See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/313701833

Use of Language By Eugene Ionesco In His Works: The Chairs And The Bald
Soprano

Article · January 2016

CITATIONS READS

0 517

1 author:

Danish Suleman
Universiti Utara Malaysia
2 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

SUPPRESSION OF VOICES AND THOUGHTS: AN UNDERCOVER VIOLENCE View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Danish Suleman on 14 February 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Use of Language By Eugene Ionesco In His Works:
The Chairs And The Bald Soprano

Danish Suleman
Post-Graduate, Department of English
Aligarh Muslim University
Aligarh
India
Abstract

This paper deals with the language used by one of the most famous modern writers
EUGENE IONESCO (1909-1994), in his plays The Chairs and The Bald Soprano. Ionesco is the
writer whose sense of literature incorporated with the experiences he gained from his life and the
observations that he made in society and people around him. The usage of language in his works
we can say, to some extent, is quite similar to other modern writers who motivated their thoughts
and writing skills to write in an absurd manner and portray the extreme level of absurdity of
human and worlds in their works. But as every writer is having their own way of flourishing the
works, like through plot, character, dialogues, scenes and so on. Ionesco too had his way of
presenting the levels of absurdity in the society and his technique was „Language’. He is often
called as Man of Anti-Theatre, because of his presentation of language as an impossible means of
communication. The paper will present these points briefly and will focus on the two above
mentioned texts in detail.
INTRODUCTION
“Hence the need to break down the language of society, which "is nothing but clichés, empty
formulas and slogans". That is why the ideologies with their fossilized language must be
continually re-examined and "their congealed language ... relentlessly split apart in order to find
the living sap beneath".” (Esslin)
Eugene Ionesco (Theatre of Absurd), Martin Esslin
Eugene Ionesco is one of the most prominent writers and critics, whom Martin Esslin has
mentioned in his Theatre of Absurd and put him equal to Samuel Beckett, in the sense that they

www.ijellh.com 66
both are the masters of language and presented absurdity in their works adroitly. Ionesco
belonged to a small French town where he polished his intellectual level, spending time in
understanding that the world is dirt, and it is environed by corrupt and meaningless people and
their actions. He understood the reason of vain purposes in which people are involved, and in his
works tries or rather say successfully furnished these thwarted attempts of men, in which they are
trying to adjust themselves in the society. These futile attempts and its consequences are knitted
by Ionesco in his plays with the help of the use of language. As we all know that he has got
mastery in presenting language from different shades of life whether it is from the people around
or the things around, they all express the intellectual quality and philosophical level of language
portrayed by Ionesco.
“We achieved it above all by the dislocation of language. Do you remember the
monologue in Waiting for Godot and the dialogue in The Bald Soprano? Beckett destroys
language with silence. I do it with too much language, with characters talking at random, and by
inventing words.” (E. Ionesco)
(BY: Eugene Ionesco)
The lines mentioned above are taken from an answer which Ionesco gave to an
interviewer for The Paris Review. For him the importance of words is simple duck‟s egg. The
words are now working just as sounds and on the contrary the images have taken its place in
order to make language more appealing and abrupt. Ionesco never had any plan of writing plays
in this manner but it was the society and its surroundings which made him believe that
everything is meaningless and futile, absurdity resides everywhere and language has no power of
explaining and clearing out things. The major plays of Ionesco deals with these absurdities
working on the grounds of language, and just because his works are from absurd approaches
does not mean that they are worthless but they are truly appreciated by the audience and critics.
Moreover, his works reflects the image of society and men in today‟s world, in which everyone
is at disoriented phase. They are doing things because they just have to do it, without any aim
and motivation, need and profits. Ionesco compared his play Bald Soprano with Beckett‟s
Waiting for Godot on the scale of language, as on one hand where Beckett uses the technique of
presenting useless words and speeches in order to show the “distortion of language” and its
value, on the other hand Ionesco produced his work in which characters talk in an awkward
manner with broken sentences and meaningless speeches and also invented the use of “presence
in absence” technique.

