 |
|
Analysing Drama - Preliminary Matters
Task C - What aspects of the language do we need to analyse when we
analyse drama?
Given that plays are mainly conversations between characters on the stage,
the most obvious kind of analysis to use will be that developed by linguists
to analyse conversational interaction, and that is what we will concentrate
on in the drama section of this course. Let's begin with looking in detail
at a small example, in order to see the sorts of things we need to explore.
The extract below is taken from Shakespeare's Henry IV, Part II.
Sir John Falstaff, is a lecherous, middle-aged and boisterous drunkard
who has spent much of the two plays Henry IV, Part I and Henry
IV, Part II teaching the young heir to the throne, Prince Hal, how
to have a good time in the inns and bawdy houses of England. Now, at the
end of the play, Hal's father, King Henry IV, has died, and Prince Hal
has just been crowned Henry V. As Hal is now king, Falstaff and his cronies
Pistol, Shallow and Bardolph think that life will carry on much as before,
but with extra funds to support the merriment. They approach him as he
leaves Westminster Abbey, after the coronation:
|
Falstaff
|
God save thy Grace, King Hal; my royal Hal!
|
|
Pistol
|
The heavens thee guard and keep, most royal imp of fame!
|
|
Falstaff
|
God save thee my sweet boy!
|
|
King
|
My Lord Chief Justice, speak to that man in vain.*
|
|
Chief Justice
|
Have you your wits? Know you what 'tis you speak?
|
|
Falstaff
|
My King! My Jove! I speak to thee, my heart!
|
|
King
|
I know thee not, old man. Fall to thy prayers.
How ill white hairs become a fool and jester.
|
(Shakespeare, Henry IV, Part II: Act 5, scene 5,
42-9)
*in vain = contemptuously
It is clear that the new King Henry V treats his old drinking friend
with considerable harshness, signalling a very different relationship
between them now that he has the power and responsibility of being the
head of state.
Look carefully at the last three lines of this extract
and try to describe in as much detail, and with as much precision as you
can, how the two different attitudes of Falstaff and the new King are
being indicated linguistically.
What could we explain by using foregrounding theory,
as dealt with in Topic 3?
What else do we need to account for if we are to
come up with a precise characterisation of the meanings and effects in
these three lines?
Our answer
|
