITERATURE 7 A. Review of Related Theories ... 7
1. Psychological Approach ... 7
xii
CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATION 46 A. Conclusions ... 46
B. Implication ... 48
REFERENCES ... 49
xiii LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix Page
Appendix A. Summary of The Chairs ... 53
1 CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
This chapter is divided into five parts. The first part is the background of the study which presents the description of the topic and also the reason why this topic is chosen. The second part is the objective of the study which describes the aim of conducting the research. The third part is the problem formulations which deal with two research questions that will be analyzed and discussed in this study. The fourth part is the benefits of the study which identify the benefits for the readers in general, the benefits for the researcher and also the benefits for the future researcher. The last part is the definition of terms used in this study and their explanation used to avoid the readers’ misunderstanding toward the certain terms.
A. Background of the Study
The creative artwork can be seen in drama, as one of three major generic divisions of literature. Through drama, the readers do not only feel the experiences or the imagination of the playwright through reading the artwork, but also they can feel the real emotions of the experiences or imagination through the characters’ dialogue and actions. Furthermore, drama is a picture, happiness and sadness, or black and white of human’s life (Herman, 2003, p. 1). Besides, drama is easier for the readers or the audiences to understand the playwright’s experiences or imagination because the event of the drama is taken from the reality that people do in their daily lives.
Drama as well as theatre develops fast. There are many plays from the Shakespeare’s era till now; and they have their own genres of the theatre. One of them, which was booming in 20th Century, is Theatre of the Absurd. In book
Theatre of the Absurd, Martin Esslin (1961) uses that term as a critic. He sees this theatre, which is popular during World War II, as a rejection of the realism drama which dramatists or playwrights conduct in their artworks. Therefore, Esslin classifies them as “absurdists”; people who make the absurd play.
By considering the facts mentioned above, the writer chose the general of the study and the play was the subject of this study. The writer was interested in a play of Ionesco entitled The Chairs. The story is really close to human’s life related to the problem they face. In reality, people always do something interesting or boring and they do them every day. Those activities can also be seen in the Ionesco’s play. The Chairs is a play showing the absurdity through the dialogue and action, which is conducted by the characters and related to the people daily life.
In brief, the playwright of this play expresses his anxiety of human existentialism through the old couple. The old couple has married for 76 years; and they are 96 years old. They live in an isolated place surrounded by water. They live in a boredom. They used to do the same activity every night. Till the old man wants to invite all of his friends and people to come to his house and will tell ‘the message’ to them. He hires the orator to tell ‘the message’ because he fells he is not capable to tell the message. His friends come one by one with their boats. The old woman prepares the chairs for them to sit. They all introduce their selves and talk each others. However, the all guests coming are all invisible. Those old couple still receive the guests and prepare the chairs to them till the orator comes. After the orator comes, the old couple decide to suicide by jumping to the water through the windows. Unfortunately, the orator is deaf. He could not talk ‘the message’ clearly.
However, on each chair, there is an invisible guest sitting on it. The old couple do not mention directly what the chairs mean. Somehow, this situation could be absurd when the title of this play is The Chairs, but the chairs are passive and could not say anything. The playwright must think about the meaning in considering the title with the purpose why the chairs appear and those old couple respond the chairs in his play.
This study means to find out what the old man means about the chairs for their guests. In analyzing the meaning of the chairs according to the old man, it is important to find out first the characteristics or the description of the old man. The writer decides to choose library study that focuses on the play script as the primary data and the theories needed on this study as the secondary data. This study uses the psychological approach to analyze the topic of the study that is the meaning of the chairs according to the old man in Ionesco’s play The Chairs. This study uses some supporting theories. They are the theory of absurdity from Albert Camus and theory of existentialism from Jean – Paul Sartre. The deeper explanation of those theories is presented in the Chapter Two
B. Objective of the Study
C. Problem Formulations
In view of the objective of the study above, the writer focuses on two problem formulations. They are:
1. How is the old man, the main character of the play, portrayed?
2. What is the meaning of the chairs according to the old man, the main character, of Eugene Ionesco’s The Chairs?
D. Benefits of the Study
By studying this play, the writer identifies the meaning of the chairs. The writer uses psychological approach with theory of absurdity and theory existentialism to analyze the characteristics of the old man so that the writer gets more knowledge about the relation between literary, psychology, and also philosophy. For the readers of this study, they may obtain some knowledge on the old man who is described to mean the chairs through literary, psychology, and philosophy. Moreover, this study is expected to give reference and comparison for the next writer.
E. Definition of Terms
1. The Chair
According to Merriam Webster’s Online Dictionary, the chair is a seat that is usually with four legs and a back. The chair was developed with the various styles. In the 16th century, many chairs began to be covered with upholstery over padding and decorated with elaborate wood carving. In this study, the chair means a mind of the old man.
2. Absurd
The meaning of absurd is rather specific to a philosophical term. Human being’s life is meaningless and lack of order or value. Camus (1955) says that human being feels stranger in this universe (p. 5). In the other hands, human being is lost and has no purpose of life. Furthermore, in this absurd play, the character is different from the other ordinary drama character. According to Esslin (1961) in his book Theatre of the Absurd, he says :
“The confrontation of the audience with character and happenings which they are not quite able to comprehend makes it impossible for them to share the aspirations and emotions depicted in the play. Emotional identification with the character is replaced by puzzle.” (p. 5)
In this study, absurd means situation between the world and the man that the old man feels.