www.ijellh.com 67
 Ionesco‟s aim was to re-evaluate language since it serves as man‟s key to communication
and expression. His language is rooted in banalities and clichés of everyday speech. He uses
language to show the failure of communication. According to Richard Coe, Ionesco used
language “to provoke the spectator”, to face him by the sheer violence of sound in a pre-
linguistic state to react and hence discover his real existence”.
In “The Chairs” language takes a new form by the use of forceful syllables and illogical
statements. The nonsensical language used by Ionesco in the play reveals that mental
development through language is impossible, and determination in man’s mental capabilities is
inevitable. The mental determination of the couple is shocking as language is reduced to an
infantile state. Physically, they appear old, but their thoughts are immature. For example, when
the Old Man cries for his mother:
“Old Man [weeping suddenly]: I’ve spoiled it? I’ve spilled it?
Ah! Where are you, Mamma, Mamma, where are you
Mamma?... hi, hi, hi, I’m an orphan.” (E. a. Ionesco)
It may be possible that the couple was once intellectually mature, but resulting boredom robbed
them of this maturity. They only talk about the past and play games to pass their time.
Ionesco also shows that illogical, unintelligent language greatly affects man‟s personality.
In other words, he shows that man‟s personality can be altered by fluctuation in language. In the
words of Richard Coe, “personality merge, fuse, exchange, sort themselves out clearly for an
instant, only to fuse and merge again”. The Old Woman in “The Chairs” is not one distinct
personality, but a fusion of many. For example, she takes up the role of a mother, then a mature
hostess and then she becomes a flippant woman flirting with one of the guests. Thus, language
destroys the uniqueness of personality.
The Orator is also easily manipulated and controlled by language, instead of using it as a
means of communication. When he opens his mouth it looks as if he is gasping for breath:
“Orator: He, mme, mm, mm. Ju, gou, hou, hou.
Heu, heu, gu, guo, gueue.” (E. a. Ionesco)
The Old couple also suffers from the same problem. They desperately try to put syllables
together to express themselves:
“Old Man and Old Woman [laughing together]: At last we laughed.
Ah! ... laughed … arrived … arrived … Ah! ...
Ah! ... rived … arrived … arrived … the idiotic bare belly
www.ijellh.com 68
 … arrived with face … arrived with the rice …
At last … bare-bellied … arrived … the trunk…
We lau … Ah! ... aughed … Ah! ... arrived … Ah! ... arrived
… aughed … aughed.” (E. a. Ionesco)
Another device which Ionesco has used extensively in The Chairs is the sequence of
“echoes”. We found that the Old Woman sift out only fragments from the Old Man sayings. The
presence of chairs on the stage also results in the lack of stability in language. The mechanical
movement of the chairs drives men out of his senses and results in the distortion of speeches.
Chairs signify nothingness of man‟s existence.
A man after the 2nd World War is so much weary and burdened by his responsibilities
that he sometimes behaves in an unpleasant manner. He becomes so frustrated from his
monotonous and humdrum life that he forgets that he once used to be an exuberant person. In
this play life seems meaningless, monotonous and the reflection of despondency can also be
formulated here. The long standing isolation from the outside world leads to broken connections
from the Old Man‟s and Old Woman‟s life as we see at several places they both are trying to
recollect the past memories, but these memories are forgotten to some extent. There is nothing
much left with them to do, so for the last seventy years they had been involved in playing
“assuming” games. The language here becomes important aspect as it shows the tiredness of
repetitions in the life of old couple.
“Old Man: Tell me the story, you know the story: “Then at last we arrived…”
Old Man: Again?... I’m sick of it… “Then at last we arrived”?
That again… you always ask for the same thing!... “Then at last we arrived…” But it’s
monotonous… For all of the seventy-five
Years that we have been married, every single evening, absolutely every
Blessed evening you have made me tell the same story, you’ve made me imitate the same
people, the same months… always the same... let’s talk about something else…” (E. a. Ionesco)
In other places where we notice the broken images from the past and where the old
couple is struggling to remember their past life in Paris. The language here shows the separation
of words and memories with the present actions. In order to get some leisure time they both
started making conversation of their pasts but the long term voidness from happiness and society
and even from their love ones made them difficult to catch those glimpses. Their speeches and
dialogues are to some extent intangible.

