The Manifestation of Existentialism
The Manifestation of Existentialism in Rhinoceros
Issues under perspective:
The ideal behind Existentialism
The Existentialist Struggle
The precarious resolution to a hapless situation
A good quote that covers the ideal behind Existentialism:
“The existentialist… thinks it very distressing that God does not exist, because all possibility of finding values in a heaven of ideas disappears along with Him; there can no longer be a priori of God, since there is no infinite and perfect consciousness to think it. Nowhere is it written that the Good exists, that we must not lie; because the fact is that we are on a plane where there are only men. Dostoyevsky said, if God didn’t exist, everything would be possible. That is the very starting point of existentialism. Indeed, everything is permissible if God does not exist, and as a result man is forlorn, because neither within him nor without does he find anything to cling to. – Jean Paul Sartre”
THE REJECTION OF LOGIC AND SENSE
Stemming from an existentialist point of view, it is important to note that Ionesco sees all human reasoning and man-made logic as absurd and essentially meaningless. He shows this view through the use of characters like Botard. Botard is an undermined character whose reasoning in the play is a (tragic) comic farce. Ionesco makes use of proud individuals who pride themselves on their seemingly intellectual superiority, then turn their own argument against them. Botard embraces his "methodical mind," and his precise, scientific view of life. His disdain of journalists led to his skepticism at the reports of the rhinoceroses. Even after being a witness of one, Botard insisted, "I can't see a thing. It's an illusion." When his self-denial backfires, Botard refuted himself by confirming the very existence of the rhinoceroses. Thus Botard’s empty accusations at the beginning and his subsequent actions show how illogic he really is, and supports Ionesco’s view that human reasoning is redundant. It does not uphold order in the world because the idea itself is flawed, and in fact totally absurd.
THE EXISTENTIALIST STRUGGLE
Ionesco establishes his mirror of truth in the character Berenger, with Berenger being the epitome of an existentialist struggle. In the play Berenger’s identifying then coming-to-terms with the situation, is itself a problematic resolution proposed by Ionesco. The struggle one faces here is not simply a matter of indifference or isolation due to one’s incapability to “fit in”.
Berenger of all people was the one truly searching for meaning in life, because he regards life as meaningless, life as fleeting and life as nothing more than “a dream”. Through drinking Berenger slips into a realm of escapism and even questioned "sometimes I wonder if I exist myself". Such remarks actually reflects the existentialist concerns in the philosophical preposition of one’s existence.
As a result of this, Berenger looks to his friend Jean who always appeared self-righteous and “cultured”, and admired Jean’s rigid willpower which he thinks he lacks. Despite several confrontations with Jean on matters they cannot agree on, he never doubted Jean but simply assumed that everything was too knowledgeable for his comprehension. Berenger had to unwillingly settle for some markers set by his friends because this was all he had to hope to become “smart” and “purposeful” like Jean and the logician. On one hand, Berenger desperately wants to fit in with his friends yet on the other at the thought of becoming a rhinoceros, Berenger was appalled. When Jean turned into a rhinoceros, Berenger claimed "I never would have thought it of him, never!" Berenger then attributed this transformation to Jean being "temporarily unbalanced" because he could not understand otherwise. His world gradually broke apart as one by one the people around him succumbed to rhinoceritis and this process ate away Berenger’s confidence in reason, culture and even love.
Thus inexorably, Berenger's initial beliefs and hopes for reforming himself is destroyed, he is unable to find ultimate meaning in life because for Ionesco, there is no meaning to be found in life.
THE PROBLEMATIC RESOLUTION
Ionesco may not have provided a direct, fool-proof solution to this struggle Berenger faced in the play, but he does leaves us clues to get to our own resolution. In Rhinoceros, it seem to suggest that identifying the presence of this struggle and embracing it would be the only truth for the existentialist. Berenger illustrates this point by making an existential decision. While the temptation to become a rhinoceros is strong, Berenger held on to his precarious human form. Ie. beginning of Act 3, Dudard proposed the possibility that Berenger could turn into a rhinoceros. Berenger disregarded the suggestion, "If you really don't want to knock yourself, you don't" (of which he was referring to the growing of a horn and turning into a rhinoceros). He further reiterates this by saying, "...If one really doesn't want to, really doesn't want to catch this thing, which after all is a nervous disease-then you don't catch it..." Berenger has exhibited an existentialist choice to not identify himself with a phenomenom of in fact the way of life in the town (becoming rhinoceros).