3. Existentialism
7
CHAPTER II
THEORY OF RELATED LITERATURE
This chapter is divided into three parts. The first part is the review of related theories which is used to analyze the topic of this study. The second is the theoretical framework which contains the explanation about the use of the theories. The last part is the context of the play which presents the description of the play setting and the setting and time in writing this play.
A. Review of Related Theories
This section will discuss the approach and the theories that are used to analyze the topic. They are Psychological approach, theory of character, theory of characterization, theory of absurdity, theory of existentialism, and theory of symbol.
1. Psychological Approach
The Theory of critical approach is the theory which allows the readers to have better understanding about the story. Rohrberger and Woods (1971) say that a critical approach helps the readers to have a reasonable judgment of the story (p. 3). There are five approaches which can be used in library study. They are formalist approach, biographical approach, the socio cultural-historical approach, the mytophoeic approach, and psychological approach (pp. 6 – 15).
approach focuses on the life as the portrait of human psychology which contains thought, behavior, human personality, motivation and the other aspects related to the human psychology (pp. 3 – 9). As many people believe that human mind is the root of every thought and action human being does. Moreover, this approach provides a set of symbolic which is common to all human beings and can be interpreted in light of human being’s experience (p. 14). Hence, the existentialism is used in this study.
2. Theory of Character
Characters play the important role in the literary work. To understand the story, the readers have to understand the characters of the drama or novel the readers are reading. The readers have to try to be able to understand better through the monologue, dialogue, and actions of the characters. Therefore, the readers understand what the story of literary work tells about.
There are several theories that define the meaning of the character. Abrams (1981) says that character is the person presented in a narrative or dramatic work in which the readers interpreted the characteristics expressed in what they say and do (p. 210). In addition, Harvey (1965) writes in his book,
Character and the Novel, that the playwright has a right to create or presents his or her fictional characters in the novel, whatever they look like, their personality, and what the problems they might face (p. 32).
minor character becomes the background of the main character. He or she is less sophisticated and responses to the experiences in the story are less complex. Therefore, he or she comes only in certain event.
According to Foster (2002), there are two kinds of character. He defines the character as a flat character and a round character (pp. 46 - 47). A flat character is built around a single idea or quality or is presented without much individualizing detail. A round character is a complex character. It is presented with subtle particularity. Thus, the character is difficult to describe with any adequacy as a person in real life, and like real person.
Character has personality and physical distinguishing to the other characters. Stanton (1965, p. 17) defines that character designates the individuals who appear in the story or the mixture of the interests, desires, emotions, and moral principles that make up each of individuals. Therefore, character gives certain situation in certain event of the story because he or she shows the emotions.
3. Theory of Characterization
states that there are nine ways which the playwright characterizes the character (pp. 161 - 167). Those nine ways are discussed below.
The first is through personal description. The playwright may describe the character’s appearances and clothes. The appearances deal with the character’s face, eyes, skin color, head, hairs, hands, even the small detail, the scar. The clothes deal with how the character dresses or the style of his or her clothes. The playwright does not only describe the character trough those ways, but also through the sense of smelling, sense of hearing, and sense of touching. Therefore, the character can be presented by his or her smell and also sound.
The second is from the character as seen by the others. Character is not always described directly; the playwright can also describe the character through the eyes and opinions of others. The readers will get the reflected image. The opinion from the character will affect what the readers think about the particular character.
The third is character speech. The playwright gives the readers the insight into the character through the speech or conversation the character does to the others. From the conversation or dialogue or monologue the character does, it will give the clue to know the characterization. From the character says, the readers can infer the character’s background. Through this way, the readers cannot only infer the background, but the readers can also infer the way of thinking of the character, what the character likes, and also the emotion of the character.
helped to shape one’s character. It may be in the form of a direct comment by the playwright, through the person’s thought through the conversation or through the medium of another.
The fifth is conversation. The playwright can take clues to one’s character through the conversation of the other people and the things they say about him or her. When people think about the others, they often give clues about one’s character that they are talking about.
The sixth is reaction. The playwright may give the readers clue to one’s character through how she or he reacts to various situations and events. Through the way a character reacts to situations and events, the readers can understand the characteristic within him or her.
The seventh is direct comment. This is the simplest way because the playwright describes or comments a one’s character directly. The reader can also understand easily by reading the story.
The eighth is thought. The playwright gives the readers knowledge of what one character is thinking about. In reality, people cannot do this because people cannot know what the others are thinking about. However in reading the story, the readers can know everything what the character is thinking about.
The ninth is mannerism. The playwright can describe one’s mannerism and habits which may also tell the readers something about the one’s character. Thus, the readers can infer one’s character from what and how he or she behaves.
