Absurdity of the Human Condition
Comparing Authoritarian Rule in Alfred Jarry’s Ubu Rex & Sony Labour Tansi’s Parentheses of Blood
“The Theatre of the Absurd can be seen as the reflection of what seems to be the attitude most genuinely representative of our own time” (Esslin 22-3). Critic Martin Esslin describes in Theatre of the Absurd (1961) how Absurdist writers parody the incongruities found in their own lives and cultures. Alfred Jarry’s infamous play Ubu Rex was first performed in 1896 in Paris, and functions under the Theater of the Absurd. Jarry mimicked the tragic farce of characters Pa and Ma Ubu after the tragedy in Shakespeare’s Macbeth; both created controversy upon their initial reveals to the public. Ubu Rex was riotous due to its hyperbolic critique of corruption among the French bourgeoisie during the fin-de-siècle–as characterized by antihero Pa Ubu. This French greed and expansion led to colonialism of the Republic of Congo at the turn of the century, which furthered French diaspora and created tension among those native to the land. In turn, “by 1945… an intuitive image of the dark side of human nature that [Jarry] had projected on to the stage proved prophetically true” (Esslin 358). Iconoclast Jarry’s absurdist works inspired Congolese playwright Sony Labour Tansi, who grew up under the Mobutu authoritarian regime. By the mid-20th century, the Democratic Republic of Congo was on the brink of being plagued by rebellion. Tansi became an active member of the opposition party and released his satirical work Parentheses of Blood in 1981. Parentheses of Blood follows the story of a lowly family whose deceased patriarch, Libertashio, is still being searched for by The Capital; a Fool and a troop of Soldiers thus patronize the family. Although both plays serve satirically under the Theater of the Absurd, Ubu Rex is an introduction to challenging authoritarian rule in 20th century Western Europe, while Parentheses of Blood is considered a reflection on the broken attempt of inducing fascism in post-colonial Africa. As a result, we can understand how severe political violence will create a setting of revolt where characters are ontologically forgetful and time is no longer linear, spiraling characters into chaos.
Disorder in Jarry’s Ubu Rex reflects a time of political and social unrest in Parisian society, predicting its fascistic regime of the 20th century. Antihero Pa Ubu is a physical representation of the French bourgeoisie: he is traitorous, juvenile, vulgar, greedy, and yet cowardly. Although, “he is more than a mere social satire. He is a terrifying image of the animal nature of man, his cruelty and ruthlessness” (Esslin 357). He becomes baser and more instinctual as he increases in power. After gaining encouragement from his slightly more rational wife Ma Ubu, Pa Ubu assassinates the respectable King Wenceslas and claims the Polish throne. Poland was not a real country during the publishing of Ubu Rex, ironically making Pa Ubu the King of a land that does not exist. Pa Ubu becomes exponentially more violent as a king, killing anyone who protests his claims and hurting those who try to help him
Pa Ubu: Down the hatch with the judges. (They struggle in vain.)
Ma Ubu: Oh, what have you done, Pa Ubu? Who will administer justice now?
Pa Ubu: Why, I will. You’ll see how well things will go.
Ma Ubu: Yes, it will be a right old mess… You’re butchering the whole world. (Jarry 41)
Jarry is critiquing the lack of care the French rule has for its people’s cares. Pa Ubu literally does so by throwing the notion of justice down a hatch due to his self-proclaimed power and large ego. He is ignorant to the fact that he is unable to rule a kingdom without justice, and that it will soon become complete chaos as a result. Ma Ubu predicts how dangerous the French rule will be in the future by using personification in reference to the “whole world.” This personification gives a more intimate relationship of the physical world to the audience, instilling a tone of fear–which carries throughout the majority of the play. Ma Ubu’s prediction of the French negatively affecting the world is correct, which is evident in the political violence that ensues in Tansi’s text–released almost a century after.
