The Caretaker Pinter Text 3d6k2b

SPEECH IN HAROLD PINTER'S THE CARETAKER Lesley Clark

Introduction In the plays of Harold Pinter, language, not action, is the predominant medium through which the characters negotiate their relationships . The study summarized in this paper attempts an analysis of the Form and Function of the language in Harold Pinter's play, The Caretaker . It aims to establish how linguistic devices are used to reveal and develop the intra- and inter-personal relationships of the characters in the play . For the purposes of this analysis, the language is viewed in the light of Grice's Co-operative Principle (1975) ; teacher-pupil discourse strategies ; adult-child discourse strategies and various other linguistic devices . The Co-operativ e Principle of Grice Grice's theory applies to spoken discourse and assumes that a number principles guide the conduct of conversation. These principles accept of that discourse is structured, that it involves a common principle, that it is a co-operative effort between participants and has a mutually accepted direction . A number of maxims and sub-maxims underlie this theory, as follows : 1 . Quality Maxim: Sub-maxims : 2 . Quantity Sub-maxim:

3. 4.

Try to make your contribution one that is true, spec if ically : 1 . Do not say what you believe to be false . 2 . Do not say what you lack evidence for . 1 . Make the information as informative as required for the current purposes of the exchange . 2 . Do not make your contribution more informative than is required .

Relevance Maxim : Make your contribution relevant

Manner Maxim : Sub-maxims :

Be 1. 2. 3. 4.

perspicuous, specifically : Avoid obscurity Avoid ambiguity Be brief Be orderly . 74

These maxims give rise to inferences beyond the semantic content of the sentences uttered . The maxim of Quality generates the pragmatic inferences that the exact truth is given ; the Quantity maxim that complete information is given; the Relevance maxim that a statement is relevant to the situation ; and the Manner maxim that events described follow a temporal order . Grice hypothesizes that maxims are often complied with on various levels, not that they are adhered to on a purely superficial level . He proposes that in most ordinary conversations where maxims are not overtly conformed to, the Hearer assumes they are being observed on a more profound level, because the belief in the Co-operative Principle is being upheld . This concept is exemplified in the following Standard Implicature : 'Davies : You getting in? I'm mending this plug .' Aston:

(The Caretaker : 21)

Although at face value Aston violates the Quantity and Relevance maxims in this exchange, this is not, in fact, the case . Our faith in the Co-operative Principle leads us to seek connections between Aston's and Davies' utterances . We therefore arrive at the conclusion, conveyed effectively by Aston, that he accepts that it is a reasonable time to go to bed, but must complete an urgent task first -- mending the plug . This example demonstrates the other major component of Grice's theory, Conversational Implicature, which looks at the underlying implications of an exchange and explains how the participants in the exchange can mean more than they say. Other categories of implicature are given below . Generalized_Implicatures

These do not require specific contexts for inferences to be generated . For example, the character Aston in The Caretaker says : 'I went into a pub the other day .' Considering the Quantity sub-maxim do not make your contribution more informative than is required , we can assume that the actual pub visited is either unknown to the Hearer, or irrelevant to the communicative intention of the Speaker . Flouting of Maxims Conversational implicatures can also arise from the flouting of maxims . In this case, a maxim is blatantly not observed in order to exploit it for a specific communicative purpose such as irony. Thus the Co-operative Principle is still being upheld . This can explain figures of speech, for example, Mick, in The Caretaker , accuses Davies with : 'You're nothing else but a wild animal .' ( The Caretaker : 73) Through the Relevance maxim we implicate that Davies has the qualities of a wild animal and, indeed, his character is revealed to be predatory, savage and territorial . Without co-operative effort, this figure of speech would be incomprehensible to the Hearer . 75

The Co-operative Principle and Conversational Implicatures in relation to 'The Caretaker' The intra- and inter-personal dimensions of the characters in the play are revealed by the conversational implicatures that their speech generates and their treatment of the Co-operative Principle . Aston's tolerance of Davies, which in turn reveals his own generosity of spirit, is shown in his acceptance of the many occasions on which Davies breaks maxims, thus failing to uphold the Co-operative Principle . For example : 'Aston :

Davies :

I went into the pub the other day . Ordered a Guinness . They gave it to me in a thick mug . I sat down, but I couldn't drink it . I can't drink Guinness from a thick mug . I only like it out of a thin glass . I had a few sips, but I couldn't finish it . If only the weather would breakl Then I'd be able to get down to Sidcup .' (Th e Caretaker : 19)

Aston allows Davies' change of topic even though Davies shows his disregard for Aston's interests and self-concern by refusing to respond appropriately to his comment . The rising hostility that Davies feels towards Aston and his attempts to dominate him are revealed in his flouting of the Quality maxim illustrated in the following utterance . This is given in response to Aston's complaints about noises Davies makes in his sleep : 'Davies :