In an era of wars, when death is most visible, Albert Camus defines that life lost all its meaning. In the book The Myth of Sisyphus, Albert Camus (1955) defines the notion of absurdity as follows:
“A world that can be explained by reasoning, however faulty, is a familiar world. But in a universe that is suddenly deprived of illusions of light, man feels a stranger. His is an irremediable exile, because he is deprived of memories of a lost homeland as much as he lacks the hope of a promised land to come. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, truly constitutes the feeling of Absurdity.” (p. 5)
Moreover, Ionesco says that the absurd is living in the world with no purpose; man is lost (Barbe, 2012). The absurd expresses a fundamental disharmony, a tragic incompatibility, in our existence. Moreover, the absurd is not a man nor in the world, but in their presence together. Camus adds that absurd is only bond uniting them. Hence, human being finds the predicament in his life. Camus adds that the absurdity can attack suddenly. Absurd can be seen when human beings realize about his condition. Human being will find this absurdity in his daily life and it becomes the object. The awareness of the object brings human being to the unexplainable situation between human beings and the world. Soriano (2009) says when human beings realize the mechanically routine of life, it means that he has experienced the absurdity (p. 24). Still according to Camus (1955), a realization to encounter the absurd, the absurd leaves choices for all human beings; they are suicide, leap of faith and recognition.
is not worth living. Hence, human being can simply choose to kill himself. It is a repudiation of life (p. 6).
The second choice is leap of faith. It means that the religious solution of positing a transcendent world of solace and meaning beyond absurd (p. 7). In simple way, the religious believer removes culpable world, replaces then with more agreeable alternatives.
The last is recognition. It means that the human being just accepts the absurdity and it is better to continue living. Absurd cannot be avoided; the only proper response to the absurd is that being brave or courageous to accept. Human being must be lived all the better if it has no meaning (p. 8).
Camus emphasizes human being to be brave to fight a battle, although he understands he cannot win on it. He should keep struggling with wit, grace, compassion for others and even a sense of mission in facing the absurd world. Hence, Soriano (2009) states that human being must be an absurd hero, a hero whose is facing the absurdity with all his integrities (p. 24).
5. Theory of Existentialism
existentialism to the world. In his book, Existentialism is a Humanism, Sartre (2007) defines that existence precedes essence (p. 21). Moreover, Palmer (2007) in Sartre Untuk Pemula says that essence means definitions, characteristics, functions, or ideas (p. 21). Sartre adds that a man comes to the world because of nothing. World does not have a reason to answer how man is. According to Nugroho (2012), Sartre defines that situation as absurd (p. 38). It means that man, firstly, is being, faces to him and the world, is discarded, and then defines himself. Man is nothing else but what he makes of himself. That man defines himself and he himself will have made what he will be (Sartre in Gould and Truitt, 1973, p. 30). Hence, subjectivity is the main point. Subjectivity then makes a man to come to his minds, to understand who he is. Man is man itself. Subjectivity is what the man creates for himself. Moreover, man is not the final result (2012, p. 59).
a Consciousness
Sartre defies consciousness. The human being is described as the conscious creature. However, there is transcendent which cannot be equated to consciousness. There are consciousness and phenomenon (Sartre in Nugroho, 2012, p. 43). Sartre defines two different ways of being to show the human beings’ consciousness. They are l’etre–en–soi (being-in-itself) and l’etre–pour– soi (being-for-itself).
1) L’etre –en –soi (Being-in-itself)
In the book Being and Nothingness, Sartre (1956) defines that l’etre–en– soi is being-in-itself (p. 7). It is the thing is. In the other hand, thing is not existence precedes essence. Thing is not a human being. Thing is being because essence is decided first. Hence, thing is essence precedes existence. L’etre–en– soi is it is what it is, being-in-itself. It cannot be was and will be (as to be) (Bertens, 2006, p. 103). Thing is thing; it cannot be thing wasthing or thing will be thing. It also cannot become the other because it cannot be changed without any helps from the other.
2) L’etre–pour–soi (Being-for-itself).
L’etre–pour–soi is it is what it is not. Sartre believes that human being defines himself and makes himself. Hence, human being is is not. Human being can be is and will be. In this definition, Sartre divides l’etre–pour–soi into two things; they are reflective and non-reflective consciousness. Non-reflective consciousness is used by human being in his daily activity. There is no I in this consciousness. Sartre (1956) says, “The consciousness of man in action is non-reflective consciousness (p. 36).” Besides that, there is I in the reflective consciousness. Ibecomes the object of reflective consciousness, and when human being thinks to the other object, it moves to non-reflective consciousness. In reflective consciousness, human being faces to several things he can do. He does not only think what he did long time ago, but also he thinks what he is doing now and what he will do. He is free to do everything he wants. Therefore, he meets anxiety and suffering. Sartre (1956) says,”Anguish then is the reflective apprehension of freedom by itself (p. 39).”
b. Freedom
Existentialism is concerned with attitudes toward life, especially attitudes upon what he is going to act or do (Kuncara, 2005, p. 39). In this absurd world, which means there is no meaning, human being realizes that he has freedom; however, freedom is not the character of human being, but freedom is human being itself (Boss in Hall C.S. and Gardner L., 1993). Human being then defines himself. He has right to make liberty of choice of what to do. In the book
what he makes of himself (p. 44).” Human being is existence precedes essence.
He is not is. He always becomes isandwill be, nothing but he dies.
Human being is condemned to be free (1956, p. 439). The freedom to choose what to brings human being to face the anxiety or anguish. In every act he does, he always meets the options and then he must choose. The anguish of freedom is really anguished over the fact that one must choose (Sartre in Nugroho, 2012, p. 52). In every choice, human being suffers; however, he also creates the world (Donald D. Palmer, 2003, p. 120).
c. Responsibility
In the book Eksistensi dan Humanisme, Sartre (2002) says that Human being has responsibility toward every choice he chooses (p. 47). He is responsible for himself, but that he is responsible for all human beings. What he chose is the best choice; and there is no better choice for him, nothing but the better choices for all human beings.