Towards the end of the play the temptation and the struggle becomes clear when realization dawned on Berenger, that identity and the ideal form of existence hangs by a thread. Berenger remarked “ I’m not good-looking. They’re the good-looking ones.” He came to this conclusion about the rhinoceros because inherently Ionesco’s intentions were to present the rhinoceros as more “good-looking”, attributed only to their brute strength and power that lies in the masses.
The play came to its climax when at the very end, Berenger’s love of his life Daisy decided to join the ranks of the rhinoceros with a mixture of self-pity and desire to be accepted by the majority. Berenger left by himself , finally crystalised the existentialist movement by declaring "I'm the last man left, and I'm staying that way until the end. I'm not capitulating!" This is significant because Ionesco has shown us how difficult it is to be a true existentialist, and to come to terms that one is really fighting a lonely battle in this struggle.
This ties back to the absurdity of the human condition, where the question/rejection of religious beliefs has taken away the only certainty man has in life to reassure himself of his value. As Nihilism pervades, life is but a relentless progress towards nothingness. Ionesco seeks to let his audience receive this message in hope that we do not become like his single-minded characters that are too caught up in their everyday life that we eventually define our lives based on the mechanized mundane routines. He would deem it a tragedy should we attempt to add meaning on something that is already meaningless. Thus I would like to end this essay with a quote : "The basic problem is that if God exists, what is the point of literature? And if He doesn't exist, what is the point of literature? Either way, my writing, the only thing I have ever succeeded in doing, is invalidated." (Ionesco in 1984, from Playwrights at Work, ed. by George Plimpton, 2000)
Issues under perspective:
The ideal behind Existentialism
The Existentialist Struggle
The precarious resolution to a hapless situation
A good quote that covers the ideal behind Existentialism:
“The existentialist… thinks it very distressing that God does not exist, because all possibility of finding values in a heaven of ideas disappears along with Him; there can no longer be a priori of God, since there is no infinite and perfect consciousness to think it. Nowhere is it written that the Good exists, that we must not lie; because the fact is that we are on a plane where there are only men. Dostoyevsky said, if God didn’t exist, everything would be possible. That is the very starting point of existentialism. Indeed, everything is permissible if God does not exist, and as a result man is forlorn, because neither within him nor without does he find anything to cling to. – Jean Paul Sartre”
THE REJECTION OF LOGIC AND SENSE
Stemming from an existentialist point of view, it is important to note that Ionesco sees all human reasoning and man-made logic as absurd and essentially meaningless. He shows this view through the use of characters like Botard. Botard is an undermined character whose reasoning in the play is a (tragic) comic farce. Ionesco makes use of proud individuals who pride themselves on their seemingly intellectual superiority, then turn their own argument against them. Botard embraces his "methodical mind," and his precise, scientific view of life. His disdain of journalists led to his skepticism at the reports of the rhinoceroses. Even after being a witness of one, Botard insisted, "I can't see a thing. It's an illusion." When his self-denial backfires, Botard refuted himself by confirming the very existence of the rhinoceroses. Thus Botard’s empty accusations at the beginning and his subsequent actions show how illogic he really is, and supports Ionesco’s view that human reasoning is redundant. It does not uphold order in the world because the idea itself is flawed, and in fact totally absurd.
THE EXISTENTIALIST STRUGGLE
Ionesco establishes his mirror of truth in the character Berenger, with Berenger being the epitome of an existentialist struggle. In the play Berenger’s identifying then coming-to-terms with the situation, is itself a problematic resolution proposed by Ionesco. The struggle one faces here is not simply a matter of indifference or isolation due to one’s incapability to “fit in”.
