plagiat merupakan tindakan tidak terpuji - core.ac.uk filehe has done in the absurd world. through...

THE MEANING OF “THE CHAIRS” ACCORDING TO THE

OLD MAN OF EUGENE IONESCO’S THE CHAIRS

A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS

Presented as Partial Fullfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree

in English Language Education

By

Alyxia Sukmaadi Handono

Student Number: 101214081

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA

2014

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJIPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

i

THE MEANING OF “THE CHAIRS” ACCORDING TO THE

OLD MAN OF EUGENE IONESCO’S THE CHAIRS

A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS

Presented as Partial Fullfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree

in English Language Education

By


Student Number: 101214081

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA

2014


ii


iii


iv

“Tuhan itu maha asyik” Sudjiwo Tejo


v


vi


vii

ABSTRACT

Handono, Alyxia Sukmaadi. (2014). The Meaning of “the Chairs”According to the Old Man of Eugene Ionesco’s The Chairs. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University.

This study discusses The Chairs, a literary work written by a well – known absurdist playwright, Eugene Ionesco. This play tells about the old man and the old woman who live in absurd world. The old man, the main character in the story, has the experiences which are important to share. The experiences are compiled in a message. By hiring the orator, the old man wants to deliver that message to the universe.

The objective of the study is to find the meaning of “the chairs” according to the old man, the main character, of Eugene Ionesco’s The Chairs. There are two problems to answer in this study; (1) How is the old man, the main character of the play, portrayed? And (2) What is the meaning of “the chairs” according to the old man, the main character, of Eugene Ionesco’s The Chairs?

The primary data of this study are the script of the play itself. The secondary data are taken from related books, dictionaries, and the Internet. This study uses theories such as the theories of character, characterization, absurdity, existentialism, and symbol. To strengthen the analysis, the psychological approach is used.

There are two things that can be concluded after analyzing the play. First, the old man is portrayed as infantile, irresponsible, and absurd. Second, the meaning of the chairs is about the balance of life which is showed by the emptiness of life. The emptiness of life is the representative of the invisible guests and the chairs. The invisible guests are the old man’s experiences through all what he has done in the absurd world. Through his experiences, the old man’s point of view about absurd can be seen. The chairs show the mind of the old man. Mind is a thing the old man has as the consciousness to do all the things freely. He has to exist in his life to get the meaning of life because the world does not give the answer. He realizes the condition of his routine of life which is called absurd. To encounter the absurd, he commits suicide. However, suicide is a confession to declare that life is not worth living. His belief leads him to behave absurdly. In other words, absurdity is the characteristic of existentialism. Through this play, student can define themselves as human being. Therefore, this play can be implemented to English class because learning English is not only about learning grammar and reading, but also the moral value.

Keywords: the chair, absurd, existentialism


viii

ABSTRAK

Handono, Alyxia Sukmaadi. 2014. The Meaning of “the Chairs”According to the Old Man of Eugene Ionesco’s The Chairs. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University.

Studi ini membahas naskah drama The Chairs sebuah karya penulis yang

terkenal absurd, Eugene Ionesco. Naskah ini menceritakan tentang kakek dan nenek yang hidup dalam dunia yang absurd. Si kakek yang menjadi tokoh utama mempunyai pengalaman berharga yang harus diceritakan. Pengalamannya dikumpulkan menjadi sebuah berita. Si kakek membayar si Pembicara untuk menceritakan beritanya kepada dunia. Studi ini bertujuan menemukan arti dari kursi – kursi menurut si kakek, yang menjadi tokoh utama, dari naskah The Chairs karya Eugene Ionesco. Ada dua masalah di studi ini; (1) Bagaimana si kakek, tokoh utama, digambarkan? Dan (2) Apa arti dari kursi – kursi menurut si kakek, yang menjadi tokoh utama, dari naskah The Chairs karya Eugene Ionesco? Sumber utama dari studi ini adalah naskah itu sendiri. Sumber tambahan diambil dari buku – buku yang berkaitan, kamus, dan internet. Studi ini menggunakan teori karakter, pengkarakterisasian, absurditas, eksistensialisme, dan simbol. Untuk memperkuat analisis, pendekatan psikologi digunakan.

Ada dua hal yang dapat disimpulkan setelah menganalisis naskah. Pertama, si kakek digambarkan sebagai seorang yang kekanak – kanakan, tidak bertanggung jawab, dan absurd. Kedua, arti dari kursi – kursi adalah tentang keseimbangan hidup yang ditunjukkan dengan kekosongan hidup. Kekosongan hidup adalah representatif dari tamu tak kelihatan dan kursi – kursi. Tamu – tamu tak kelihatan adalah pengalaman – pengalaman dari apa yang telah si kakek perbuat. Melalui pengalaman – pengalamannya, pandangan si kakek akan absurditas dapat dilihat. Kursi – kursi menunjukkan pikiran si kakek. Pikiran adalah sesuatu yang dimiliki si kakek sebagai kesadaran akan kebebasannya bertindak. Dia harus hidup untuk mencari arti dari hidupnya karena dunia tidak menjawab arti dari hidup. Dia menyadari kondisi rutinitasnya yang dapat dikatakan sebagai absurditas. Untuk menghadapi absurditas, si kakek memilih bunuh diri. Walaupun demikian, bunuh diri adalah pengakuan jika hidup tidak berarti. Keyakinannya ini membawanya untuk bertindak absurd. Ini berarti bahwa absurditas adalah ciri dari eksistensialisme. Melalui naskah drama ini, mahasiswa dapat mengartikan dirinya sendiri sebagai manusia. Oleh karena itu, naskah drama ini dapat diterapkan di kelas Drama Bahasa Inggris karena belajar Bahasa Inggris tidak hanya belajar mengenai tata bahasa dan membaca, tapi juga mengenai moral.

Kata kunci: the chair, absurd, existentialism


ix

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First of all, I would like to praise the Lord, Jesus Christ for giving me the

right time in finishing all these things. This is the sign of His helpful presence in

my life. He is the one absorbed God.

My greatest gratitude is addressed to my sponsor, Dr. Ant. Herujiyanto,

M.A. for guiding me in finishing my thesis. I thank his patience, advice, and

support in helping me in any situation. I appreciate every encouragement that he

gave to me.

I would like to thank all PBI lecturers for their help in improving my

English skill. Moreover, I also thank for Mbak Danik for her administration help.

I dedicate my gratitude to my father in heaven, Ir. Handono, MS., for his

endless love through everything he gave to me. Moreover, I am thankful to my

mother, Dra. Danar Adiati, for her hardworking that always inspires me to do so. I

am really grateful to be their only child.

I thank all my incredible friends in PBI USD 2010. I thank them for being

a home and family for me. I also thank all my friends in PBI class B for the

chance to learn about life through Breaktime, EWD, EAD, and Play. I also would

like to thank Teater Seriboe Djendela for sharing everything and helping me in

finding the meaning of life through many plays I joined.

I also thank Elizabeth Giovanni, Chrisilia Cahyani, Damasus Bagus

Wahyu, Hendy Adrian, and Edwin Gandawijaya for being my fabulous friends in

coloring my life.

I would like to express my gratitude to Yulia Cahyani, S.Pd. for becoming

my partner in enjoying the process of coffee brewing.


x

I would like to give my appreciation to those whose names cannot be

mentioned one by one who helped me finish this thesis. May God always be with

them.



xi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

TITLE PAGE .......................................................................................... i

APPROVAL PAGES .............................................................................. ii

DEDICATION PAGE ............................................................................. iv

STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY ....................................... v

PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI ........................................ vi

ABSTRACT ............................................................................................ vii

ABSTRAK ................................................................................................ viii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................................................... ix

TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................ xi

LIST OF APPENDICES ......................................................................... xiv

CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION 1

A. Background of the Study ................................................. 1

B. Objective of the Study ..................................................... 5

C. Problem Formulation ...................................................... 5

D. Benefits of the Study ....................................................... 5

E. Definition of Terms ......................................................... 5

CHAPTER II. THEORY OF RELATED LITERATURE 7

A. Review of Related Theories ............................................ 7

1. Psychological Approach ............................................ 7

2. Theory of Character ................................................... 8


xii

3. Theory of Characterization ........................................ 10

4. Theory of Absurdity .................................................. 12

5. Theory of Existentialism ........................................... 14

a. Consciousness ..................................................... 15

b. Freedom............................................................... 16

c. Responsibility ...................................................... 17

6. Theory of Symbol ...................................................... 18

B. Theoretical Framework ................................................... 18

C. Context of the Play .......................................................... 20

CHAPTER III. METHODOLOGY 21

A. Object of the Study.......................................................... 21

B. Approach of the Study .................................................... 22

C. Method of the Study ........................................................ 23

CHAPTER IV. ANALYSIS 24

A. The Portrayal of the Old Man ......................................... 24

1. Infantile ..................................................................... 26

2. Irresponsible .............................................................. 28

3. Absurd ....................................................................... 31

B. The Meaning of the Chairs .............................................. 34

1. Consiousness ............................................................. 35

2. Freedom..................................................................... 39

3. Responsibility ............................................................ 42

CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATION 46

A. Conclusions ..................................................................... 46

B. Implication ...................................................................... 48

REFERENCES ........................................................................................ 49

APPENDICES ........................................................................................ 52


xiii

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix Page

Appendix A. Summary of The Chairs .................................................... 53

Appendix B. Biography of Eugene Ionesco ............................................ 56


xvii


1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

This chapter is divided into five parts. The first part is the background of

the study which presents the description of the topic and also the reason why this

topic is chosen. The second part is the objective of the study which describes the

aim of conducting the research. The third part is the problem formulations which

deal with two research questions that will be analyzed and discussed in this study.

The fourth part is the benefits of the study which identify the benefits for the

readers in general, the benefits for the researcher and also the benefits for the

future researcher. The last part is the definition of terms used in this study and

their explanation used to avoid the readers’ misunderstanding toward the certain

terms.

