Analysis and Review of Picnic on the Battlefield - Essay Example

ENG 102-003 July Analysis and Review of Picnic on the Battlefield Literature often has many different approaches to the way in which meaning can be provided to the reader. As a function of these different approaches, it is oftentimes difficult to adequately understand the way in which a particular author, poet, or playwright tries to accomplish within a given work. Thus, the following discussion will engage the reader with an understanding of the play Picnic on the Battlefield. Although this particular play has been viewed as “absurdist,” such a definition should not be taken as true that there is little to no understanding represented within the play in question. Instead, it is the understanding of this particular author that even though the play itself is a tragic comedy and does represent some elements of the absurd, it is both relevant and effective in helping to describe and define some of the deeper realities of the human condition and the way in which understanding of simple issues is often differentiated between the young and the old. As such, the following paper will be concentric upon analyzing some of these thought provoking truths that the play exhibits, and drawing a deeper level of analysis to them in the hope that the content of the play can be appreciated and taken more seriously than it might otherwise be viewed. One of the first aspects of the play that is immediately illustrated has to do with the fact that the absurd and the deadly serious are shown side by side. For instance, the deadly serious is represented by the fact that a battlefield exists in which the life and death of tens of thousands of young people pay the balance each and every day. However, the absurd aspect is also shown with Zapo’s parents parading into this battlefield and viewing it as something of a novelty or curiosity. This provides the reader with a first glimpse into the way in which the author utilizes the absurd as a means of proving a point. Ultimately, Zapo is frustrated by the presence of his parents in this particular field of conflict. The underlying reasons for this are multiple. The first has to do with the fact that an overly protective mother insists upon ensuring that he follows a careful regimen of Heidi, and a boisterous and arrogant father demands respect and calls into question the manliness and courage of his young son, relating war stories from his youth and actively comparing the lack of action and heroism represented on the front to the level of heroism he saw during his youth. Beyond this frustration, Zapo is also faced with the reality of death and the continual fear that is represented on the battlefield. This demonstrated with respect to the way in which Zapo and his prisoner run for cover as the bombing begins and the manner through which his parents are seemingly clueless to the threat to life it represents. In fact, Zapo’s mother is so absurdly out of sync with reality that instead of diving for cover, she merely opens her own umbrella and continues on with the dainties of the picnic. Another element of the juxtaposition between absurdity and reality is reflected with respect to the way in which Zapo’s mother and father encouraged him to take an unrealistic photo with the prisoner that has been captured. Ultimately, Zapo does not take any satisfaction that he has captured enemy soldier. However, due to the fact that his parents are unrelenting and insist that he take a photo to illustrate this exceptional achievement, Zapo gives into their demands and demeans the prisoner that he has taken by placing his foot on the prisoner’s stomach as the photo is snapped. The reader/viewer is instantly aware of the fact that Zapo regrets this and is possibly reticent to performing such a feat with the understanding that the places between prisoner and warden could have easily been reversed. Another representation of the absurd in contrast with reality is with regard to the scene directly after the bombing takes place. As Red Cross medics are running through the field of conflict and asking for wounded and checking to see who might still be alive, Zapo’s mother raises her hand and states, “Yes, I cut my finger slicing onions earlier” (Arrabal 39). This ridiculous assertion stands as yet another proof that the horrors and realities of the front line of conflict seems to be completely lost on the older generation. Likewise, the most important moment in which the overall absurdity of the play meets logic and serves to provide a resolution for the tension that has thus far been building is with respect to the moment in which Zapo’s father “realizes” that the young men have lost all passion to fight and are simply exhausted and bored with the conflict. Although this is painfully evident to anyone, Zapo’s father embraces this truth as if it were newly revealed to him and utilizes it to make the broad pronouncement that since these young men are bored with the conflict it should end. However, even as the absurdity of the parents is represented within the play time and time again, the absurdity of war is the greater absurdity; due to the fact that even after such a broad pronouncement is made and understood by everyone, the war continues and another bombardment begins. Ultimately, the breakdown in human logic and understanding contributes to situations in which a failure in judgment creates an ongoing and self perpetuating bad decision; as is so oftentimes represented within war and battlefield decisions of life and death. Regardless of this understanding, Zapo and Zepo merely continue on in the roles that they have been tasked with. All the while, the reader/viewer is encouraged to understand the futility of all of this and the frustration/boredom that the soldiers feel is not a new feeling and has not been defined or realized by Zapo’s father; instead, it has existed since the very opening moments that the conflict existed and the men were forced into the type of lifestyle that now defines them. The continual comparison between the absurd along with the real is ultimately what provides the mechanism through which the reader is able to engage a further understanding of this particular play. Although this tactic and/or technique has discouraged many individuals from appreciating specifically what the author of the play meant, on closer analysis, it is clear and apparent that this particular approach ultimately provides a great deal of inference with respect to human nature. Additionally, the reader can note that it also provides a further understanding of the mechanisms through which action is engaged in order to meet societal expectations. Although the state of Zapo and his fellow soldiers serves as the primal mechanisms through which his universe is defined, the sentient and freethinking Zapo, and his fellow soldiers, has instead resigned himself to a state of operating based upon the expectations that society and their families/loved ones places upon them. In essence, the author of this particular play is seeking to draw the reader’s attention to the fact that societal norms and expectations are ultimately what continue to contribute to the violence that is represented during wartime. Although this could have easily been effected via another approach, it is the understanding of this particular reader/analyst that the means of comparing absurdity with reality is the most effective mechanism that this particular understanding of the represented. Work Cited Arrabal, Fernando. Guernica, and other plays. New York: Grove Press, 1986. Print. Outline: Paper’s Topic: The paper’s topic is concentric on a comparison between the absurd and the real that is represented within the play Picnic on the Battlefield”. Paper’s Purpose: The purpose of the paper is to draw the reader’s attention to the way that the playwright uses the absurd to highlight understanding that would otherwise be lost in the play. Thesis Statement: As such, the following paper will be concentric upon analyzing some of these thought provoking truths that the play exhibits and drawing a deeper level of analysis to them in the hopes that the content of the play can be appreciated and taken more seriously than it might otherwise be viewed. Intended Audience: The intended audience of the play is individuals that have read the play and seek to gain a more full and complete understanding of it. Introduction: I: The Absurd and the Serious A: The curiosity of war B: The prisoner’s dilemma II: The irrationality of thought A: The picture B: The bombing C: The realization III: The purpose A: Discussion of how the absurd defines the play B: Effectiveness of approach Conclusion Read More