www.ijellh.com 69
 “Old Woman: No, my darling, I’ve forgotten.
Old Man: How did we reach it? Where is the road? This place was called Paris I think…
Old Woman: Paris never existed, my little one.
Old Man: That city must have existed because it collapsed… it was the city of light, but it
has been extinguished, extinguished for four hundred years… nothing remains of it today, except
a song.” (E. a. Ionesco)
Ionesco‟s “The Chairs”, “The Lesson” and “The Bald Soprano”, run on the same track
from the perspective of language and its depiction. They all show the absurdity of situations and
time from different angles. But “The Chairs” is extensively dramatizing the emptiness and
voidness of words with the use of clichés and slogans. There is the game of chairs
(metaphorically) in which there is dissemination of chairs having gradually taken place, till the
end of the play, all over the stage. Although the chairs are empty and the absence of the guests
can easily be noticed by naked eyes, the language here works as a technical device which
presents the “presence in that absence”.
The conversations between the Old Man and the Old Woman are degraded by the
conversations between “these two and the invisible guests” as these conversations took place in
different situations unnecessarily.
“Old Man: That’s not true, I’m an orphan, hi, hi.
Old Woman: My pet, my orphan, dworfan, worfan, morphan, orphan.
Old Man: No… I don’t wan’t; I don’t wa-a-a-ant.” (E. a. Ionesco)
The conversation which they had separately from the guests came out to be something in sense,
as they make themselves open in-front of these imaginary guests and talked in the manner as if
the guests are actually there and making them feeling comfortable or listening to their sad stories.

“Old Man [to Belle]: I am very touched… You’re still the same, in spite of everything… I’ve
loved you, a hundred years ago… But there’s been such a change… No, you haven’t changed a
bit… I loved you, I love you…”
“Old Woman [to the photo-engraver]: Oh no, Oh! no, Oh! la la, you give me the shivers. You
too, are you ticklish? To tickle or to be tickled? I’m a little embarrassed… [She laughs]. Do you
like my petticoat? Or do you like this skirt better?” (E. a. Ionesco)
Ionesco is a man who is known as the advocate of Anti-Theatre, explicitly anti-realist and
by implication anti-reality as well. He uses language not as a means of communication but as a

www.ijellh.com 70
disability of showing and unfolding emotions. The linguistically paralyzed works of Ionesco
plots extremely difficult analytical judgments that audience has to make and to gather bits and
pieces of dialogues and scenes. All of his works are written in the same manner in which he
discarded the actual notion of language that has to be used in any work. The purpose behind this
is obviously visible that he urged himself to portray the present scenario of human world in
which man is very helpless that too when he is not able to share that helplessness with anyone.
Ionesco always rejected the imputations of being anti-realist and presenting the
impossibility of communication in language. He stated that humans themselves create barriers
between them and society, and he is just a narrator who is simply portraying the human
conditions through his way of using language. There are also some psychological connotations
related to the language which I will discuss later.
The play of course, as I mentioned above, is revolving around the presentation of
“presence in absence”. The chairs are continuously consuming the stage and creating a kind of
mess. Although the empty chairs are also the part of the play or rather say an important part of
the play, audience has to formulate the ongoing conversation on stage which is only one sided.
Advancing of the unreal guests and the chairs as well, focusing on the idea of emptiness and
presence in absence on stage. Ionesco used undoubtedly the best method of presenting absurd
language in this play. The presence of Colonel, Mrs. Belle, the photo-engraver, the Emperor and
other Mr., Mrs. and Misses is assumed by us in the form of empty chairs and the dialogues of the
Old Man and Old Woman as soon as they started conversations with them. The conversation
between them shows a kind of attachment of the Old couple towards the society and its different
types of members, as we come across with guests from different working area. The reason
behind this is the long term detachment or separation from the outer world, in which they had
their good memories, at some good time, at some good places and with some good people
especially with their son. The lack of words is also representing the lack of communication
which came out in the form of echoing language used by the Old Woman:
“Old Man: Let me pass, please let me pass. [Desperate:] Ah! Will
I ever be able to reach him?
Old Woman [echo]: Reach him… reach him…”
“Old Man: All my enemies have been rewarded and my friends have betrayed me…
Old Woman [echo]: Friends… betrayed… betrayed…” (E. a. Ionesco)

