Chapter Three

Man and Superman:

The Language of Philosophy and Comedy

62

In the intervening period between Candida and Man and Superman, Shaw wrote

a number of plays with considerable theatrical success -plays such as, The Man

of Destiny, You Never Can Tell, The Devil 's Disciple, Caesar and Cleopatra, in

which he has amended some of his earlier technical lapses. Now his theatre

idiom incorporates more innovative components. His stage with elaborate setting

shows greater complexity in the representation of even non-realistic themes and

motifs. He shows much technical novelty in using music, light/shade and other

stage effects along with spectacular projection of situations and characters,

though the basic element of discussion is utilized in different modes. In the

1890s there was a belief that the English actors of that time could not possibly

cope with the flood of dialogue - that their tongues were not glib enough to

rattle it off at the lightning speed required. Shaw took the challenge and

introduced long solo speeches in Man and Superman, fusing them with ample

amount of comedy and philosophy, so as to draw the audience to his main

purpose - to give them a foretaste of his philosophy of Creative Evolution, and

to show how his vision is staged. All this has been done with the aid of verbal

dialogues and non-verbal visual elements. An atmosphere of dream and fantasy

constitutes an important portion of the play in Act III.

Man and Superman is a more mature play than Candida in respect of its subject

and dramatic technique. Here we have "a biological comedy with spiritual

overtones, or a spiritual comedy with a biological ground bass" (Bentley 16).

Thematically viewed, the domestic comedy material with its eternal triangle in

Candida changes into a superb blending of comedy and philosophy in Man and

Superman. Louis Crompton calls Tanner "a comic Prometheus" (81 ), committed

to the ideals of social reconstruction for an egalitarian society. Tanner, in the real

63

Shavian manner, denounces the cruelties, injustices and stupidities of society

through his impassioned rhetorical arguments. All through the theatre speeches

here Shaw is able to create in us a perception that we are listening to a

philosopher who is right in all his major philosophic premises and amusingly

wrong as to his minor ones (81).

The play opens in Portland Place, where Roebuck Ramsden consoles the

mournful young man Octavius on the death of Whitefield, friend of Ramsden

and father of Ann (whom Octavius is expected to marry as per her father's

wish). Ramsden also warns Octavius about the bad influence of his friend John

Tanner, who suddenly appears there to announce that Mr Whitefield in his Will

has appointed Ramsden and Tanner joint guardians of his daughter. Ramsden

(who dislikes Tanner for authoring a 'licentious' book "The Revolutionist's

Handbook") and Tanner (who dislikes Ramsden on socio-political grounds) are

unwilling to share the joint responsibility, but Ann appears there and beguiles

them into accepting the charge. Meanwhile, a scandal breaks upon them

concerning Violet (Octavius's sister) who has got into a secret marriage but

adamantly refuses to disclose the husband's name. In the next Act at Richmond

(house of Ann's mother) Octavius informs Tanner that Ann has rejected him.

Tanner plays it down with his peculiar philosophy of woman as a huntress

playing with the intended victim. Later on, when Ann complains about her

mother's interfering role, he jokingly suggests that Ann should break her chains

by taking a motor-ride to the continent with him. To his horror, she agrees. His

horror doubles, when his chauffeur Straker informs him that he is actually Ann's

"marked-down victim." Tanner immediately flees in his car to Spain. The third

Act shows Tanner and Straker captured by brigands in the Sierra Navada. While

listening to the brigand-chief Mendoza's pathetic love· story; Tanner has a

dream, that forms a di~logue-sequence called "Don Juan in Hell" - in which

Tanner becomes Don Juan, Ramsden becomes Don Gonzalo, Mendoza the

Devil, and Ann the Dona Ana of Mozart's Opera. This dream-sequence becomes

a discussion about Heaven, Hell, Woman and the philosophy of the Life Force.

Don Juan is the exponent of this philosophy. The dream ends. Next morning

64

Tanner wakes up to find himself confronted by Ann (along with her mother and

sister). Soldiers arrive too. All are safe - including the brigands whom Tanner

introduces as his escort. The fourth Act opens in a hotel at Granada, where

Violet resolves the mystery of her marriage and Ann completes her capture of

Tanner.

Though Shaw sometimes calls the play a tragi-comedy, it has always been

treated as a philosophical comedy or a high comedy. In stray perfonnances the

play was sometimes treated as a farce or a burlesque. A correct production of the

play must bring out the spirit of polished and skilful comedy. The interior setting

in Acts I, II, and IV must show evidence of wealth and aflluence. The play

(minus the Hell Scene) was first perfonned at the Royal Court Theatre on 21

May 1905 under the auspices of the Stage Society. There were two perfonnances

there. Then on 23 May 1905 the play was staged in public by Vedrenne and

Barker at the same theatre, and they continued it for twelve matinees. All these

performances avoided the "Don Juan in Hell" sequence of Act III. The first

American production was held on 5 September 1905 by Robert Loraine at the

Hudson Theatre, New York. Later on, Loraine toured the whole ofU. S. with the

production. The "Don Juan in Hell" scene as a separate unit was first perfonned

at the Royal Court Theatre by Vedrenne and Barker on 4 June 1907. The entire

play (i.e. with the Hell scene) was first produced by Esme Percy on 11 June 1915

at the Lyceum Theatre, Edinburgh; in London the first full production was

presented on 23 October 1925 at the Regent Theatre. The Hell scene became so

popular that many groups performed it as a separate dramatic sequence, and

even as a group-reading sequence in evening dress without scenery or costumes.

Charles Laughton toured the U.S. with this Hell scene-sequence. Among all

productions of the play (with or without the Hell scene), the one under the

Ve~enne-Barker management was supposed to be the ~ost ideal performance,

bringing out the real Shavian spirit of a serious comedy that would not degrade

itself into farce, while retaining the full splendours of wit and humour.

65

II

The play opens with a situation that reminds us of the opening of Candida.

Ramsden prides himself on being a liberal democrat and a man ahead of his

time, but actually his ideas are as conventional as Morell's Christian Socialism.

Like Morell, he implicitly accepts and rather cherishes the existing patriarchal

social structure: both of them depend on such a social system and advance their

ideals within it. Ramsden is the fatherly guardian of Ann Whitefield, who, like

Candida, perplexes others about her real motive to achieve some future end of

her own. Ann's suitor is the passive and poetic Octavius who idolises her, as

Eugene does Candida. The character types, such as, Ramsden, Octavius and

Tanner have some striking resonances with Morell, Lexy and Eugene in

Candida, and the situation bears superficial resemblance to the earlier play. But

all these potential ingredients have been developed not into an emotional triangle

for another domestic comedy, but into a philosophical comedy with wider

spheres of action and vision.

Shaw has advanced the dramatic action in two different structures: the ostensible

one of surface-drama which unfolds the familiar incidents and episodes of comic

romance, with its stereotypes of the pursuer and the pursued; and a conceptual

deep structure which exploits the Don Juan1 legend in a novel and innovative

manner. Its forward movement directs the surface action. The two structures do

not merely co-exist, they are interrelated, with the second, grounding the first.

Right from the start, Shaw has used his theatre language to explore different

chords of the psychic world of his characters. His dialogues are marked by

inflation-deflation movement. Thus, when Ramsden is informed that Tanner has

come to his house and wishes to see him, he is first surprised, and then gets

angry, because their mutual hatred for each other is well known, and even

Octavius is surprised at Tanner's visit. Ramsden refuses to see him. The fact that

Tanner has come here in company with- among others- Ann, further infuriates

Ramsden. But when·Octavius says that Tanner is "desperately afraid of Ann,"

66

and he must have something really serious to say to Ramsden, the latter allows

Tanner to see him:

[ ... He is now in the panic-stricken phase; and he walks straight up to

Ramsden as if with the fiXed intention of shooting him on his own hearthrug.

But what he pulls from his breast pocket is not a pistol, but a foolscap

document which he thrusts under the indignant nose of Ramsden as he

exclaims.].

TANNER Ramsden: do you know what that is?

RAMSDEN [loftily] No, sir.

TANNER. It's a copy of Whitefield's will. Ann got it this morning.

RAMSDEN. When you say Ann, you mean, I presume, Miss Whitefield.

TANNER. I mean our Ann, your Ann, Tavy's Ann, and now, Heaven help me,

my Ann!

OCTAVIUS [rising, very pale] What do you mean?

TANNER. Mean! [He holds up the will]. Do you know who is appointed Ann's

guardian by this will?

RAMSDEN [coolly] I believe I am.