A. Background of the Study

Literature is the expression of human feeling, imaginative process and

creativity (Wellek, 1971, p. 2). Human feeling uses human senses and thoughts to

feel the experiences and then to share the experiences. The experiences will be put

into an imagination world imitating those experiences through the imaginative

process and creativity to be an artwork. As seen in Wellek and Warren (1977) in

their book Theory of Literature, literature is said to be creative art what a

playwright had produced. The playwright will bring the readers out of their reality

to the playwright’s imagination as the creative artwork (p. 15).


2

The creative artwork can be seen in drama, as one of three major generic

divisions of literature. Through drama, the readers do not only feel the

experiences or the imagination of the playwright through reading the artwork, but

also they can feel the real emotions of the experiences or imagination through the

characters’ dialogue and actions. Furthermore, drama is a picture, happiness and

sadness, or black and white of human’s life (Herman, 2003, p. 1). Besides, drama

is easier for the readers or the audiences to understand the playwright’s

experiences or imagination because the event of the drama is taken from the

reality that people do in their daily lives.

Drama as well as theatre develops fast. There are many plays from the

Shakespeare’s era till now; and they have their own genres of the theatre. One of

them, which was booming in 20th Century, is Theatre of the Absurd. In book

Theatre of the Absurd, Martin Esslin (1961) uses that term as a critic. He sees this

theatre, which is popular during World War II, as a rejection of the realism drama

which dramatists or playwrights conduct in their artworks. Therefore, Esslin

classifies them as “absurdists”; people who make the absurd play.

The playwrights who are well-known as absurdists are Samuel Becket,

Eugene Ionesco, Arthur Adamov, and Edward Albee. However, one of absurdist,

which is controversial, is Eugene Ionesco. Ionesco has several absurd artworks.

Nevertheless, one of his famous and extraordinary artworks is The Chairs. The

Chairs arrived as the surrealism theatre with the worry of Ionesco’s life. Thus,

Ionesco became the pioneer of the theatre of absurd with Samuel Bucket.


3

By considering the facts mentioned above, the writer chose the general of

the study and the play was the subject of this study. The writer was interested in a

play of Ionesco entitled The Chairs. The story is really close to human’s life

related to the problem they face. In reality, people always do something

interesting or boring and they do them every day. Those activities can also be seen

in the Ionesco’s play. The Chairs is a play showing the absurdity through the

dialogue and action, which is conducted by the characters and related to the

people daily life.

In brief, the playwright of this play expresses his anxiety of human

existentialism through the old couple. The old couple has married for 76 years;

and they are 96 years old. They live in an isolated place surrounded by water.

They live in a boredom. They used to do the same activity every night. Till the old

man wants to invite all of his friends and people to come to his house and will tell

‘the message’ to them. He hires the orator to tell ‘the message’ because he fells he

is not capable to tell the message. His friends come one by one with their boats.

The old woman prepares the chairs for them to sit. They all introduce their selves

and talk each others. However, the all guests coming are all invisible. Those old

couple still receive the guests and prepare the chairs to them till the orator comes.

After the orator comes, the old couple decide to suicide by jumping to the water

through the windows. Unfortunately, the orator is deaf. He could not talk ‘the

message’ clearly.

Interestingly, ‘the message’ is not talked clearly in the end. Moreover,

another interesting thing to point out is the chairs used. The chairs are passive.


4

However, on each chair, there is an invisible guest sitting on it. The old couple do

not mention directly what the chairs mean. Somehow, this situation could be

absurd when the title of this play is The Chairs, but the chairs are passive and

could not say anything. The playwright must think about the meaning in

considering the title with the purpose why the chairs appear and those old couple

respond the chairs in his play.

This study means to find out what the old man means about the chairs for

their guests. In analyzing the meaning of the chairs according to the old man, it is

important to find out first the characteristics or the description of the old man. The

writer decides to choose library study that focuses on the play script as the

primary data and the theories needed on this study as the secondary data. This

study uses the psychological approach to analyze the topic of the study that is the

meaning of the chairs according to the old man in Ionesco’s play The Chairs. This

study uses some supporting theories. They are the theory of absurdity from Albert

Camus and theory of existentialism from Jean – Paul Sartre. The deeper

explanation of those theories is presented in the Chapter Two

B. Objective of the Study

The objective of the study is to find the meaning of “the chairs” according

to the old man, the main character, of Eugene Ionesco’s The Chairs.


5

C. Problem Formulations

In view of the objective of the study above, the writer focuses on two

problem formulations. They are:

1. How is the old man, the main character of the play, portrayed?

2. What is the meaning of the chairs according to the old man, the main

character, of Eugene Ionesco’s The Chairs?

D. Benefits of the Study

By studying this play, the writer identifies the meaning of the chairs. The

writer uses psychological approach with theory of absurdity and theory

existentialism to analyze the characteristics of the old man so that the writer gets

more knowledge about the relation between literary, psychology, and also

philosophy. For the readers of this study, they may obtain some knowledge on the

old man who is described to mean the chairs through literary, psychology, and

philosophy. Moreover, this study is expected to give reference and comparison for

the next writer.

E. Definition of Terms

To avoid the readers’ confusion and misunderstanding, the writer clarifies

the specific terms used in this study.


6

1. The Chair

According to Merriam Webster’s Online Dictionary, the chair is a seat that

is usually with four legs and a back. The chair was developed with the various

styles. In the 16th century, many chairs began to be covered with upholstery over

padding and decorated with elaborate wood carving. In this study, the chair means

a mind of the old man.

2. Absurd

The meaning of absurd is rather specific to a philosophical term. Human

being’s life is meaningless and lack of order or value. Camus (1955) says that

human being feels stranger in this universe (p. 5). In the other hands, human being

is lost and has no purpose of life. Furthermore, in this absurd play, the character is

different from the other ordinary drama character. According to Esslin (1961) in

his book Theatre of the Absurd, he says :

“The confrontation of the audience with character and happenings which they are not quite able to comprehend makes it impossible for them to share the aspirations and emotions depicted in the play. Emotional identification with the character is replaced by puzzle.” (p. 5)

In this study, absurd means situation between the world and the man that the old

man feels.

3. Existentialism

Existentialism according to Sartre (1956) is the philosophy which is

centered upon individual existence and the development of personal essence. The

man is nothing. Sartre says that the man exists with consciousness through his


7

experiences (1956). In this study, existentialism means existence precedes

essence.


7

CHAPTER II

THEORY OF RELATED LITERATURE

This chapter is divided into three parts. The first part is the review of

related theories which is used to analyze the topic of this study. The second is the

theoretical framework which contains the explanation about the use of the

theories. The last part is the context of the play which presents the description of

the play setting and the setting and time in writing this play.

A. Review of Related Theories

This section will discuss the approach and the theories that are used to

analyze the topic. They are Psychological approach, theory of character, theory of

characterization, theory of absurdity, theory of existentialism, and theory of

symbol.

1. Psychological Approach

The Theory of critical approach is the theory which allows the readers to

have better understanding about the story. Rohrberger and Woods (1971) say that

a critical approach helps the readers to have a reasonable judgment of the story (p.

3). There are five approaches which can be used in library study. They are

formalist approach, biographical approach, the socio cultural-historical approach,

the mytophoeic approach, and psychological approach (pp. 6 – 15).

The psychological approach is the approach used to achieve the objective

of this study. Furthermore, Rohrberger and Woods say that psychological


8

approach focuses on the life as the portrait of human psychology which contains

thought, behavior, human personality, motivation and the other aspects related to

the human psychology (pp. 3 – 9). As many people believe that human mind is the

root of every thought and action human being does. Moreover, this approach

provides a set of symbolic which is common to all human beings and can be

interpreted in light of human being’s experience (p. 14). Hence, the existentialism

is used in this study.

2. Theory of Character

Characters play the important role in the literary work. To understand the

story, the readers have to understand the characters of the drama or novel the

readers are reading. The readers have to try to be able to understand better through

the monologue, dialogue, and actions of the characters. Therefore, the readers

understand what the story of literary work tells about.

There are several theories that define the meaning of the character.

Abrams (1981) says that character is the person presented in a narrative or

dramatic work in which the readers interpreted the characteristics expressed in

what they say and do (p. 210). In addition, Harvey (1965) writes in his book,

Character and the Novel, that the playwright has a right to create or presents his

or her fictional characters in the novel, whatever they look like, their personality,

and what the problems they might face (p. 32).

According to Abrams, character has two definitions. They are major or

main character and minor character. Major or main character is the character who

has the important role in the story from beginning to the end. On the other hand,


9

minor character becomes the background of the main character. He or she is less

sophisticated and responses to the experiences in the story are less complex.

Therefore, he or she comes only in certain event.

According to Foster (2002), there are two kinds of character. He defines

the character as a flat character and a round character (pp. 46 - 47). A flat

character is built around a single idea or quality or is presented without much

individualizing detail. A round character is a complex character. It is presented

with subtle particularity. Thus, the character is difficult to describe with any

adequacy as a person in real life, and like real person.

Character has personality and physical distinguishing to the other

characters. Stanton (1965, p. 17) defines that character designates the individuals

who appear in the story or the mixture of the interests, desires, emotions, and

moral principles that make up each of individuals. Therefore, character gives

certain situation in certain event of the story because he or she shows the

emotions.

3. Theory of Characterization

To understand deeper the character, characterization is needed for the

playwright and also the readers. The characterization is a process which the

playwright creates the character. In the other words, Rohrberger & Woods (1971)

says that characterization is a device to make the readers believe that the character

is the particular type of person (p. 20). For the readers, it helps them to understand

each character of the story. In the book Understanding Unseen, Murphy (1972)


10

states that there are nine ways which the playwright characterizes the character

(pp. 161 - 167). Those nine ways are discussed below.