6. Theory of Symbol
Symbol has meaning. According to Roberts and Jacobs (1987), Symbolism is designed to extend meaning. Symbol comes in direct relationship and describes together a specific thing with idea, values, persons or way of life. However, it is not easy to understand. It may be despotic because sometimes it has no any connection or relationship with the object which is proposed. A symbol can appear in the form of thing, person, place, action, situation, or even the way of thinking (p. 279).
To understand the meaning of the symbol needs high level of imagination. In the book An Introduction to Literature: Fiction/Poetry/Drama, Lawrence (1961) says that understanding a meaning of symbol is a work which needs imagination and emotion, not intellectual (p. 56). On the other hand, Roberts and Jacobs believe that the object and description can be developed as symbol only within an individual work. It names private symbol. Private symbol is more difficult than universal symbol. Universal symbol uses the well-known thing, which people are familiar with that to find the meaning, e.g. culture or religion. Meanwhile, the meaning of private symbol can be found in the context of the specific work of fiction (1987, p. 280).
B. Theoretical Framework
support the writer in answering the problem formulations. The theory of critical approach to literature, theory of character and theory of characterization are used to answer the first problem formulation. Theory of absurdity, theory of existentialism and theory of symbol are used to answer the second problem formulation.
The first problem formulation is “How is the old man, the main character of the play, portrayed?” The psychological approach, which deals with human thought, behavior, etc, leads the writer to analyze about the character. Theory of character,characterization, and absurdity are used to reveal the old man’s characterization. Those theories are going to guide the writer in the process of analyzing the main character through many aspects based on the theories. Theory of characterization, giving nine ways of characterization, is applied in order to analyze the characterization of the old man. By understanding the character of the old man, it would be easier to understand the meaning of the chairs according to the old man.
C. Context of the Play
1. The Time and the Place Setting of Writing the Play
The Chairs was written in 1951 in France, one year after the first Ionesco’s play, The Bald Soprano. 1951 was 6 years after World War II and the war was still happening, the cold war, at that time. At that time, the Marxist was so famous and dominating. Marxist was the role in French Revolution. It had the socialist politicians supporting Marxism at that time. It was marked by social struggle. Moreover, there was also pro-communist riot in Paris. In 1951, there was French Legislative Election; and communist party got the most popular party in the elective. The philosophy development was also concerned. The existentialism got the fame in French, even Europe. Furthermore, existentialism influenced the French literature. It had tried to mix with Marxism, but it was failed. Existentialism achieved that at that time because people still felt desperate with all of the ruin. The Chairs, then, was produced the first time on April 22nd, 1952. 2. The Setting of the Play
21
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
This chapter is divided into three parts. The first part is the Object of the Study which presents the information related to the play used in this study. The second part is the Approach of the Study which presents the approach used in analyzing the play. The last is Method of Study which presents the sequence actions in analyzing the play.
A. Object of the Study
The object of this study is a play entitled The Chairs. The Chairs is a play written by the absurdist playwright Eugene Ionesco on April, 1951 in France. It was produced for the first time in 1952 at the Théâtre Lancry. It was directed by Sylvain Dhomme. Moreover, this play has been on the staged for many times. This play was also directed by the students from University of Pittsburg, Tara Estelle Adelizzi and the production was also become her thesis. Ionesco influences many playwrights in the world and Indonesia is the one of them. In Indonesia, the well-known poet and playwright, W.S. Rendra has adapted this play with the other title namely Kereta Kencana. Eventhough it is not the translation version of The Chairs, Kereta Kencana still keeps the characters from the The Chairs. This play was famous at that time before Samuel Backet’s
Eugene Ionesco was the Romanian, and then he moved to France and stayed there. His literary works were influenced by the existentialism. Furthermore, existentialism was the philosophy movement in 19th Century, after the war, when people felt desperate of all. Ionesco showed the desperation of the people through his play. Hence, Esselin in The Theatre of the Absurd says that Ionesco’s The Chairs is the one of the absurd play. It is the beginning of this genre movement.
The Chairs consisting of 25 scenes tells about the old couple staying in an island. The old man has many friends. He invites them to come to his house. He has something to say to them that it is very important. His wife helps him to prepare the chairs for all the guests to sit. Finally, it presents what the work is generally about.
B. Approach of the Study
C. Method of the Study
The method used in this study is library study. It means that the writer gathered the primary data and the secondary data. The primary data is the play
The Chairs by Eugene Ionesco. The secondary data are all the literature references related to the theories gathered from books and the Internet.
In order to focus on the analysis, there are some stages to accomplish the study. The first stage was choosing the play as the primary data. To gain the more understanding of the story, the writer read and reread the play. The writer read carefully especially if he found the difficult terms to get the better interpretation and imagination. The second stage was choosing the main topic based on the play. The third stage was formulating the problems. The fourth stage was collecting the secondary data from books in the library or internet to find the theories related to the problem formulations. The theories used in this study are theory of character, theory of characterization, theory of absurdity, theory of existentialism and theory of symbol. The fifth stage was answering the problem formulations.