TANNER. You! You and I, man! I! I!! I!!! Both of us! [He flings the will down

on the writing table]. (Act I, 335)

This explosive information terribly shocks Ramsden. While Tanner apprehends

that Ann will "commit every crime a respectable woman can" and put everything

on the guardians, Ramsden simply refuses to accept the guardianship. But

Tanner warns him that his refusal is meaningless - "You might as well refuse to

accept the embraces of a boa constrictor when once it gets round your neck."

The three male figures are obsessed with their possible relation with Ann.

Tanner wants to distance himself from her, and advises his friend Octavius to do

the same. But Ocatavius dreams of marrying her, of having a "lifetime of

happiness" with her. Tanner baffies Octavius by saying that "a lifetime of

happiness! No man alive could bear it: it would be hell on earth." Ramsden,

unable to realise the implication of Tanner's words, gets angry and says that he

is not ready to listen to his "fooleries." The three male characters are presented,

as it were, engaged in a bargain, over the possession of Ann. They talk about the

desires and prospects of a young lady in her absence. Shaw might enkindle the

67

desire of the audience to witness on the stage how the absentee Ann works her

way, subtly and indirectly, into their minds forcing them to fulfil her desires:

OCTAVIUS. May I make a suggestion?

RAMSDEN. Certainly, Octavius.

OCTAVIUS. Amt we forgetting that Ann herself may have some wishes in this

matter?

RAMSDEN. I quite intend that Annie's wishes shall be consulted in every

reasonable way. But she is only a woman, and a young and inexperienced

woman at that.

TANNER. Ramsden: I begin to pity you. (Act I, 336)

Ann ultimately has her own way of getting the two accept her as their ward in

deference to her father's wishes ("My father's wishes are sacred to me", she

says). While Ramsden surrenders to her sentimentality, Tanner capitulates to her

wiles. The plot-line follows a particular pattern based on some episodic

situations. The Tanner-Ann-Octavius world of action is deeply related to the

Violet-Malone world which forms the sub-plot, both thematically and

structurally. Both the main plot and sub-plot derive the force of their action

from the wills of some "paternalistic figures"- the deceased Mr Whitefield,

Ramsden, Malone Senior, and also the portraits, busts and photographs of great

figures of Ramsden's political and social beliefs. The chief function of the sub­

plot of Man and Superman is to "extend the range of the play's critical and

satirical reference" (Gibbs 128).

Shaw has nicely utilised all the possibilities of the whole dramatic situation -

particularly of his 'women in love.' In the main plot, Ann is professed to be in

love with Tanner in spite of his stem opposition, but nothing is clearly known

about Violet's love. Thus, the open love of Ann is to be contrasted with the

secret love of Violet. Shaw has treated all these materials in a naturalistic way

with greater scope for dialogue in the dramatic structure, fusing reality and myth

- the reality of emotional relationship of the two pairs and the myth of Don

Juan. In Man and Superman we have the more quintessential Shaw than in any

other Shavian play. Here, the philosophy of Creative Evolution operating as the

Life Force has been objectified through the episodes of love of Ann and Tanner

68

on the comic level, and through the dream episodes of Ana and Don Juan, on the

metaphysical level. Each of these reflects upon the other, gaining force from

each other for their respective advancement in course of the action. While

Tanner's dream sequence, an idiom of theatre, may be dramatically and

psychologically linked to his role in the rest of the play, it reveals his

helplessness and constraints on the level of the subconscious, and is thus

counterpointed by the Shavian dialectical patterns and sharp wit. It sounds

significant that Ann wishes to call Tanner by the name of Don Juan - "I'll call

you after your famous ancestor Don Juan" (Act I). In agreement with Charles A.

Berst we may say that Don Juan is a subconscious projection of Tanner, and an

alter ego of Shaw. Berst comments:

The authorial oversoul is most badly present in Tanner, Juan, and Shotover, but

even these characters function in such disparate roles as self-caricature, alter­

ego, and a combination of the two. (302-303)

III

From the beginning, Tanner tries to scrupulously remove the wrong romantic

ideas of happiness through his philosophical conviction expressed in superb wit,

humour and of course pungent satire. Octavius feels that to be under the

"fascination" of a beloved woman is to have a foretaste of "fulfilment" on his

part, but Tanner disagrees and wittily makes the point that the "fulfilment" is

essentially on the woman's purpose resulting in happiness- neither the man's

nor the woman's, but Nature's - for "Vitality in a woman is a blind fury of

.creation." Octavius's illusion that women take the ''tenderest care of us" is

shattered by Tanner's pungent retort: "Yes, as a soldier takes care of his rifle or a

musician of his violin." The Shavian twist lies in the fact that in the love-relation

between a woman and a man, the latter would be treated as an "instrument" by

the former. Tanner now wants to make Octavius realise that the purpose of an

69

artist is exactly like that of a woman - i.e. new creation. This creativity is

achieved through ruthless destruction of each other. In his long speech Tanner

explains how the true artist will starve his wife and children and make his

mother drudge for his living so as to enable him to completely devote to his art.

He gets into intimate relations with women only to discover their deepest secrets

in his art. "To women he is half vivisector, half vampire"- Tanner asserts this

paradoxical truth of an artist's life. While woman as mother can ruthlessly

destroy others to continue her work of creation, to preserve the race and to renew

life, the artist would ruthlessly sacrifice a thousand women for the sake of

creating a finer picture, writing a greater play or poem, for conceiving a

profounder philosophy. Tanner concludes: "Of all human struggles there is none

so treacherous and remorseless as the struggle between the artist man and the

mother woman." Tanner's defmition of the ''true artist" is essentially Shavian.

An artist, Tanner thinks, would be indifferent almost to everything, except his

art:

The true artist will let his wife starve, his children go barefoot, his mother

drudge for his living at seventy, sooner than work at anything but his art. (Act

I, 341i

The remarkable feature of Tanner's philosophical arguments is that they have

not turned a boring speech. The readers and audience, as well as Octavius as the

direct listener, have been always on the alert and felt intellectually provoked by

the twists of words and expressions, the use of wit and paradox, and the reversal

of common ideas about woman, mother and artist.

This sort of serious discussion about love, art and happiness comes to a

temporary break with the entry of Ramsden who is cheerfully and comically

welcomed by no other than Tanner: "Good morning, fellow guardian" (Act I,

341 ). The expression "fellow guardian" creates a sense of mirth among the

audience, but it is soon drowned when Ann discloses that Violet has committed

something "dreadful", which is disclosed to be unwedded pregnancy. But to

Tanner, Violet has fulfilled the "highest purpose and greatest function" (342).

Now the speeches of Tanner reflect the deeper truth of the Shavian philosophy.

70

When he says that Violet in this condition needs help and respect, the actual

Tanner comes out- one who has the real feeling for motherhood. This is the

first news of creation in a play where sterility is apparent in most areas. But as

Morgan points out, Violet's supposed pregnancy determines the later course of

action in the first Act in which one finds no mention of the matter. From this we

may conclude, with William Archer, that Shaw has here dramatised "a purely

metaphysical conception of Woman as a man-devouring monster" (T. F. Evans

117).

IV

The end of the first Act is marked by Tanner's spontaneous help and assistance

to Violet, the would-be-mother. He unhesitatingly declares that he is

wholeheartedly on her side in this matter, and with "sincerest respect" supports

her action with the gusto of a typical Shavian heretic: "You are entirely in the

_right; and the family is entirely in the wrong" (Act I, 350). The juxtaposition of

"right" and ''wrong" in a single sentence adds much force and vitality to

Tanner's conviction. Shaw's manipulation of language here creates an

impression that even in a dramatically heightened situation he does not forget

how to use words in their proper place to give the audience the actual taste of the

situation. Again, his authorial voice in stage direction states that Octavius

"overwhelmed with shame"(350) does not have the courage to face the reality as

it is; he is rather swayed by his emotions, and therefore never comes to "know"

that Violet is "right." The audience gets enough mirth by the visual presentation

of a baftled Octavius. Shaw has subtly made a distinction between the traditional

lover and the Shavian "libertine" in the portrayal of Octavius and Tanner. The

Violet episode has betrayed the hollowness of the patriarchal concept of chastity

and virginity, and also the underlying power relation between a man and a

woman in the hegemonic concept of society. The match between Violet and

71

Hector Malone Jr. inverts the social conventions. Though ordinarily it would be

a good match, Hector Malone Sr., a self-made American millionaire, wants his

son to marry an English aristocrat's daughter or a peasant's daughter, in order to

gain what he describes as a social profit. That is why the marriage is kept a

secret. But the twist of the situation is that it is Violet, not Hector, who insists on

concealing the whole matter, because- as she says:

You can be as romantic as you please about love, Hector; but you mustnt be

romantic about money .... It is I and not you who suffer by this concealment.

