Chapter 5

A Study of Structure

Contents

5.1. Elements of Structure

5.2. Elements of Drama

5.2 .1. Theme

5.2.2. Action/ Plot

5.2.3. Characters

5.2.4. Language

5.2.5. Music

5.2.6. Spectacle

5.3. Dramatic Structure

5.3.1. Point of Attack

5.3.2. Exposition

5.3.3. Rising of Action

5.3.4. The Climax

5.3.5. Resolution

5.4. Types of Plot Structure

5.4.1. Aristotlean structure

5.4.2. Climactic structure

5.4.3. Episodic structure

5.5. Come Back Little Sheba A study of its structure

5.6. Picnic – A Study of its Structure

5.7. The Dark at the Top of the Stairs – A study of its structure

5.8. Bus Stop : A Study of its Structure

5.9. Splendor in the Grass : A study of its structure

Structure Analysis

5.1. Elements of dramatic structure

Dramatic structure involves the overall framework or method the playwright uses

to organize the dramatic material and action. It is important for the playwright to

establish themes but the challenge comes in applying structure to the ideas and

inspirations. Understanding the basic principles of dramatic structure is quite necessary to

understand and analyse the structure of plays.

There are many ways to write a play. Sometimes a playwright starts with an idea.

Another playwright may begin with a single character in mind. Some playwrights base

their work on spectacle. Plays can be tightly structured or episodic. Regardless of the

original inspiration, the work of the playwright is not just to set forth the idea, to create

characters or to tell a story. A playwright recreates and restates the human experiences

and the universal mirror of mankind.

5.2. Elements of drama

Most successful playwrights follow the theories of play writing and drama that were

established over two thousand years ago by Aristotle. In his works The Poetics Aristotle

outlined the six elements of drama in his critical analysis of the classical Greek tragedy

Oedipus Rex written by the Greek playwright, Sophocles, in the fifth century B.C. The

six elements as they are outlined involve: Thought, Theme, Ideas; Action or plot;

Characters; Language; Music and spectacle.

5.2.1. Theme

Theme is what the play means as opposed to what happens (the plot).The playwright

chooses some event or incident that he wants to present to the audience. It is the raw

material which may not have any basic form, beauty or structure.

5.2.2. Plot

Plot includes the seven structural components used in the selection and

arrangement of events in the story. These selected events are then typically arranged in

some pattern that is both coherent and interesting. The plot presents the theme chosen by

the playwright in a meaningful and coherent manner. So plot means what happens rather

than what it means. The plot must have some sort of unity and clarity by setting up a

pattern by which each action initiating the next rather than standing alone without

connection to what came before it or what follows. In the plot of a play, characters are

involved in conflict that has a pattern of movement. The action and movement in the play

begins from the initial entanglement, through rising action, climax, and falling action to

resolution. For Aristotle, “beauty consists in magnitude and arrangement” of the plot,

which he called “the soul of drama.”1 (David vx) But he also recognized that there was

much more to a drama than just “a beginning, middle and end” or “proper magnitude” of

its plot. In poetics, he addressed such matters as the definition of character, their qualities

and ways of being portrayed; causes for the rise of dramatic storytelling and its

relationship to view of life; the effect tragedy (and, by interference, any kind of story) has

on an audience; and the mode of manner of diction. He was concerned with all these

matters-all related to the architecture of dramatic storytelling. The success of the story

depends on the plot.

5.2.3. Characters

To present the theme through the plot the playwright creates characters. The number

of the characters depends on the story. He can create any type of characters the story

demands. The two main types of characters are round and flat.

5.2.4. Language

Language is chosen in keeping in mind the audience to whom it is presented.

5.2.5. Music

Music is created according to the situation and trend.

5.2.6. Spectacle

Spectacle depends upon the demand that the story makes and the affordability of the

producers.

Besides the elements outlined above the playwright has other major

considerations to take into account. The genre and form of the play is an important aspect

since it has to chosen by the playwright according to the subject he has in his mind.

Tragedy, Comedy, Tragicomedy, Domestic comedy are the traditional genre forms

adapted by the playwrights. While some playwrights are pure in their choice of genre for

a play others mix and match.

5.3. Dramatic Structure

Dramatic structure involves the overall framework or the method by which the

playwright uses to organize the dramatic material and or action. It is important for

playwrights to establish themes but the challenge comes in applying structure to the ideas

and inspirations. Understanding basic principles of dramatic structure can be invaluable

to the playwright. Most modern plays are structured into acts that can be further divided

into scenes .The pattern most often used is a method by where the playwright sets up

early on in the beginning scenes all of the necessary conditions and situations out of

which the later conditions will develop. Generally the wants and desires of one character

will conflict with another character. With this method the playwright establishes a pattern

of complication, rising action, climax and resolution. This is commonly known as cause

to effect arrangement of incidents.

The basic Characteristics of the cause to effect arrangement are:

Clear exposition of situation

Careful preparation for future events or the building of actions

Unexpected but logical reversals or the climax

An obligatory scene or denouement

Logical resolution or catharsis

5.3.1. Point of Attack

The moment of the play at which main action of the plot begins. This may occur ion

the first scene, or it may occur after several scenes of exposition. The point of attack

triggers the main action which pays the way for the rest of the action. Point of attack is

instigated either due by some character or incident.

5.3.2. Exposition

Exposition reveals information that the audience needs to know in order to follow

the main story line of the play. It introduces all the characters to the readers or the

audience. It also gives the relevant back ground information and prepares the audience

for the events that will follow.

5.3.3. Rising Action

Rising action is the section of plot beginning with the point of attack and/or inciting

incident and proceeding forward to the crisis into the climax. The action of the play will

rise as it set up a situation of increasing intensity and anticipation. These scenes make up

the body of the play and usually create a sense of continuous mounting suspense in the

audience.