www.ijellh.com 71
There is always a huge disagreement between language and thought which reflects the mental
state in many ways. The Old Woman here is clearly not able to focus on her words and thoughts
which lead her to echo the words spoken out by the Old Man, this could also be possible in the
way that she wanted to put emphasis on the dialogues of Old Man.
The usage and formulation of Ionesco‟s language, as far as the present scenario is
concerned, is not inappropriate and questionable. However, Ionesco himself had to go through
from several criticisms by the people who thought that he used his own fabricated language as a
tool to break the connection between communication and language. He simply is the person who
wanted to focus on those elements of society through his language where a normal person is
suffocating from handicapped beliefs and motives. You can simply take it as the absurdity of the
situation which he presented through typically formulated language. These absurdities through
language can also be seen in other great modern writers like Harold Pinter, Samuel Beckett,
Albert Camus, Jean-Paul Sartre and so on. All these writers had present the top class absurdities
in their works which almost at every place were also criticized by different people. These
writers, as Ionesco did, focused on different aspects of the society and human flaws, emerged in
the form of absurd characters, situations, plot, dialogues and language.
There are so many points on which the plays of these writers and Ionesco‟s works, as for
example,
 Language is often fragmented non-sequiturs.
 Audience often alienated, teased, puzzled and disturbed.
 Plot may be illogical.
 Relationships are nebulous and audience wonders about characters’ relationships.
 Plot is both comic and tragic
 Pauses are used to heighten tensions.
 Intends to disturb and surprise by creating a new unpredictable form.
 Intends to shatter preconceived notions of theatre conventions.
Eugene Ionesco‟s handling of language can also be extruded from his other plays and
among them one is The Bald Soprano, his very first and one of the best works by this French-
Romanian writer. This play is different and uncanny in many ways and Ionesco was criticized for
his cynical views on language by Kenneth Tynan a critic for the London Observer. In this we
have come across so many meaningless snickers, nonsensical stories and poems, unconnected
and mismatched dialogues. The whole play is full of non-sequiturs speeches and statements.
www.ijellh.com 72
Language extensively working on the futile attempts of making meaningful communication in
modern society, that out of the way creates nonsense and ridicules sensible thoughts, if
prevailing somewhere in this modern world.
The opening of the play, the stage direction, is itself quite irritating in the sense of reputation of
the word English.
“A middle-class English interior, with English arm-chairs.
An English evening. Mr. Smith, an Englishman, seated in his English armchair and wearing
English slippers, is smoking his English pipe and reading and English newspaper, near an
English fire……………
… .The English clock strikes 17 English strokes” (E. a. Ionesco)
This is not only the opening scene having repetitions of words but in the whole play at
several places we can find them. Language through words is substituted by the language of
irregular actions at some places. Deformity of the language is maintained throughout the play in
different forms. The broken and disturbed conversations made the play at first place quite
difficult to understand and comprehend the connectivity between dialogues and situations. The
conversation between Mr. and Mrs. Smith at the very beginning of the play showed almost one
sided conversation, as Mr. Smith‟s words changed by Ionesco in the form of actions,
“Mrs. Smith: …… That’s because we live in the suburbs of London and because our
name is Smith.
Mr. Smith [continues to read, clicks his tongue]
Mrs. Smith: …… However, I prefer not to tell them that their oil is bad.
Mr. Smith [continues to read, clicks his tongue]”…….. (E. a. Ionesco)
This type of language is used by Mr. Smith for quite a long time as Mrs. Smith continues to tell
her stories.
The story of this play was composed by Eugene Ionesco at the time when he was learning
English from English language primers. The language in primer is like that no sensible person
would like to exercise, like:
“The ceiling is up, and the floor is down”
And at last this becomes the reason for Ionesco to decide that language is unnecessary for
communication. There is a concept of “Tragedy of Language” coined by Ionesco in order to
demonstrate the meaningless verbosity of words and sentences or speeches in one‟s