While Sony Labour Tansi also depicts a time of political corruption in a time of war, Parentheses of Blood mocks the effects of fascist rule after French colonialism is introduced to the Congo. The Capital searches for Libertashio, though already dead and buried, because he is a symbol for freedom and rebellion against authoritarian rule. His alias itself is a play on the word “liberty.” Throughout the entire play, soldiers threaten to kill Libertashio’s family, but never actually do so (Tansi 16).
THE SERGEANT: We’ll take back his head. I think this time the Capital will believe once and for all that Libertashio is dead. (Mark draws his gun and shoots the Sergeant.) Mark, why did you shoot me? D… D… dead! (He slumps over.)
Mark takes his stripes, and after a brief, incomprehensible ceremony conducted by those from the house, he is made Sergeant and his comrades drink to his success.
SERGEANT MARK: (to the Soldiers) Cowards are buried at night… The Capital doesn’t hear too well. They tell us to search for him, and that’s what we’re doing. Any number of Libertashio’s will do. We’ll find a fifty or a hundred if we have to, as many as the Capital wants. (Pause.) We aren’t looking to find anyone; we’re looking for the sake of looking. (Pause.) If you say Libertashio is dead you’re the one we’ll kill. I have no desire to die myself. (He drinks.) (Tansi 10-13)
Soldiers refuse to claim that Libertashio is dead because they would then have no purpose to their work, proving absurdity in the meaninglessness of their lives. Tansi’s use of hyperbole in the number of “Libertashio’s” the Capital is asking for adds to the absurdity of the request. The authoritarian regime under Mobutu is representative of the Capital and its outlandish requests. The Congolese government under fascism has become a result French colonialism and its rebellion in Congolese society. Soldiers aim to kill Libertashio and the people that they are supposed to be protecting, but end up paradoxically killing each other for a lack of purpose. In contrast to Jarry’s work, the people of power in Tansi’s play reject cowardice; each time a soldier dies because they proclaim Libertashio dead, a new Sergeant is reinstated and professes his lack of cowardice. In both plays, there are blurred lines between characters existing in the state of life or death.
In both Ubu Rex and Parentheses of Blood, many of the characters become forgetful about their presence in reality, and begin to question whether they are dead. These ontological questions arise towards the end of the plays, when chaos has begun to encompass the lives of the characters due to poor political practices. Throughout the play, Pa Ubu repeats the phrase, “Great God, I’m dead! No, I’m all right after all” (Jarry 55). He is not physically “alright,” but admits to being “all right”–as an authoritarian figure, he is still in denial of how politically unjust he is being. This religious allusion to a higher entity is pertinent in Western culture, emphasizing the spread of Christian ideologies through colonialism. Similarly, Libertashio’s daughters repeat, “We’re dead” (Tansi 45), in confusion of their current state. However, to be “dead” in Parentheses of Blood means one is politically inactive, and has accepted the authoritarian regime for its oppressive nature without a willingness to fight. Jarry’s definition of death is more so a state of confusion that his political powers have due to an anticipated fear of being defeated by the public in the future. Jarry’s form of death reflects the lack of care the French bourgeoisie have for the public’s concerns; his characters’ ontological forgetfulness predicts future unrest in France with World War II.