5.3.4. The Climax

Climax is the converging point where all of the earlier scenes and action in the play

will build technically to the highest level of dramatic intensity. This part of the play is

generally referred to as the moment of the play's crisis. This is the moment where major

dramatic questions arise to the highest level, the mystery hits the unraveling point, and

the culprits are revealed. This should be point of highest stage of dramatic intensity in the

action of the play. The whole combined action of the play generally lead up to this

moment.

5.3.5. Resolution

The resolution is the moment of the play in which the conflicts are resolved. It is

the solution to the conflict in the play, the answer to the mystery, and the clearing up of

the final details. This is the scene that answers the questions raised earlier in the play. In

this scene the methods and motives are revealed to the audience.

5.4. Types of plot structure

There are different kinds of structures that playwrights at different point of time

applied to their works. Round, Aristotlean, linear, climactic and episodic are a few that

can be named. The structure in which many subplots run through the play can be

described as 'River Action' in this type of plot actions not closely linked are moving in

parallel to be integrated at the end of the play. This contrasts to the single or episodic

action in Macbeth, or the mirror action in King Lear where there is both a main and a

sub-plot present. Shakespeare has used this structural technique to create both humour

and tension. The subplots also pick up on the themes of love and mistaken identities,

preparing us for the part those themes will play in the main plot.

Round plot in a play is where the action of the plot gets back to where it has

started at the end of action, with no drastic change occurs to modify either the situation or

the position of the characters.

5.4.1. Aristotlean structure

Aristotle, the architect of dramatic structure advocated that the plots should be

well knit and he formulated the three unities -–the unity of time, the unity of action and

the unity of place. According to Aristotle the plot or the structure is the way the

incidents are presented to the audience. According to him the plot must be continuous,

have magnitude and complete with a beginning, middle, and end. The beginning, must

start the cause-and-effect chain but not be dependent on anything outside the compass of

the play. The middle, or climax, must be caused by earlier incidents and itself cause the

incidents that follow it. The resolution must be caused by the preceding events but not

lead to other incidents outside the compass of the play ; the end should therefore solve or

resolve the problem created during the incentive moment. Aristotle calls the cause-and-

effect chain leading from the incentive moment to the climax the 'tying up' , that is

termed as the complication by the playwrights and critics later times. Aristotle terms the

more rapid cause-and-effect chain from the climax to the resolution the 'unravelling',

termed as dénouement in later times.

When Aristotle says that the plot must be complete he means that it should be

structurally self-contained, with the incidents bound together by internal necessity, each

action leading inevitably to the next with no outside intervention. According to Aristotle,

the worst kinds of plots are 'episodic', in which the episodes or acts succeed one another

without probable or necessary sequence; the only thing that ties together the events in

such a plot is the fact that they happen to the same person.

5.4.2. Climactic structure

The characteristics of climactic structure are as follows:

i. Plot begins late in story, closer to the very end or climax

ii. Covers a short space of time, perhaps a few hours or at most a few days

iii. Contains a few solid, extended scenes, such as three acts with each act comprising

one long scene.

iv. Occurs in a restricted locale, one room or one house

v. Number of characters is severely limited, usually not more than six or eight

vi. Plot in linear and moves in a single line with few subplots or counter plots

vii. Line of action proceeds in a cause and effect chain. The characters and events are

closely linked in a sequence of logical, almost inevitable development.

5.4.3. Episodic Structure

i. The characteristics of episodic structure are as follows

ii. Plot begins relatively early in the story and moves through a series of episodes

iii. Covers a longer period of time: weeks, months and some times years

iv. Many short fragmented scenes; sometimes an alternation of short and long

scenes

v. May range over an entire city or even several countries

vi. Frequently marked by several threads of action, such as two parallel plots, or

scenes of comic relief in a serious play.

The modern playwrights in keeping with the taste and demand of the audience

have the plays structured into acts that can be further divided into scenes. An act is a

major division in a drama. Scenes are juxtaposed to one another. An event may result

from several causes or no apparent cause, but arises in a network or web of circumstances

In Greek plays the sections of the drama signified by the appearance of the Chorus were

usually divided into five acts. This is the formula for most serious drama from the Greeks

to the Romans to the Elizabethan playwrights like William Shakespeare. The five acts

denote the structure of dramatic action. They are exposition, complication, climax, falling

action and catastrophe. William Inge the champion of domestic play genre modified the

conventional five act structure without violating the traditional rules laid down by the

great architects.

5.5. Structure of Come Back Little Sheba

. The five act structure was followed until the nineteenth century and later the

modern realistic drama replaced the conventional five act play structure with three act

structure. A study of Come Back Little Sheba which has been appreciated as certainly

“the most sturdily crafted”2 (Simon 67) shows that Inge has comprised the three act

structure further and has composed a two act play. He has combined the exposition and

the conflict building or the complication and presented it in the first act of the play and he

has combined the climax, denouement and resolution in the second act. Though he has

deviated from the conventional five act structure of play writing yet he has striven to

keep up the three unities, strictly adhered by the great Greek dramatist. The whole action

of the play Come Back Little Sheba takes place at the residence of the protagonist and the

plot is well made and there is no event or dialogue included in the play which does not

contribute to the development of the action of the play. He has also made use of the other

dramatic devices like conflict, contrast, suspense and irony quite effectively. He has even

drawn a character, Mrs. Coffman who plays the role of the Greek Chorus in the play to

certain extent.