Actually Violet wants Hector to be independent of his father's money, to

struggle through poverty and establish himself in life. But meanwhile Violet

boldly faces social scandal about her unwedded pregnancy, particularly the

reactions of the established morality. Octavius (her brother), Ramsden and Miss

Ramsden express their shock at and disapproval of her position, while Tanner

justifies her on philosophical grounds ("that vitality and bravery are the greatest

qualities a woman can have, and motherhood her solemn initiations into

womanhood"). But Violet repulses all these insults by disclosing her true marital

status. Shaw satirises all this in his characteristic manner, by the employment of

pungent wit and piercing verbal rhetorics:

VIOLET. [flushing with indignation] Oh! You think me a wicked woman, like

the rest. You think I have not only been vile, but that I share your

abominable opinions. Miss Ramsden: I have borne your hard words

because I knew you would be sony for them when you found out the truth.

But I wont bear such a horrible insult as to be complimented by Jack on

being one of the wretches of whom he approves. I have kept my marriage a

secret for my husband's sake. But now I claim my right as a married

woman not to be insulted.

OCTAVIUS. [raising his head with inexpressible reliejj You are married!

VIOLET. Yes; and I think you might have guessed it. What business had you

all to take it for granted that I had ~o right to wear my wedding ri~g? Not

one of you even asked me: I cannot forget that.

TANNER. [in ruins] I am utterly crushed. I meant well. I apologize - abjectly

apologize.

72

VIOLET. I hope you will be more careful in future about the things you say.

Of course one does not take them seriously; but they are very disagreeable,

and rather in bad taste, I think.

TANNER. ... We have all disgraced ourselves in your eyes, I am afraid, except

Ann .... (Act I, 350)

Again, one may note how Shaw has created a fme dramatic situation aided by

his favourite inflation-deflation technique with the help of just a single word

"know." When Tanner says that Ramsden and Octavius have told him of the

uneasy plight of Violet, she immediately retorts: "But they dont know" (350),

making the audience believe that these two men are unaware of the pregnancy

of Violet or the person responsible for it. Tanner's "Dont know what?"

strengthens the idea, but only to be deflated with Violet's flat but convincing

assertion: "They dont know that I am in the right" (350).

Violet here asserts her individual right as a woman. The gradual unfolding of the

dramatic action is really unique. Violet now gains confidence to declare that she

is a married woman and she deliberately keeps her marriage a mystery for her

husband's sake. All the characters present are sorry and ashamed of their

behaviour towards her, except Miss Ramsden, who still demands to know the

identity of the husband. The episode is marked by the victory of Violet, which

begins with her embarrassment and ignominy:

MRS RAMSDEN. [stiffiy] And who, pray, is the gentleman who does not

acknowledge his wife?

VIOLET. [promptly] That is my business, Miss Ramsden, and not yours. I

have my reasons for keeping my marriage a secret for the present.

RAMSDEN. All I can say is that we are extremely sorry, Violet. I am shocked

to think of how we have treated you.

OCTAVIUS. [awkwardly] I beg your pardon, Violet. I can say no more. (Act I,

350)

Tanner makes the situation perfectly clear. He says t? Violet:

Dont hit us when we're down, Violet. We seem to have made fools of

ourselves; but really it was you who made fools of us. (350)

Violet has the courage to utter such a statement: "Oh, how infamous! How

abominable! How disgracefully you have all been talking about me!" (350). The

73

"secret" love and marriage of Violet with the still unnamed lover is perfectly

balanced by the open love-chase between Ann and Tanner. However, the Act

ends, again, with the sarcastic comment by Tanner: "The cup of our ignominy is

full" (3 51).

Shaw's metaphysical attitude as reflected in his theatre considers man as a

transitional phase in his evolution towards a superior level of existence. His

heroes are therefore aware of their responsibility towards society as agents of the

Life Force3• Tanner's proposed conjugal relation entails his surrender to that

force which has been presented in the guise of a theatrical love-chase. Tanner,

the individual, protests and tries to get rid of the inevitable clutch of Ann. This

offers Shaw ample scope to create comedy invested with his own philosophy.

Shaw's comic genius is concerned with the plight of the individual in his relation

to society. Here, in Man and Superman, Tanner, the clown-hero, has succeeded

in assimilating the dualities of his roles, - a dignified hero and a supercilious

clown, - so that he can see through the nature of man.

v

The blending of comedy and philosophy in Man and Superman continues in the

second Act- more vitally and forcefully, with the uncovering of the underlying

secret and mysterious connotation of one incident after another. The Act starts

with the casual conversation between Tanner and the Chauffeur (Straker) who is

labelled as Shaw's ~New Man'- one who is a sort of polytechnic engineer, a

man of the world, not a product of any formal upper-class college. Here the

Shavian language is essentially satirical. Shaw satirises the so-called intellectuals

who do not have sufficient knowledge and experience about reality itself.

However, the action receives another turn and twist with the entry of Octavius.

74

Tanner's dramatic speeches reveal the belief that Octavius is a "fool" to think

that he is the pursuer in love, while the fact is the reverse - it is Ann who has to

play that role. Ann is endowed with the potential of a vitalist. Shaw has inverted

the traditional concept of love-chase. Inversion is a motive force in the Shavian

canon of drama. The active role of a woman in love is finely expressed in

Tanner's comically but antithetically balanced words:

It is a woman's business to get married as soon as possible, and a man's to

keep unmarried as long as he can (Act II, 353).

But this cannot dissuade Octavius from his obsession, and when he says that

Ann is his only source of inspiration, Tanner does not want to miss the

opportunity of puncturing his romantic illusion:

Many Ann; and at the end of a week youll fmd no more inspiration in her than

in a plate of muffins (354).

Octavius is still incorrigible to articulate his rhapsody of love:

Ah, if we were only good enough for Love! There is nothing like Love: there is

nothing else but Love: without it the world would be a dream of sordid horror

(354).

Tanner, however clownish he may be in his outward behaviour, has the insight

to feel that Octavius is no match for Ann. In the traditional love-drama Octavius

is Don Juan, but in the Shavian dramatic framework that place is reserved for

Tanner - for here we have to witness the ip.version of the mythical Don Juan

story.

VI

After the Tanner-Octavius episode, Shaw improvises another attractive dramatic

episode marked by sheer comicality and wit, in which we first come to know

that Ann has warned her sister Rhoda not to go out with Tanner. This bit of

information has been communicated to Tanner by Rhoda through a letter. Tanner

feels it to be a great insult to him. The Shavian hero has supposed that it is Ann

75

who has fabricated a fine lie, just to deceive him and to draw him into her web,

just like a spider. This small episode is marked by the use of a single word

"understand" with a multiple variations in different situations for eliciting

different connotations. Octavius first says: "I think I understand her"; and then

he asks Tanner not to misunderstand Ann: "Surely you cannot misunderstand,

Jack, Ann is shewing you the kindest consideration, even at the cost of deceiving

you"; and fmally he receives the most deserved compliment from one no other

than Ann: "How well you understand!" (Act II, 355). The single word

'understand' involving the three major characters builds up an interesting verbal

pattern. And the sensitive reader easily fmds out Shaw's unusual love for this

particular word which is used in Candida almost in the manner of a refrain or a

Zeit motif Ann here appears to be a skilful manipulator of the situation, taking it

all into her own side, while consoling Octavius by saying that he understands her

so well. She takes advantage of Octavius's illusory love of her, which Tanner

sees through, so that he accuses her: "if Tavy were not in love with you past all

salvation he'd have found out what an incorrigible liar your are." When Ann

confesses to him that she knows that Tanner is not a man of coarse behaviour, he

is very prompt to know why she lied to her sister:

ANN. I know you are incapable of behaving badly -

TANNER. Then why did you lie to her?

ANN. I had to.

TANNER. Had to!

ANN. Mother made me.

TANNER. [his eye flashing] Ha! I might have known it The mother! Always

the mother! (356)

Tanner-Ann confrontation is highly theatrical. Ann's justification of her act on

the plea of her mother's will prompts Tanner to raise larger issues. Tanner

rejects Ann's idea that love for one's mother cannot be a hindrance to one's

development of individuality. The argument involves questions about the

psychological influence of mother on her children's mind. However, the

dramatic significance of the episode lies in the fact that Ann's deliberately

76

contrived situation prompts Tanner to ponder over the miserable plight of the

women in general. He suggests:

. . . . the first duty of manhood and womanhood is a Declaration of

Independence: the man who pleads his father's authority is no man: the woman

who pleads her mother's authority is unfit to bear citizens to a free people (Act

II, 356).