The first is through personal description. The playwright may describe the

character’s appearances and clothes. The appearances deal with the character’s

face, eyes, skin color, head, hairs, hands, even the small detail, the scar. The

clothes deal with how the character dresses or the style of his or her clothes. The

playwright does not only describe the character trough those ways, but also

through the sense of smelling, sense of hearing, and sense of touching. Therefore,

the character can be presented by his or her smell and also sound.

The second is from the character as seen by the others. Character is not

always described directly; the playwright can also describe the character through

the eyes and opinions of others. The readers will get the reflected image. The

opinion from the character will affect what the readers think about the particular

character.

The third is character speech. The playwright gives the readers the insight

into the character through the speech or conversation the character does to the

others. From the conversation or dialogue or monologue the character does, it will

give the clue to know the characterization. From the character says, the readers

can infer the character’s background. Through this way, the readers cannot only

infer the background, but the readers can also infer the way of thinking of the

character, what the character likes, and also the emotion of the character.

The fourth is past life. By letting the readers learn something about a

person’s past life, the playwright can give the readers a clue to events that have


11

helped to shape one’s character. It may be in the form of a direct comment by the

playwright, through the person’s thought through the conversation or through the

medium of another.

The fifth is conversation. The playwright can take clues to one’s character

through the conversation of the other people and the things they say about him or

her. When people think about the others, they often give clues about one’s

character that they are talking about.

The sixth is reaction. The playwright may give the readers clue to one’s

character through how she or he reacts to various situations and events. Through

the way a character reacts to situations and events, the readers can understand the

characteristic within him or her.

The seventh is direct comment. This is the simplest way because the

playwright describes or comments a one’s character directly. The reader can also

understand easily by reading the story.

The eighth is thought. The playwright gives the readers knowledge of what

one character is thinking about. In reality, people cannot do this because people

cannot know what the others are thinking about. However in reading the story, the

readers can know everything what the character is thinking about.

The ninth is mannerism. The playwright can describe one’s mannerism and

habits which may also tell the readers something about the one’s character. Thus,

the readers can infer one’s character from what and how he or she behaves.

4. Theory of Absurdity


12

In an era of wars, when death is most visible, Albert Camus defines that

life lost all its meaning. In the book The Myth of Sisyphus, Albert Camus (1955)

defines the notion of absurdity as follows:

“A world that can be explained by reasoning, however faulty, is a familiar world. But in a universe that is suddenly deprived of illusions of light, man feels a stranger. His is an irremediable exile, because he is deprived of memories of a lost homeland as much as he lacks the hope of a promised land to come. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, truly constitutes the feeling of Absurdity.” (p. 5)

Moreover, Ionesco says that the absurd is living in the world with no purpose;

man is lost (Barbe, 2012). The absurd expresses a fundamental disharmony, a

tragic incompatibility, in our existence. Moreover, the absurd is not a man nor in

the world, but in their presence together. Camus adds that absurd is only bond

uniting them. Hence, human being finds the predicament in his life. Camus adds

that the absurdity can attack suddenly. Absurd can be seen when human beings

realize about his condition. Human being will find this absurdity in his daily life

and it becomes the object. The awareness of the object brings human being to the

unexplainable situation between human beings and the world. Soriano (2009) says

when human beings realize the mechanically routine of life, it means that he has

experienced the absurdity (p. 24). Still according to Camus (1955), a realization to

encounter the absurd, the absurd leaves choices for all human beings; they are

suicide, leap of faith and recognition.

The first choice is suicide which is simple but fooly. However, Camus

calls this suicide as a physical suicide. Suicide is a confession to declare that life


13

is not worth living. Hence, human being can simply choose to kill himself. It is a

repudiation of life (p. 6).

The second choice is leap of faith. It means that the religious solution of

positing a transcendent world of solace and meaning beyond absurd (p. 7). In

simple way, the religious believer removes culpable world, replaces then with

more agreeable alternatives.

The last is recognition. It means that the human being just accepts the

absurdity and it is better to continue living. Absurd cannot be avoided; the only

proper response to the absurd is that being brave or courageous to accept. Human

being must be lived all the better if it has no meaning (p. 8).

Camus emphasizes human being to be brave to fight a battle, although he

understands he cannot win on it. He should keep struggling with wit, grace,

compassion for others and even a sense of mission in facing the absurd world.

Hence, Soriano (2009) states that human being must be an absurd hero, a hero

whose is facing the absurdity with all his integrities (p. 24).

5. Theory of Existentialism

In this Existentialism, as a philosophical movement, was born in the 19th

Century and 20th Century. In the 19th Century, Soren Kierkegard (1813 – 1855)

and Friedrich Nietzche (1844 – 1900) show the existentialism to the world for the

first time, although, at that time, they did not use the term of existentialism. Jean –

Paul Sartre, a French Philosopher, is the one who introduces the term of


14

existentialism to the world. In his book, Existentialism is a Humanism, Sartre

(2007) defines that existence precedes essence (p. 21). Moreover, Palmer (2007)

in Sartre Untuk Pemula says that essence means definitions, characteristics,

functions, or ideas (p. 21). Sartre adds that a man comes to the world because of

nothing. World does not have a reason to answer how man is. According to

Nugroho (2012), Sartre defines that situation as absurd (p. 38). It means that

man, firstly, is being, faces to him and the world, is discarded, and then defines

himself. Man is nothing else but what he makes of himself. That man defines

himself and he himself will have made what he will be (Sartre in Gould and

Truitt, 1973, p. 30). Hence, subjectivity is the main point. Subjectivity then makes

a man to come to his minds, to understand who he is. Man is man itself.

Subjectivity is what the man creates for himself. Moreover, man is not the final

result (2012, p. 59).

Sartre, as the existentialist, generally regards several terms in

existentialism. They are consciousness, freedom, suffering, responsibility, and

also consequences. The basic thing in existentialism is the consciousness. The

existential movement then emphasizes the freedom and the responsibility of the

man as the part of his existence. Man has a freedom to choose which brings him

to all the consequences what he has chosen. There are Sartre’s points of view

toward consciousness, freedom, and responsibility which affect the human beings’

life.


15

a Consciousness

Sartre defies consciousness. The human being is described as the

conscious creature. However, there is transcendent which cannot be equated to

consciousness. There are consciousness and phenomenon (Sartre in Nugroho,

2012, p. 43). Sartre defines two different ways of being to show the human

beings’ consciousness. They are l’etre–en–soi (being-in-itself) and l’etre–pour–

soi (being-for-itself).

1) L’etre –en –soi (Being-in-itself)

In the book Being and Nothingness, Sartre (1956) defines that l’etre–en–

soi is being-in-itself (p. 7). It is the thing is. In the other hand, thing is not

existence precedes essence. Thing is not a human being. Thing is being because

essence is decided first. Hence, thing is essence precedes existence. L’etre–en–

soi is it is what it is, being-in-itself. It cannot be was and will be (as to be)

(Bertens, 2006, p. 103). Thing is thing; it cannot be thing was thing or thing will

be thing. It also cannot become the other because it cannot be changed without

any helps from the other.

2) L’etre–pour–soi (Being-for-itself).

In the book Being and Nothingness, Sartre (1956) says that l’etre–pour–

soi is being-for-itself (p. 9). Consciousness is experiences. It means that

consciousness is limited by perspective of experience, live, and stay in the

experience. Because of this, human being realizes that the world has no meaning

for him. This consciousness is nothingness (Sartre in Nugroho, 2012, p. 45).


16

L’etre–pour–soi is it is what it is not. Sartre believes that human being

defines himself and makes himself. Hence, human being is is not. Human being

can be is and will be. In this definition, Sartre divides l’etre–pour–soi into two

things; they are reflective and non-reflective consciousness. Non-reflective

consciousness is used by human being in his daily activity. There is no I in this

consciousness. Sartre (1956) says, “The consciousness of man in action is non-

reflective consciousness (p. 36).” Besides that, there is I in the reflective

consciousness. I becomes the object of reflective consciousness, and when human

being thinks to the other object, it moves to non-reflective consciousness. In

reflective consciousness, human being faces to several things he can do. He does

not only think what he did long time ago, but also he thinks what he is doing now

and what he will do. He is free to do everything he wants. Therefore, he meets

anxiety and suffering. Sartre (1956) says,”Anguish then is the reflective

apprehension of freedom by itself (p. 39).”

b. Freedom

Existentialism is concerned with attitudes toward life, especially attitudes

upon what he is going to act or do (Kuncara, 2005, p. 39). In this absurd world,

which means there is no meaning, human being realizes that he has freedom;

however, freedom is not the character of human being, but freedom is human

being itself (Boss in Hall C.S. and Gardner L., 1993). Human being then defines

himself. He has right to make liberty of choice of what to do. In the book

Eksistensialisme dan Humanisme, Sartre (2002) says, “Man is nothing else but


17

what he makes of himself (p. 44).” Human being is existence precedes essence.

He is not is. He always becomes is and will be, nothing but he dies.

Human being is condemned to be free (1956, p. 439). The freedom to

choose what to brings human being to face the anxiety or anguish. In every act he

does, he always meets the options and then he must choose. The anguish of

freedom is really anguished over the fact that one must choose (Sartre in Nugroho,

2012, p. 52). In every choice, human being suffers; however, he also creates the

world (Donald D. Palmer, 2003, p. 120).

c. Responsibility

In the book Eksistensi dan Humanisme, Sartre (2002) says that Human

being has responsibility toward every choice he chooses (p. 47). He is responsible

for himself, but that he is responsible for all human beings. What he chose is the

best choice; and there is no better choice for him, nothing but the better choices

for all human beings.

Human being cannot take the responsibility to the other human being, even

to God because he has decided what to do by himself. It can make him anxiety

and suffer. However, they, anxiety and suffering, are the pure and humble

suffering; and human being who faces the anxiety and suffering is human being

who can be responsible toward what he has chosen. If human being does not

suffer, he must cover his suffering (Sartre, 2002, p. 53). Thus, human being who

can take the responsibility is not a child who is under 5 years old and people who

is mentally ill (Nugroho, 2012, p. 84).