Each of Inge’s plays is a slice of real life and Come Back Little Sheba is no

exception. As a result the exposition part of the play unfolds casually and transports us

into the world of Doc and Lola. In the first act, first scene Doc tells Marie that he

discontinued his study of Medicine and became a Chiropractor instead. Similarly in the

course of dialogue between Doc and Lola the information that Doc was an alcoholic and

it is only eleven months since he has stopped drinking is revealed to the readers. From the

conversation between Lola and the postman it is gathered that Doc is no more an

alcoholic and there is a quart of whiskey lying in the kitchen shelf and Doc has not

touched it for months. In the second scene the reason why Doc gave up his study of

medicine is also given to readers through his conversation with Lola. As the plot keeps

moving the exposition is quite sleekly built without making the readers conscious of it.

Complication also is introduced in scene -2. Doc is dismayed to find out the truth about

Mary. Both, his doubt regarding the character of Mary and Lola’s invitation to him to

peep at Turk and Mary shock and disappoint Doc. Lola further upsets him by reading

Marie’s telegram without her permission. Doc who appears to be stoic and saintly

actually is raging a war inside him. Parallel to the external conflict that is moving the

action of the plot there is a conflict raging inside Doc as well. His desires to be good and

decent but his Apollonian self is in conflict with his Dionysian self. It is not that he is

upset with Marie just because she is entertaining Turk at the back of Bruce; but it is

because that at the core of his heart he is in love with Marie, who he tends to believe to

be the personification of purity and innocence. Lola is at a loss to understand the conflict

that is driving Doc mad. She continues with her amorous behaviour and instigates Doc’s

sense of resentment further. The conflicts move the action forward and at the end of act-1

Scene -2 the complication is well built into the course of dramatic action.

In scene-1 act-II, when Doc understands that Marie is quite immoral the

conflict in his mind gets further complicated and the plot gains momentum. Doc is unable

to take the fact that she has been cheating him under his own roof that too, assisted by his

wife. He walks away with the whiskey bottle he has left untouched for months. In scene –

2, Lola finds it out and tension mounts on her. Scene 3 is the climactic or cathartic scene

is a masterfully crafted scene, in which Doc lets lose his pent up feelings. The final

Resolution scene depicts Lola and Doc draw a compromise.

The analysis shows that all elements of structure including contrast

conflict, plot device, irony and humour well imbued into the play. The exposition extends

up to scene –1 of act –II and the complications start in scene-2 of act –I and continue

almost till the third scene of act-II. The climax strikes like a sudden storm and is

breathtakingly violent and lengthy. The resolution scene in comparison to the previous

scene is short and breezy.

Contrast is used as a plot device to move the course of action quite effectively by

the playwright in the play. The main characters Doc and Lola are poles apart in their

behaviour. Doc is stoic and silent whereas Lola is flirtatious and garrulous. The play

starts highlighting the contrast in their behaviour. The opening scene shows Doc get up

early in the morning and prepare breakfast in the kitchen. He is neatly dressed. He prays

and in general appears cheerful. Lola gets up late comes down clumsily dressed. She is

sad and apologetic. Besides Doc, garrulous Lola is presented also as a sharp contrast to

the young and worldly-wise Marie. The old couple placed along the virulent fun loving

young couple Turk and Marie present unmistakably a sad contrast. Docile Doc is a

contrast to vibrant Turk. Thus there are so many contrasts well drawn in play and the

intention of the playwright to intensify and move the plot ahead with the help of the

contrasts drawn becomes clear.

The elements of suspense and irony are also introduced into the play. There is

mystery surrounding the disappearance the couple’s dog Sheba. Lola suspects Mrs.

Coffman to have stolen her dog Sheba. Sheba symbolically stands for her lost youth. It is

an irony that she does not understand that in the course of time a young person loses his

youth and beauty and will never get it back. It is also an irony that Lola wishes Doc to

comeback home sober but at the same time it is she who instigates him to resume

drinking.

Mrs. Coffman’s role in the play could be compared to that of the chorus in Greek

drama. Every now and then she passes on a judgment or a comment on Lola. She advices

Lola to get busy and comforts Lola whenever needed. She is a mute spectator to Doc’s

violent outburst and after that silently cleans up the mess created by him. .

Though Inge is accused of being more interested in psychoanalyzing his

characters than in building his plots, the study shows that his employment of the Freudian

paradigm brings out the conflicts inside a person which in turn helps to intensify the

course of the action in the play. It unearths the fact that it is Lola’s sense of depreciation,

her regret that in her life she has had no chance to get intimate with any muscular man

and to put it more precisely not with any man except Doc that makes her behave in that

mean, vulgar, indecent way. The revelation of what is going on in Lola’s mind enables

the reader to follow the plot better. No amount of physical or verbal action could be used

as effectively as this psychoanalytic technique to enable the course of action to gather the

required momentum. Similarly it is only when Doc feels that his emotions have been

perceived by Lola he feels helplessly naked and he loses his emotional balance for the

first time. When Lola points out to him that he is too much bothered about Turk’s

involvement with Marie he vehemently denies: “why should I be ? why should I?”

(Gassner III. 432; 1.1) and leaves the scene. The conflict of the plot is triggered here and

gains momentum in the following scenes.

Another element of plot device conflict has been made use of by Inge quite

effectively to intensify the course of action and move it ahead. Hegel’s structural

paradigm is the dramatic technique well adopted by Inge in the play. Hegel’s structural

paradigm contained in what he calls ‘dialectic’ helps explain how the conflict between

Doc and Lola is used by Inge to drive the narrative forward diachronically. Hegel’s

dialectic consists of two opposing forces- a thesis and an antithesis- held in opposition,

each struggling for dominance, but both eventually destroy the negative aspects of each

other and recombine the left over positive qualities in to a resolution he calls a

synthesis… in which all struggle ceases at the point of perfection (Johnson)3.