www.ijellh.com 73
surroundings. The repetitions of dialogues and at the same time making contradictory statements
are the key features of this concept.
Modernity and its reflection are drawn by the clumsy and mechanistic characters in this
play. Tragedy of language interpreted from one dialogue to another. The characters themselves
look supernatural elements as they don‟t give any clear idea about anything and continuously
make contradictory remarks. When Mr. and Mrs. Smith talks about an old family friend Bobby
Watson and his family, they create such a mess on the discussion and depiction of Bobby
Watson‟s character. Ionesco‟s aim of marking gaps in communication and language becomes
quite successful here as Bobby Watson‟s whole family‟s name is Bobby Watson, which literally
bring your brain out of skull once you start connecting the relations of him. Besides that, the
variety of judgments made in order to bring out Bobby Watson‟s identity also startled the
audience and readers at the very beginning of his introduction. Mr. Smith made several
contradictory remarks on the death of Bobby Watson,

“Mr. Smith: Tsk, it says that Bobby Watson died.

Mrs. Smith: My God, the poor man! When he died?
Mr. Smith: Why do you pretend to be astonished? You know very well that he’s been dead these
past two years. Surely you remember that we attended his funeral a year and a half ago.
Mrs. Smith: ……………………
Mr. Smith: It wasn’t in the paper. It’s been three years since his death was announced……..
Mrs. Smith: ………………………
Mr. Smith: ………………… Poor Bobby, he’d been dead for four years and he was still
warm…………..” (E. a. Ionesco)
It seems very awkward when you go through these types of descriptions of someone, but as
Ionesco uses language out of the way, he uses each and every possible manner in order to make
language impossible for communication.
There remains a very minute difference if we try to make a comparison between
Ionesco‟s works to the other absurd writers who also speak of the communication gap through
language. The nearest among them is Samuel Beckett who uses the same kind of technique in his
play Waiting for Godot. We don‟t have to go deep in Beckett‟s works, but the idea should be
picked up from here that it is not only Ionesco who revolted against language as a means of

www.ijellh.com 74
communication. The attitude of both the writers for formulating and presenting the nature of
language is to a large extent the same.
The language in Ionesco‟s plays works on the theory of deconstruction and existential
philosophy. That is to say it is concerned with the relationship between text and meaning. The
idea as proposed by Jacques Derrida about the significance of language through words and its
meaning, incorporated by Ionesco in the form of Aporia that is featuring most of his texts. The
ambiguities and clichés are considerably in use, as the language is something which can create
both positive as well as negative impact on readers. But it all depends on the readers that how
they will make assumptions and decisions regarding any texts of this kind. The durability of the
text is just not only depending on the writer who constructs Aporias in order to allude the
deformity of language, but the role of the audience or readers to choose between these aporias
for their understanding. This can easily be understood from The Bald Soprano where Ionesco
creates a number of statements from which he shows the usage of Aporia.
“Mr. Smith: Fortunately, they had no children.
Mrs. Smith: That was all they needed! Children! Poor woman, how could she have managed!
Mr. Smith: She’s still young. She might very well remarry. She looks so well in mourning.
Mrs. Smith: But who would take care of the children? You know very well that they have a
boy and a girl. What are their names?” (E. a. Ionesco)
The play consists of hundreds of contradictory statements, amalgam of repetitions and dubious
remarks on each and every situation. The consequences of the 2nd world war had completely
broken the connections of men with religion, culture and language. They lost all hope of
begetting knowledge and faith, which finally lead to the drastic change in the motives of men in
the society. The writers of Existentialist philosophy like Sartre and Camus made distinction
between rationality and irrationality among human lives, which creates a sense of disorientation
and confusion in the face of an apparently meaningless or absurd world. (Wyatt)
Apparently, the characters in Ionesco‟s works are common men who create comedies and
depict human conditions in absurdities, mostly with the motive of creating or rather say
distorting the language and thoughts. The Bald Soprano and The Chairs both are sinuous in their
plots and formation of language, because of which Ionesco faced a lot of criticism. The integrity
that he showed in order to be present his thoughts through his works, costs him as one of the
most Anti-theatre men. The play The Bald Soprano is also an Anti-Play whose title also came
into the writer‟s mind conjecturally, as he first wanted to use the title “English Made Easy”, but