Here, the sudden influx of seriousness into the surface reality of comedy is not

only highly theatrical but also essentially philosophical. When Tanner says that

"nature proclaims for the daughter a father's care and for the son a mother's,"

the sensitive audience observes how easily Shaw refers to the Electra complex

and Oedipus complex in the play. Tanner argues that children must outgrow the

influence of their parents, in order that they can develop into independent

personalities. He advises Ann in good faith to get out of her mother's influence­

"Dor Break your chains. Go your way according to your own conscience and not

according to your mother's." In the course of the advice he lightheartedly

suggests - "Come with me to Marseilles and across to Algiers and to Biskra, at

sixty miles an hour .... That will finish your mother and make a woman of you."

Tanner has never thought of the consequences. Ann immediately accepts the

proposal:

ANN .... It would be delightful: thank you a thousand times, Jack. I'IJ come.

TANNER. [aghast] Youll come!!!

ANN. Of course.

Tanner helplessly watches how the situation goes out of his hand, and it is Ann

. who has the dominating role to play. The gap between Tanner's expectation and

the actual situation creates laughter and amusement, and we. cannot but enjoy the

entire situation feeling how unwittingly the Shavian hero has become the

destined victim of the heroine's "Independence." Tanner has to suffer, so to say,

from a boomerang ef!ect. Shaw relies on the c~ncept of balanced opposites in

the creation, manipulation, and of course, resolution of the dramatic conflicts.

For example, we may refer to the fact that Ann has lied to Tanner to ensnare

him, to serve her own purpose - to create the seedling of the "Superman."

Violet has done the same for her purpose of marrying Hector, and they both have

77

to keep the marriage a "secret". Tanner's fleeing away from Ann's clutch is

balanced by Hector's willing submission to the passionate Violet. The Act has

episodic revelations of facts - one fact, whether exposed or concealed, leads to

the acceleration of another. The identity of Hector Malone has been deliberately

kept secret for heightening the mystery of the play, but this is immediately

revealed when Hector and Violet are allowed enough scope to unravel their

emotions and feelings. However, the Act ends, once again, with the bafflement

of Tanner who does not know that he is the "destined prey". When Tanner asks

Straker 'as man to man' as to why he thinks that why Octavius has no chance

with Miss Whitefield, Straker makes some comments which explode upon

Tanner like bombshells:

STRAKER. Cause she's arter summun else.

TANNER. Bosh! Who else?

STRAKER. You.

TANNER. Me!!!

STRAKER. Mean to tell me you didnt know? Oh, come, Mr Tanner!

Why, it's as plain as the nose on your face ...

TANNER. [wildly appealing to the heavens] Then I -I am the bee, the spider,

the marked down victim, the destined prey.

STRAKER. I dunno about the bee and the spider. But the marked down victim,

thats what you are and no mistake; and a jolly good job for you, too, I

should say. (Act ll, 360}

Thus again a sense of ''mystery" is created which is lurking in the minds of both

the hero and the audience. That Shaw is deliberately preparing his ground for the

plantation of his theory of Creative Evolution is hinted here. The comic ending is

therefore just a prelude to a new, philosophic beginning.

VII

The love-chase of Tanner by Ann in Act III in a motor-race across Europe

\ecomes a spectacular and concrete aspect of Shaw's visual theatre language.

78

The characters taking part in the love-chase in. the second Act seem to be

transported into a dream-world of unreality in the Third. There is a theatrical

preamble with the characteristic interplay of Shavian wit and fun. The motorcar

of Tanner fleeing Ann and journeying across Europe is intercepted in the

Spanish mountains by Mendoza and his brigands. Here we have a fine instance '

of the Shavian use of wit and repartee. Mendoza boastfully introduces himself to

Tanner:

I am a brigand: I live by robbing the rich.

This is immediately deflated by the smart retort of Tanner:

I am a gentleman: I live by robbing the poor (Act ill, 364).

These antithetically balanced exchanges .are appealing to the intellectual

audience and to the general ones. This has been pointed out by Richard Burton:

It is not the intellectuals who appreciate and applaud him, but the general

theatre public; a public caring little or nothing about his ideas or reformatory

purposes, but reacting gladly to his wit and humour, his flair for character, his

genius for story and situation. (277)

The dramatic situation - Tanner and his chauffeur in the hands of brigands

comprising professed Socialists, Anarchists ·etc. - is made to evade direct

political discussions. Instead, Shaw turns it into a half-comic situation, with the

brigand chief Mendoza confiding to Tanner his sentimental love-life. As Tanner

falls asleep, he gets into dreams which reconstruct his present plight. Shaw

demonstrates great theatrical foresight and daring in presenting surrealistic

sequences on the stage at the very beginning of the twentieth century. Most

producers omitted this part from their performances of the play. A.M. Gibbs,

however, thinks that this scene constitutes "an integral part of the whole and the

play is the poorer without it" (135).

The 'Don Juan in Hell Scene' is a sort of drama itself- a-play-within-a-play.

Shaw here seems to project some facts of real life in the forms of the fantasy

world, with roles interchanged and situations twisted. Tanner becomes Don

Juan, Ann becomes Dona Ana, Ramsden's statue becomes Ann's father (Mr

Whitefield), and Mendoza resembles the Devil in Spanish dress - all from the

Spanish opera. The fantasy world allows the humans to plunge into the sub-

79

conscious layer of the mind to reveal and realise the truth. Shaw has been able to

transmute that dream reality into an actual dramatic performance. Here Tanner

and Ann, transformed as Don Juan and Ana, can talk more freely, more whole­

heartedly, without feeling the restrictions of their social identity and their ego,

while they indulge in a sort of role-playing.

In the Hell Scene Tanner, who is changed into Don Juan, appears to be more

vital than Ana in driving his arguments home. Shaw manipulates the language of

Don Juan more dramatically, and with more psychological insight. The

comicality of Juan's language is unmistakable when he informs Ana that since

her dead father is getting bored in heaven, he may at any moment come to this

hell. However, Juan's language is very straightforward, and his arguments are

directed towards a particular goal. That is why now he seems to be more

acceptable in this role than in the main plot's frame of action, where he has to

play the role of the universal comic philosopher as Jack Tanner.

The musical quality of the Shavian theatre language is best exemplified in this

famous Hell Scene. Shaw has painstakingly constructed the Scene, fusing in it so

many components of theatre - music, dream, verbal acrobatics, pungent wit,

long debates. Most of the directors preferred to eschew this Scene from the main

frame of the play, for they thought it to be unstageable. They missed one of the

basic aesthetics of Shaw's theatre, namely his passion for music. The Scene is

both dramatic and musical. It is almost a re-working of Don-Giovanni which has

been labeled by Shaw as ''the world's masterpiece in stage art" (qtd.in Wisenthal

287). The underlying musical quality of Tanner's long philosophic arguments is

proof enough to show Shaw's desire to make drama operatic in this context. The

Scene is "not only a kind of vocal string quartet but is also thoroughly operatic"

(Wisanthal 288). The vocal music in Tanner's philosophic speech is so

effectively woven into the texture of his prose that the audience is moved into

their deepest sensibility. Wisenthal rightly states that the Hell Scene proves the

musical nature of Shaw's dramatic language. "What has become of the music in

the hell scene of Man & Superman?" ( qtd. in Wisenthal 288), an angry Shaw

asked the producer of a BBC radio production in 1946. He believed that music is

80

necessary for creating the proper dramatic effect as well as for providing relief to

the audience who might feel overburdened by the philosophic threads of the

dialogues. The solo speeches of Don Juan are musically framed. The clashes of

values among the characters are musically expressed. Music creates emotion.

Don Juan comments: "Hell is full of musical amateurs: music is the brandy of

the damned." The speeches of the characters are so musical that they can be sung

also. They are orchestrally related to each other.

The Hell Scene dramatises the Shavian philosophy of Creative Evolution and

also of the Life Force. Although some critics consider the scene as superficial or

detachable from the main action, we might say that without this scene the

intended blending of comedy and philosophy would have remained unrealised.

The philosophical concept of "Superman" is artistically dramatised here.

Without the Hell Scene, Shaw's Tanner would be merely a comic butt, a fool,

not an evolving Superman. Eric Bentley comments: "Take away the episode in

hell, and Shaw has written an anti-intellectual comedy" ( qtd. in Bloom 8).