Berenger of all people was the one truly searching for meaning in life, because he regards life as meaningless, life as fleeting and life as nothing more than “a dream”. Through drinking Berenger slips into a realm of escapism and even questioned "sometimes I wonder if I exist myself". Such remarks actually reflects the existentialist concerns in the philosophical preposition of one’s existence.
As a result of this, Berenger looks to his friend Jean who always appeared self-righteous and “cultured”, and admired Jean’s rigid willpower which he thinks he lacks. Despite several confrontations with Jean on matters they cannot agree on, he never doubted Jean but simply assumed that everything was too knowledgeable for his comprehension. Berenger had to unwillingly settle for some markers set by his friends because this was all he had to hope to become “smart” and “purposeful” like Jean and the logician. On one hand, Berenger desperately wants to fit in with his friends yet on the other at the thought of becoming a rhinoceros, Berenger was appalled. When Jean turned into a rhinoceros, Berenger claimed "I never would have thought it of him, never!" Berenger then attributed this transformation to Jean being "temporarily unbalanced" because he could not understand otherwise. His world gradually broke apart as one by one the people around him succumbed to rhinoceritis and this process ate away Berenger’s confidence in reason, culture and even love.
Thus inexorably, Berenger's initial beliefs and hopes for reforming himself is destroyed, he is unable to find ultimate meaning in life because for Ionesco, there is no meaning to be found in life.
THE PROBLEMATIC RESOLUTION
Ionesco may not have provided a direct, fool-proof solution to this struggle Berenger faced in the play, but he does leaves us clues to get to our own resolution. In Rhinoceros, it seem to suggest that identifying the presence of this struggle and embracing it would be the only truth for the existentialist. Berenger illustrates this point by making an existential decision. While the temptation to become a rhinoceros is strong, Berenger held on to his precarious human form. Ie. beginning of Act 3, Dudard proposed the possibility that Berenger could turn into a rhinoceros. Berenger disregarded the suggestion, "If you really don't want to knock yourself, you don't" (of which he was referring to the growing of a horn and turning into a rhinoceros). He further reiterates this by saying, "...If one really doesn't want to, really doesn't want to catch this thing, which after all is a nervous disease-then you don't catch it..." Berenger has exhibited an existentialist choice to not identify himself with a phenomenom of in fact the way of life in the town (becoming rhinoceros).
Towards the end of the play the temptation and the struggle becomes clear when realization dawned on Berenger, that identity and the ideal form of existence hangs by a thread. Berenger remarked “ I’m not good-looking. They’re the good-looking ones.” He came to this conclusion about the rhinoceros because inherently Ionesco’s intentions were to present the rhinoceros as more “good-looking”, attributed only to their brute strength and power that lies in the masses.
The play came to its climax when at the very end, Berenger’s love of his life Daisy decided to join the ranks of the rhinoceros with a mixture of self-pity and desire to be accepted by the majority. Berenger left by himself , finally crystalised the existentialist movement by declaring "I'm the last man left, and I'm staying that way until the end. I'm not capitulating!" This is significant because Ionesco has shown us how difficult it is to be a true existentialist, and to come to terms that one is really fighting a lonely battle in this struggle.
This ties back to the absurdity of the human condition, where the question/rejection of religious beliefs has taken away the only certainty man has in life to reassure himself of his value. As Nihilism pervades, life is but a relentless progress towards nothingness. Ionesco seeks to let his audience receive this message in hope that we do not become like his single-minded characters that are too caught up in their everyday life that we eventually define our lives based on the mechanized mundane routines. He would deem it a tragedy should we attempt to add meaning on something that is already meaningless. Thus I would like to end this essay with a quote : "The basic problem is that if God exists, what is the point of literature? And if He doesn't exist, what is the point of literature? Either way, my writing, the only thing I have ever succeeded in doing, is invalidated." (Ionesco in 1984, from Playwrights at Work, ed. by George Plimpton, 2000)
posted by gLOB-tROt at 5:33 PM
1 comments
