Introduction

SPEECH IN HAROLD PINTER'S THE CARETAKER

Lesley Clark

In the plays of Harold Pinter, language, not action, is thepredominant medium through which the characters negotiate theirrelationships .

The study summarized in this paper attempts an analysis of the Formand Function of the language in Harold Pinter's play, The Caretaker . Itaims to establish how linguistic devices are used to reveal and developthe intra- and inter-personal relationships of the characters in the play .

For the purposes of this analysis, the language is viewed in the lightof Grice's Co-operative Principle (1975) ; teacher-pupil discoursestrategies; adult-child discourse strategies and various other linguisticdevices .

The Co-operativ e Principle of Grice

Grice's theory applies to spoken discourse and assumes that a numberof principles guide the conduct of conversation. These principles acceptthat discourse is structured, that it involves a common principle, that itis a co-operative effort between participants and has a mutually accepteddirection . A number of maxims and sub-maxims underlie this theory, asfollows :

1 . QualityMaxim:

Try to make your contribution one that is true,spec if ically:

Sub-maxims :

1 . Do not say what you believe to be false .2 . Do not say what you lack evidence for .

2 . QuantitySub-maxim:

1 . Make the information as informative as required forthe current purposes of the exchange .

2 . Do not make your contribution more informative thanrequired .

3 . RelevanceMaxim :

Make your contribution relevant

4 . MannerMaxim :

Be perspicuous, specifically :Sub-maxims :

1 . Avoid obscurity2 . Avoid ambiguity3 . Be brief4 . Be orderly .

74

is

These maxims give rise to inferences beyond the semantic content ofthe sentences uttered . The maxim of Quality generates the pragmaticinferences that the exact truth is given ; the Quantity maxim thatcomplete information is given; the Relevance maxim that a statement isrelevant to the situation ; and the Manner maxim that events describedfollow a temporal order .

Grice hypothesizes that maxims are often complied with on variouslevels, not that they are adhered to on a purely superficial level . Heproposes that in most ordinary conversations where maxims are not overtlyconformed to, the Hearer assumes they are being observed on a moreprofound level, because the belief in the Co-operative Principle is beingupheld . This concept is exemplified in the following Standard Implicature:

'Davies : You getting in?Aston: I'm mending this plug .'

(The Caretaker : 21)

Although at face value Aston violates the Quantity and Relevancemaxims in this exchange, this is not, in fact, the case . Our faith in theCo-operative Principle leads us to seek connections between Aston's andDavies' utterances . We therefore arrive at the conclusion, conveyedeffectively by Aston, that he accepts that it is a reasonable time to goto bed, but must complete an urgent task first -- mending the plug . Thisexample demonstrates the other major component of Grice's theory,Conversational Implicature, which looks at the underlying implications ofan exchange and explains how the participants in the exchange can meanmore than they say.

Other categories of implicature are given below .

Generalized_Implicatures

These do not require specific contexts for inferences to begenerated . For example, the character Aston in The Caretaker says : 'Iwent into a pub the other day .' Considering the Quantity sub-maxim do notmake your contribution more informative than is required , we can assumethat the actual pub visited is either unknown to the Hearer, or irrelevantto the communicative intention of the Speaker .

Flouting of Maxims

Conversational implicatures can also arise from the flouting ofmaxims . In this case, a maxim is blatantly not observed in order toexploit it for a specific communicative purpose such as irony. Thus theCo-operative Principle is still being upheld . This can explain figures ofspeech, for example, Mick, in The Caretaker , accuses Davies with :

'You're nothing else but a wild animal .' ( The Caretaker : 73)

Through the Relevance maxim we implicate that Davies has the qualitiesof a wild animal and, indeed, his character is revealed to be predatory,savage and territorial . Without co-operative effort, this figure ofspeech would be incomprehensible to the Hearer .

7 5

The Co-operative Principle and Conversational Implicatures in relation to'The Caretaker'

The intra- and inter-personal dimensions of the characters in the playare revealed by the conversational implicatures that their speechgenerates and their treatment of the Co-operative Principle . Aston'stolerance of Davies, which in turn reveals his own generosity of spirit,is shown in his acceptance of the many occasions on which Davies breaksmaxims, thus failing to uphold the Co-operative Principle . For example :

'Aston :

I went into the pub the other day . Ordered a Guinness .They gave it to me in a thick mug . I sat down, but Icouldn't drink it . I can't drink Guinness from a thickmug . I only like it out of a thin glass . I had a few sips,but I couldn't finish it .

Davies :

If only the weather would breakl Then I'd be able to getdown to Sidcup .'

(The Caretaker : 19)

Aston allows Davies' change of topic even though Davies shows hisdisregard for Aston's interests and self-concern by refusing to respondappropriately to his comment .