www.ijellh.com 75
then he altered it with “A Blond School Teacher”, and he finally ended up with “The Bald
Soprano”, as at the time of rehearsal the character who played the role of Fire-Chief, flubbed the
line from "une institutrice blonde"[a blond school teacher] to "une cantatrice chauve"[the bald
soprano].
“Fire Chief [moving towards the door, then stopping]: Speaking of that – the bald soprano?
[General silence, embarrassment]
Mrs. Smith: She always wears her hair in the same style.
Fire Chief: Ah! Then goodbye, ladies and gentlemen.” (E. a. Ionesco)
The play even didn‟t make the reason of giving this type of title, clearly anywhere. There is
nothing in the play which has to do with hair or baldness. This is only to create nonsensical
elements through language and nothing else.
The ending of the play is quite serious, because after the Fire Chief left the house, the
language of other people turned suddenly into some kind of unconnected sentences, hard to
understand. It looks as they are speaking because they have to speak, regardless of the people
around and the topic on which they have to speak. They all speak in order to create the word
chain and of course fulfill the desired motive of Ionesco.
“Mrs. Martin: I can buy a pocketknife for my brother, but you can’t buy Ireland for your
grandfather
Mr. Smith: One walks on his feet, but one heats with electricity or coal.
Mr. Martin: He who sells an ox today, will have an egg tomorrow.
Mrs. Smith: In real life, one must look out of the window.” (E. a. Ionesco)
The ending of the play I think is the proper example for which it is considered to be an absurd
play. The misconception, disfigurement, brummagem and tragedy of language made the play
more hilarious than expected.
And then there comes a point at the end of the play where we come across the very unique and
disturbed phase of dialogues, expressions and voices on the stage. Then there are the characters
that look stupefied and irritated because of something unclear and unexplained. They all started
exploiting their throats with full intensity and screamed out their speeches and reacted madly.
“Mr. Smith: Cockatoos, cockatoos, cockatoos, cockatoos,……..
Mrs. Smith” Such caca, such caca, such caca, such caca,……..
Mr. Martin: Such cascades of cacas, such cascades of cacas, such cascades…….
Mrs. Martin: Cactus, coccyx! Crocus! Cockaded! Cockroach” (E. a. Ionesco)

www.ijellh.com 76
This sequence of non-sequiturs sentences, clichés and aporias had nothing to do with the
sequence and plot of the play. It looks as if these dialogues were intentionally inserted in the play
in order to show the extreme absurdness in language and human memory. The other instances of
these types of dialogues occurred when the play is about to end and we come across with the
absolute repetition of the play, when Mr. and Mrs. Martin again comes on the stage and the play
starts in the same manner as it was in the beginning with same dialogues and actions. The
difference was the change in characters with Mr. and Mrs. Martin in the place of Mr. and Mrs.
Smith and Mr. and Mrs. Smith entered as guests.
The same thing we can see in The Chairs, where the ending of the play made language
impossible for communication, as said by Ionesco. The time has come at this stage for which the
Old Man waited so long and for which all the guests, obviously invisible are called upon. The
Orator has to give the long-awaited message. The guests and the Old couple were unbelievably
happy and excited, and for that reason they commit suicide, with the thought that now the Orator
is finally here and will surely circulate the message of existence. But suddenly something
happened and everyone came to know that the Orator himself is deaf-mute. He tries several times
to deliver the message but the only thing one could here was sounds, meaningless sounds. Then
he tries to circulate the message through written form and started writing on the blackboard but
that all was also nonsensical and impossible to understand.
“Orator [on the blackboard]: ANGELFOOD
NNAA NNM NWNWNW V
Orator: Mmm, Mmm, Gueue, Gou; Gu. Mmm, Mmm, Mmm, Mmm,” (E. a. Ionesco)
He made all possible efforts in order to provide the message but all in vain. He then finally left
the stage and Ionesco tells us about the stage directions.
“We hear for the first time the human noises of the invisible crowd; these are bursts of laughter,
murmurs, shh's, ironical coughs; weak at the beginning, these noises grow louder, then again,
progressively they become weaker (E. a. Ionesco)”
This literally creates big question and confusion for the audience and readers, as for the whole
play it seemed that there were no invisible guests and we started assuming the existence of these
guests and the language was the only medium through which we could easily reach to this
possibility. But this statement made by Ionesco perplexed everyone because from this
description it looks that there were guests all the time as they are now laughing and making
noises which is audible. The ultimate result from all this came out is that language is nothing but