18

6. Theory of Symbol

Symbol has meaning. According to Roberts and Jacobs (1987),

Symbolism is designed to extend meaning. Symbol comes in direct relationship

and describes together a specific thing with idea, values, persons or way of life.

However, it is not easy to understand. It may be despotic because sometimes it has

no any connection or relationship with the object which is proposed. A symbol

can appear in the form of thing, person, place, action, situation, or even the way of

thinking (p. 279).

To understand the meaning of the symbol needs high level of imagination.

In the book An Introduction to Literature: Fiction/Poetry/Drama, Lawrence

(1961) says that understanding a meaning of symbol is a work which needs

imagination and emotion, not intellectual (p. 56). On the other hand, Roberts and

Jacobs believe that the object and description can be developed as symbol only

within an individual work. It names private symbol. Private symbol is more

difficult than universal symbol. Universal symbol uses the well-known thing,

which people are familiar with that to find the meaning, e.g. culture or religion.

Meanwhile, the meaning of private symbol can be found in the context of the

specific work of fiction (1987, p. 280).

B. Theoretical Framework

In order to answer the problem formulations, the writer uses some

theories. The theories that have been reviewed in the previous part are used to


19

support the writer in answering the problem formulations. The theory of critical

approach to literature, theory of character and theory of characterization are used

to answer the first problem formulation. Theory of absurdity, theory of

existentialism and theory of symbol are used to answer the second problem

formulation.

The first problem formulation is “How is the old man, the main character

of the play, portrayed?” The psychological approach, which deals with human

thought, behavior, etc, leads the writer to analyze about the character. Theory of

character,characterization, and absurdity are used to reveal the old man’s

characterization. Those theories are going to guide the writer in the process of

analyzing the main character through many aspects based on the theories. Theory

of characterization, giving nine ways of characterization, is applied in order to

analyze the characterization of the old man. By understanding the character of the

old man, it would be easier to understand the meaning of the chairs according to

the old man.

After answering the first problem formulation, the writer will explore the

second problem formulation. The second problem formulation is “What is the

meaning of the chairs according to the old man?” Theory of symbol is used to

understand the symbol used, in this term the chair. Theory of absurdity and

existentialism are used to understand what the character does in the play. Besides

that, these theories also support the approach in order to understand the meaning

of the chair in existentialism.


20

C. Context of the Play

1. The Time and the Place Setting of Writing the Play

The Chairs was written in 1951 in France, one year after the first Ionesco’s

play, The Bald Soprano. 1951 was 6 years after World War II and the war was

still happening, the cold war, at that time. At that time, the Marxist was so famous

and dominating. Marxist was the role in French Revolution. It had the socialist

politicians supporting Marxism at that time. It was marked by social struggle.

Moreover, there was also pro-communist riot in Paris. In 1951, there was French

Legislative Election; and communist party got the most popular party in the

elective. The philosophy development was also concerned. The existentialism got

the fame in French, even Europe. Furthermore, existentialism influenced the

French literature. It had tried to mix with Marxism, but it was failed.

Existentialism achieved that at that time because people still felt desperate with all

of the ruin. The Chairs, then, was produced the first time on April 22nd, 1952.

2. The Setting of the Play

The old man was 96 years old. He lived with his wife, Semiramis. They

had been married for seventy-five years. They lived in the island surrounding

water. It was not clear enough whether it was sea, lake, river, or only water. The

house they lived was simple, not too big or small. There were many chairs for the

guests to sit. There was one big door in the middle and there were several side

doors in the right and left of the main door. There were also two windows in the

right and left of the main door where the old couple jumped through.


21

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

This chapter is divided into three parts. The first part is the Object of the

Study which presents the information related to the play used in this study. The

second part is the Approach of the Study which presents the approach used in

analyzing the play. The last is Method of Study which presents the sequence

actions in analyzing the play.

A. Object of the Study

The object of this study is a play entitled The Chairs. The Chairs is a play

written by the absurdist playwright Eugene Ionesco on April, 1951 in France. It

was produced for the first time in 1952 at the Théâtre Lancry. It was directed by

Sylvain Dhomme. Moreover, this play has been on the staged for many times.

This play was also directed by the students from University of Pittsburg, Tara

Estelle Adelizzi and the production was also become her thesis. Ionesco

influences many playwrights in the world and Indonesia is the one of them. In

Indonesia, the well-known poet and playwright, W.S. Rendra has adapted this

play with the other title namely Kereta Kencana. Eventhough it is not the

translation version of The Chairs, Kereta Kencana still keeps the characters from

the The Chairs. This play was famous at that time before Samuel Backet’s

Waiting for Godot was published then.


22

Eugene Ionesco was the Romanian, and then he moved to France and

stayed there. His literary works were influenced by the existentialism.

Furthermore, existentialism was the philosophy movement in 19th Century, after

the war, when people felt desperate of all. Ionesco showed the desperation of the

people through his play. Hence, Esselin in The Theatre of the Absurd says that

Ionesco’s The Chairs is the one of the absurd play. It is the beginning of this

genre movement.

The Chairs consisting of 25 scenes tells about the old couple staying in an

island. The old man has many friends. He invites them to come to his house. He

has something to say to them that it is very important. His wife helps him to

prepare the chairs for all the guests to sit. Finally, it presents what the work is

generally about.

B. Approach of the Study

The psychological approach is the approach used to achieve the objective

of this study. As Rohrberger and Woods (1971) say that psychological approach

focuses on the life as the portrait of human psychology which contains thought,

behavior, human personality, motivation, and the other aspects related to the

human psychology. As many people believe that human mind is the root of every

thought and action human being does. Moreover, this approach provides a set of

symbolic which is common to all human beings and it can be interpreted in light

of human being’s experience. Hence, the existentialism is used in this study.


23

C. Method of the Study

The method used in this study is library study. It means that the writer

gathered the primary data and the secondary data. The primary data is the play

The Chairs by Eugene Ionesco. The secondary data are all the literature references

related to the theories gathered from books and the Internet.

In order to focus on the analysis, there are some stages to accomplish the

study. The first stage was choosing the play as the primary data. To gain the more

understanding of the story, the writer read and reread the play. The writer read

carefully especially if he found the difficult terms to get the better interpretation

and imagination. The second stage was choosing the main topic based on the play.

The third stage was formulating the problems. The fourth stage was collecting the

secondary data from books in the library or internet to find the theories related to

the problem formulations. The theories used in this study are theory of character,

theory of characterization, theory of absurdity, theory of existentialism and theory

of symbol. The fifth stage was answering the problem formulations.

The writer used psychological approach to analyze the ideas of

existentialism revealed through the old man. The last stage was concluding the

whole study.


24

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS

This chapter is divided into two parts. The first part is the explanation

about the character of the old man. This part aims to answer the first problem

formulation. The second part is the ideas of existentialism revealed through the

old man as the main character. This explanation is intended to answer both

problem formulations.

A. The Portrayal of the Old Man

The Analyzing the character in the novel or play is an essential level to do.

It is the base level to do before doing the further levels in understanding the story.

Understanding the meaning of the character brings the readers understand the

whole story; from the intrinsic elements to the extrinsic element. To understand

the extrinsic element or the meaning of the story, the readers must understand first

the character. In this part, the writer focuses on the discussion of the character of

the play.

Abrams (1981, p. 210) says that character is the person presented in a

narrative or dramatic work in which the readers interpreted the characteristics

expressed in what they say and do. Abrams, then, divides it into two definitions;

they are major and minor character. Major character is the character who has the

important role in the story from beginning to the end. He should be able to attract


25

the readers’ attention who and how the character is through his characterization.

According to Abrams’ theory, the old man is categorized as the major character in

this play. He attracts the readers’ attention through their characterization and the

story. Furthermore, he has the important role. He presents himself in the story

from the beginning to the end. He can attract the readers’ attention through what

he says because the story is all about what the meaning of life is which is

according to him. Moreover, he undergoes conflict leading his attitude and

conversation along the story (Harvey, 1965).

The old man is categorized as a round character. He, according to Foster

(2002), is presented with subtle particularity. Thus, the character is difficult to

describe with any adequacy as a person in real life and like a real person. He has

been living for ninety five years and has experienced many moments with his wife

like the story that he always tells his wife entitled “Then at Last We Arrived”. He

is confusing himself why he is incapable in delivering the message.

Character designates the individual who appears in the story or the mixture

of the interests, desires, emotions, and moral principles that make up each of

individuals (Stanton, 1965). The old man gives certain situation in the story

because he shows the emotions in conversation. The old man becomes so soft

when Belle, his ex-girlfriend, comes to his house. His attitude is different when

the colonel comes to his house. He becomes so muscular. Furthermore, it is also

different when the last guest he invites comes. He becomes so enthusiasm

knowing the emperor comes. He shouts. He runs.


26

Characterization is an important thing for the readers to understand the

character deeper. Characterization is a process which the character is portrayed

like a real person who is living in a real world. In the other words,

characterization can be a device for the readers to believe that character is the

particular type of a person (Rohrberger & Woods, 1971). Murphy explains that

there are nine ways which the playwright characterizes the character; they are

personal description, others characters’ opinion, speech, past life, conversation of

others, reaction, direct comment, thought, and mannerism.

In order to gain the deeper understanding on the old man’s

characterization, the discussion of the old man’s characterization will be analyzed

using Murphy’s theory.

1. Infintile

This The old man is an infantile man. He is ninety five-years old, but he

does not do such a wise man who has experienced many things in his life. The old

man’s infantile can be seen when he tells the old woman, his wife, about the old

story Then at Last We Arrived, which is told every night since they married. At

the end of the story, the old woman mocks the old man’s job, general factotum.

The old man then suddenly weeps while calling his mamma.

OLD WOMAN : Oh! My darling, you are so really fine. Oh! So really, you know, so really, so really, you could have been anything in life, a lot more than general factotum.