The rising hostility that Davies feels towards Aston and his attemptsto dominate him are revealed in his flouting of the Quality maximillustrated in the following utterance . This is given in response toAston's complaints about noises Davies makes in his sleep :

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

The Quality maxim is flouted here, as this is obviously not Aston'sintent . By way of Relevance, Davies can be seen to mean that Aston'srequests are extremely unreasonable and not to be complied with .

The attitudes towards the Co-operative Principle and conversationalimplicatures that arise are very revealing about the relationship betweenMick and Davies . The predatory, territorial instincts of Davies arerecognized by Mick . His rejection of Davies and his right to the room isrevealed in the following exchange which follows Mick telling Davies thathe will share the penthouse with his brother :

'Davies : What about me?Mick :

All this junk here, it's no good to anyone .'(The Caretaker : 61)

The implicature generated is that Davies is excluded from thepenthouse . We can infer that he is part of the useless junk Astonaccumulates .

Davies' interior motives are sharply perceived by Mick, as is revealedby his flouting of the Quality maxim in the utterance that follows . Hesays, with regard to Davies' working abilities :

'Mick :

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

7 6

The statement is blatantly false, as Mick clearly comprehends Davies'character . By way of Relevance, we infer that he has an ironic intent,his irony conveying and reemphasizing his profound understanding ofDavies' interior motives and his objections to them .

It is through conversational implicatures arising from Davies' speechthat his feelings too are manifested . His fear of Mick emerges clearly andhis own inferior position is reinforced . For example:

'hick :

What's your name?Davies :

I don't know you . I don't know who you are .'

Davies' response gives rise to the generalized conversational implicaturethat he is unwilling to reveal his identity to a stranger . His warinessindicates his recognition of Mick as a potentially powerful adversary aswell as his profound mistrust of others and his desire for self-concealment .

The dramatic significance of the pragmatic inferences arising from thecharacters' observation and flouting of conversational maxims is seen inthe insights thus gained into their personalities and relationships .

Adult-Child and Teacher-Pupil linguistic strategies and their relationshipto the characters in The Caretaker

The balance of power between Aston and Davies and the linguisticstrategies by which it is constructed and conveyed can be compared toadult-child language strategies, as described by Sinclair and Coulthard(1975) and Mead (1976) .

Aston is the adult, the caregiver and provider who satisfies Davies'physical needs, giving him a home and money . Conversely, Davies, thechild, is economically dependent on Aston for shelter, clothing and hisbasic necessities .

Aston's desire to meet Davies' physical wants is in striking contrastwith his reluctance to negotiate an emotional relationship . Davies' pleasfor psychological empathy are responded to with purely physical support .In their initial exchanges, Aston offers Davies a seat, tobacco, a bed, topick up his bag from the cafe and, later, a smoking jacket and thecaretaking job . His language use therefore establishes Aston as aprovider, and hence in a dominant position . These utterances are all madein the declarative form, for example:

'Aston :

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

This reinforces Aston's superior role, as he assumes the authority tocomplete-an action on Davies' behalf without his prior consent .

Aston also withholds, or fails to volunteer, information to Davies, astrategy used by adults when a concept is beyond a child's mentalcapacities or taboo . For example, when Davies seeks reassurance about theblacks next door : 'Davies : They don't come in?' Aston does not supply

7 7

the information requested, but responds with 'You see a blue case?' (TheCaretaker : 19) . Davies' complaints about Aston's withholding ofinformation and failure to communicate further illuminate his subordinateposition . He complains that Aston 'don't say a word' to him (TheCaretaker : 58) and 'don't have any conversation' ( The Caretaker : 60) . Itis Aston who controls the structure of their conversations

Another strategy employed by Aston is his use of explicit directivesas offers to Davies . For example: 'Sit down .' ( The Caretaker : 7) and'Take a seat .' ( The Caretaker : 8) .

He also plays the role of teacher to Davies, the uncomprehendingstudent, when he instructs Davies in the use of his electric fire. Heemploys another teacher-pupil strategy by refusing Davies a clock, thuscontrolling Davies' time . A further assertive strategy is his censure ofDavies, when the latter has criticized his shed .

Censure is a much-wielded linguistic weapon that Mick uses againstDavies . He consistently insults and criticizes Davies, reinforcing hisdominant position . He accuses Davies of being 'choosy' ( The Caretaker :33) and of being a 'fibber', 'rogue', 'scoundrel', 'robber', 'old skate'and 'a barbarian ( The Caretaker : 34,35) . He interrupts Davies' attemptsto defend himself, thus denying him equal speaking rights andsubordinating him further, whereas Davies, in contrast, makes only onecensure of Mick .

Mick uses many directives to Davies, most of which monitor or directhis behaviour . For example, Davies is instructed with: 'Don't get tooperky' ( The Caretaker : 35), 'Don't get out of your depth' ( The Caretaker :35), 'Don't overstep the mark, son' ( The Caretaker : 38) and 'Don't get tooglib' ( The Caretaker : 50) .

