Old Times by Harold Pinte. Conversational battles - Essay Example

Conversational battles Old Times is a play by Harold Pinter set in the year 1971. The play was meant to mark its producer, Peter Hall’s 40th birthday. The play’s main characters where Deely (Collins Blakely), Kate (Dorothy Tutin) and Anna (Vivien Merchant). Both the characters are in their forties. This work focuses on some communication strategies employed by the characters in the play. The characters employ different techniques to pass across their messages. There is a great use of flashback in the entire play. The play begins with Kate and Deely (married couples) discussing Anna, Kate’s old friend and roommate. Kate creates some humor by telling Deely that Anna once stole her underpants. The use of humor relieves some tension in the play. The audience is left relaxed as it waits for the next scene. The element of flashback is reflected further in the next scene when Anna talks of the fun and happy moments she had with Kate in their youthful stage. Deely also takes this opportunity to talk about his old sailing life while Kate simply does the hearing. Kate hardly speaks a word in this scene. Anna tells of a moment when she walked into their room and found a man crying on their couch while Kate was sleeping on her bed. She tells of not recognizing the sobbing man as he covered his face. The man later stares at her as she walks to Kate’s bed and walks away. At this point, the audience is left wondering whether the sobbing man would be Deely, but the play advances with Kate walking to the birthroom. Confrontation and evidence is applied by Deely to convince Anna of their meeting some twenty years ago. Deely insists that Anna used to wear clothes and convince men to buy her drinks. Deely admits falling a victim once and he bought her drinks, only for Anna to disappear in the crowd. Anna strongly denies this accusation and the audience can easily see that the two characters are in some sort of conflict. Deely reminds Anna on some instances to convince her that they actually met in the drink place. Deely talks of staring Anna’s skirt and the latter getting away in the crowd. Anna starts paying him great attention after learning of the skirt staring instance. She later admits of being bought a drink in one of the local joints and a man really stared at her skirt. The play advances with Kate walking out of the bathroom with her shower robs. She still remains silent while the two other characters try to draw her attention. Anna talks of Kate lending her inner pants and this causes Kate to conquer the scene; she remembers an instance when Anna was ‘dead’. Anna was sleeping dead on the bed with mud. She further tells of the arrival of a man who was directed to sleep on the ‘extra bed’ since the man could not see Anna. Anna was about to be suffocated from the weight of the man and the mud covering her. The characters used metaphors to pass some information to both the audience and to fellow characters. Metaphors can be defined as phrases that sound positive while in real sense have a sarcastic implication. For instance, Kate tells Anna, “I remember you dead” (Pinter 65). He tells her while smiling, despite the weight of the word death. But she later diverts the attention of the audience by talking about the mud and dirt covering Anna. Metaphors could be used to silence other parties in a conversation. Anna is left silent and wondering about the moment her old friend and roommate talks of her death. She must have thought of the actual death before Kate explains the faked death while they were roommates. The metaphor could also leave someone unappreciated or despised. The old time’s characters used metaphors in the play’s scenes to provoke each other. Metaphors create some kind of humor in the play that would charm the crowd and leave everyone excited. The opponent would easily lose his/her grounds after the opponent have used some metaphor on him/her and won the crowd (O'Brian 48). The same strategy applies in the current or modern conversational battles. The current or modern plays employ metaphors in scenes having conversational battles. The strategy is also applied in the family conversational battles. One partner may use some sarcastic words to silence the other partner. The best way to make your conversational battle is to utter his/her secrecy but in a friendly way, otherwise it might get physical. Nobody would like to learn that his /her secrets are in the open. Anna is silenced whenever Kate’s reveals her deepest secrets like the instance of the underpants theft among others. Metaphors application is indicated when Ann tells Deely, “You have a wonderful casserole…. I mean wife” (Pinter 56). Deely is shocked but the message is clear. Anna was a funny character that would always be silenced by other characters whenever she started a conversation. Making quick and nonchalantly reply is another strategy the old time’ characters used to silence their conversational battle opponents. A quick reply would always leave the opponent confused and short of words. Anna used a quick reply to silence Deely when the later acquired their first meeting in the bar. Anna is fast to deny such allegations and Deely is forced is forced to recall some instances that can make the lady convinced (Ethridge 109). Fast response denies conversational battle opponent appropriate time to think of the next argument lines. Appropriate application of this strategy would always the other party ‘blank’ and confused. The old time characters were fast speakers to challenge and win their opponents whenever some arguments arose. Kate is a slow speaker in the play but whenever she speaks, both the character and the audience are left shocked, she comes with deep convincing thoughts as a surprise after long hours of silence. The old time characters would always engage in dialogue battles with their fellow actors to ascertain their suitability in certain scenes. Deep thought before the reply is another way to win the conversational battle in the play. Deep thought implies critically analyzing some idea or subject before letting another party know your mind. Although it may seem the opposite of fast speech, it allows one to collect himself/herself before engaging in the dialogue. Kate used this strategy whenever she talks to Deely and Ann (Chua 47). The character takes time to speak, but whenever she speaks, the other characters are left quite. Philosophers during the time the play was shot lament that the best speakers ever known are those who took their time before making certain dialogue responses. This strategy would always leave your opponent confused. In major occasions, deep thought will lead to responses full of logics and wisdom. However, this strategy is ideal in dialogues between scholars or educated society members (Childs116). One may be taken to be weak or confused on using this strategy in the midst of an illiterate crowd. The characters would go through their past life and knowledge before engaging in any conversational battles. In the fight they would take time and reflect on logics or actual occurrences in their life time. In the end, their responses would look mature, correct and convincing. This would always silence their opponents. The same strategy is applied in the modern conversational battle arena. The adults who are full of wisdom and experience would always be slow in speaking while the younger conversational opponents would rush into making wrong responses, or use non-logical facts to support their arguments. The old would on the other hand take time and base their arguments on past experience or true facts. This would make the later be collected and calm as the conversational battles continues (Busenitz 98). A wise kid would always realize the wisdom from the old men and give up the conversational fight. This strategy also applies in the modern courts where attorneys take their time and support their arguments from facts in the constitutions among other documents. The best lawyers are those who are composed and calm in arguing their side of the case. The judge is the final verdict maker would listen to both sides of the arguments and select on the best, basing it on logical evidence and support from the constitution among other legal documents. This strategy is regarded as the most effective modern way of winning a conversational battle, more so in a generation where law is the ultimate boss in the society. Every argument is based on some basic principles like societal norms and beliefs, legal and ethical implications. There is irony in the play. Irony is the unexpected happening in the literature world. Anna had so many friends as Kate tells it out, but Kate talks of Anna as her only friend in their youth time. But the irony is that Anna is not married despite her being sociable than her old friend, Kate. Deely is actually shocked having not met Anna, his wife’s only friend yet they were roommates for over twenty years. This is the great irony because the audience is left thinking how that would have happened. Kate later kills her best friend Anna, on allegations that the latter was planning to snatch her husband away. This made sense because one would term it jealousy, but when she kills Deely, this is not normal. The question is, if she killed Anna thinking the later would steal her Deely, why kill the man in the end. Works Cited Busenitz, Arlen. Conversation Magic. New Jersey: Create space publishing, 2010. Print Childs, James . Faithful conversation. New York: Fortress press, 2003. Print Chua, Amy. Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother. New York: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2011. Print Ethridge, Shannon. Every woman's battle. New York: Doubleday publishing group, 2008. Print O'Brian, Patrick. Master and commander. New York: W.W Norton Press, 2003. Print Pinter, Harold. Old Times. New York: Pgw, 1971. Read More