24
CHAPTER IV
ANALYSIS
This chapter is divided into two parts. The first part is the explanation about the character of the old man. This part aims to answer the first problem formulation. The second part is the ideas of existentialism revealed through the old man as the main character. This explanation is intended to answer both problem formulations.
A. The Portrayal of the Old Man
The Analyzing the character in the novel or play is an essential level to do. It is the base level to do before doing the further levels in understanding the story. Understanding the meaning of the character brings the readers understand the whole story; from the intrinsic elements to the extrinsic element. To understand the extrinsic element or the meaning of the story, the readers must understand first the character. In this part, the writer focuses on the discussion of the character of the play.
the readers’ attention who and how the character is through his characterization. According to Abrams’ theory, the old man is categorized as the major character in this play. He attracts the readers’ attention through their characterization and the story. Furthermore, he has the important role. He presents himself in the story from the beginning to the end. He can attract the readers’ attention through what he says because the story is all about what the meaning of life is which is according to him. Moreover, he undergoes conflict leading his attitude and conversation along the story (Harvey, 1965).
The old man is categorized as a round character. He, according to Foster (2002), is presented with subtle particularity. Thus, the character is difficult to describe with any adequacy as a person in real life and like a real person. He has been living for ninety five years and has experienced many moments with his wife like the story that he always tells his wife entitled “Then at Last We Arrived”. He is confusing himself why he is incapable in delivering the message.
Characterization is an important thing for the readers to understand the character deeper. Characterization is a process which the character is portrayed like a real person who is living in a real world. In the other words, characterization can be a device for the readers to believe that character is the particular type of a person (Rohrberger & Woods, 1971). Murphy explains that there are nine ways which the playwright characterizes the character; they are personal description, others characters’ opinion, speech, past life, conversation of others, reaction, direct comment, thought, and mannerism.
In order to gain the deeper understanding on the old man’s characterization, the discussion of the old man’s characterization will be analyzed using Murphy’s theory.
1. Infintile
This The old man is an infantile man. He is ninety five-years old, but he does not do such a wise man who has experienced many things in his life. The old man’s infantile can be seen when he tells the old woman, his wife, about the old story Then at Last We Arrived, which is told every night since they married. At the end of the story, the old woman mocks the old man’s job, general factotum. The old man then suddenly weeps while calling his mamma.
OLD WOMAN : Oh! My darling, you are so really fine. Oh! So really, you know, so really, so really, you could have been anything in life, a lot more than general factotum.
OLD MAN : (weeping suddenly) I’ve spoiled it? I’ve spoiled it? Ah! Where are you, mamma, mamma, where are you, mamma?....hi, hi, hi, I’m an orphan. (he moans) ….an orphan, dworfan. (Act 3: 4)
In this case, the old man feels bad after hearing his wife mocks his job. Moreover, she says that the old man can be more than a general factotum. It means that the old woman is not really proud of her husband’s job. Then, the old man does not like what the old woman says. The old man suddenly weeps and moans as he cannot think why he can be a general factotum. As a man, he does not say a word first to give the clear clarification to his wife why he chooses a general factotum as a job. Because the old man does not give clear clarification, the old woman states that the old man spoils his career. Since the old man cannot perceive, he weeps and moans like a boy.
Furthermore, he does not blame himself as a man who has chosen the job; he then tries to find out his mamma. It means that he is searching for someone who can protect him from the blame of the old woman’s statement. Hence, he calls mamma. When every man was a boy, mamma was his parent who was very close to him. If something bad comes to him, mamma will care of her boy. When boy’s toy is broken, mamma will come to ask why and go buying the new one. It seems like the old man. When the old man gets the problem which cannot be solved by him, he becomes a boy who breaks his toy and asks his mamma to give the newest one. It is childlike.
However, he does not deliver the message by himself. He asks the orator to deliver his message.
OLD MAN : Yes, Colonel, they are not here yet, but they'll be here. And the Orator will speak in my behalf, he will explain the meaning of my message. ..Take care, Colonel, this Lady's husband may arrive at any moment. (Act 11: 10) OLD MAN : …. We're waiting for the Orator, he'll tell you, he'll
speak in my behalf, and explain everything that we hold most dear. . . he'll explain everything to you. . .when? .. when the moment has come. . .the moment will come soon. . . (Act 19: 19)
Those statements show that the old man does not want to deliver the message. Actually, only the old man itself knows what the meaning of the message is. When the message is ready to deliver, he does not want to tell. Then, he calls the orator to deliver the message. It is indicated that he is infantile because he runs away from his problem and gives the problem to the other, in this case the orator.
2. Irresponsible
By his own action and speech, the old man shows himself as an irresponsible man. He does not take the responsible of his job or obligation. His irresponsibility can be seen when he is a child and a father.
In the beginning, the old man weeps and moans when the old man is talking about his job, general factotum. He calls his mamma and asks where she is. Then, he states that he is an orphan. It means that he does not have mamma.
I’ll be back in a moment….I was in a hurry… I was going to the ball, to dance. I will be back in a minute. But when I returned, she was already dead, and they had buried her deep… I broke open the grave, I searched for her.. I couldn’t find her. (Act 14: 13)
It means that the old man does not take the responsiblity as a child to accompany his parents when they are in trouble. People usually prefer choosing their family’s importance to choosing the others. People like being together with their family to get laugh together. Furthermore, people like being together also with their family, although their family are in trouble or bad situation. In this case, the old man is different. In the difficult situation, when his mamma was dying, he chose to “kill” her. Although his mamma asked him to stay beside her to accompany her, he still chose to leave her. He said that he would be back soon. However, his mamma passed away when he came back.
