|
The Semiotics of Coda "In a war of ideas, it is people who get killed." Stanislaus J. Lec Moisés Kaufman's Gross Indecency,
a play first performed in 1993, was written as historical account of the
trials and conviction of homosexuality, in the British Courts of 1895,
of the famous poet and dramatist, Oscar Wilde. This "gross indecency,"
as it was known in the late nineteenth century, was illegal under British
Law. Wilde's conviction was the result of a lawsuit gone bad. The suit,
initiated by Oscar Wilde against his lover's father, the Marquess of Queensbury,
was for libel; the Marquess of Queensbury accused Wilde of sodomy, and
Wilde, enraged, chose to sue him (Kanfer, 1997). Over the course of the
trial, several men testified to having been paid for sexual services by
Wilde, presenting the "damning evidence" that led to Wilde's
jail sentence and exile (Hart, 1998). The play focused mainly on the course of the
three trials, the social and judicial opinions and accusations, and Oscar
Wilde's persona during that time. As the play begins its close, the Epilogue
is used as a summation of Oscar Wilde's prison term and eventual death
upon release and exile. This Epilogue scene serves as a quasi "prologue"
to the final scene, Coda. The semiotics of Coda include strategically
placed signifiers used to represent Oscar Wilde's Judgement Day, in God's
Court. Coda, taken from one of Wilde's prose poems, "The House of
Judgement," was written as dialogue to be performed by multiple characters
of the play, remaining in full costume, but portraying themselves as simple
narrators. The scene begins, "This is from a prose
poem written by Oscar Wilde a year after his release from prison"
(Kaufman, 1998). These words, at their most basic meaning, have the signified
meaning of Wilde thinking about, meditating over and revising the words
that are about to follow, as a writer does with any poem or prose writing.
This line also prepares the audience's mindsets for listening closely
to the dialogue instead of t he nonverbal language that may take place.
This also may be one of the reasons this scene is so powerful without
utilizing a lot of action. The significance of the words "a year
after his release from prison" is that Wilde is writing with the
recent experience of persecution or suffering. The dialogue continues, as a signifier, describing
a man's experience in The House of Judgement. As written, a man stands
before God, and God reads the evil deeds the man has done from the Book
of Life. The man admits his wrongdoings, and God begins to sentence him
to Hell. The man begs against this, his argument being, "...Because
in Hell I have always lived." After a silence, God begins to sentence
the man again, this time, into Heaven. The man begs against God's judgement
again arguing, "...Because never, and in no place, have I been able
to imagine it..." (Kaufman, 1998). There is silence, and the play
ends. An improvement to the original direction, as
performed by the PlayMakers Repertory Company, though originally written
to be performed by several narrators, the actor of Oscar Wilde's character
solely performs Coda. As in all theatrical performances, the signs have
to have a higher degree of motivation than some other modes of communication--the
simple reason being that there is most often a particular idea or thought
process that is trying to be revealed through the dialogue, scenery and
acting. This signifier of the actor of Wilde's character doing the reading
shows a closer relation between Oscar Wilde and the man said to be in
judgement. Although they are present, the other characters circle a spotlight
under which the scene is read by the one actor, placing the body of Oscar
Wilde as the audience knows it into the dialogue of the man in "The
House of Judgement." The spotlight signifies the aloneness of a person
standing in judgement of God. The actor is not physically alone, but there
was no one else there to speak for him about himself. As the actor reads
the scene from the text of a book, the other characters, still in full
costume, read along with him in their own copies of the text, in the shadows. This scene also serves as an illustration of
Wilde as his most fragile and naked self. Having Wilde's assigned actor
read the dialogue by himself in this scene also puts a human quality onto
Wilde's character that was not there before. Throughout the play, his
character is observed as a witty, intelligent and profoundly stubborn
man, unable to be thwarted by social rules, threats or judgements. Through
to his conviction, Wilde acted as a man of dignity and strength. Kaufman
added Coda as an additional resolution to the life of Oscar Wilde, as
well as a chance for the audience to experience the guilt, terror and