On the other hand, Parentheses of Blood depicts the memory of Libertashio as one of a recent past–liberty was once promised but is not present due to the historical context of the Congo in the late 20th century. Ramana exclaims that the Capital “have handcuffs to spare, even for the dead. France sold them fifteen million pairs, which makes about one pair for every two citizens” (Tansi 44-45). Handcuffs are Western conventions that were introduced to the Congo by France imposing trade upon the people. While Western incarceration practices lead to death, but do not actually kill the innocent characters in Parentheses of Blood, Jarry makes a point to ruthlessly kill the innocent characters that come in the way of Pa Ubu. As previously mentioned, Sergeant Mark does not want to admit Libertashio is dead because he will be killed if he does (Tansi 13). The memory of Libertashio serves as the Soldiers’ meaningless purpose to proceed in life. They function under orders from the Capital, who are influenced by Western fascist political practices, but do not know how to execute the same amount of ruthlessness as the French do in Ubu Rex. These empty promises portray the disorganized and chaotic nature of the Congolese government as a result of fascist Mobutu. A lack of communication with the public serves each of these societies negatively. Characters that are in positions of governmental authority in each of these plays are unaware and uneducated about democratic proceedings. Despite his lack of a physical presence, Libertashio’s prominence in the play is shown through repetition of the phrase, “Long live Libertashio” (Tansi 53). While Tansi’s play, uses “Long live Libertashio” as a reminder of the lack of liberty that the society is constantly searching for, Jarry’s play repeats the phrase “Long live Old Ubu” less and less as the play carries on (Jarry 29). These phrases connote political rebellion–typical to the cyclical nature of history and politics in Western Europe and Africa. Ubu Rex anticipates a rebellion as it precedes World War II that is defined by its dictatorial conflict, whereas Parentheses of Blood illustrates the ill effects of a dictatorship on a colonized society. Repetition in both of these plays is used as a means for Jarry and Tansi to depict the cyclical environment of the absurd condition. Memory–or the lack thereof–in these two plays contributes to the disordered human condition of wartime.
Both playwrights depict time as occurring in a cyclical fashion as a result of the chaos that ensues in each of these plays; particularly, Jarry uses the spiral symbol on Pa Ubu’s chest to depict this notion. Both authors wrote their plays originally in French, and later translated them into English. Ubu Rex is a five-act play, each of which is split up into various shorter scenes; this mimics the format of Shakespearean plays that were considered unconventional to both the Shakespearean era and to the fin-de-siècle era public, which was used to classical “well-made” plays (Esslin 357). Both Jarry and Shakespeare pushed social norms with the content found in the language of their plays. However, Shakespeare’s Macbeth was still considered a more widely accepted work than Jarry’s at the time Ubu Rex’s release. Ubu Rex is a farce that breaks literal and societal conventions, just as Pa Ubu continually wreaks havoc on the people of Poland throughout each Act of the play. Pa Ubu speaks a language that only exists in Ubu Rex, a main aspect found in the Theater of the Absurd. Thus, Jarry’s use of malapropism and vulgarity in the play can be seen as another break in cultural convention. The word that Pa Ubu uses as the signal to assassinate Wenceslas is “pschitt” (Jarry 28); this malapropism is repeated throughout the play to create an ironic sense of stability to the public because it a controversial word. This vulgarity shocked the French public, and sparked a new genre of plays that pushed radical viewpoints, such as Jarry’s. Moreover, Jarry sees time and history as a spiral; the spiral is symbolic of uncontained violence in politics. Time is non-linear in these plays of the Theater of the Absurd. Additionally, this can be linked to the ideology of pataphysics, of which French Absurdist Jarry is the founder. The notion that history repeats itself is pertinent to these works because both occur in different times and cultures, yet fascist mayhem is still present in both. Usually, the rebellion itself becomes the institution because change is needed, as seen in Parentheses of Blood with Libertashio’s necessity to the Capital. Both of these plays depict how dictatorial rule leads to the self-destruction of power. The more absolute power one person has, the more detrimental a society will become. In turn, form imitates the historic context of each of these plays.
Also, Tansi’s work displays the cyclical nature of rebellion and time as soldiers are repeatedly killed and reinstated as new Sergeants. Parentheses of Blood is a play divided into three evening scenes and one morning scene, and each scene is prefaced with a Prologue[1], of which a narrator describes the “Parentheses of Blood.” The Soldiers themselves are representative of fascism because each of them is considered equal to one another, besides the Sergeant. The fact that the Soldiers do not know how to pronounce the word “ballot box” early on in the play is exemplary of the lack of knowledge the of democratic processes (Tansi 15). As previously mentioned, Pa Ubu literally throws his Justices down a hatch; this occurs as a result of him not understanding the importance of taxes that need to be paid to the monarchy (Jarry 41). This is paradoxical, since the Soldiers and Pa Ubu are representative of the government and of keeping justice. Ironically, Tansi references Jarry’s work as Soldier Mark is struggling with the pronunciation of other words connoted to democracy and keeping the peace. He explains how he has a friend who does not know how to “pronounce police headquarters. He always says ‘Polish quarters’” (Tansi 15). This, too, is a nod to Jarry’s work, since Pa Ubu is the new King of Poland–a land that does not exist at the time of Ubu Rex’s publishing, but does exist during the time of Parentheses of Blood’s publishing. Aleyo, one of Libertashio’s daughters, is aware of many of the harsh realities of the absurd world that her family lives in:
ALEYO: We’re talking in circles. It’s death that’s making us do it. (Pause.) I’ve had my bad moments. But I’ve never talked in circles. The world is linear. As is life. It’s idiotic to… to exist turning in circles. Absolutely idiotic. (Tansi 31).