The irresponsibility of him can also be seen when the old man becomes a father. He had a child. Then, his child left him.
As he went we could hear him calling: “It’s you who are responsible”…. (Act 14: 13)
It means that the old man does not take the responsiblity as a father. The old man cannot hold his child back and stay. His child goes away while saying if this is the old man who is responsible. It is a direct speech from the old man’s child if the old man and his wife kill the birds. The child feels like they betrayer him. He feels disappointed because of that situation. In the other hand, it means that the old man also does not take care of his child well. He does not understand what his child likes and needs. Furthermore, after his child goes, he does not try to search for his child. He is staying still and doing nothing as it happens and he does not care. Because of that moment, he and his wife live alone without his child. His child never comes back. In brief, he is failed as a father.
The other evidence of his irresponsibility is the old man’s inability to deliver the message. Because the message is all about his experience so that it should be his task to deliver his own message. In the end of the story, he does not deliver the message. He even hires the orator to speak.
OLD WOMAN : It's easy once you begin, like life and death. .. it's enough to have your mind made up. It's in speaking that ideas come to us, words, and then we, in our own words, we find perhaps everything, the city too, the garden, and then we are orphans no longer. OLD MAN : It's not I who's going to speak, I've hired a
professional orator, he'll speak in my name, you'll see
according to him, is the way how the message is delivered. It seems like he relies the problem to the orator. Therefore, he is irresponsible.
3. Absurd
The old man is a man who feels the absurdity. The absurd is not a man nor in the world, but in their presence together. In brief, absurd is living in the world with no purpose; a man is lost. It is shown in this play through the conversation between the old man and the old woman.
OLD MAN : Come my darling, close the window. There's a bad smell from that stagnant water, and besides the mosquitoes are coming in.
OLD WOMAN : How can you, my darling? ... It makes me dizzy. Ah! This house, this island, I can't get used to it. Water all around us ...water under the windows, stretching as far as the horizon. (Act 1:2)
He lives in the island which is surrounded by the water. It shows that the old man is living alone in his world. Although, he lives with his wife, but the house is the only one which is built. There is no other home so that it is difficult to reach by others. Moreover, the guests have to come with boats to reach the island. Hence, it can be called an isolated island.
The isolated island where the old man is living shows that he is lost. It symbolizes he is trapped in some places, his house. Hence, there is a distance between him and the world. In this context, the old man is far away from the others who live in the other place.
life, it means that he has experienced the absurdity. It is shown by the old man. The old man realizes that he always does the same thing a day after day. It can be seen when he protests if it is boring to tell the same story every night.
OLD WOMAN : Tell me the story, you know the story: "Then at last we arrived..."
OLD MAN : Again? ...I'm sick of it ..."Then at last we arrived"? That again...you always ask for the same thing!" … Then at last we arrived...” But it’s monotonous. .. For all of the seventy-five years that we've been married, every single evening, absolutely every blessed evening, you've made me tell the same story, you've made me imitate the same people, the same months. ..always the same ...let's talk about something else. (Act 3:3)
The old man knows so well about his life. He realizes the change of the shadow of the sunlight. He thinks that the shadow can be seen at 6 p.m. However, now there is no shadow. He adds that long ago, at 9 p.m., there was a shadow.
OLD MAN : The conversation between the old man and the old woman shows that they know their routine of life. OLD WOMAN : You can't see them, there's no sunlight, it's
nighttime, my darling.
OLD MAN : There are still shadows. (Act 1:2)
OLD MAN : It's six o'clock in the evening...it is dark already. It wasn't like this before. Surely you remember, there was still daylight at nine o'clock in the evening, at ten o'clock, at midnight. (Act 2:2)
OLD MAN : I have a message, that's God's truth, I struggle, a mission, I have something to say, a message to communicate to humanity, to mankind.
OLD WOMAN : To mankind, my darling, your message! OLD MAN : That's true, yes, it's true. (Act 5:5)
Moreover, the old man definitely feels confused about the message so that he hires the orator to tell the message.
OLD MAN : It's not I who's going to speak, I've hired a professional orator, he'll speak in my name, you'll see. (Act 7:6)
Likely in absurd, the message is the object. The old man tells that the message is about his experiences and it is very important for all human being. The old man does not tell what the message is in whole conversation. He always says that the orator will come soon. He thinks that he cannot say it. However, the message tells about the old man’s experiences, it means that the message is unexplainable. Experience is the situation between the human being and the world. It becomes the basic of the old man’s message.
B. The Meaning of the Chairs
In surface meaning, the chairs can be called as places to sit human being. it can be seen in Eugene Ionesco’s The Chairs. There are many chairs which are provided in the old man’s house. The chairs are used as a place to sit for every guest coming to his house. The chair there are sit by every guest, whoever they are. The colonel sits on the chair. Until the emperor sits on the same kind of chair. Furthermore, the chair can symbolize the degree or position of a person. Chairman is a leader of a company. It shows the power of a person. Evethough the name of the title is the chairs, the focus of the play does not 100% goes to the chairs.