It is in the dream sequence that Tanner, in the persona of Juan, comes out more

successful in his mission of defeating everyone, which he cannot enact in the

realistic stage performances. But the language used by Shaw in the scene to

articulate his philosophy is never disjointed or fantastical. It has still its

underlying strength and vitality. Here Don Juan shows the usual Shavian energy

and gusto in his long speeches, maintaining a profound argumentative and

persuasive mode of approach. When Ana "almost tenderly" asks Juan if he really

loves her, Juan is as if able to sense that his danger is not yet over even in hell,

and delivers a series of words to dissuade her from the path of love:

"Oh, I beg you not to begin talking about love. Here they talk of nothing else

but love: its beauty, its holiness, its spirituality, its devil knows what! (Act ill,

370)

Soon Juan discovers that he does not belong in Hell, but in Heaven "atriong the

masters of reality" (Act III, 370). As the play enacts its sequence of

action/incidents, Tanner is obviously the master of that reality, as he is aware of

Ann's true nature which has been revealed in the comical interactions in the

81

play. Shaw's manipulation of theatre language shows that the three main male

figures differ in their attitude to Ann. Ramsden sees her as a dutiful and loving

daughter; Octavius regards her as a helpless orphan in need of protection, but to

Tanner, Ann is no longer in danger and therefore needs no help at all: "Stand by

her! What danger is she in?" In his state of dream Tanner as Juan does not ignore

his identity as 'a comic Prometheus.' His theatrical language is charged ~ith

comic and satiric overtones. He turns the conventional concept of Hell and

Heaven upside down by virtue of his inimitable verbal rhetorics: "hell is the

home of the unreal and of the seekers for happiness .... Heaven is the home of

the masters of reality."

Moreover, in the Hell scene we find a continuation of the discussion between

Don Juan and Dona Ana on the ongoing debate (on the dual roles of man and

woman) between Tanner and Ann which was initiated in the Ramsden study.

The nominal setting of Hell enables Juan to speak beyond the confines of

theatrical and historical time. Shaw's vision of man's advancement in society is

reflected in Don Juan's passion for evolution as his decisive advantage over the

mundane interests of the Devil. In the dialogue of Juan there are the usual comic

touches of wishfulfilment, but far more engaging is the fulfilment of the

evolutionary scheme.

Morgan (The Shavian Playground) likes to take up the whole episode as a

replica of the "theatre of the masque" (105). She offers further to trace the

similarity between this Shavian spectacle and of Shakespeare's As You Like It

While the Duke and his company sojourn in the ideal world of the Forest of

Arden to unburden their hearts, to renew human relations, and moreover, to tell

the truths untold in the court, in the dream sequence enacted in hell in Man and

Superman, Shaw shifts his characters from the urban to the fantastical - where

his main dramatic figur~s re-appear not in 'deliberate disguise,' but in the~r

metamorphosed identities. While the obstacles to the fulfillment of love in

Shakespeare's comedy are of political nature, those in Shaw's play are of

psychological nature. But the significant point of similarity lies in the fact that

here Ann has to play a number of tricks to win over Tanner, just as her

82

Shakespearian counterpart - Rosalind or Ganymede - has to play different

pastoral tricks to win Orlando. The Ann-Tanner love episode is dramatically and

thematically more significant than the purely romantic Rosalind-Orlando love­

episode, because it transports the audience to a higher plane of thought and

philosophy that offers an intellectual defence of Don Juanism.

Margery M. Morgan is of the opinion that the "Hell scene" presents "Shaw's

undramatic verbosity", remarkable only for the "straight political propaganda"

by the playwright, where "the debate form is sham; there is no real conflict"

(104). But such an interpretation of the dream scene is not acceptable. In regard

to Morgan's charge of the lack of conflict we may well argue that here the

conflict is more psychological than logical, because Don Juan's role here

actually propagates the Shavian doctrine of Love, Marriage, Justice and Honour,

and also shatters the conventional ideas of Heaven and Hell. A. M. Gibbs has

pertinently observed that in the Dream Scene "the play's comedy and philosophy

are brought into a dynamic and mutually modifying relation" (135). Shaw uses

his theatre vocabulary to serve this dual purpose - the purpose of providing his

philosophy and relieving the audience by means of some comic touches. For

instance, we may refer to the brief episode between Don Juan and Ana where the

former unconsciously as in a dream, narrates how he has been lucky enough in

escaping from the clutches of a woman who was to make him a sure prey. This

is highly comic, as Juan here reenacts the fate of his earthly prototype which we

have already witnessed. But this comicality is temporarily sidetracked when the

Shavian Don Juan refutes the "foolish philosopher" Descartes's formulation "I

think, therefore I am," and admits that it is the woman who taught him to say "I

am, therefore I think',., - an inversion of the Cartesian philosophy of putting the

essence of man before his existence to assert the contrary doctrine that existence

precedes essence.

83

VIII

Shaw has consciously made the ideas of Hell and Heaven overlap with each

other, not simply to demolish the hollowness of conventionality regarding these

two spheres, but also to lead the audience to partake in the Shavian world of

paradox and verbal playfulness. He achieves a disorientation of conventional

modes of life and theatre by the power of his theatre language. This language

operates through vigorous shifts of thought and argument, allusion, emotion and,

of course, a unique rhetorical mode. Shaw's theatre language enables him to

dramatise the interactions between the so-called underworld figures quite

. convincingly. The Heaven-Hell-Superman configuration dramatised in the

Dream scene, includes a very significant dialectical pattern operating on the level

of "philosophic man" and mother-woman. When Juan frankly confesses that it is

the woman who induces him to say "I would think more; therefore I must be

more" (Act III, 381), he is actually paying tribute to the infinite vitality embodied

in the ''woman" that makes human history a process of creative evolution rather

than a static abstraction. Again, when he admits that "Man is Woman's

contrivance for fulfilling Nature's behest in the most economical way" (378), he

is only advancing the Shavian dramatic technique of inversion as a mode of

adding profundity to the philosophical ground of the plot-line. By saying this

Juan indirectly admits that Ana has a role in the cosmic scheme more vital than

any· other ordinary woman has. This is something which Tanner has been

reluctant to acknowledge in the comic plot of the main drama, where she is just a

predatory woman, with a purpose of getting married "as soon as possible." In the

Dream, Juan speaks more freely and philosophically, because he is rather

liberated from the shackles of society, and also perhaps making himself eligible

enough to be the father of the "Superman." This unique aspect of his philosophy

could be effectively represented by the use of Shaw's theatre language in the

unfamiliar context of Hell.

84

At the end of the Dream sequence Ana chooses not to remain either in heaven or

hell. She now seeks neither happiness nor self-understanding, since for her both

are irrelevant. Ana wants to return to the "real" world, the world in which the

struggle for evolution from nothing to everything, from man to Superman, still

goes on:

I believe in the Life to Come. [Crying to the universe] A father! a father for the

Superman!" (389).

She rushes off the stage to put off her mythical dress as Dona Ana and reappears

as Ann Whitefield who is still determined to pursue her Jack. Marriage is a

"shameful surrender", according to Tanner. But he will have to accept it because

''we do the world's will, not our own." He further states: "The Life Force. I am

in the grip of the Life Force" (402). This is the culmination of the Ann-Tanner

dialectical relation that paves the way for the emergence of new minds and new

men.

Ann becomes a genuine partner in the futurity of the Tanner world. She is now

overwhelmed with a sense of fulfilment and does not know what he is talking

about: she rather indulgently urges Tanner to "go on talking" (405). The

''universal laughter" thus caused is the Shavian approval of this synthesis,

associated with the joy at the fulfilment of the Life Force.

IX

The Superman is the most specified goal of the Life Force. The end of the 'Don

Juan in Hell' scene, where Ana leaves in search of a father for the Superman,

amply justifies it. The Superman is not a distinct end-product of any particular

theory. Like Bergson, Shaw also views the universe as containing two warring

elements -life and matter. Within the given system life seeks to control and

dominate matter, hopefully becoming independent of matter, that is, the body.

The vision of this process is reflected in Baclq to Methuselah ( 1921 ). Again,

85

following the argument of Alan P. Barr we may well s;ay that each improvement

in this evolutionary progression can be looked upon as being a step closer to the

creation of the Superman, or the attainment of the lat¢st Superman, who will in

turn be surpassed by the "Supersuperman" (101). Actually, what Shaw aims at is

a better world, and the Superman then becomes an improved version of man or a

superhuman being.