What do you want me to do, stop breathing?' (Th e Caretaker : 66)

The Quality maxim is flouted here, as this is obviously not Aston's intent . By way of Relevance, Davies can be seen to mean that Aston's requests are extremely unreasonable and not to be complied with . The attitudes towards the Co-operative Principle and conversational implicatures that arise are very revealing about the relationship between Mick and Davies . The predatory, territorial instincts of Davies are recognized by Mick . His rejection of Davies and his right to the room is revealed in the following exchange which follows Mick telling Davies that he will share the penthouse with his brother : 'Davies : Mick :

What about me? All this junk here,

it's no good to anyone .' (Th e Caretaker : 61)

The implicature generated is that Davies is excluded from the penthouse . We can infer that he is part of the useless junk Aston accumulates . Davies' interior motives are sharply perceived by Mick, as is revealed by his flouting of the Quality maxim in the utterance that follows . He says, with regard to Davies' working abilities : 'Mick :

Christ! I must have been under a false impression .' (The__ Caretaker : 72) 76

The statement is blatantly false, as Mick clearly comprehends Davies' character . By way of Relevance, we infer that he has an ironic intent, his irony conveying and reemphasizing his profound understanding of Davies' interior motives and his objections to them . It is through conversational implicatures arising from Davies' speech that his feelings too are manifested . His fear of Mick emerges clearly and his own inferior position is reinforced . For example : 'hick : Davies :

What's your name? I don't know you .

I don't know who you are .'

Davies' response gives rise to the generalized conversational implicature that he is unwilling to reveal his identity to a stranger . His wariness indicates his recognition of Mick as a potentially powerful adversary as well as his profound mistrust of others and his desire for selfconcealment . The dramatic significance of the pragmatic inferences arising from the characters' observation and flouting of conversational maxims is seen in the insights thus gained into their personalities and relationships . Adult-Child and Teacher-Pupil linguistic strategies and their relationship to the characters in The Caretaker The balance of power between Aston and Davies and the linguistic strategies by which it is constructed and conveyed can be compared to adult-child language strategies, as described by Sinclair and Coulthard (1975) and Mead (1976) . Aston is the adult, the caregiver and provider who satisfies Davies' physical needs, giving him a home and money . Conversely, Davies, the child, is economically dependent on Aston for shelter, clothing and his basic necessities . Aston's desire to meet Davies' physical wants is in striking contrast with his reluctance to negotiate an emotional relationship . Davies' pleas for psychological empathy are responded to with purely physical . In their initial exchanges, Aston offers Davies a seat, tobacco, a bed, to pick up his bag from the cafe and, later, a smoking jacket and the caretaking job . His language use therefore establishes Aston as a provider, and hence in a dominant position . These utterances are all made in the declarative form, for example : 'Aston :

I'll pop down and pick them up for you .' ( The Ca retaker : 11)

This reinforces Aston's superior role, as he assumes the authority to complete-an action on Davies' behalf without his prior consent . Aston also withholds, or fails to volunteer, information to Davies, a strategy used by adults when a concept is beyond a child's mental capacities or taboo . For example, when Davies seeks reassurance about the blacks next door : 'Davies : They don't come in?' Aston does not supply 77

