ELTWeekly Vol. 3 Issue#99 | September 26 | ISSN 0975-3036
Subscribe to ELTWeekly (FREE)
Md. Afrozuddin works as Assistant Professor of English at Sri Venkateswara Institute of Technology (SVIT), NH-44, Behind Anantha PVC Pipes, Hampapuram (V), Rapthadu (M), Anantapur – 515722.
The 19th century saw the introduction of legislation that began a process of state intervention into the living and working conditions of the men and women of Britain. Many people’s living conditions were shocking and degrading. As a young man, “Shaw worked for a firm of estate agents collecting tiny sums of rent from slum dwellers in Dublin. Shaw hated this job and that it was through this experience that … he saw how gentleman actually behaved and how they made their money out of working men and women … Landlords, it seemed to him, were little better than thieves.”[1]
Shaw intended his first play to expose the practices of slum landlords and the corruption within local government that continued to line the pockets of those willing to exploit and abuse. At the time of its first performance in 1892, it excited a great of controversy, a sense of uproar which delighted Shaw and the reaction of the middle class audiences was understandable since they recognized the attack Shaw was making on them.
George Bernard Shaw hoped that Widowers’ Houses, the first of his early plays that he dubbed as “Unpleasant” would prick people’s social conscience. He was savy enough to know that a play must entertain before it can enlighten and so he wrapped a concept he described as “grotesque realistic exposure of slum.
[1] Archibald Henderson, George Bernard Shaw: His Life and Works, a Critical Biography, (Kessinger Publishing, 2004), P.96.
landlordism”[1] around a romance between a Blanche Sartorius and Harry Trench. Shaw’s fist play, completed in 1892 when he was already 35, is remarkably like the flood of his plays to come in its mix of conventional drawing-room comedy and ironic social criticism. It is really a perfect little conundrum, pointedly insisting that even the morally fastidious are compromised by the moral taint of their money.
Widowers’ Houses would be the first in a series of “Plays Unpleasant” that tackled with “Shaw’s noted pungent wit such issues as poverty, sexual politics and prostitution, quite racy topics for their time.”[2] Shaw’s socialist politics are never far from the surface, keeping the light-hearted romantic follies in check with their more serious couplings. One finds the play a decidedly pleasant experience. The play Widowers’ Houses not only fulfils Shaw’s aim to expose the hidden ties between pleasant people who imagine that such sordid matters as slum-lordism do not touch them, but also to entertain. Shaw, even in this fledgling effort managed to pursue a moral agenda but without preaching, and leaves it to the viewers to draw their own conclusions about the parallels between the rot at the bottom of the polite and polished edifice of upper crust London circa 1890 and today’s New York.
Widowers’ Houses is remarkably well structured into three forward moving acts. The first act which allows the romance to blossom and the background differences to be established is staged during a traditional Victorian holiday abroad.
[1] John William Cunliffe, Leaders of the Victorian Revolution, (The University of California, D. Appleton-Century Company, incorporated, 1934), P. 324.
[2] Toby Cole, Actors on Acting: The Theories, Techniques, and Practices of the Great Actors, (Crown Publishers, 1970), P.370.
The middle act starts like a comedy of manners, but turns more serious when the adage about money being the root of all evil comes into play and brings the wedding plans to a halt. The last act is Shaw at his most clever. It offers neither a plan for dealing with the social injustices brought to light nor does it have any of the characters change their hypocritical mindsets.
Please click here to read the rest of research paper in a PDF file
2 comments