Thus, the individual love-situation changes into a universal doctrine of marriage

with an explicit evolutionary purpose in the fmal phase of the play, where we

almost witness the Shavian theatrical reproduction of the Bergsonian

philosophical doctrines. Man and Superman is a "<blmatic parable of Creative

Evolution," as Shaw himself claims in the Preface to Back to Methuselah (CP

545), in which, he thinks, the message has got lost in the brilliance of the

comedy. But what is remarkable is Shaw's departure ft-om the Darwinian theory

of the 'Survival of the Fittest' which implies that the weakest would die out

because of the strongest ones. Shaw has utilised the Violet-episode and Tanner's

discreet strategy to protect her from social disgrace, as an axiom to prove the

necessity of a social environment in which the weakest and the helpless persons

can live, and to discard any order that is unresponsiv¢ to the needs of men and

women5.

Shaw was never a philosopher in the usual sense of tQe term, but he believed in

the development of the human spirit, and human consciousness. Fully committed

as he was to an evolutionary pattern of change, he mQStly drew from Bergson's

philosophy of elan vital. Though Shaw is essentially a heretic, he develops for

himself and for modem man a firm belief in th¢ philosophy of creative

evolution, and gives it almost a religious, rather a mystic, character. Though

derived from Lamarck, with its emphasis on envirQnmental changes helping

species to acquire new qualities, the theory of eyoluti~n underwent many forms

of transformation. For Darwin, biological and historjcal evolution depends on

the ruthlessness and chance factor in the process of natural selection, in which

consists the struggle for existence. Samuel Butler opposed the Darwinian theory.

And like him, Shaw too emphasised the role of the mind - instead of

86

fortuitiousness and chance in natural selection, and the belief that there is a

universal design for evolution of the human speci~ ~s. This is to be upheld against

the modem commercialism creating confusion, a;'arm and anarchy. He says in

"The Religion of the Future":

We want to get back to men with some be lief in the purpose of the universe,

with determination to identify themselves with it and with the courage that

comes from that. ... As for my own posit( on, I am, and always have been, a

mystic. (qtd. in Leon Hugo 52-53)

The universal design is the evolution of better h, 1mans and ultimately of the

Superman. The driving force working behind this design is the Life Force, the

Bergsonian elan vital. But Shaw does not wholly su',1scribe to Bergson's doctrine

that justifies oppression of one class by another as~- 'natural' condition and war

as an inevitable 'law of nature.' Again, Shaw's beli~fin the 'Life to come,' what

is better known as the. Shavian Supennan is 'the just man made perfect,' the

culminating point of 'creative evolution'. Though (:escended from Nietzsche's

Ubermensch, the Shavian concept rejects Nietzschei s model of the Supennan -

''the pattern of the Supennan as a ruthless being wh~ 1 would cast out the human

impulses of mercy and tenderness and love and be: the embodiment of Might

attained through the exercise of the 'Will to Power.' ~haw's Superman was to be

the embodiment of Right. ... " (A.C. Ward, "(ntroduction to Man and

Superman" 268). Life Force, according to Shaw, is Norking through man and

woman towards attaining the ultimate goal, and sin,~ life in this light is far

greater than and beyond the individual man, man's fur ction will be to assist Life

Force in its upward movement. Don Juan says in the tQ ird Act:

DON JUAN. [somewhat impatiently] ... Are 1ve agreed that Life is a force

which has made innumerable experiments~ in organizing itself; that the

mammoth and the man, the mouse and the ~ 1egatherium, the flies and the

fleas and th~ Fathers of the Church, are mot:< or less successful attempts to

build up that raw force into higher and ltigher individuals, the ideal

individual being omnipotent, omniscient, infi, Uible, and withal completely,

unilludedly self-conscious: in short, a god?

THE DEVIL. I agree, for the sake of argument.

THE STATUE. I agree, for the sake of avoiding ~ gument.

•

87

ANA. I most emphatically disagree as rega(ds the Fathers ofthe Church; and I

must beg you not to drag them into the ~ rgument.

DON JUAN .... Life has not measured th( success of its attempts at godhead

by the beauty or bodily perfection of th( result, since in both these respects

the birds, as our friend Aristophan< s long ago pointed out, are so

extraordinarily superior, with their rower of flight and their lovely

plumage, and, may I add, the touching poetry of their loves and nestings,

that it is inconceivable that Life, hav~.g once produced them, should, if

love and beauty were her object, start < ff on another line and labor at the

clumsy elephant and the hideous ape, '\i 'hose grand children we are? (Act

III,379)

················································•········································· ANA. Not a personal or friendly relation! What relation is more personal?

more sacred? more holy?

DON JUAN. Sacred and holy, if you like, Ana, but not personally friendly.

Your relation to God is sacred and ltoly: dare you call it personally

friendly? In the sex relation the univet,sal creative energy, of which the

parties are both the helpless agents, over; ides and sweeps away all personal

considerations, and dispenses with all p :rsonal relations. The pair may be

utter strangers to one another, speakin~ different languages, differing in

race and color, in age and disposition, i vith no bond between them but a

possibility of that fecundity for the sakl, l of which the Life Force throws

them into one another's arms at the ex< hange of a glance. (Act ill, 384)

THE DEVIL. I still fail to see, Senor Don Juan, that these episodes in your

earthly career and in that of the Seiior Cq mmander in any way discredit my

view of life. Here, I repeat, you have aU that you sought without anything

that you shrank from.

DON JUAN. On the contrary, here I have· everything that disappointed me

without anything that I have not already tried and found wanting. I tell you

that as long as I can conceive somethlli g better than myself I cannot be

easy unless I am striving to bring it into existence or clearing the way for

it. That is the law of my life. That is 1 he working within me of Life's

incessant aspiration to higher organizat! on, wider, deeper, intenser self­

consciousness, and clearer self-understan. ling. It was the supremacy of this

purpose that reduce love for me to the ~ ~re pleasure of a moment, art for

me to the mere schooling of my facultie: , religion for me to mere excuse

88

for laziness, since it had set up a God who loq ked at the world and saw that

it was good, against the instinct in me that lq oked through my eyes at the

world and saw that it could be improved. I tel: you that in the pursuit of my

own pleasure, my own health, my own fq rtune, I have never known

happiness. It was not love for Woman that d~ livered me into her hands: it

was fatigue, exhaustion. When I was a child, ~ nd bruised my head against a

stone, I ran to the nearest woman and erie( l away my pain against her

apron. When I grew up, and bruised my solll against the brutalities and

stupid~ties with which I had to strive, I did a~ 1in just what I had done as a

child. (Act ill, 385-86)

Thus we fmd that through all these long debates and1 clashes of ideas a new

dramatic form is introduced. Shaw called it 'discussion'; as he refers to the 1913

edition of The Quintessence of lbsenism and desc~,bes as Ibsen's 'prime

technical novelty.' But there is a fundamental difi(-rence between Ibsen's

'discussion' technique and Shaw's. In both Ibsen and Shaw, long discussions

and debates are made dramatically interesting by presen; ation of intellectual and

emotional conflicts, but Shaw adds two more elements .o his discussions. First,

he has inherited from his mother a passion for music, which he utilised while

working as a professional music critic. When he began: writing plays based on

the conflict of ideas and found it necessary to use lengtl; 1y speeches, his musical

talent instilled into them the rhythms and sound effecj s of music, so that the

lengthy discussions, instead of becoming tiresome acquire wonderfully

animated and orchestral character. This has been exemt)lified in the excerpt of

dialogue quoted above from the Hell scene (Act Ill). ~ fhe second element by

.· which Shaw makes his discussion highly interesting is f\ n: nobody before Shaw

thought it possible to retain the effect of seriousness throjtgh a dramatic blending

of levity and seriousness, comedy and philosophy. One simple example among

innumerable ones, can be relevantly cited here. At the enll of the Hell scene, Ana

feels the need for searching out the Superman:

ANA. ... Tell me: where can I find the Superman?

THE DEVIL. He is not yet created, Senora.

THE STATUE. And never will be, probably. Let Its proceed: the red fire will

make me sneeze. [They descend].

89

ANA. Not yet created! Then my work is not jYet done. [Crossing herself

devoutly] I believe in the Life to Come. [Cryi~ to the universe] A father! a

father for the Superman! (Act III, 389)

The Hell scene in third Act is an indispensable part of tire play, both structurally

and thematically, as Nethercot points out: "Without thej~third act the title has no I

meaning. It is not until the very end of Tanner's and *ndoza's dream that the I

word Superman is mentioned; and it is used nowhere els~ in the play" (279).