The two main characters Doc and Lola are poised opposite to each other in the

play. Both have positive as well as negative qualities in them. Lola is sluggish, vulgar and

dirty but she is not secretive. She tells Doc openly that she used to be quite worried about

his drunkenness:

When I think of the way you used to drink, always getting into fights, we

had so much trouble. I was so scared! I never knew what was going to

happen (Gassner III. 416;1.1).

She even asks him whether he regrets the fact that he had to marry her. Thus she

with not any restrain bares all her emotions to Doc as well as to the others. Doc on the

other hand is secretive about his emotions. Whenever Lola tries to elicit some

information out of him he just avoids giving any straight answer. He appears to be

passive and patient all the time. But actually he is a waging a war with the conflict that is

torturing him with in. The resolution scene brings out all that is dark inside him. Lola is

dazed by the shocking revelation. She encounters the ‘real’ Doc for the first time. The

resolution scene is an excellent example of the Hegelian episodic structure employed by

Inge in the play. A week later, when both Doc and Lola meet a lot of changes have taken

over them. The negativity in each of them seems to have negated the others’ and the

positive elements in their natures seem to have fused and thus with a new strength and

vision they start their life on a new note. Doc suggests Lola that he would get her a sad

looking bird dog. Thus he indicates her that though they have lost their Sheba, their

youth, still he an old man would try to give Lola what she has missed out in her life.

Although Doc and Lola have had bouts of fights and had compromised on earlier

occasions as well, only this time there is an indication that the process of synthesis is

complete. Lola accepts Sheba to be dead. Hence although the action seems to get back to

the point where it has started it could be assumed that the structure of the play is not

circular but Hegelian.

Lola’s flirtation with the milkman and her attempts to linger her conversation with

the post man and her coquettish behaviour with Turk all on the surface appear to have

been employed in the plot to provide some comic relief. But actually they add to the

depth of the plot as it is a technique employed by Inge to highlight the boredom in Lola’s

life.

Inge uses Mary- Turk relationship as the plot device to advance the action of the

plot. Mary stirs up the repressed emotions of the Doc which erupts with the force of the

volcano towards the end of the play. She is used as a ploy to build conflicts and

complicate the plot. She contributes, quite innocently, to weaken the already weak tie

between Doc and Lola and she plays havoc with the emotions of Doc. After the climactic

scene, the playwright feels that there is no further need for Marie as there is no need to

build any further conflict to complicate or create tension in the plot. Thus paving the way

to draw a perfect denouement he disposes Marie off. Without realizing the depth of the

role she played in the lives of her hosts Marie leaves with Bruce to Cincinnati. The way

Inge has used Marie as a plot device makes one understand that a contrived or arbitrary

plot device may annoy or confuse, causing a lot of confusion and disbelief. However a

well crafted plot device or one that emerges naturally from the setting or the characters of

the story may be entirely accepted or may not even be noticed by the audience. Thus the

study reveals Come Back Little Sheba to be three act master piece created by a superb

artist.

5.6. Picnic: A study of its structure

An analysis of the play Picnic shows it as an example of classic play structure. Its

action is comprised into three acts which takes place in a single day. The action of the

play is set on the side by side porches of Mrs. Flo Owens and Mrs. Helen Potts house

holds. The plot has conflicts, contrast, plot devises, irony and suspense all elements

required for an artistic masterpiece.

The play as it opens, subtly throws light on the prosaic lives of the characters who

are cramped almost to extinction by their repressions. They all are looking for a means to

escape. The technique that Inge has adopted to draw the exposition is superb. To put it in

the words of Judith Allen:

His artistry is in slowly revealing the minimal; commonplaceness of

characters involved in and overwhelmed by the repetitiveness of their

daily lives. He makes his “unfolding” a directly emotional experience for

the audience, illustrating the unexpected in human nature4 (Allen 2).

The exposition of the plot in the first act introduces all the characters and the information

related to Hal is given to others by Alan. In the course of Act 1 light is thrown on the fear

of insecurity that each of the protagonist harbours in mind. Due to the sense of insecurity

a conflict is constantly going on in the minds of not only Hal and Madge but also other

characters. As the plot moves ahead, in the course of second its momentum is intensified

by the characters who are drawn in sharp contrast to one another. Contrast is an another

dramatic device employed by the playwright to intensify the action of the play.

The climax culminates at the end of scene 1 of Act II when Rosemary bursts out

like a volcano at Hal. The denouement is drawn in the first scene of Act III. The scene

reveals Inge as a master craftsman. Old maid Rosemary and Howard are juxtaposed with

young and beautiful Madge and Hal. Rosemary and Howard get physical and after that

Rosemary demands Howard to marry her. Rosemary who has been affecting indifference

to men falls on her knees and begs Howard to marry her. She subjects herself to a kind of

psychoanalysis and bares her heart to Howard. The scene reveals the secret that she is the

opposite of what she has been posing herself to be. Her split personality shocks Howard.

Thus Inge achieves what he wanted to do:

I want my plays,” Inge said ,”to provide the audience with an experience

which they can enjoy… and which shocks them with the unexpected in

human nature, with the deep inner life that exists privately behind the life

that is publicly presented (Shuman 60)5.

The denouement is followed by resolution or catharsis in the last scene where

Rosemary succeeds in trapping Howard in to marrying her. Similarly Hal and Madge

recognize their passion for each other and Madge follows Hal to Tulsa. But for Flo who

has to suffer one more disappointment, the rest of the characters continue their life in the

same monotonous way.

