An Analysis of David Mamet's Play "Oleanna" Within the Frame of Aristotelian Tragedia
Tufan KarabulutOleanna, the controversial play by David Mamet, has generally been reviewed by the critics within the context of addressing the issues of sexual harassment, political correctness and academic education. Mamet’s plays have also been considered as a combination of absurd theatre and traditional realism. However, Mamet has dismissed all of these approaches and stated that Oleanna is an Aristotelian tragedy, depicting the unequal power relationship between a professor and his pupil against the institutional background of higher education. In this study, by pursuing this description of Mamet, Oleanna is reviewed based on the determining elements of the plot of Aristotelian tragedy. Within this context and as per Aristotle's definition of tragedy, the protagonist of the play, Professor John, and the plot are examined in terms of "hubris", "hamartia", "peripeteia", "anagnorisis" and "katharsis" concepts; arguing the notion that John is a modern tragic hero and Oleanna is a modern Aristotelian tragedy.
Aristotelesyen Tragedya Çerçevesinde David Mamet’in “Oleanna” Oyununun İncelenmesi
Tufan KarabulutDavid Mamet’in tartışma yaratan oyunu Oleanna, eleştirmenler tarafından, genellikle, cinsel taciz, siyaseten doğruculuk ve akademik eğitimin sorunlarını ele alan bir çerçevede değerlendirilmiştir. Mamet’in oyunları, aynı zamanda absürt tiyatro ile geleneksel realizmin bir bireşimi olarak görülmüştür. Mamet ise tüm bu yaklaşımlara karşı çıkarak Oleanna’nın, yüksek öğrenimin kurumsal zemininde, bir profesör ile öğrencisi arasındaki eşit olmayan güç ilişkisini anlatan Aristotelesyen bir tragedya olduğunu ifade etmiştir. Bu çalışmada, Mamet’in bu nitelendirmesinin izi sürülerek Oleanna, Aristotelesyen tragedyanın olay örgüsünü belirleyen unsurlar çerçevesinde değerlendirilmektedir. Bu bağlamda, Aristoteles’in tragedya tanımından hareketle, oyunun protagonisti olan profesör John ve olay örgüsü “hubris”, “hamartia”, “peripeteia”, “anagnorisis” ve “katharsis” kavramları açısından incelenerek, John’un modern trajik bir kahraman, Oleanna’nın da modern Aristotelesyen bir tragedya olduğu düşüncesi tartışılmaktadır.
Like other plays by Mamet, Oleanna was considered as a combination of absurd theatre and traditional realism. There were even those who argued that Oleanna had postmodern signs. However, Mamet disagreed with all these approaches and stated that Oleanna is an Aristotelian tragedy. In this article, first of all, starting from the definition of Aristotle’s tragedy, Oleanna’s plot is examined in terms of “hubris”, “hamartia”, “peripeteia”, “anagnorisis” and “katharsis” concepts. Then, the notion that the protagonist of the play, Professor John, is a modern tragic hero and that Oleanna is a modern Aristotelian tragedy is discussed.
All three scenes in which Oleanna’s dramatic weave is structured take place in John’s university room. In the two-character play, the protagonist John is both a family man and a university lecturer. Since he is about to be appointed to permanent staff in professorship, he is getting ready to buy a new house. The antagonist, Carol, is a lower-middle-class student. During the plot, Carol, the biggest obstacle to John’s achievement of his goals, will pose a growing threat to him as the play progresses.
Starting from the first scene in Oleanna, we witness the struggle for superiority, which is tried to be established through an exchange of words between John and Carol. While Carol’s inability to understand and use academic language makes her feel “stupid”, John tells her that it is not intelligence that prevents her from learning, but her lack of self-worth and that she should stop feeling that way. The breaking point of the first scene is John’s private lesson offer to Carol. From this point on, basic hamartia takes place when John acts in disregard of academic rules and even tells Carol that he likes her. Throughout the first scene, it is John’s hubris that drives him to act with a greater confidence than he should.
The second scene opens with a surprise situation where the balances are completely reversed. Carol interprets John’s actions on the first scene as “elitist”, “sexist” and “pornographic”, and considers John’s statement that he likes her as harassment. An investigation is launched against John when Carol and her supporting group submit a complaint to the Tenure Committee. This process is a sign that positive developments in John’s life are at risk, thus the peripeteia has begun. Even though John manages to regain dominance over his student with his subtle and rational approach, it does not take long for Carol to revert. When Carol wants to leave the room at the end of the scene, John’s attempt to block her recreates his original hamartia. From this moment on, John’s peripeteia really occurs and proceeds negatively in an irreversible manner.
In the third scene, we learn that John’s appointment had been suspended and is to be referred to the Disciplinary Board. When the scene opens, we realize that John had invited Carol to his room again and wanted to apologize to her. Carol mentions that her group will withdraw the complaint if he approves the banning of certain books they find objectionable in the curriculum. However, John gets upset when he sees that his book is also on the list. We can say that the seeds that will carry John to anagnorisis are planted as of this moment. John is shocked when he finds out over a phone call from his lawyer, Jerry, that a criminal prosecution can be initiated against him for attempted rape. The phone rings again; this time the caller is his wife. Carol tells John that he should not call his wife “baby.” An infuriated John loses control and starts physically assaulting Carol. As John lifts a chair and walks towards Carol, he collects himself at the last minute and the play ends. A tragic destruction had taken place, and John was dragged into his pathos.
Consequently, the play’s protagonist John becomes a modern reflection of the Aristotelian tragedy hero, carrying all the elements that a tragedy hero must have in the plot. We can also express that John’s tragic journey has a cathartic effect on the audience. In the frame of all these evaluations, it seems possible to say that Oleanna is a modern version of the Aristotelian tragedy.