X

Shaw dramatically represents the fulfilment of the evo~tionary aim of the Life

Force in the fourth Act of Man and Superman, where ~e emphasis is more on

comic resolution than on philosophic postulation. The ~ction takes place in the

"garden of a villa in Granada," where all the dramatis personae have gathered,

including Mendoza. The drama now proceeds to resolv+ the Violet-Hector issue ~

and fmally, the Ann-Octavius-Tanner tangle. Malon~ Senior, the billionaire '

father of Hector, who has intercepted Violet's lovet-letter to Hector, as a I I

confrontation with Violet, addresses her as Miss Robin~n and tells her in blunt

language that he will not approve his son marrying her, ~ven though Hector may '

be disappointed, because ''Men thrive better on disapp~tments in love than on i

disappointments in money." He explains that after hif father's death in utter !

poverty and starvation (in Ireland) he was forced to mi~ate to America. Now he

is a moneyed man and wants "no middle class properifes and no middle class

women for Hector." Instead, he wants a lady with a title~ that is, with aristocratic '

background, that will mean "a social profit" ,for him. ~eanwhile Hect~r comes

in, furious against his father for having misappropriatef1 the letter addressed to

him. When Malone Senior wants Hector to introduc1 him to the family, he

refuses, even on Violet's request: ''No, I will not. H4 is no father of mine."

Malone is deeply hurt and angered by his son disownin. him before his English

90

friends. But Hector now asserts his manliness even over his duties as a son

("before everything I'm a Mahn! n''), and defiantly fl(eclares that he will marry

Violet. This shocks everyone in the family, and Tann¢r and Ramsden, who know

that Violet has been pregnant and already married, express their shock:

MALONE. [bitterly] So this is the highbot11 social tone Ive spoilt be me

ignorant, uncultivated behaviour! Makin love to a married woman! [He

comes angrily between Hector and Violetl and almost bawls into Hector's

left ear] Y ouve picked up that habit of the: British aristocracy, have you?

HECTOR. Thats all right. Dont you trouble yt:mrself about that. I'll answer for

the morality of what I'm doing.

TANNER. [coming forward to Hector's rig~t hand with flashing eyes] Well

said, Ma1one! You also see that mere qtarriage laws are not morality! I

agree with you; but unfortunately Violet ~oes not.

MALONE. I take leave to doubt that, sir. [lFning on Violet] Let me tell you,

Mrs Robinson, or whatever your right Ijame is, you had no right to send

that letter to my son when you were the ~fe of another man.

HECTOR [outraged] This is the last straw. j)ad: you have insulted my wife.

MALONE. Your wife!

TANNER You the missing husband! Anotiler moral imposter! [He smites his

brow, and collapses into Malone's chair'). (Act IV, 396)

Malone Senior at first cannot accept the situatiqn, since Hector has married

without his consent, and asserts that Violet has '4married a beggar," and even

sneeringly refers to the remittance of a thousand dollars Hector has received

from him. The language, particularly the words '~ggar" and "remittance", have

double function here. First, it indicates Malone's paternal authority and money

power, and secondly, it works as a last blow on ijector's personality, so that he

thrusts the remittance letter on his father sayina. "I dont sell the privilege of

insulting my wife for a thousand dollars." H¢ctor's use of words here is

significant in that he now seems to have come out of his father's attitude to life,

which is based on the fear of poverty and its only way out through buying and

selling and investment. Hector now wants to earn his livelihood as a worker.

MALONE .... She's married a beggar.

91

HECTOR. No: she's married a Worker [his American pronunciation imparts

an overwhelming intensity to this simple and unpopular word]. I start to

earn my own living this very afternoon. (Act IV, 396)

We should note Shaw's juxtaposition of the words "be:ggar" and ''worker", and

Hector's intonation in pronouncing the latter word ('worker') which is

'unpopular' in the social circle concerned. It is found that Life Force is working

through Violet to bring about two ostensible results upon two males - first, it

arouses the man in Hector (projecting a heroic front worthy of his classical

name), to get out of his father's commercialism and opt for the dignity of a

worker's labour; secondly, it subdues the audacious billionaire and reduces him

almost to a sentimental fool cringing for the favour of his son's wife. However,

Violet, a mother-to-be, who seems to be instinctive!) serving the Life Force,

knows the value of money in real life and favours Maione Senior by accepting

the thousand dollars returned by Hector. The old man nnw declares that Violet is

"a grand woman": "I wouldnt exchange her for ten duchesses." It is to be noted

that Malone the billionaire cannot outgrow his deej)-rooted commercialism,

expressing everything in terms of 'exchange' or transaction. Tanner seems to be

struck by Malone's surrender through the agency of the Life Force:

And that poor devil is a billionaire! one of the ~~liSter spirits of the age! Led in

a string like a pug dog by the first girl who takes the trouble to despise him!

(Act IV, 397)

Tanner, however, feels threatened indirectly by a similar prospect for himself: "I

wonder will it ever come to that with me." We know that that is exactly what

overtakes him.

It is now Ami's turn to achieve her goal as the central agent of the Life Force in

this play. She fmds two stumbling blocks in her way- the first one is Octavius,

her sentimental and poetic lover, and the second is the toughest, that is to say the

hidden awareness of Tanner being the intended target, and his consequent

resistance. Ann resorts to the devices of downright lying to Octavius and also

coaxing him. She refers to the will of her deceased f~er who ''wished me to

marry Jack" and also to her mother being "set on it" :(Octavius later fmds out

from Mrs Whitefield the humbug of it all). Almost li}(je Candida consoling her

92

disappointed lover Eugene, Ann too calls Octavius "a nice creature - a good

boy." Octavius asserts that his worshipful attitude 1 o Ann's 'divinity' will

continue to their long married life, even at the age of eighty, "one white hair"

from her will make him ''tremble more than the thickes~ gold tress from the most

beautiful young head." Ann now fmds it easy eno 1gh to make Octavius's

sentiments evaporate into the nothingness of Rom~ ~tic poetry. The Shavian

idiom in the context of the ruthless operation of the Lite Force against Romantic

sentimentalism is quite effective:

ANN .... You would always worship the grou( d I trod on, wouldnt you? ...

Oh, thats poetry, Tavy, real poetry .... "t ou must be a sentimental old

bachelor for my sake .... A broken heart is· 1 very pleasant complaint for a

man in London if he has a comfortable in( orne .... Perhaps it's because

youre a poet. You are like the bird that pre .ses its breast against the sharp

thorn to make itself sing. (Act N, 398-99)

Shaw, we notice, satirises even his favourite poet Sheley here in objectifying the

predicament of the Romantic poet producing poe1 ry through suffering and

agony. Ann the realist does not forget to mention the 11ecessity of "a comfortable

income" to sustain such romantic suffering of a disap:)()inted lover. But she does

not stop at that, ·and goes on to dismiss all illusions s1 ill lingering in Octavius by

plainly telling him - "I suppose I dont love you, T~ vy," and again, "I wouldnt

marry you for worlds, Tavy." When Octavius points' mt that her target Tanner is

"an unwilling man," she asserts: "Theres no such tt ing as a willing man when

you really go for him [she laughs naughtily]."

The Shavian idiom consists here of the naughty lau~. and the verbal components

which together create the image of her predatory na1 ure as the determined agent

of the Life Force - one that refuses to be idealised 1 md deified, one that pursues

and seizes its prey. As a result, even though Tann;~r fmds Ann to be a liar, a

coquette,. a bully, and a hypocrite, he feels himself ir evitably in her very grip:

Ann, alone with Tanner, watches him an£i waits. He makes an irresolute

movement towards the gate; but some magli etism in her draws him to her, a

broken man.

ANN. Violet is quite right. You ought to get t narried.

93

TANNER [explosively] Ann: I will not mary you. Do you hear? I wont, wont,

wont, wont, WONT marry you.

ANN [placidly] Well, nobody axd you, sirs\ e said, sir she said, sir she said. So

thats settled.

TANNER. Yes, nobody has asked me; but ei erybody treats the thing as settled.

It's in the air .... (Act IV, 402)

The whole presentation of this scene is both visua: ly and verbally colourful -

Ann looks like a terrible huntress, a python magne(cally attracting its prey, and

Tanner looks like a veritable victim totally hypnotisl·d and unable to move away.

Tanner's repetition of the word 'wont' is moe~ ingly paralleled by Ann's

repetition of 'sir she said'. But the most significant~ 1stance of visually colourful

word is Ann's use of 'axd' in contrast with Tanne( 's 'asked' - connoting the

thrust of an 'axe' in the act of asking Tanner i :l marry her. Tanner now

understands that he is "in the grip of the Life Fore!:" which he cannot escape.

Apparently Tanner vents his anger upon her by · calling her names mostly

associated with animals - "elephant", ''tiger", "be!ll'", "lioness", "cat", "boa­

constrictor", "spider", "bee" and ''vampire"- thus t. rrning her into a ''veritable

one-woman zoo." These outrageous epithets appa:~ently referring to Ann's

predatory nature actually carry deeper significance. I )ally Peters Vogt in "Ann

and Superman: Type and Archetype" comments:

In mythic lore, the lioness is held to be a sym( ol of the Magna Mater, while

the queen bee is associated with both the mothe; goddess and the Virgin Mary.