Eugene Ionesco is a playwright who is famous with his idea of absurdity. Even, The Theatre of Absurd awards him as an absurdist, although he does not want to be called as an absurdist. The idea of absurdity is not far with idea of existentialism; because the root of existentialism is the absurd. The work of Ionesco focuses on human being, especially when they start questioning their existence and the meaning of their life. In those processes, they will feel the absurdity. Hence, through existentialism and absurdity, Ionesco shows the deeper meaning of the chairs.
of the story, he and his wife throw themselves out the window. They commit suicide.
In this work, the main character is the Ionesco’s tool to deliver the ideas of existentialism. Furthermore, the main character represents the thought of Ionesco. The ideas of existentialism come out through the main character’s thought, his responses to the other, and his attitudes, which are all absurd. Not only those, the ideas of existentialism are also shown through the old man’s speech and other character’s opinion toward him.
The following discussion focuses on Ionesco’s ideas of existentialism revealed through the main character, the old man, in The Chairs. The discussion is divided into several subtopics to explain more detail.
1. Consciousness
Consciousness is the important thing to understand existentialism. Sartre says that human being comes to the world because of nothing so that the world does not have reason to answer what he is. Firstly, man is being, faces the world, then defines himself. Hence, Sartre says that existence precedes essence. To define what he is, he creates himself. The tool to create himself is consciousness. The human being is described as the conscious creature.
consciously. As Sartre says that human being is described as the conscious creature so that what the old man does is consciousness.
Furthermore, the old man in existentialism is categorized as l’etre–pour– soi or being-for-itself. The old man is it is what it is not. He is what he is not because he always defines himself and makes himself. He can be what he is now and what he will be. It is definitely related to existence precedes essence. The old man will change every time depending what he chooses. The old man is not a thing, which is l’etre–en–soi or being-in-itself, because the thing is essence precedes existence. The old man is not human being, who is in the thought first, then he exists; but he exists first and then he creates himself. It can be seen in Act 3, when the old woman asks the old man to tell the story.
OLD WOMAN : Tell me the story, you know the story: "Then at last we arrived..."
OLD MAN : Again? ...I'm sick of it ..."Then at last we arrived"? That again...you always ask for the same thing!" … Then at last we arrived...” But it’s monotonous. .. For all of the seventy-five years that we've been married, every single evening, absolutely every blessed evening, you've made me tell the same story, you've made me imitate the same people, the same months. ..always the same ...let's talk about something else. (Act 3:3)
OLD WOMAN : It's as if suddenly I'd forgotten everything. .. it's as though my mind were a clean slate every evening ... Yes, my darling, I do it on purpose, I take a dose, of salts ...I become new again, for you, my darling, every evening ...Come on, begin again, please. OLD MAN : Well, if you want me to.
OLD WOMAN : Come on then, tell your story. ..It's also mine; what is yours is mine! Then at last we arrived.
OLD MAN : Then at last we arrived. ..my sweetheart. OLD WOMAN : Then at last we arrived. ..my darling. (Act 3:3)
It shows that the old man accepts the request of the old woman to tell the story. Hence, the old man is a man who likes granting his wife’s request. In brief, the old man, as human being, consciously changes his choice; and it makes it is what it is change also.
In the other hand, l’etre–pour–soi is related to l’etre–en–soi. The consciousness of human being to define himself brings him to define his surroundings. It means that human being defines the meaning of things. The example is like the old man and the chairs. There are so many chairs in a room of his house. However, the old man itself defines the chairs, which are being-in-itself, whether the chairs are as the meaningless chairs in a room, or as things to sit, or as only things to make the interior look beautiful. Then, in the story, the old man brings the chairs to every invisible guest to sit.
OLD MAN : Don't be so impatient. You'll hear my message. In just a moment.
OLD WOMAN : Ah! ...I hear his voice! Do you know, my husband has never been understood. But at last his hour has come.
OLD MAN : Listen to me, I've had a rich experience of life. In all walks of life, at every level of thought. . .I'm not an egotist: humanity must profit by what I've learned. (Act 19:19)
It strengthens that the message is the experience of the old man because the old man says that he has a rich experience in his life. It means that he through all his life consciously. Moreover, he has a lot of friends from different background. It also strengthens that he has worked at many works and places with different background; such as soldier, boyfriend, up to the last job, general factotum. It makes his experiences richer. Hence, consciousness is what he chooses and what he is doing.
Furthermore, what the old man says about his experience is categorized as reflective consciousness. When the old man says about him, he goes into his reflective consciousness. The thought about him is reflective consciousness. There is I or the old man itself in this reflective consciousness. It means that I becomes the object. The example is like this.
OLD MAN : Listen to me, I've had a rich experience of life. In all walks of life, at every level of thought. . .I'm not an egotist: humanity must profit by what I've learned. (Act 19:19)
Non – reflective consciousness is consciousness of human being in his daily life. Sartre says that the consciousness of human being in action is non – reflective consciousness. There is no I in this consciousness.
The example of non – reflective consciousness is like what the old man says in Act 2. The old man says, “It's six o'clock in the evening. It is dark already. It wasn't like this before. Surely you remember, there was still daylight at nine o'clock in the evening, at ten o'clock, at midnight.” The object is not the old man. Something which is in his consciousness is those objects; such as evening, midnight, the day, Semiramis or the daylight. Thus, there is no I or the old man itself in his action.