ALEYO: … Here we die in stages, in circles. (Tansi 38).
This idea of dying in circles can be related to Jarry’s notion of pataphysics. Tansi uses many exaggerations, or hyperboles, throughout the play because the world that these characters exist in is too close to the realities of Tansi’s contemporary Congo. Although Aleyo initially describes a world where life is linear, she expands and claims that death can occur in circles, as well. Death is much more finite and, in this case, violent act. She has accepted the world she lives in by the truths of Libertashio’s (liberty’s) death and is aware of the corruption the Capital has over her family. However, it is evident how the soldier’s deaths occur in a circular fashion because they have become slave to the Capital’s corrupt ideologies. Deaths occur as a result of political strife in this play, which reflects life and the Congo in a rebellious, paradoxical state. The theme of death remains throughout the tragic farce that is Parentheses of Blood. In turn, more and more people agree to revolt against the authoritarian rule as each of these plays goes on. Esslin illustrates how “plays written in this new convention will, when judged by the standards and criteria of another, be regarded as impertinent and outrageous impostures” (21). In fact, Tansi’s play stopped being published to the public as a result of the backlash it received from a political standpoint. These absurdist writers create plays that mimic the harsh realities of fascist dictatorships that lead to pandemonium in a time of war. Time is cyclical in Parentheses of Blood because its form is shown as a reaction to the historical context of the Mobutu regime.
Overall, Jarry and Tansi’s works function under the Theater of the Absurd because they use their exaggerated comedic plays to critique the unjust authoritarian rule of 20th century Congolese government and the fin-de-siècle French bourgeoisie. Political corruption and violence leads characters in each of these plays to ontologically reconsider their presence in society. Moreover, this sense of chaos that ensues as a result of fascist dictatorships can be mimicked by the repetitive nature of political rebellion. Time Parentheses of Blood was actually first performed by the Ubu Theater Repertory Theater, which was part of new plays from French-speaking Africa and the Caribbean. Jarry’s innovative works inspired Tansi. Historical context, memory and form all work dynamically together to create plays that criticize the destructive nature of fascist rule on a progressive and volatile society. Ubu Rex anticipates future political turmoil of World War II, whereas Parentheses of Blood portrays the harsh effects authoritarian regime had on the Democratic Republic of the Congo. It can be concluded that both satires explore how authoritarian rule leads to a “sense of metaphysical anguish at the absurdity of the human condition” (Esslin 23-4).
[1] It is unclear whether the Prologue is considered or shown as a character, present or not, on stage. The Prologue acts as an introductory setting for comparison of the wartime struggle to a football game. The number of players on the field (11-12) in football is also referenced in regards to death and Libertashio throughout the play. The “Parentheses of Blood” are a pair of metaphorical brackets that limit the people in the play to a life of constant battle against each side and within itself.
Works Cited:
Esslin, Martin. The Theatre of the Absurd. Garden City: Vintage, 1961. Print.
Jarry, Alfred. "Ubu Rex (Ubu Roi)." The Ubu Plays: Ubu Rex. New York: Grove, 1969. Print.
Tansi, Sony Labour. Parentheses of Blood. New York City: Ubu Repertory Theater Publications, 1986. Print.
Photo courtesy of IMDB.