Conflict is one of the dramatic devices quite effectively used by the playwright to

advance the action of the plot. The conflicts that ravage the minds of each of the

characters in general are never exposed to others. Madge the beauty queen doubts the

depth of Alan’s love. She thinks that he is only in love with her beauty and not with her

real self. The attention that she receives only increases her fear of insecurity since she is

afraid that her beauty is not going to serve her for ever. Her beauty could not even take

her name across the Kansas City since the magazine which printed her photograph after

she won the beauty pageant did not do a good job. She wants to escape to another world

where she can get some recognition for her real self. Similarly insecurity is chasing Hal

like a real villain since childhood. He tells Alan ”I gotta get some place in this world

Seymour. I got to” (Gassner IV. 221;1). Rosemary too is haunted by the fear of

insecurity. She is frantically looking for some one who will marry her. Flo wants

security for her daughters. Thus security one of the dramatic devices employed by the

playwright is really well portrayed and it brings out pathos in the lives of all the

characters.

Another catalyst employed by the playwright to kindle action is ‘boredom’ which

almost all the characters in the play want to escape. Madge is bored with her mundane

life and she is not at all thrilled by the attention she gets from the boys all over the town.

She does not enjoy her job at the dime store. She wants to do something which may take

her name all over the country. Thus she is waiting to escape the dull routine of her life.

Rosemary and the other teachers are also equally bored with their lives. They do not even

enjoy their outings. Mrs. Potts is also suffering her boring life silently. That is why she is

quite enthusiastic about the picnic. She bakes a Baltimore cake and tells Flo that it is the

only way she can draw the others' attention towards her. She tells:

I feel sort of excited, Flo. I think we plan picnics just to give ourselves an

excuse-to let something thrilling happen in our lives (Gassner IV., 226; 2)

Millie is talking of moving to New York city when she grows up.

Thus each character is working out to escape the boredom of life in their way. To put it in

the words of Judith Allen:

Everyone dreams of escape. Everyone dreams of finding their place in the

world. Everyone dreams of being loved. Inge believed the journey was not

so much in the action of the journey but ultimately, in the emotional

human experience we all go through in our guest for that love. This

journey is the essential root of his realism.

The action of the plot is moved along through effective dialogues. The dialogues are

strikingly realistic as if they have come directly from the lives of the lower middle class

people portrayed in the play.

Contrast is used as a good dramatic device in the play. Hal and Alan are polar

opposite. Alan is rich, sophisticated, confident, well-mannered and well accepted by the

society. Hal is poor, unsophisticated less confident and is looked down by the society.

Alan’s strength is his money and Hal’s strength is his looks.

In contrasting Hal with Alan and allowing Madge to feel ambivalent about

which of the two can offer her most happiness, Inge masterfully portrays

the shifting paradigm of his age6 (www.frymoline.com).

Intelligent Millie is a contrast to beautiful Madge. They add to the action of the plot by

their constant fighting and disagreement. Mrs. Flo is shrewd and ambitious. Mrs. Potts is

content and generous. Dubious Rosemary is a contrast not only to Mrs. Potts but to her

own self. As a contrast to Rosemary –Howard who indulge in sensuous love, the young

couple Madge and Hall are portrayed as a pair to be passionately in love. The three

teachers are an interesting study in contrast. Rosemary is too sensitive and too aware of

the amazing life that might just be beyond her grasp. Christine, the new teacher is quite

shy. Irma is very fashion conscious and talkative.

As the theme deals more with the feelings and emotions than with physical action

the playwright concentrates more on character building. Each character is developed as a

contrast to another and this technique adds to the variety as well as the movement of the

plot.

The element of irony is also employed by the playwright to heighten the effect of

the action. Hal comes to the town looking for his friend Alan who promises to help him

to settle down. Ironically it is Alan who drives him away from the town. It is an irony that

although Mrs. Flo’s intuitively feels that Hal could be a potential threat to her daughters’

well being yet she could do nothing to stop him. Alan in spite of Mrs. Flo’s doubts

vouchers for Hall. He says that he can control Hal. Unfortunately neither Alan could

control Hal nor do his riches control Madge.

Suspense, an interesting dramatic element is also well used by Inge in the plot to

heighten the dramatic effect. The question whether Madge would follow Hal to Tulsa or

is kept a secret till the end. Thus the analysis shows that the play is technically well

conceived and could be cited as an example of structural masterpiece.

5.7. Dark at the Top of the Stairs : An analysis of structure

An analysis of the play Dark at the Top of the Stairs shows that the structure of the

play is climactic. The plot begins late in story and the action covers a short space of time.

It contains three acts without any further division of the acts into scenes and occurs in the

same location and only eight main characters are portrayed and the plot moves in a single

line with no sub plot. Thus all the factors mentioned above substantiate the fact that the

structure of the play is climactic.

The plot is divided into three acts and it reveals an interesting pattern. In each act

action starts comparatively on a normal pace and the dramatic intensity accelerates as the

plot moves ahead. Thus they seem to be a fall and rise in the movement of the action. But

some critics like Aaron Riccio7 (Riccio 3) misconceive this effective dramatic structure

technique of William Inge and fail to see the unity of action well contrived between the

acts. The dramatic technique that Inge adopted for this play seems to demonstrate that in

the texture of a drama the knots must be noticeable; each scene must exist by itself in

order to present an object lesson, a teasing ground for the characters in order to eliminate

the sense of inevitability that may come in the course of a well made act with its

exposition, climax and denouement.

The exposition exposes the state of affairs in the Floods’ family. In act I, the marital

discard between Rubin and Cora their social, emotional and psychological conflicts, their

not so good economic condition and the fears and feelings of their children are brought to

the surface. The act quickly unveils the fact that Rubin and Cora are not very happily

married and each member of the family is suffering due to their inability to communicate

with others. It also well portrays Cora’s anxiety to settle her children well and their

relatively low status in the society. It can be said that the plot is moving on a serious but

not on a tragic note. But towards the end of the scene when Cora and Rubin quarrel over

Reenie’s dress and Rubin storms out of the house the plot gets thicker.

In the second act the action begins on a normal note. Cora is hosting Lottie and

Morris and Lottie warns her husband not to accept Cora’s request to permit Cora and the

children to go with them. Reenie is unwilling to attend the Ralstons' birth day party.