the information requested, but responds with 'You see a blue case?' (The Caretaker : 19) . Davies' complaints about Aston's withholding of information and failure to communicate further illuminate his subordinate position . He complains that Aston 'don't say a word' to him (The Caretaker : 58) and 'don't have any conversation' ( The Caretaker : 60) . It is Aston who controls the structure of their conversations Another strategy employed by Aston is his use of explicit directives as offers to Davies . For example : 'Sit down .' ( The Caretaker : 7) and 'Take a seat .' ( The Caretaker : 8) . He also plays the role of teacher to Davies, the uncomprehending student, when he instructs Davies in the use of his electric fire . He employs another teacher-pupil strategy by refusing Davies a clock, thus controlling Davies' time . A further assertive strategy is his censure of Davies, when the latter has criticized his shed . Censure is a much-wielded linguistic weapon that Mick uses against Davies . He consistently insults and criticizes Davies, reinforcing his dominant position . He accuses Davies of being 'choosy' ( The Caretaker : 33) and of being a 'fibber', 'rogue', 'scoundrel', 'robber', 'old skate' and 'a barbarian ( The Caretaker : 34,35) . He interrupts Davies' attempts to defend himself, thus denying him equal speaking rights and subordinating him further, whereas Davies, in contrast, makes only one censure of Mick . Mick uses many directives to Davies, most of which monitor or direct his behaviour . For example, Davies is instructed with : 'Don't get too perky' ( The Caretaker : 35), 'Don't get out of your depth' ( The Caretaker : 35), 'Don't overstep the mark, son' ( The Caretaker : 38) and 'Don't get too glib' ( The Caretaker : 50) . These directives reveal Mick's understanding of Davies' character, that he foresees that Davies will 'overstep the mark' and try to take advantage of Aston . As with the case of censure, Davies issues few directives to Mick, but when he does, they are employed as defence mechanisms, for he is not the superior that Mick is when issuing explicit directives . His utterances are simply desperate attempts to gain some control over the situation in which he finds himself with Mick . He is a victim struggling against an aggressor as he tries to regain his tros and bag from Mick . Mick reinforces his dominant position over Davies on a number of occasions, monitoring even his thoughts and claiming to be able to read his mind with declarations such as 'I know what you want .' ( The Caretaker : 59) . He also controls Davies' past by creating it for him, and Davies indicates his subordination by accepting this fictitious past history in the colonies . The-teacher's right to criticize the subordinate pupil is assumed by Mick when he makes judgements about Davies' linguistic abilities and deliberately misinterprets him, as can be seen in the following example . When Davies claims Aston is 'no particular friend' of his, Mick responds with : 'I'm sorry to hear my brother's not friendly .' ( The Caretaker : 47) 78

Davies again shows his subordinate position in the relationship by accepting Mick's interpretation . Mick further questions Davies' lexical usage when he uses the adjective 'funny' to describe Aston : 'Mick : Pause Davies : Mick : Davies :

What's funny about him? Not liking work . What's funny about that? Nothing .' (T he Caretaker : 50)

When Davies retracts his statement above and follows with an attempt to re-explain his meaning, he implies his acknowledgment of linguistic incompetence and inferiority to Mick . Mick's dominant position and Davies' subordinate role are constantly restated by the variety of different language devices they employ . From Mick's first utterance to Davies : 'What's your game?'( The Caretaker : 29) onwards, their ability to understand each other's real intentions and the threats hidden below the surface meanings of their language are conveyed in their verbal interactions . In contrast, the relationship between the brothers is revealed in their limited exchanges to be well-balanced . Verbal strategies such as censure, directives, and adult-child, teacher-pupil strategies are significantly lacking in their exchanges in which the Co-operative Principle is upheld . Mick uses a strategy normally associated with the subordinate character when he repeats Aston's words : 'From the roof, eh?' (The Caretaker : 37) . However, this implication of subordination is negated by the other linguistic strategies employed in his exchanges with his brother . He volunteers relevant information and partially repeats Aston's words, indicating his willingness to participate in the exchange on equal . In addition, the check-back strategies employed by Mick display his desire to -11rc Bill communication . In fact, the brothers' Aialnmia Ah^"t th? (iafnanwi Tnnf is the only example of a conversation in which participant- makP a genuine effort to communicate on equal in the play . Conclusion Aston's and Davies' exchanges can therefore be seen to exhibit many of the linguistic features of adult-child exchanges and are successfully negotiated to establish Aston in a dominant role . Similarly, Mick and Davies, through verbal strategies common to teacher-pupil interactions, establish a relationship with Davies in the subordinate role .

79

Grice's Co-operative Principle is, furthermore, exploited by the characters in the same way as it is by speakers of colloquial English . The language is seen to be functioning beyond its semantic form in the pragmatic inferences arising from the conversational implicatures examined . The dramatic significance of these inferences is evident in the insights provided into the characters' psychological mechanisms . Their motives, fears, strengths and weaknesses are revealed through their treatment of the Co-operative Principle and manipulation of the other linguistic devices examined . Through this analysis of the linguistic devices and exchanges of The Caretaker , we witness Pinter's creation of a 'new dynamic of dialogue in which the coercive power of social conversation becomes the focus of character confrontation' (Quigley, 1976) .

REFERENCES

Clark, L .D . 1987 . Speech in Harold Pinter's 'The Caretaker' . M.A . Thesis . University of Hong Kong Grice, H .P . 1975 . 'Logic and conversation' . In Syntax and Semantics 3 : Speech Acts , edited by P . Cole & J .L . Morgan, pp . 41-58 . New York : Academic Press . Mead, R . 1985 . 'The discourse of small-group teaching' . In Dialogue and Discourse , edited by D . Burton . Pinter, H . 1960 . The Caretaker . London : Pyre Methuen . Quigley, A .E. 1975 . The Pinter Problem . Princeton University Press . Sinclair, J .M. & Coulthard, R .M . 1975 . Towards an Analysis of Discourse: the English Used by Teachers and Pupils . London : Oxford University Press .