OLD MAN : Let’s be modest… we should be content with the little. OLD WOMAN : Perhaps you’ve spoiled your career?


27

OLD MAN : (weeping suddenly) I’ve spoiled it? I’ve spoiled it? Ah! Where are you, mamma, mamma, where are you, mamma?....hi, hi, hi, I’m an orphan. (he moans) ….an orphan, dworfan. (Act 3: 4)

In this case, the old man feels bad after hearing his wife mocks his job. Moreover,

she says that the old man can be more than a general factotum. It means that the

old woman is not really proud of her husband’s job. Then, the old man does not

like what the old woman says. The old man suddenly weeps and moans as he

cannot think why he can be a general factotum. As a man, he does not say a word

first to give the clear clarification to his wife why he chooses a general factotum

as a job. Because the old man does not give clear clarification, the old woman

states that the old man spoils his career. Since the old man cannot perceive, he

weeps and moans like a boy.

Furthermore, he does not blame himself as a man who has chosen the job;

he then tries to find out his mamma. It means that he is searching for someone

who can protect him from the blame of the old woman’s statement. Hence, he

calls mamma. When every man was a boy, mamma was his parent who was very

close to him. If something bad comes to him, mamma will care of her boy. When

boy’s toy is broken, mamma will come to ask why and go buying the new one. It

seems like the old man. When the old man gets the problem which cannot be

solved by him, he becomes a boy who breaks his toy and asks his mamma to give

the newest one. It is childlike.

Furthermore, the other evidence of infantile is that the old man runs from

the problem. He says that he has a message and it must be heard by all people.


28

However, he does not deliver the message by himself. He asks the orator to

deliver his message.

OLD MAN : Yes, Colonel, they are not here yet, but they'll be here. And the Orator will speak in my behalf, he will explain the meaning of my message. ..Take care, Colonel, this Lady's husband may arrive at any moment. (Act 11: 10)

OLD MAN : …. We're waiting for the Orator, he'll tell you, he'll speak in my behalf, and explain everything that we hold most dear. . . he'll explain everything to you. . .when? .. when the moment has come. . .the moment will come soon. . . (Act 19: 19)

Those statements show that the old man does not want to deliver the message.

Actually, only the old man itself knows what the meaning of the message is.

When the message is ready to deliver, he does not want to tell. Then, he calls the

orator to deliver the message. It is indicated that he is infantile because he runs

away from his problem and gives the problem to the other, in this case the orator.

2. Irresponsible

By his own action and speech, the old man shows himself as an

irresponsible man. He does not take the responsible of his job or obligation. His

irresponsibility can be seen when he is a child and a father.

In the beginning, the old man weeps and moans when the old man is

talking about his job, general factotum. He calls his mamma and asks where she

is. Then, he states that he is an orphan. It means that he does not have mamma.

OLD MAN : I let my mother die alone in a ditch. She called after me, moaning feebly: “My little child, my beloved son, don’t leave me to die all alone…Stay with me. I don’t have much time left.” Don’t worry, Mamma, I told her,


29

I’ll be back in a moment….I was in a hurry… I was going to the ball, to dance. I will be back in a minute. But when I returned, she was already dead, and they had buried her deep… I broke open the grave, I searched for her.. I couldn’t find her. (Act 14: 13)

It means that the old man does not take the responsiblity as a child to accompany

his parents when they are in trouble. People usually prefer choosing their family’s

importance to choosing the others. People like being together with their family to

get laugh together. Furthermore, people like being together also with their family,

although their family are in trouble or bad situation. In this case, the old man is

different. In the difficult situation, when his mamma was dying, he chose to “kill”

her. Although his mamma asked him to stay beside her to accompany her, he still

chose to leave her. He said that he would be back soon. However, his mamma

passed away when he came back.

The irresponsibility of him can also be seen when the old man becomes a

father. He had a child. Then, his child left him.

THE OLD WOMAN : He said to me:”You kill birds! Why do you kill birds?”… but we don’t kill birds.. we’ve never harmed so much as a fly… his eyes were full of big tears. He wouldn’t let us dry them. He wouldn’t let me come near him. He said: “Yes, you kill all the birds, all the birds.”… He showed us his little fists… “You are lying, you’ve betrayed me! The streets are full of dead birds, of dying baby birds.” It’s the song of the birds! ..”No, it’s their death rattle. The sky is red with blood.”… No, my child, it’s blue. He cried again: “You’ve betrayed me, I adored you, I believed you to be good.. the streets are full of dead birds, you’ve torn out their eyes.. Papa, Mamma, you’re wicked!... I refuse to stay with you.” … I threw myself at his feet… His father was weeping. We couldn’t hold him back.


30

As he went we could hear him calling: “It’s you who are responsible”…. (Act 14: 13)

It means that the old man does not take the responsiblity as a father. The old man

cannot hold his child back and stay. His child goes away while saying if this is the

old man who is responsible. It is a direct speech from the old man’s child if the

old man and his wife kill the birds. The child feels like they betrayer him. He feels

disappointed because of that situation. In the other hand, it means that the old man

also does not take care of his child well. He does not understand what his child

likes and needs. Furthermore, after his child goes, he does not try to search for his

child. He is staying still and doing nothing as it happens and he does not care.

Because of that moment, he and his wife live alone without his child. His child

never comes back. In brief, he is failed as a father.

The other evidence of his irresponsibility is the old man’s inability to

deliver the message. Because the message is all about his experience so that it

should be his task to deliver his own message. In the end of the story, he does not

deliver the message. He even hires the orator to speak.

OLD WOMAN : It's easy once you begin, like life and death. .. it's enough to have your mind made up. It's in speaking that ideas come to us, words, and then we, in our own words, we find perhaps everything, the city too, the garden, and then we are orphans no longer.

OLD MAN : It's not I who's going to speak, I've hired a professional orator, he'll speak in my name, you'll see

He runs away from his task. He has the idea which should ne heard by everybody

because it is important. However, he does not do that. Hiring professional orator,


31

according to him, is the way how the message is delivered. It seems like he relies

the problem to the orator. Therefore, he is irresponsible.

3. Absurd

The old man is a man who feels the absurdity. The absurd is not a man nor

in the world, but in their presence together. In brief, absurd is living in the world

with no purpose; a man is lost. It is shown in this play through the conversation

between the old man and the old woman.

OLD MAN : Come my darling, close the window. There's a bad smell from that stagnant water, and besides the mosquitoes are coming in.

OLD WOMAN : How can you, my darling? ... It makes me dizzy. Ah! This house, this island, I can't get used to it. Water all around us ...water under the windows, stretching as far as the horizon. (Act 1:2)

He lives in the island which is surrounded by the water. It shows that the old man

is living alone in his world. Although, he lives with his wife, but the house is the

only one which is built. There is no other home so that it is difficult to reach by

others. Moreover, the guests have to come with boats to reach the island. Hence, it

can be called an isolated island.

The isolated island where the old man is living shows that he is lost. It

symbolizes he is trapped in some places, his house. Hence, there is a distance

between him and the world. In this context, the old man is far away from the

others who live in the other place.

Furthermore, the absurd can be seen when the human being realizes about

his condition. Then, when the human being realizes the mechanically routine of


32

life, it means that he has experienced the absurdity. It is shown by the old man.

The old man realizes that he always does the same thing a day after day. It can be

seen when he protests if it is boring to tell the same story every night.

OLD WOMAN : Tell me the story, you know the story: "Then at last we arrived..."

OLD MAN : Again? ...I'm sick of it ..."Then at last we arrived"? That again...you always ask for the same thing!" … Then at last we arrived...” But it’s monotonous. .. For all of the seventy-five years that we've been married, every single evening, absolutely every blessed evening, you've made me tell the same story, you've made me imitate the same people, the same months. ..always the same ...let's talk about something else. (Act 3:3)

The old man knows so well about his life. He realizes the change of the

shadow of the sunlight. He thinks that the shadow can be seen at 6 p.m. However,

now there is no shadow. He adds that long ago, at 9 p.m., there was a shadow.

OLD MAN : The conversation between the old man and the old woman shows that they know their routine of life.

OLD WOMAN : You can't see them, there's no sunlight, it's nighttime, my darling.

OLD MAN : There are still shadows. (Act 1:2)

OLD MAN : It's six o'clock in the evening...it is dark already. It wasn't like this before. Surely you remember, there was still daylight at nine o'clock in the evening, at ten o'clock, at midnight. (Act 2:2)

Furthermore, there is an object in absurdity, in daily life. The awareness of

the object brings human being to the unexplainable situation between the human

being and the world. It can be seen when he has a routine of life. He realizes that

he has something to tell about. The message is something to tell about.


33

OLD MAN : I have a message, that's God's truth, I struggle, a mission, I have something to say, a message to communicate to humanity, to mankind.

OLD WOMAN : To mankind, my darling, your message! OLD MAN : That's true, yes, it's true. (Act 5:5)

Moreover, the old man definitely feels confused about the message so that he

hires the orator to tell the message.

OLD MAN : It's not I who's going to speak, I've hired a professional orator, he'll speak in my name, you'll see. (Act 7:6)

Likely in absurd, the message is the object. The old man tells that the

message is about his experiences and it is very important for all human being. The

old man does not tell what the message is in whole conversation. He always says

that the orator will come soon. He thinks that he cannot say it. However, the

message tells about the old man’s experiences, it means that the message is

unexplainable. Experience is the situation between the human being and the

world. It becomes the basic of the old man’s message.

The last evidence is that the old man commits suicide in the end of the

story. As Camus says that absurd leaves choices for all human beings to encounter

the absurd; and the old man chooses to commit suicide. In Act 24, after the

emperor comes, the old man and the old woman shout each other, they say

goodbye each other while getting near to the window. Then, they throw

themselves out the window to the water. It means that the old man dies.

Committing suicide which the old man does makes him absurd. Thus, he declares

that life is not worth living.