Sammy Goldenbaum arrives along with Flirt to take Reenie to the party. Sammy is no

happy boy either. His sad story adds depth to the already serious plot. Lottie’s refusal to

take Cora’s family to Oklahoma and her revelation about her personal life and Cora’s

inability to trace Rubin put together all jolt, Cora out of her mind and the action reaches

the height of climax at the end of second act. The third act begins comparatively on a

peaceful note but Cora’s attempt to get Reenie out of her psychological conflict and her

attempt to get Sonny out of his Oedipus complex intensifies the action. And the news of

Sammy Goldenbaum’s death jerks the plot to a new height. Then with the arrival of

Rubin and his confession the denouement starts and it is followed by a quick resolution

where all the four Floods seemingly overcome their emotional and psychological

conflicts.

Miscommunication is used as the catalyst to move the action of the plot quite

effectively by the playwright. The main reason for the conflict between Rubin and Cora

is lack of communication. Cora has not understood Rubin and Rubin does not confide his

fears in Cora. As a result both feel insecure and when Cora buys the dress Rubin who is

on the verge of loosing his job, feeling highly insecure about his future and financial state

acts violently. It is the miscommunication that triggers the action of the plot. When

finally Rubin confesses to Cora everything falls in place. It is due to miscommunication

Reenie and Sony keep fighting. If only Reenie had communicated her liking for Sammy

he would not have committed suicide. Lottie and Morris do not communicate with each

other at all. Cora never has understood her sister due to lack of communication. Hence it

could be summarized that due to lack of communication all the conflicts arise in the play.

To intensify the action of the plot and to make it more interesting Inge has made use

of the conventional element contrast quite effectively in the play. Cora is a contrast to her

sister Lottie. Cora is an ambitious mother. Though she fights with her husband yet she

loves him. She is conscientious and never explicitly talks about sex and in general she is

a contended person. Lottie pretends to love her husband and she is a deprived woman

who always talks about sex and is dissatisfied with life in general.

Sammy Goldenbaum is a contrast to his friend Punky Givens. Sammy is a well

mannered, good looking, loving and lovable boy but it is quite sad that he could not find

a place for himself in the society. Punky Givens on the other hand is a funny rich boy

well accepted by the society. Dull and Dumb Morris is drawn as a sharp contrast to the

virulent and handsome Rubin. Unlike Rubin Morris lets his wife dominates him. Introvert

Sonny is a contrast to his handsome and extrovert father Rubin. Even Cora calls him a

speckled egg (Gassner V.133;1). The characters who stand in contrast against each other

contribute to the movement of the action of the play quite effectively.

The action of the plot is triggered in the exposition when Rubin finds out that Cora

has purchased a new dress for Reenie. He is upset not because Cora bought a new dress

for Reenie but because Cora did not inform him about the dress and he happened to hear

it from an outsider. In act II Reenie fails to communicate her feelings to Sammy and she

lets him down. If only she had communicated her feelings to him then she could have

saved Golden Baum. In Scene 3 when Cora communicates with Reenie she perceives her

emotional conflicts and tries to solve them. Similarly when she communicates to Sonny

what she feels about him then Sonny tries to get over his Oedipus complex. Similarly

when Lottie and Cora communicate with each other, without any inhibition they

understand each other better. Finally Rubin and Cora communicate their fears and

feelings of insecurity and they understand each other and that helps them to settle their

marital discard and enables them to start life with a renewed vigour. Thus Inge uses

miscommunication as a wonderful plot devise which triggers the action of the plot and

takes it to the end.

Since Inge is a realistic writer and his work is a slice of life presented, the plot is not

devoid of everyday humor. There are statements like

Rubin: Then that’s what you’re gonna do. There’ll be ice-cream parlors in

hell before I come back to this place and listen to your jaw (Gassner V.

147; 1).

It is a great irony that Cora even after eighteen years of marriage could not read Rubin’s

mind and as a result she complicates her relationship with her husband. She wants peace

and harmony but ironically it is she who is responsible for the emotional conflict that

each member of her household is suffering. Similarly she could not see through Lottie her

elder sister. It is a great irony that what she perceives Lottie to be is not what she actually

is. A careful reading of the complications that thicken the action of the plot at the end of

each of the act reveals that it is Cora who is directly responsible for it.

The analysis of the plot shows that Inge has employed all the necessary elements and

effective techniques required for triggering action and building tension and has created a

structure necessary for supporting his theme with the expertise of a master craftsman.

Hence Aaron Riccio's statement:

There are major issues addressed in Inge’s plays, including suicide and spousal

abuse, but because his three acts are disconnected in thematic structure, the final

resolution of these scenes seems rushed and ill-conceived8 (Aaron Riccio 2) cannot be

agreed with.

5.8. Bus stop: A study of its structure

Inge’s veritable Noah’s ark (Shuman 58)9 Bus Stop is a three act play. The characters

include Bo, the clumsy cowboy, the sexy Cherie a singer, Dr. Lyman, a drunkard, Virgil

a middle aged cowboy, Elma an adolescent sweet girl, middle aged Grace, the owner of

the restaurant, Carl the bus driver and Will Masters the local sheriff .The whole action of

the play occurs at Grace’s restaurant within a span of five hours. Taking into account that

the action of the play is linear just with one main plot, the fewer characters, time and the

place of action, it can be stated that the structure of the play is climactic.