These three roles represent the extreme ofview1 held by Tanner, Octavius and

Ramsden, respectively. Similarly, the creativi~ •, aggressiveness and illusion

associated with the spider are traits that Ann, exhibits as she pursues and

persuades, a5 much as she exhibits the streng( 1 and powerful libido which

tradition accords the elephant. But it is the snake· ~pithet that occurs most often,

at least four times. In addition, there is the stag ~ business of the feather boa

coiled around Tanner's neck. Inextricably ideo( fied with Eve -with whom

Ann is linked in the stage directions - the snake more than any other creature

symbolises the feminine principle. . . . Once ag. tin the evolutionary process,

with which Ann is clearly associated, is sugge~ ted. Moreover, the snake is

regarded as a symbol of energy, thereby epitom; zing one of Ann's essential

qualities. (224-25)

94

Thus it is inevitable that the Life Force in the shape < f Ann totally possesses

Tanner. When he finds his repeated refusals rendered ~teaningless, and as Ann

tries to move away, Tanner himself seizes her in his arl ns and declares: "I love

you. The Life Force enchants me: I have the whole wi >rld in my arms when I

clasp you". Ann, too, becomes conscious about her gre~ t role as the agent of the I

Life Force, and the responsibility seems to be so big th~ "she swoons" under the

strain of her fmal declaration- "I have promised to m8j ry Jack" ( 404). I

Margery Morgan rightly raises the question ifMr Whi~!field's will which starts

the dramatic action is not used by Shaw as his "central 1 ;trategic pun" (108). We

find a significant example of wordplay involving varl ous connotations of the

term 'will' in the climatic confrontation between Tannel and Ann:

TANNER .... Your father's will appointed me yq i.lf guardian, not your suitor. I

' I

shall be faithful to my trust.

ANN [in low siren tones] He asked me who I would have as my guardian

before he made that will. I chose you!

TANNER. The will is yours then! The trap was l~~d from the beginning.

ANN [concentrating all her magic] From the begl nning- from our childhood­I

for both of us- by the Life Force.

TANNER. I will not many you. I will not many j ou. J

ANN. Oh, you will, you will. (Act N, 403)

This wordplay on 'will' with its legal and psychologic~~l meaning and also as an

auxiliary verb reveals a powerful aspect of Shaw's the{,tre language. A.M.Gibbs

comments:

In a sense, of course, the end of the play can ~ seen as a victory of the wil1,

both in the sense ofthe legal instrument and the: volitional influence of the old

society, and an ironic contradiction of Tanner'~ affinnation in the Dream of

the potential of the individual human will to 1 'romote evolutionary change.

(127)

The theatre idiom of Shaw thus becomes successful in ltssimilating all the verbal

and the non-verbal components into a single string of ~ynchronization creating a

profound sense of wonder in the minds of the audienc( who never feel bored by

the philosophic discussions of the play. The fmal epi!,ode of the play showing

the reconciliation of the protagonists is spectacularly p: ·esented. Tanner and Ann

95

leap into a new region of evolutionary progress where t4 ~y would continue their

life as a new man and a new woman. Shaw's language Slows this possibility on

a higher plane of reality.

Notes & References: Chapter. Three

Notes

1. Don Juan was a Spanish legendary character,: famous for his ability in

chasing women. We first fmd him in literature /n El Burlador de Sevilla Y

Convidado de Piedra (The Trickster of Se' ille and Guest of Store)

written by Tirso de Molina in 1630. Since then the story of this legendary

figure has been used by many other writers i: 1 many versions, the most

popular being those which depicted him as ll great deceiver of ladies,

among them Donna Ann was the most familirr. Her father was killed by

Juan in a duel. Juan is later dragged down to bell. At the suggestion of A.

B. Walkley, the drama-critic of The Tim~s, Shaw wrote Man and

Superman by reinterpreting the Don Juan stor). ·

2. This speech of Tanner may be considered !LS a direct reproduction of

Shaw's own childhood experience of negligC:l1Ce and indifference shown

to him by his parents. He knew that he WO'Jld never receive the usual

fatherly love from his so-called 'official fath;~r,' but his earnest desire to

96

gain motherly love was frustrated also. This \Vas perhaps because her

artistic self (she was a music artist) overshadow,!d her motherly affection

for Sonny (Shaw's nickname). Ironically, parental carelessness became a

boon to him. Shaw himself admitted it when be was over seventy. The

Shavian bio-critic Holroyd quotes Shaw's statement which he revealed to

Marie Stopes, "The fact that I am still alive ~lt 78 1/ 2 I probably owe

largely to her [Bessie's] complete neglect ofm~: during infancy" ( qtd. in

Holroyd 9).

3. Shaw was an optimist with a commitment to society, in believing that

man as an individual should play a vital r~,,le in the formation and

reformation of the environment of the society. This he believed as a

Socialist and wanted to transmit his doctrine1: into his theatre. Gareth

Griffith has mentioned Shaw's query about the relevance of writing plays

in his Socialism and Superior Brains: The Po~itica/ Thought of Bernard

Shaw (1993): 'What is the use of writing plays?' Shaw asked, 'What is

the use of anything? - if there is not a will that finally moulds a chaos

itself into a race of gods with heaven for an environment, and if that will

is not incarcerated in Man' (128). Shaw did not believe that the given

environment should be considered as a 'dead destiny' for Man.

4. Descartes, a seventeenth century French philosopher, revolutionised

philosophy by announcing, "Cogito, ergo sum" meaning "I think,

therefore, I AM." Coleridge has taken help of this philosophic issue in

formulating his concept of poetic credo. Shaw, however, reverted

Descartes in making Tanner say, "I am, tht'l)refore, I think," obviously

giving much importance to individual potent~al in the re-construction of

the society.

5. _The views expressed he~e are taken from iny own article "Man and

Superman: From Theory to Theatre" - pub)ished in the Journal of the

_Department of English, The University of }3urdwan, Vol. XIV, No I,

2005.

97

Works Cited

Barr, Alan P. Victorian Stage Pulpiteer: Bernard Shaw's Crusade. Athens: The

University of Georgia Press, 1973.

Bentley, Eric. "The Th~atre." George Bernard Shaw's Man and Superman. Ed.

Harold Bloom. Modem Critical Interpretation$. New York: Chelsea

House, 1987. 15-19.

Berst, Charles A. Bernard Shaw and the Art of Dra~. Urbana: University of

Illinois Press, 1973.

Bloom, Harold, ed. George Bernard Shaw's Man and Superman. Modem

Critical Interpretations. New York: Chelsea HoUjse Publishers, 1987.

Burton, Richard. Bernard Shaw: The Man and the Ma~k. New York: Henry Holt

and Company, 1916.

Crompton, Louis. Shaw the Dramatist: A Study of the bztellectual Background of

the Major Plays. London: George Allen & Un~ln Ltd, 1971.

Evans, T. F., ed. Shaw: The Critical Heritage. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul

Ltd, 1976.

Gibbs, A.M. The Art and Mind of Shaw: Essays in Cr!ticism. 1983. Houndmills:

The Macmillan Press Ltd, 1985.

Griffith, Gareth. Socialism and Superior Brains: The political thought of

Bernard Shaw. London: Routledge, 1993.

Holroyd, Michael. Bernard Shaw: The One-Volume A)ejinitive Edition. London:

Chatto & Windus, 1997.

Hugo, Leon. Bernard Shaw: Playwright and Preacher. Great Britain: Methuen &

Company Ltd, 1971.

Morgan, Margery M. The Shavian Playground: All Exploration of the Art of

George Bernard Shaw. London: Methuen & Co Ltd, 1972.

Nethercot, Arthur H. Men and Supermen: The Sha~ian Portrait Gallery. New

York: Blom, 1966.

98

Shaw, Bernard. Man and Superman. Ed. A.C.Ward. Bpmbay: Orient Longman,

1979.

---.The Complete Prefaces of Bernard Shaw. London: P1ml Hamlyn, 1965.

Vogt, Sally Peters. "Ann and Superman: Type and Arcltetype." George Bernard

Shaw. Ed. Harold Bloom. Modern Critical VieNS. New York: Chelsea

House Publishers, 1987. 215-32.

Wisenthal, J. L. "Shaw's plays as music-drama." The Cambridge Companion to

Shaw. Ed Christopher Innis. Cambridge: Cambri~ge UP, 1998.283-308.