34

B. The Meaning of the Chairs

In surface meaning, the chairs can be called as places to sit human being. it

can be seen in Eugene Ionesco’s The Chairs. There are many chairs which are

provided in the old man’s house. The chairs are used as a place to sit for every

guest coming to his house. The chair there are sit by every guest, whoever they

are. The colonel sits on the chair. Until the emperor sits on the same kind of chair.

Furthermore, the chair can symbolize the degree or position of a person. Chairman

is a leader of a company. It shows the power of a person. Evethough the name of

the title is the chairs, the focus of the play does not 100% goes to the chairs.

Eugene Ionesco is a playwright who is famous with his idea of absurdity.

Even, The Theatre of Absurd awards him as an absurdist, although he does not

want to be called as an absurdist. The idea of absurdity is not far with idea of

existentialism; because the root of existentialism is the absurd. The work of

Ionesco focuses on human being, especially when they start questioning their

existence and the meaning of their life. In those processes, they will feel the

absurdity. Hence, through existentialism and absurdity, Ionesco shows the deeper

meaning of the chairs.

In his work, The Chairs, Ionesco offers his ideas of existentialism to the

readers. The Chairs tells about a man who lives in absurdity. The main character

here, the old man, lives in absurdity with his wife, Semiramis. He left his mother,

who was dying, when he was young. He let his son go when he was not too old.

He invites all the people to his house, which is located in island surrounded by

water, to tell the message he got, although, he does not tell the message. In the end


35

of the story, he and his wife throw themselves out the window. They commit

suicide.

In this work, the main character is the Ionesco’s tool to deliver the ideas of

existentialism. Furthermore, the main character represents the thought of Ionesco.

The ideas of existentialism come out through the main character’s thought, his

responses to the other, and his attitudes, which are all absurd. Not only those, the

ideas of existentialism are also shown through the old man’s speech and other

character’s opinion toward him.

The following discussion focuses on Ionesco’s ideas of existentialism

revealed through the main character, the old man, in The Chairs. The discussion is

divided into several subtopics to explain more detail.

1. Consciousness

Consciousness is the important thing to understand existentialism. Sartre

says that human being comes to the world because of nothing so that the world

does not have reason to answer what he is. Firstly, man is being, faces the world,

then defines himself. Hence, Sartre says that existence precedes essence. To

define what he is, he creates himself. The tool to create himself is consciousness.

The human being is described as the conscious creature.

As discussed in the first part of analysis, the old man is described as a man

who is infantile, irresponsible, and feels absurd. All of those things are nothing

firstly before the old man was born and faced the world. As existentialism says,

existence precedes essence so that the old man is the one creating himself to be

like those things. Moreover, all of those things are done by the old man


36

consciously. As Sartre says that human being is described as the conscious

creature so that what the old man does is consciousness.

Furthermore, the old man in existentialism is categorized as l’etre–pour–

soi or being-for-itself. The old man is it is what it is not. He is what he is not

because he always defines himself and makes himself. He can be what he is now

and what he will be. It is definitely related to existence precedes essence. The old

man will change every time depending what he chooses. The old man is not a

thing, which is l’etre–en–soi or being-in-itself, because the thing is essence

precedes existence. The old man is not human being, who is in the thought first,

then he exists; but he exists first and then he creates himself. It can be seen in Act

3, when the old woman asks the old man to tell the story.

OLD WOMAN : Tell me the story, you know the story: "Then at last we arrived..."

OLD MAN : Again? ...I'm sick of it ..."Then at last we arrived"? That again...you always ask for the same thing!" … Then at last we arrived...” But it’s monotonous. .. For all of the seventy-five years that we've been married, every single evening, absolutely every blessed evening, you've made me tell the same story, you've made me imitate the same people, the same months. ..always the same ...let's talk about something else. (Act 3:3)

It shows that the old man refuses the offer of the old woman because he gets

bored for telling the same story every single night. Hence, the old man is a man

who likes refusing the request of his wife. However, after several conversations,

after the old woman attempts to persuade the old man, the old man starts telling

the story.


37

OLD WOMAN : It's as if suddenly I'd forgotten everything. .. it's as though my mind were a clean slate every evening ... Yes, my darling, I do it on purpose, I take a dose, of salts ...I become new again, for you, my darling, every evening ...Come on, begin again, please.

OLD MAN : Well, if you want me to. OLD WOMAN : Come on then, tell your story. ..It's also mine; what

is yours is mine! Then at last we arrived. OLD MAN : Then at last we arrived. ..my sweetheart. OLD WOMAN : Then at last we arrived. ..my darling. (Act 3:3)

It shows that the old man accepts the request of the old woman to tell the story.

Hence, the old man is a man who likes granting his wife’s request. In brief, the

old man, as human being, consciously changes his choice; and it makes it is what

it is change also.

In the other hand, l’etre–pour–soi is related to l’etre–en–soi. The

consciousness of human being to define himself brings him to define his

surroundings. It means that human being defines the meaning of things. The

example is like the old man and the chairs. There are so many chairs in a room of

his house. However, the old man itself defines the chairs, which are being-in-

itself, whether the chairs are as the meaningless chairs in a room, or as things to

sit, or as only things to make the interior look beautiful. Then, in the story, the old

man brings the chairs to every invisible guest to sit.

Consciousness is experience. It means that consciousness is limited by

perspective of experience, lives and stays in the experience. The old man shows it

in the story. In Act 19, when all the guests almost come, the old man says

something about the message, which is also his experience.


38

OLD MAN : Don't be so impatient. You'll hear my message. In just a moment.

OLD WOMAN : Ah! ...I hear his voice! Do you know, my husband has never been understood. But at last his hour has come.

OLD MAN : Listen to me, I've had a rich experience of life. In all walks of life, at every level of thought. . .I'm not an egotist: humanity must profit by what I've learned. (Act 19:19)

It strengthens that the message is the experience of the old man because the old

man says that he has a rich experience in his life. It means that he through all his

life consciously. Moreover, he has a lot of friends from different background. It

also strengthens that he has worked at many works and places with different

background; such as soldier, boyfriend, up to the last job, general factotum. It

makes his experiences richer. Hence, consciousness is what he chooses and what

he is doing.

Furthermore, what the old man says about his experience is categorized as

reflective consciousness. When the old man says about him, he goes into his

reflective consciousness. The thought about him is reflective consciousness. There

is I or the old man itself in this reflective consciousness. It means that I becomes

the object. The example is like this.

OLD MAN : Listen to me, I've had a rich experience of life. In all walks of life, at every level of thought. . .I'm not an egotist: humanity must profit by what I've learned. (Act 19:19)

When he says to listen to him, he is in his reflective consciousness. In the other

hand, when the old man thinks about the object outside him, it means that he

moves to his non – reflective consciousness.


39

Non – reflective consciousness is consciousness of human being in his

daily life. Sartre says that the consciousness of human being in action is non –

reflective consciousness. There is no I in this consciousness.

The example of non – reflective consciousness is like what the old man

says in Act 2. The old man says, “It's six o'clock in the evening. It is dark already.

It wasn't like this before. Surely you remember, there was still daylight at nine

o'clock in the evening, at ten o'clock, at midnight.” The object is not the old man.

Something which is in his consciousness is those objects; such as evening,

midnight, the day, Semiramis or the daylight. Thus, there is no I or the old man

itself in his action.

2. Freedom

Freedom is the other key word for Sartre’s existentialism. In this absurd

world, which means there is no meaning, human being realizes that he has

freedom; however, freedom is not the character of human being, but freedom is

human being itself. Human being is the only being which his existence precedes

his essence. Then, it is definitely related to consciousness. Human being is

conscious toward his freedom to create himself and gives himself the meaning. It

can be called the subjectivity. These all are in the old man.

Freedom is not the characteristics of the old man, but freedom is the old

man itself. The old man is the human who has the essence for his life and has

freedom to make what he will be. It shows through what he chooses.

OLD WOMAN : Around, around, my little pet. [Silence.] Ah! yes, you've certainly a fine intellect. You are very gifted, my darling. You could have been head president,


40

head king, or even head doctor, or head general, if you had wanted to, if only you'd had a little ambition in life…

OLD MAN : What good would that have done us? We'd not have lived any better. ..and besides, we have a position here. I am a general, in any case, of the house, since I am the general factotum. (Act 2:2)

The old woman says that the old man can be more than a general factotum; such

as head king or head president. However, the old man feels comfortable to be

general factotum. Through this way, the old man is free to define himself. Anyone

can make the old man to be, only the old man can.

Human being is what he is not. He is never is. The guest can interpret if

the young old man was infantile or if the old old man is irresponsible because he

is still alive. Hence, he will always be something different depending what he

chooses. The example before shows the young old man was and the old old man

is. However, it ends up when the old dies in the end of the story. The guest can

interpret if the old man is absurd finally. He cannot be the other. He is what he is

because he dies after throwing himself out. He does not have the freedom again to

take the chance to choose. As long as he lives, he has a liberty right to choose.

However, he dies in the end. Therefore, he does not have freedom at all.

Human being is condemned to be free. The freedom to choose what to be

brings human being to face the anxiety or anguish. Every single decision human

being chooses, it takes the anxiety and suffering to him. It shows in the old man’s

life. When the old man was young, he faced two choices whether he went to

dance or he accompanied his mom.

OLD MAN : I let my mother die alone in a ditch. She called after me, moaning feebly: “My little child, my beloved son,


41

don’t leave me to die all alone…Stay with me. I don’t have much time left.” Don’t worry, Mamma, I told her, I’ll be back in a moment….I was in a hurry… I was going to the ball, to dance. I will be back in a minute. But when I returned, she was already dead, and they had buried her deep… I broke open the grave, I searched for her.. I couldn’t find her. (Act 14: 13)

The choice is that he chose to go dancing. The effect is that his mom passed away.