www.ijellh.com 77
an obstacle in one‟s social life. The inability to produce language through which one can make
communication is lost and people are in very dramatic conditions. They are trying their best to
explore the possibilities of making oneself social through language but these attempts become
futile. This is the only idea of Ionesco behind all his works, in which he draws a huge line
between language and communication.
Kenneth Tynan criticizes the ways in which Ionesco uses the language in order to show
the lack of communication through his works, as he said in one of his remarks that:
“Here at last was a self-proclaimed advocate of anti-theatre: explicitly anti-realist and by
implication anti-reality as well. Here was a writer ready to declare that words were meaningless
and that all communication between human beings was impossible” (Esslin)
Tynan even called Ionesco as a Messiah of the enemies of realism in the theatre, and his attack
provoked the long interesting debates on the subject of language. But Ionesco handsomely
replied and said that he has no personal interest in making the language impossible for
communication, it is because human beings and the society create discrimination and are unable
to produce language as per their thoughts. They are motiveless in regard with communication
which shows the meaningless features of their lives. He simply portrays their dramatic mental
and social activities in his works.
Ionesco‟s and Kenneth Tynan‟s argumentative controversies made Ionesco more popular
and familiar as a playwright of nonsensical and hilarious plays. But at the same time the down to
earth writer devoted his works to the realities of human situations. He successfully beats the
target from his peerless intellectual talent and knowledge of modern paralyzing behavior of
humans in order to make communication through the intellectual use of language. These qualities
of his can easily be deeply observed on an extensive level from his plays, The Chairs and The
Bald Soprano.

www.ijellh.com 78
 References:
 "Ionesco‟s Theater of the Absurd, and the Chaos of Language." Web log post. Musings of
the Mad Wordsmith (and Other Things). Ed. Linguanerd. N.p., 23 Apr. 2014. Web. 10
Jan. 2016.
 Esslin, Martin. The Theatre of the Absurd. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1980.
 Guppy, Shusha. "Eugene Ionesco, The Art of Theater No. 6." Paris Review Interviews.
Paris Review, n.d. Web.
 Ionesco, Eugène, and Martin Crimp. The Chairs. London: Faber and Faber, 1997. Print.
 Ionesco, Eugène, Tina Howe, and Eugène Ionesco. The Bald Soprano; And, the Lesson.
New York: Grove, 2006. Print.
 Klaver, Elizabeth. "The Play of Language in Ionesco's Play of Chairs."Modern Drama.
Number 4 ed. Vol. 32. Toronto: U of Toronto, 1989. 521-27. Print. Winter 1989.
 Ott, Karen Lee, ed. "Eugène Ionesco: Man of the Theatre/Theatrical Man."Untitled
Theater Company (n.d.): n. pag. Web.
 Pounders, Steven. "Eugene Ionesco and the Theatre of the Absurd." Baylor - Department
of Theatre Arts. Baylor University, n.d. Web.
 Wyatt, C. S. "The Primer Home Page Clarifying Nothing since 1996."Existential Primer:
Home Page. Ed. S. D. Schnelbach. N.p., 31 Dec. 2015. Web. 10 Jan. 2016.

www.ijellh.com 79

View publication stats