The exposition of the play is quite lengthy. As the play opens the playwright prepares

the readers to anticipate the bus to arrive at Grace’s with the passengers and to get them

stranded there for a few hours. He also prepares the readers not to expect many

passengers on board the bus. It is quite obvious that having a fewer characters would

facilitate the playwright a better dramatic focus and enable him to build his theme in a

more effective way. The dramatic device contrived by Inge to reveal the necessary

background information is quite interesting. He makes use of Elma for the purpose of

eliciting information from others. She interacts with all the characters and in the course of

her conversation she gathers all the necessary information. Since the play is based on

dialogue more than on action Inge uses her as the plot device to trigger the action of the

plot. The dramatic device adopted of Inge invoked a mixed response.

He [Gerald Weals] complains that Elma …wanders from character to

character, gathering information as though she were a researcher for

Current Biography this statement is demonstrably true; but the question

remains of whether or not this weakness is very significant. The device of

using on central character in this way is not unusual…in a play which is

more dependent upon thought than action, the method does not have a

weakening effect (Shuman 65)10.

The first act brings to the surface the basic theme, the search for true love. Bo and

Cherie entangled in the conflict of love, make the best of the first act. Bo is in pursuit of

love. He wonders how Cherie could not love him inspite of his being young, handsome

and rich. The thrice married, selfish, nympholeptic Dr. Lyman, a Shakespearean scholar

is also in quest of love. The act also enforces another significant point that people who

cannot find true love would be designed to be lonely.

If the first act could be assumed as a question then the second act could be

interpreted as the answer. It answers the query why people are unable to find true love.

Inge obviously is suggesting a solution to the conflict of love. Cherie wonders that there

maybe no such thing called love that exists. But Dr. Lyman rightly points out that man in

his evolution has lost the ability to give his true love to anyone. In the middle of the act it

becomes quite evident that Cherie is all for Bo, though she may take her own time to

admit it. When Lyman attempts to play Romeo the fact that he is nowhere near him in

real life unnerves him. Meanwhile the conflict between Bo and Cherie takes an ugly turn

and Bo ends up fighting with the sheriff. The sheriff takes him under custody. Virgil

informs Cherie the fact that she is the only girl that Bo ever loved. Touched by the

genuineness of his love Cherie accepts Bo. Technically the play should end here on a

happy note. But the fact that Inge does not end the play here shows that the playwright’s

concern is not merely Bo and Cherie love conflict. He wants to portray love on a broader

spectrum. Hence the action continues. The third act combines the denouement and

resolution. The action gets more emotion based and it serves mainly to convey the

messages that love has no room for selfishness, love requires humbleness and life without

love will be lonely.

The fight scene quite obviously is a dramatic technique introduced into the plot with

a purpose. It gives an opportunity to Will Master to give the message that love requires

humbleness. Similarly the enactment of Shakespearean scene is a well contrived dramatic

technique of a master craftsman. Dr. Lyman a nympholeptic tries to play Romeo against

Elma as Juliet. Her innocent angelic nature counters his sly, calculative, pretentious evil

move. Remorse stricken, he gives up. The plot brings to the surface the real theme that

selfishness and love cannot exist together.

Irony plays a significant role in the play. The scholarly Lyman could not find real

love because he is too selfish to give his real love to anyone. It is a great irony that

Lyman a university professor, though aware of the flaw in his character, does not mend

his way. Similarly Virgil portrayed in sharp contrast to Dr. Lyman gives up love and

accepts loneliness as a company. The irony of Grace’s state cannot be ignored. She is

unable to adjust with her husband and prefers to be alone, although she hates it.

It could be noticed that the element of humor pervades the play throughout. It helps

to face the bitter facts of life in a better way. Bo’s innocence, Cherie’s attitude and Will

Masters shrewd observations all add to the lighter vein of the play. Will Masters finds out

that Carl has not gone for a walk but to Grace’s apartment. He tells Carl

Well, I ya better go upstairs ’cause someone took your overshoes and left ‘em

outside the door to Grace’s apartment (Gassner IV. 273; 3).

Similarly the conversation between Bo and Cherie may not help one but smile.

Bo: Cherie, did I tell ya ‘bout my color television set with a 24 inch screen?

Cherie: One million times! Now go ‘way ( Gassner IV. 266;2).

Inge has also quite thoughtfully employed the technique of contrast to intensify and

increase the dramatic effect of the plot. Some of the characters in the play are real

contrast to each other. Young innocent Elma is a sharp contrast to the worldly wise

Cherie. Dr. Lyman, the pervert professor who pursues love relentlessly is poised as a

contrast to Virgil, who with all earnestness has given up the company of girls. To avoid

being lonely Dr. Lyman is in quest of love whereas Virgil accepts loneliness at the cost of

love.

The analysis of the play reveals that Inge has used all necessary dramatic

elements like conflict, contrast, plot device, irony and humour quite effectively to make

Bus Stop ,to put it in the words of Baird Shuman “ a dramatically tight play”11 (68)

5.9. Splendor in the Grass : A study of its structure

The structure of Splendor in the Grass the scenario differs from the structure of

Inge’s other plays. The action of the scenario spreads over five years as opposite to the

well knit five hour plot of Bus Stop. The scene of action also shifts to different locations.

Since it is a scenario the three unities of time place and action meant for a play cannot be

expected to be adhered strictly here. The action in general takes place in eastern Kansas

barring the period when Bud goes to Yale. The course of action starts in 1929 and

extends up to 1934.

So the two unities- the unities of place and the unity of time are flouted in the

Splendor in the grass.

The structure of Splendor in the Grass as different form the climactic structure of the

four major plays of Inge the structure could be described as episodic since there are many

characters in the play and besides the main plot that deals with Bud and Deanie there is

also a sub plot that deals with Ginny and her affairs.