These directives reveal Mick's understanding of Davies' character,that he foresees that Davies will 'overstep the mark' and try to takeadvantage of Aston .

As with the case of censure, Davies issues few directives to Mick, butwhen he does, they are employed as defence mechanisms, for he is not thesuperior that Mick is when issuing explicit directives . His utterances aresimply desperate attempts to gain some control over the situation in whichhe finds himself with Mick .

He is a victim struggling against anaggressor as he tries to regain his trousers and bag from Mick .

Mick reinforces his dominant position over Davies on a number ofoccasions, monitoring even his thoughts and claiming to be able to readhis mind with declarations such as 'I know what you want .' ( The Caretaker :59) . He also controls Davies' past by creating it for him, and Daviesindicates his subordination by accepting this fictitious past history inthe colonies .

The-teacher's right to criticize the subordinate pupil is assumed byMick when he makes judgements about Davies' linguistic abilities anddeliberately misinterprets him, as can be seen in the following example.When Davies claims Aston is 'no particular friend' of his, Mick respondswith :

'I'm sorry to hear my brother's not friendly .' ( The Caretaker : 47)

7 8

Davies again shows his subordinate position in the relationship byaccepting Mick's interpretation .

Mick further questions Davies' lexical usage when he uses theadjective 'funny' to describe Aston:

'Mick :

What's funny about him?PauseDavies : Not liking work .Mick :

What's funny about that?Davies : Nothing .'

(The Caretaker : 50)

When Davies retracts his statement above and follows with an attempt tore-explain his meaning, he implies his acknowledgment of linguisticincompetence and inferiority to Mick .

Mick's dominant position and Davies' subordinate role are constantlyrestated by the variety of different language devices they employ. FromMick's first utterance to Davies : 'What's your game?'( The Caretaker : 29)onwards, their ability to understand each other's real intentions and thethreats hidden below the surface meanings of their language are conveyedin their verbal interactions .

In contrast, the relationship between the brothers is revealed intheir limited exchanges to be well-balanced . Verbal strategies such ascensure, directives, and adult-child, teacher-pupil strategies aresignificantly lacking in their exchanges in which the Co-operativePrinciple is upheld .

Mick uses a strategy normally associated with the subordinatecharacter when he repeats Aston's words : 'From the roof, eh?' (TheCaretaker : 37) . However, this implication of subordination is negated bythe other linguistic strategies employed in his exchanges with hisbrother . He volunteers relevant information and partially repeats Aston'swords, indicating his willingness to participate in the exchange on equalterms . In addition, the check-back strategies employed by Mick displayhis desire to -11rc Bill communication .

In fact, the brothers' Aialnmia Ah^"t th? (iafnanwi Tnnf is the onlyexample of a conversation in which participant- makP a genuine effort tocommunicate on equal terms in the play .

Conclusion

Aston's and Davies' exchanges can therefore be seen to exhibit many ofthe linguistic features of adult-child exchanges and are successfullynegotiated to establish Aston in a dominant role .

Similarly, Mick andDavies, through verbal strategies common to teacher-pupil interactions,establish a relationship with Davies in the subordinate role .

7 9

Grice's Co-operative Principle is, furthermore, exploited by thecharacters in the same way as it is by speakers of colloquial English .The language is seen to be functioning beyond its semantic form in thepragmatic inferences arising from the conversational implicaturesexamined .

The dramatic significance of these inferences is evident in theinsights provided into the characters' psychological mechanisms . Theirmotives, fears, strengths and weaknesses are revealed through theirtreatment of the Co-operative Principle and manipulation of the otherlinguistic devices examined . Through this analysis of the linguisticdevices and exchanges of The Caretaker , we witness Pinter's creation of a'new dynamic of dialogue in which the coercive power of socialconversation becomes the focus of character confrontation' (Quigley,1976) .

REFERENCES

Clark, L .D . 1987 . Speech in Harold Pinter's 'The Caretaker' . M.A . Thesis .University of Hong Kong

Grice, H .P . 1975 . 'Logic and conversation' . In Syntax and Semantics 3 :Speech Acts , edited by P . Cole & J .L . Morgan, pp . 41-58 . New York :Academic Press .

Mead, R . 1985 . 'The discourse of small-group teaching' . In Dialogue andDiscourse , edited by D . Burton .

Pinter, H . 1960 . The Caretaker . London : Pyre Methuen .

Quigley, A .E. 1975 . The Pinter Problem . Princeton University Press .

Sinclair, J .M. & Coulthard, R .M . 1975 . Towards an Analysis of Discourse:the English Used by Teachers and Pupils . London : Oxford UniversityPress .