2. Freedom
Freedom is the other key word for Sartre’s existentialism. In this absurd world, which means there is no meaning, human being realizes that he has freedom; however, freedom is not the character of human being, but freedom is human being itself. Human being is the only being which his existence precedes his essence. Then, it is definitely related to consciousness. Human being is conscious toward his freedom to create himself and gives himself the meaning. It can be called the subjectivity. These all are in the old man.
Freedom is not the characteristics of the old man, but freedom is the old man itself. The old man is the human who has the essence for his life and has freedom to make what he will be. It shows through what he chooses.
head king, or even head doctor, or head general, if you had wanted to, if only you'd had a little ambition in life…
OLD MAN : What good would that have done us? We'd not have lived any better. ..and besides, we have a position here. I am a general, in any case, of the house, since I am the general factotum. (Act 2:2) The old woman says that the old man can be more than a general factotum; such as head king or head president. However, the old man feels comfortable to be general factotum. Through this way, the old man is free to define himself. Anyone can make the old man to be, only the old man can.
Human being is what he is not. He is never is. The guest can interpret if the young old man was infantile or if the old old man is irresponsible because he is still alive. Hence, he will always be something different depending what he chooses. The example before shows the young old man was and the old old man is. However, it ends up when the old dies in the end of the story. The guest can interpret if the old man is absurd finally. He cannot be the other. He is what he is because he dies after throwing himself out. He does not have the freedom again to take the chance to choose. As long as he lives, he has a liberty right to choose. However, he dies in the end. Therefore, he does not have freedom at all.
Human being is condemned to be free. The freedom to choose what to be brings human being to face the anxiety or anguish. Every single decision human being chooses, it takes the anxiety and suffering to him. It shows in the old man’s life. When the old man was young, he faced two choices whether he went to dance or he accompanied his mom.
don’t leave me to die all alone…Stay with me. I don’t have much time left.” Don’t worry, Mamma, I told her, I’ll be back in a moment….I was in a hurry… I was going to the ball, to dance. I will be back in a minute. But when I returned, she was already dead, and they had buried her deep… I broke open the grave, I searched for her.. I couldn’t find her. (Act 14: 13)
The choice is that he chose to go dancing. The effect is that his mom passed away. The passing away of his mom is the anxiety, anguish, and suffering. Those are haunting the old man so that he is suffering. Moreover, not to choose is also the choice. It can be seen in Act 14, when the old man’s son goes. It is the time when his son is angry and goes, but the old man is only weeping. His son goes and never comes back. He does not try to hold his son go. This is the proof if not to choose is also the choice where there are also anxiety, anguish, and suffering.
The other evidence of freedom is shown through how the old man plays with the chairs. As the analysis in part Consciousness before, the old man chooses to bring the chairs out of the room. The using of the chairs is to sit all of the guests. The old man is free to not choose the chairs to stay still in the room as meaningless chairs or as things only to make the interior beautiful.
3. Responsibility
The Responsibility human being takes is not responsibility for him. Satre adds that responsibility human being takes is responsibility for all human being. Subjectivity, which makes human being come to his mind and then to understand who he is, is the root of responsibility. It means that human being is subject who chooses which one is better. In his consciousness, he is not responsible for him, but also for all human being. In the other hand, what he does or chooses is also good for the others who do the same thing.
The play The Chairs is a play which tells about absurdity; if world does not have a reason to answer how man is so that life does not have meaning. Ionesco puts the old man in the absurd world. He searches on the meaning of life so that he suffers. He regrets when he let his mom pass away and when he let his son go and never come back.
human being who can be responsible toward what he has chosen. Therefore, if the old man does not suffer about what he does, it means that he is covering his suffering. It means that he does not take the responsibility.
However, the old man is responsible for he himself; he does not take the responsibility for the others. As Sartre says that the responsibility human being takes is not responsibility for him; moreover, the responsibility human being takes is responsibility for all human being. It does not match toward what the old man does. Although the choice of him is good for he himself; but it is not good for the others. In this case, the others are his wife, his mom, his son, his guests, and his orator.
Furthermore, the old man’s choice to leave his mom is not good for his mom. It can be seen when the old man comes back, his mom has passed away. He does not accompany her when she is dying. Hence, the old man comes back with his regret because he does not accompany her. It shows that the old man has a good choice for he himself; but it is not good for his mom when she is dying.
The irresponsibility of the old man can be also seen through the action of the old man to the guests and the orator. The message, which the old man promises to the guests, is not clear because the orator, who becomes the old man’s representative to tell the message, is deaf and dumb person. He cannot talk. If he forces to talk, the voice is not clear. It can be seen in Act 25 after the double suicide. He only utters the guttural sounds of mute. The message is still unclear, although he writes the message on the blackboard.
Based on the story, the old man is not responsible toward the guests and the orator. Yet, the old man is responsible in the beginning because he suffers. The old man’s suffering is shown when he decides to suicide, as a realization to encounter the absurd. However, his suffering affect to the others. The unclear message to the guests is the evidence. The guests should have got the message after coming to the old man’s guests. However, they get nothing. What they see is only very unclear words “ANGELFOOD” and “NNAA NNM NWNWNW V”. Furthermore, the burden moves to the orator. The burden should belong to the old man; but, because the old man cannot tell the message, so that he is called irresponsible.