The passing away of his mom is the anxiety, anguish, and suffering. Those are

haunting the old man so that he is suffering. Moreover, not to choose is also the

choice. It can be seen in Act 14, when the old man’s son goes. It is the time when

his son is angry and goes, but the old man is only weeping. His son goes and

never comes back. He does not try to hold his son go. This is the proof if not to

choose is also the choice where there are also anxiety, anguish, and suffering.

The other evidence of freedom is shown through how the old man plays

with the chairs. As the analysis in part Consciousness before, the old man chooses

to bring the chairs out of the room. The using of the chairs is to sit all of the

guests. The old man is free to not choose the chairs to stay still in the room as

meaningless chairs or as things only to make the interior beautiful.

However, once again, human being is condemned to be free; and human

being lives in the absurd world. As long as he is alive, he always creates himself

through every choice of freedom. As Sartre says if anguish then is the reflective

apprehension of freedom by itself. Hence, in every choice human being takes,

there is anguish, but there is also how a world is created.


42

3. Responsibility

The Responsibility human being takes is not responsibility for him. Satre

adds that responsibility human being takes is responsibility for all human being.

Subjectivity, which makes human being come to his mind and then to understand

who he is, is the root of responsibility. It means that human being is subject who

chooses which one is better. In his consciousness, he is not responsible for him,

but also for all human being. In the other hand, what he does or chooses is also

good for the others who do the same thing.

The play The Chairs is a play which tells about absurdity; if world does

not have a reason to answer how man is so that life does not have meaning.

Ionesco puts the old man in the absurd world. He searches on the meaning of life

so that he suffers. He regrets when he let his mom pass away and when he let his

son go and never come back.

In the previous analysis, the old man is not responsible because he leaves

and let his mom pass away and let his son go. In deeper meaning, the action of

him about those two is good for him as long as he can take the responsibility of it.

The action is his choice. The choice is a process. He is a subject which comes to

his own mind and then understands who he is. Then, he gets the choice to leave

his mom. Although his mom passes away, the choice he takes is good. The every

choice he takes is always good for him. Good choice comes to him because after

the accident, he suffers. However, the suffering is the pure and humble suffering.

In the other hand, the suffering of him shows that he is responsible toward what

he does. As Sartre says human being who faces the anxiety and suffering is


43

human being who can be responsible toward what he has chosen. Therefore, if the

old man does not suffer about what he does, it means that he is covering his

suffering. It means that he does not take the responsibility.

However, the old man is responsible for he himself; he does not take the

responsibility for the others. As Sartre says that the responsibility human being

takes is not responsibility for him; moreover, the responsibility human being takes

is responsibility for all human being. It does not match toward what the old man

does. Although the choice of him is good for he himself; but it is not good for the

others. In this case, the others are his wife, his mom, his son, his guests, and his

orator.

Furthermore, the old man’s choice to leave his mom is not good for his

mom. It can be seen when the old man comes back, his mom has passed away. He

does not accompany her when she is dying. Hence, the old man comes back with

his regret because he does not accompany her. It shows that the old man has a

good choice for he himself; but it is not good for his mom when she is dying.

The same thing the old man does is when his son goes from the house.

When the son is angry about the death birds and he shouts that he wants to leave,

the old man does not do anything. He seems to let his son go. Yet, his wife tries to

hold the son go. What the old man does is his choice. Hence, the choice is good

toward his subjectivity. The old man is sad because of it. It shows that he suffers.

He is responsible. However, it affects the others. The son goes. His wife is really

sad because her son goes. It shows that the old man is not responsible for the

others.


44

The irresponsibility of the old man can be also seen through the action of

the old man to the guests and the orator. The message, which the old man

promises to the guests, is not clear because the orator, who becomes the old man’s

representative to tell the message, is deaf and dumb person. He cannot talk. If he

forces to talk, the voice is not clear. It can be seen in Act 25 after the double

suicide. He only utters the guttural sounds of mute. The message is still unclear,

although he writes the message on the blackboard.

Based on the story, the old man is not responsible toward the guests and

the orator. Yet, the old man is responsible in the beginning because he suffers.

The old man’s suffering is shown when he decides to suicide, as a realization to

encounter the absurd. However, his suffering affect to the others. The unclear

message to the guests is the evidence. The guests should have got the message

after coming to the old man’s guests. However, they get nothing. What they see is

only very unclear words “ANGELFOOD” and “NNAA NNM NWNWNW V”.

Furthermore, the burden moves to the orator. The burden should belong to the old

man; but, because the old man cannot tell the message, so that he is called

irresponsible.

Therefore, chair means the balance of the life which human being suffers.

The human being will be born and will die. Life and death is fate wich all human

beings suffer. There is no human being living thousand years. He must die some

time. That is what the old man suffers in the play. He lives. Then, he must die

through all the choices he chooses.


45

What the old man chooses and does in the play can be concluded in the

chairs. Chairs may not be the important thing in the play because there are many

chairs, but the real characters are only three. However, chairs are used to the place

to all invisible guests sit. The invisible guests are the poor man until the emperor.

They all sit on the same chairs. Each thing has a meaning and relation. The

invisible guests show the experiences of the old man. As the old man says that the

message is all about his experiences. Therefore, the chairs show the mind of the

old man. All of the experiences are saved in the mind. However, the chairs are sit

by the invisible guests. In the other words, the experiences are invisible. Hence, it

all means that all of things which the old man experiences in his whole life is all

about the emptiness of life.


46

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATION

This chapter is divided into two parts. The first part is concerned with the

conclusions of the analysis which answer two problems formulated in the Chapter

One. The second part, the writer offers some suggestions for the future writers.

A. Conclusions

Eugene Ionesco is successful in presenting his character, the old man, with

his ideas and experiences of life through his work The Chairs. Through his work,

he shares his ideas about how people question their lives through the existence of

the old man. Ionesco emphasizes how the old man lives in the absurd world

through the old man’s characterization. The absurdity leads him to be conscious

toward his freedom, suffering, and responsibility.

In The Chairs, the old man is portrayed as a man who is infantile. It is

showed when the old man weeps, moans, and sobs like a child to his wife. He also

runs away from the problem, which he should have told to the guests. Then, he is

a man who is irresponsible. He leaves his mom pass away when he is asked to

accompany her; he lets his son go after the accident of death birds; and he hires

the orator to tell the message. The last, he is man who feels the absurd. He realizes

that his routine of his life is boring. He feels he is trapped in the unexplainable

between his life and the world.


47

By paying attention on the old man’s characterization, the writer finds

some principles of existentialism in the old man. There are three main points

which have been reviewed with existentialism.

The first point is the consciousness. The old man is categorized as l’etre–

pour–soi or being-for-itself. He is it is what it is not. He is what he is not because

he always defines himself. Existence precedes essence. He promises to tell the

message which is concluded all of his experiences. Experience is consciousness.

The second point is the freedom. Freedom is not the characteristic of the

old man, freedom is the old man. Freedom does not have a limit. He is free to

choose who he is. He chooses to be general factotum; he chooses to take the

chairs out of the room; he chooses to commit suicide. In this sense, the old man

should be responsible toward what he has chosen.

The last point is the responsibility. Responsibility the old man takes is not

the responsibility for him, but also for all human being. The old man is

responsible for he himself because he suffers when his mom passes away, when

his son goes, and when he commits suicide. However, he is irresponsible for the

other because the choice of him has bad effects for the others.

This study concludes that the old man shows if the world is absurd. It is

showed by how the old man does through the chairs and the invisible guests.

Based on the existentialism, the invisible guests are the experiences the old man

has; and the chairs are the mind of the old man. In the end of the story, the old

man dies and he leaves the invisible guests sitting on the chairs. The mind is

empty. The life is empty. The life loses all of the meaning.


48

B. Implication

This study is about literature, especially about the play. Literature is good

to be implemented in English class in university because it can be the media to

express the potential of the students in English language like reading poems or

playing a drama. Teacher can help the students to be more creative in learning

through literature. Literature can be the story in poems, novels, and also plays.

Literature takes an important role in learning English language. Through

literary works, students can improve English language skills, such as grammar,

reading, and vocabularies. Furthermore, the students can find the moral value in

the literary works. The moral value in Eugene Ionesco’s The Chairs is about

defining himself as a human being. Then, in the end of the story, The Chairs

means the balance of life, life and dead. However, balance of life must not only

mean as dead and life. For students, the balance of life means as the balance of

skills. Students have to improve their hard skills through learning at school and

gaining the best scores. Furthermore, students have to also improve their soft

skills through joining organizations or theater. As Anies Baswedan says that high

GPA can only bring the students into administrative test. It means that having best

hard skills is not enough. Students need soft skills to complete what students

really need because they, soft skills, could make the students’ mental stronger to

face the real world.

Having both of skills makes the students’ lives balance. It means that they

are ready to face and take the responsibility to the real world. So, this play can be

implemented in drama class.


49

REFERENCES

“Absurd”. Def 1a. Merriam webster’s online dictionary. Retrieved, October 2013, from http://www.merriam-webster.com/concise/absurd

“Drama”. Def 1a. Merriam webster’s online dictionary. Retrieved, October 2013, from http://www.merriam-webster.com/concise/drama

“The Chair”. Def 1a. Merriam webster’s online dictionary. Retrieved, October 2013, from http://www.merriam-webster.com/concise/chairs

Anonymous. (1995). Merriam webster’s encyclopedia of literature. Springfield, Mass: Merriam Webster, Incorporated.

Abrams, M.H. (1981). A glossary of literary terms. New York: Holt, Reinhart, and Winston.

Barbe, N.B. (2012). Le neant dans la pensee contemporaine. Retrieved, September 2013, from https://www.academia.edu/860111/Beckett_and_Ionesco_The_Absurd_and_Resistance

Bartens, K. (2006). Filsafat barat kontemporer perancis. JakartaL Gramedia Pustaka Utama.

Barnet, S, Berman M., & Burto W. (1961). An introduction to literature: Fiction/poetry/drama (2nd ed.). New York, Toronto: Little, Brown and Company Inc.