Inge has followed a different exposition technique in Splendor in the Grass. In his

scenario he supplies the background information by having the characters talk almost to

themselves, to muse about the past. Inge might have chosen to turn his scenario into a

Montague-Capulet type of conflict, in which case the plot would have been contrived and

completely predictable. However, Ace Stamper is no Montague; he is too realistic to fight

directly the love situation between Bud and Deanie (Shuman 101).12

The conflict between Bud and Ace, an idealist and realist triggers the action and

keeps the plot moving. It is the ill conceived advice given by Ace to Bud that poisons his

mind and breaks his relationship with Deanie. It is because of her not so worldly wise

mother’s advice Deanie suffers. Thus in the play it is the advice of the parents that acts as

the catalyst. It is a great irony that the parents who should bring in happiness in the lives

of children take it away from them as in the case of Bud and Deanie; instead of peace

they create conflict in their minds. Bud is caught in a conflict whether to follow his

father’s wish or his own. Similarly Deanie’s wish to give into Bud’s desire conflicts with

her desire to please her mother. Inge beautifully delineates the conflict in the minds of

Bud and Deanie, an idealistic pair of lovers and the emotional trauma that torture them.

The conflicts serve to intensify the action of the plot. Similarly the sharp contrasts drawn

by the playwright also contribute significantly to the dramatic development of the plot.

Ginny and Juanita help to perceive the depth of Deanie’s agony. By poising Ginny the

personification impurity against Deanie the personification of purity Inge tries to show

that both at opposite extremes are suffering. Angelina who follows a middle course is at

peace. Bud an idealist is a contrast to his father Ace, a materialist. Both are unable to live

the way they want. Bud is forced by circumstances to compromise to survive.

The river plays a significant role in the play. It serves both artistic and dramatic

purpose. To Bud and Deanie the river is a mute companion. It is in its presence that they

meet and it is in its presence finally they separate. In the presence of the river Bud could

not make love to Juanita and that reveals his recognition of the river as a watchful elder

brother. When upset Deanie tries to jump into the river and attempts to end her miseries

in its lap.

It is a great irony that Ace who criticizes Deanie for her suicide attempt later he

himself commits suicide. The two basic conflicting values - - love and money lock horns

in the play and direct the course of action. Deanie, an idealist tries to end her life because

of love. Ace, a materialist ends his life because he cannot face his inevitable financial

failure. The play reaches the climax with Deanie’s attempt to commit suicide and when

she is in the hospital Bud visits her with an intention to marry her. The play could have

ended here on a happy note but the play continues and playwright builds a second climax.

The anti climax is quite lengthy where the protagonist Bud meets Angelina and marries

her and Deanie meets Johnny. The play ends on a realistic but a mildly pessimistic note.

The reason for the anti climax probably is that Inge wanted to give the young people a

message that if they accept life as it comes, then their life would flow uninterrupted like a

river. The analysis reveals that the playwright has woven into the structure of the plot all

necessary dramatic elements quite effectively and as a result despite its lengthy anti

climax it is appreciated for its structural perfection.

Thus the analysis of all the four major plays and the scenario reveals Inge to be a

great artist who could take common place incidents and sculpture them into structural

wonders and captivate and mesmerize the readers.

Chapter 5

A Study of Structure

Works cited

1. David, Letwin. The Architecture of Drama Plot, Character, Theme, Genre, and Style.

Lanham:Scarecrow press2008.

2. Simon, John “ The ‘Sheba’ of Queens,”. New York magazine .9 sep.1974

3. Johnson, Jeff. William Inge and Subversion of Gender: Rewriting Stereotypes in the

Plays, Novels and Screenplays .North Carolina: Ma Farland Company. 2005

4. Allen, Judith. Play guide. Picnic, dir. Judith Allen 7 April, 2007. 13Apr.2010

<http://www.openstage.com/productions/piece.php?pieceId=118>

5. Shuman Baird, William Inge. New York.. Twayne publishers,1965.

6. www.frymoline.com

7. Riccio, Aaron. Play. The dark at the top of the stairs.2April 2007. 23 jan 2010

<http://that soundscool.blogspot.com/2007/04/play-dark-at-top-of-stairs.html>

8. op. cit.

9. Shuman Baird, op. cit.

10. op. cit.

11. op. cit.

12. op. cit.

Come Back Little Sheba

1. Point of attack - - When Lola discourages Doc from congratulating Marie.

(Act 1. sc 1).

2. Point of attack - - When Doc objects to Marie her painting Turk's semi nude picture.

(Act 1. sc 1).

3. Point of attack - - When Doc hears Marie and Turk laughing inside Marie's room.

(Act 1. sc 1).

4. Point of attack - - When Turk's laughter floats out of Marie's room from the middle of

the night. (Act 1. sc 1).

5. Climax - - When Doc encounters Turk coming out of Marie's room. (Act 1. sc 1).

6. & 7. - - Denouement (Act 2. sc 2&3).

8. Resolution (Act 2. sc 4).

Picnic

1. Point of attack 1 - - In the beginning of Act 1. when Millie innocently asks Hal

whether Mrs.Potts gave him breakfast.

2. Climax - - Towards the end of Act 2. when Rosemary verbally attack Hal.

3. Denouement - - Rosemary traps Howard (Act 3. sc 1).

4. Resolution - - Madge follows Hal to Tulsa (Act 3. sc 2).

The Dark at the Top of the Stairs

1. Point of attack - - Towards the end of Act 1, when Cora buys Reenie a dress without

informing Rubin.

2. Climax - - Towards the end of Act 2 when Lottie declines Cora's request and as well

when Cora fails to trace Rubin.

3. Denouement - - Sammy's death and Rubin's coming back home (Act 3).

Bus Stop

1. Point of attack - - In the middle of Act 1 when Bo spots Cherie's suitcase at Grace's

restaurant.

2. Point of attack - - Towards the end of Act 2 when Dr.Lyman playing Romeo gets

remorse stricken.

3. Climax - - At the end of the Act 2 when Bo picks up a flight with the sheriff.