humility of such a pillar. By having the actor step out of the actual
character of Wilde, but continue to be in full costume, the audience gets
the physical view of a normal human being, costumed in 'Oscar Wilde,'
transcending into the thought that Wilde could be no more than human himself. Coda also ends the "act" of the courtroom
scenes. Actual courtroom situations are an act themselves, with different
roles and 'shows' put on for the deciding individuals, whether it be a
jury or judge. Coda is also a courtroom, but in this courtroom there is
only one Judge. There is no act to be played because this Judge already
has the evidence and has already made His decision. This scene also takes
on a more serious courtroom tone than the one that was seen before. The
words of the man in judgement are more pleading than Wilde's original
dialogue of witty comments and punch lines. The words of God seem to be
more final, true, and less opinionated than those of the people in the
human courtroom. Also at the scene's end, the dialogue continues,
but it is not performed by reading. The dialogue is spoken, with the book
elevated, making the scene move off of the book and onto the stage. This
act alone transfers the actor reading the book back into Wilde's character,
in the spotlight--in front of God--, aside the book that he holds about
his head--the Book of Life--, and the last words are spoken: "Wherefore
can I not send thee unto Heaven, and for what reason?…Because never,
and in no place, have I been able to imagine it, [a]nswered the Man. And
there was silence in the House of Judgement" (Kaufman, 1998). The
actor closes the book, and the spotlight is shut off. This close makes an automatic question mark
arrive in the minds of the audience--what is the verdict? No one knows
God's final judgement. Previously, the audience had either agreed or disagreed
with the judgement of Man, in Wilde's original court case, and has conjured
up some sort of sympathy or apathy for Wilde. The audience is forced for
the first time in the play to see the man as simply any man--maybe themselves--standing
before God. Not only has this man "lived in Hell" all his life,
but he has also turned down the offer of Heaven. The signifier of the
characters surrounding the spotlight, the same characters that convicted
and persecuted Wilde, again signified that God is the true Judge. The
audience is forced to feel possible guilt, contempt, and uneasiness at
the thought of God standing as Judge, and that man's judgement, up to
this point, whether wrong, right or neither is trivial. Coda was very effective, if not with gaining
the audience's compassion for Wilde, then getting an audience that may
have more traditional views of sexual preference to possibly empathize
and be connected, at least once, with such a foreign thought of homosexuality.
This scene is able to take off Wilde's mask of homosexuality and reveal
the person underneath. One could argue that Coda was one of the most detrimental
scenes of the play, making sure that the entertainment that the audience
had enjoyed up to that point carried a meaning or understanding along
with it. Oscar Wilde, as one of the most controversial
people of his time, has been labeled a martyr and hero for the homosexual
community. It has also been said that "...Kaufman paints Wilde not
as a gay hero but as our patron saint who died to give voice to the love
that dare not speak its name" (Scanlan 1997). After observing the
play, and analyzing the semiotics of his writings, Oscar Wilde seems to
be more of a 'hero' and 'patron saint' who died for shedding light on
and bringing forth the entire aesthetic world. Wilde will always be remembered
for this famous conviction of homosexuality, but by this conviction, he
had and continues to bring about an attraction to the artists' world,
through his controversy and talent. Kaufman states in an interview with interviewer Jesse McKinley, "Was it worth it for him? No, he lost his entire life. He had to flee England, change his name, hang his head in shame...Was it worth it for us? Yes. But only if we can learn from it" (McKinley 1997). REFERENCES Hart, Erin (1998). Wilde things. Twin Cities Sidewalk. Kanfer, Stefan (1997). Feasting with panthers. New Leader, 80, 22-24. Kaufman, M. (1998). Gross indecency: the three trials of Oscar Wilde. New York: Random House. McKinley, Jesse (1997). As far as he could go. Anerican Theatre, 14, 24. PlayMakers Repertory Group (Dramatic Ensemble). (25 Oct 1998). Gross indecency: the three trials of Oscar Wilde [Play]. Chapel Hill, NC: Paul Green Theatre. Scanlan, Dick (1997). Wilde world. Advocate, 735, 64. Wilde, O. (1900). Fairy tales and poems in prose.
New York: Modern Library. |