Camus, A. (1955). The myth of sisyphus. New York: Random House Inc.

Esslin, M. (1961). Theatre of the absurd. New York: Anchor Books

Foster, E.M. (2002). Aspects of the novel. New York: Rosseta Books LLC.

Gould, J. & Willis H.T. (1973). Existentialist philosophy. London: Dickenson.

Hall, C.S., & Gardner L. (1993). Psikologi kepribadian 2: Teori – teori holistik (organismik – fenomenologis), translated by Yustinus. Yogyakarta: Kanisius.


50

Harvey, W.J. (1965). Character and the novel. New York: Monarch Press.

Kuncara, W. (2005). Samuel backet’s concept of life as revealed through the main character of his play waiting for godot: A study of existentialism. Yogyakarta: English Language Education Study Program, Department of Language and Arts Education, Faculty of Teachers Training and Education, Sanata Dharma University.

Murphy, M.J. (1972). Understanding unseen: An introduction to English poetry and the english novel for overseas students. London: George Allen and Unwin, Ltd.

Nugroho, Y.P.A. (2012) Humanisme sartre dan aplikasinya di dalam proses teater. Yogyakarta: Program Studi Ilmu Teologi, Jurusan Teologi, Fakultas Teologi, Universitas Sanata Dharma.

Palmer, D.D. (2003). Sartre untuk pemula, translated by B. Dwianta Edi Prakosa and Stepanus Wakidi. Yogyakarta: Kanisius.

Roberts, E.V. & Jacobs H.E. (1987). Fiction: an introduction to reading and writing. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Inc.

Rohrberger, M. & Woods S.H. (1971). Reading and writing about literature. New York: Random House Inc.

Sartre, J.P. (1956). Being and nothingness, essays on phenomenological ontology, translated by Hazel E. Barnes. New York: Philosophical Library.

Satre, J.P. (1976). Being and nothingness: An essay on phenomenological ontology. London: Menteun and Co Ltd.

Sartre, J.P. (2007). Existentialism is a humanism, translated from French by Carol Macomber. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.

Sartre, J.P. (2002). Eksistensialisme dan humanisme, translated by Yudhi Murtanto. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.

Stanton, R. (1965). An introduction to fiction. New York: Holt, Reinhart, and Winston.


51

Soriano, A. (2009). The idea of absurdity reflected in the characterization of characters in Samuel Backet’s Endgame. Yogyakarta: Department of English Letters, Faculty of Letters, Sanata Dharma University.

Waluyo, Herman J. (2003). Drama: Teori dan pengajarannya. Yogyakarta: Hanindita Graha.

Welleck, R. and Warren, A. (1977). Theory of literature. New York: Brace and World Inc.


52

APPENDICES


53

APPENDIX 1

SUMMARY OF THE CHAIRS

The Chairs is one of Eugene Ionesco’s works. It tells the story about an

old couple. They were the old man and the old woman. The old man was the

general factotum. They had been married for ninety-six years. They lived in an

isolated island which was surrounded by water. They used to do the same things

every day. The old man always looked out the window to look for a shadow.

Then, he used to tell the old story to his wife every night entitled Then at Last We

Arrived. Although he used to tell the same story, he forgot several lyrics.

The old woman used to praise the old man for his story. She even hoped

that the old man could be more than just a general factotum. She said that he had

spoiled his career, then he sobbed and called his mamma. She said to him that she

was his mamma and his wife, but he insisted that he was orphan. He calmed down

when she remained that the guests were going to come. He must deliver the

message to them, although he had hired the professional Orator to speak in his

name. He thought that he had difficulty in expressing himself.

The old man and the old woman heard a boat approaching and the bell

rang. The lady, the first guest, came. The guest was invisible. The old woman

brought a chair for the lady to sit. They all were having a conversation. The bell

rang again. There was a second guest, the colonel, which was also invisible. The

old woman brought him a chair to sit. The colonel and the old man had a


54

conversation about their experience in war. The bell rang again. There were two

invisible guests. There were the lady and her husband. The lady was La Belle who

was the old man’s ex. Her husband was a photo – engraver. The old woman

brought them chairs to sit. The old man told their romantic story with Belle and

the old man had a conversation with a photo – engraver.

In the middle conversation, the old man said that he and his wife never had

a child. Then, the old woman remained how their son went. He remembered and

told that their child went because his child accused them of killing the birds.

Furthermore, he also remembered how his mamma died on his arms. The bell

rang again. The invisible newspaper men came. He then asked his wife to bring

chairs and he introduced them to another invisible guests. Moreover, he remained

that the Orator would come to tell the message. The bell rang again. There were

an invisible family, including smallest and twin. He asked his wife again to bring

more chairs out. The bell rang several more times. The old man let all the

invisible guests come and his wife was busy bringing the chairs out to fill up the

room.

The old woman started telling that there were no more chairs. They were

pushed to the stools. There was increasingly loud noise. Then, the door opened.

The invisible emperor stood there. The old man and the old woman showed their

respect by introducing the emperor to all the invisible guests. He remained that the

Orator was going to come soon and then he asked them to be more patient.

Furthermore, the room became silent. They stared at a main door for a long time.

The Orator came, a real person. The old man let the guests to get the Orator’s


55

autograph. Then, the old man introduced himself and thanked to all the invisible

guests for coming, the Orator, the event organizer, the people who built the

building and the chairs, the technicians, and those who made the program. He also

thanked to his wife who had supported him. He said that he and his wife could die

happily because his message would be delivered to all the guests and all that was

left of humanity.

The old man and the old woman threw themselves out the window. There

was silent. There was only the sound of their yelling and bodies falling into water.

Then, the Orator came to the guests and made them clear that he was deaf and

dumb. He could not speak clearly, then he gave up. He wrote with some chalks on

the blackboard the word “ANGELFOOD” and some nonsense words with a lot of

“N”s. He erased the words and wrote “AADIEU ADIEU APA”.


56

APPENDIX 2

THE BIOGRAHY

Eugene Ionesco was born on November 26th, 1909 in Slatina, Romania,

150 km from Bucharest. He was the son of Romanian man, Eugen Ionescu, and

French woman, Thérèse Ipcar. He also had two siblings, a brother and a sister.

Ionesco Family moved to Paris, where his father continued his study and became

a doctor of Law, after Eugen’s birth.

Marilina, his younger sister, was born on February 11th, 1911. Then, a

year after, Mircea, his younger brother, was born. Just 18 months after the birth of

Mircea, the child died because of meningitis. In 1914, Ionesco family lived in

Square Vaugigard in Paris.

In 1916, Ionesco’s father came back to Bucharest for military service

when Romania entered World War I. However, Ionesco’s mother and her two

young children remained in Paris and managed their lives alone, although they

were helped by Thérèse’s parents. After the end of the war, Ionesco’s family

thought that his father had died because there was no news of his father.

During a two – year period 1917 to 1919, Ionesco’s mother sent her two children

to live and study in the countryside, La Chapelle – Antheraise. In this period, it

was the most peaceful and harmonious in his life.

In 1922, Eugene returned to Romania in May with his sister because his

father received custody of the children, forcing both Eugene and Marlina to move


57

back. He learnt Romanian and attended the college Sfantul Saca or Saint Sava in

Bucharest and then he graduated the baccalaureate at the secondary school in

Craiova in1928. Yet, his father gave the money for his studies so that he could be

an engineer, but he was more interested in literature. This was the difficult period

of him. Besides he had to speak Romanian to be his native language, although he

considered French as his mother tongue, his relations with his father’s family was

very bad. Moreover, his relation with his stepmother was worse because she did

not like children. His sister moved to her mother and her father agreed to pay any

maintenance of her. Eugene stopped living with his father in 1926. It was only

four years after he moved to his father and two years before he graduated from

secondary school. Therefore, these years were the most influential of his writing.

In 1934, Eugene Ionesco received a degree in literature from the

University of Bucharest. This year was also the time when he started publishing

his writing to various magazines. Nu (No!) was a work he published. It was the

collection of critical and protest essays against the established value of Romanian

literature. Then, in 1936, he got married with Rodica Burileanu and worked as a

French teacher in Cernadova. Furthermore, he attempted to live in France between

1939 and 1942, but the German Occupation and World War II led to constant

unsettlement and flight about Europe. In 1944, his daughter, Marie – France, was

born on August.

In 1945, Eugene Ionesco and his family moved to Paris and worked as a

proofreader and freelance writer. In 1948, he started writing first the play which

was later to be entitled The Bald Soprano. Then in 1950, The Bald Soprano was


58

performed at the first time. Thus, his life as a playwright began. He went on to

write the other plays, such as The Lesson, The Chairs and Jack, or the Submission

(1952), Victims of Duty (1953), Amedee, or How to Get Rid of It (1954), The New

Tenant (1955), The Killer (1959), Rhinoceros (1959), Exit the King and A Stroll in

the Air (1962), Hunger and Thirst (1964), Killing Game (1970), Macbett (1973),

Man with Bags (1975), and Journey Among the Dead (1980).

On January 22th, 1970 Eugene Ionesco was elected a member of the

French Academy, to take over the seat of Jean Paulhan. The same year, he

received the Great Austrian Prize of European Literature.

In his later life, Eugene Ionesco gave up writing altogether, perhaps finally

defeated by his struggle with language. He was hospitalized again and again. On

November 27th, 1992 the Uniwersytet Slaski, Katowice, Poland, gave him the title

of Honorary Doctor. Furthermore, he was also a member of CIEL which militates

for the observance of human rights in all countries and for freedom of scientists,

writers, and artists. Eugene Ionesco died on March 28th, 1994 in his beloved home

of Paris. He was 84 years old.

Retrieved, November 2014, from http://www.ionesco.org/vie-en.html


plagiat merupakan tindakan tidak terpuji - core.ac.uk filehe has done in the absurd world. through...

Documents