Guide to Stoppard's two worlds

Press, 23 March 1985, Page 22

Guide to Stoppard's two worlds

Stoppard: The Mystery and the Clockwork. By Richard Corballis. Amber Lane Press/Methuen, 1984. 204 pp. Appendices, bibliography. (Reviewed by Paul R. Bushnell) Studies of the plays of Tom Stoppard have, on the whole, been collections of isolated essays on the various major works of this most popular of contemporary English playwrights. Such is not the case with this book. In his concise introduction to the work, Dr Corballis (of the University of Canterbury) suggests that the “design of every published Stoppard play is essentially the same. There is always a collision between two worlds: a world of mystery and uncertainty, which is the real world, and a world of ‘clockwork,’ abstraction and artifice, which is an unreal dream world — a world, Stoppard insists, to be avoided.” This argument succeeds in its intention to be provocative, for it stands on its head much of the existing

critical literature on Stoppard. Many writers, dazzled by Stoppard’s linguistic felicity, consider the plays to be existentialist displays of doubt that anything is real or has moral significance. This reaction was almost universal to Stoppard’s first hit, “Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead,” and it has continued unabated ever since. In setting out the opposing case, Corballis has been admirably comprehensive, casting his critical eye over all the radio and television plays, as well as the single novel and all the published stage works. This breadth of examination buttresses the argument as the reader is guided through the various plays, with Corballis marshalling a convincing amount of evidence in support of his interpretation. Each chapter deals with a single major play, providing a plot summary, exploring dominant themes and

metaphors, and articulating the design underlying the apparently chaotic structure, as well as probing the philosophical issues which the play raises. The chapter on “Every Good Boy Deserves Favour” is typical in its careful teasing out of the relationship between the idea of the play-and its eventual realisation on stage. Similarly, that dealing with “Travesties” articulates a view of the play which is helpful in making sense of its explosive concoction of politics, verbal fun, and theatrical pyrotechnics. Reservations about the book are few. Despite Corballis’s feelings to the contrary, Stoppard seems to me a relatively heartless writer, and one who is, with the possible exception of only a few plays, uncomfortable with emotion and unable to portray it convincingly. When discussing Stoppard’s sources, Corballis is occasionally unclear whether the other work actually had any influence, or

whether it simply has affinities with the plays. Elsewhere, affinities are claimed which do not bear analysis. The chiming of Big Ben in “Dirty Linen,” for example, does not make the same point as the whirring clocks in W. H. Auden’s ballad “As I Walked Out One Evening.” However, these lapses are rare, and understandable when dealing with a writer as eclectic as Stoppard, whose habit of reference to other works of literature encourages critics to go on a paperchase, searching out quotes and clarifying illusions. This work of critical appraisal does much more, as well as providing a comprehensive bibliography. A clear and cogently-argued approach to the Stoppardian canon, it will be valuable as a reference tool for the student and as a most readable introduction for those who have simply enjoyed the plays in performance and want to find out more about them.