Paper 110 : “Power Dynamics and Control in The Birthday Party: The Oppression of the Individual”

 “Power Dynamics and Control in The Birthday Party: The Oppression of the Individual”

This blog is a part of the assignment of Paper 110 : History of English Literature – From 1900 to 2000 

Academic Details:

Name : Jay P. Vaghani

Roll No.         : 06

Sem. : 2

Batch : 2024-26

E-mail : vaghanijay77@gmail.com   

Assignment Details:

Paper Name : History of English Literature – From 1900 to 2000 

Paper No. : 110

Paper Code : 22403

Unit : 4- Drama – Absurd, Comedy of Menace

Topic                : “Power Dynamics and Control in The Birthday Party: The Oppression of the Individual”

Submitted To         : Smt. Sujata Binoy Gardi, Department of English, Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavnagar University

Submitted Date : April 17, 2025

The following information—numbers are counted using QuillBot:

Words         : 2015

Characters         : 14111

Characters without spaces : 12172

Paragraphs         : 89

Sentences         : 161

Reading time         :8 m 4 s

Table of Contents

Introduction

The Setting as a Mechanism of Control

The Arrival of Goldberg and McCann: Institutional Power and Its Apparatus

Stanley’s Identity Crisis: The Subject under Siege

Language as a Weapon of Control

The Role of Meg and Petey: Passive Complicity

Ritual, Party, and Performance: Violence Disguised as Celebration

Interpretations of Institutional Power: Political and Psychological Readings

The Endgame: Muteness and Erasure

Conclusion

References

Abstract

This assignment investigates the mechanisms of power and control in Harold Pinter’s The Birthday Party (1957), focusing on the systematic oppression of the individual through institutional and psychological forces. By analyzing the spatial entrapment of Stanley Webber, the ambiguous authority of Goldberg and McCann, and the manipulative use of language, silence, and ritual, the essay uncovers how Pinter dramatizes the dehumanization of the subject under invisible regimes of dominance. Drawing upon critical theory, psychoanalysis, and absurdist aesthetics, the study reveals how Pinter's minimalist theatrical world reflects broader anxieties about conformity, surveillance, and the erosion of selfhood in the modern world. Ultimately, the play serves as a chilling allegory of the individual’s helplessness before anonymous and omnipresent power.

Keywords

Harold Pinter, The Birthday Party, Power, Control, Identity, Theatre of the Absurd, Surveillance, Psychological Oppression, Institutional Violence, Silence, Language, Ritual

Research Question

How does Harold Pinter's The Birthday Party depict the mechanisms of power and control, and in what ways does the play dramatize the systematic oppression and erasure of the individual?

Hypothesis

Harold Pinter's The Birthday Party illustrates that power operates not through overt violence alone but through subtle and ritualized forms of psychological control, such as language, silence, and enforced identity, thereby portraying the individual as vulnerable to erasure within institutional and societal frameworks.

1.Introduction

Harold Pinter’s The Birthday Party (1957) is one of the seminal works of the Theatre of the Absurd, reflecting anxieties about identity, power, and authoritarian control in post-war society. While seemingly absurd and illogical on the surface, the play conceals a profound critique of social and psychological mechanisms of dominance. This essay explores the themes of power dynamics and control in The Birthday Party, focusing on how the play illustrates the systematic oppression of the individual—particularly through the character of Stanley Webber. Drawing from critical theory, psychoanalysis, and political interpretations, this analysis demonstrates how Pinter constructs a theatrical world where language, silence, ritual, and violence become tools of control, and where individuality is crushed under mysterious institutional forces.

---

2. The Setting as a Mechanism of Control

The isolated boarding house run by Petey and Meg in a sleepy seaside town becomes a claustrophobic space emblematic of psychological imprisonment. The ambiguity of the setting—with its lack of historical or geographical specificity—allows the audience to read the house as a symbol of society, or even the human psyche. The mundane domestic space becomes the stage for invasive power, suggesting that no space is safe from surveillance or manipulation.

The confinement of Stanley in this house, and his reluctance to leave, signifies a condition of psychological stasis. His fear of the outside world and his attachment to the domestic interior suggest an internalized form of control—he is already subdued, not physically but emotionally and mentally. As Martin Esslin notes in The Theatre of the Absurd, Pinter’s worlds are “menacing precisely because they are so ordinary.”

---

3. The Arrival of Goldberg and McCann: Institutional Power and Its Apparatus

The play’s true conflict begins with the entrance of Goldberg and McCann, two mysterious strangers who claim to be there to organize Stanley’s birthday party, which he himself denies. These characters embody institutional power—Goldberg the bureaucratic mouthpiece of tradition and family values, McCann the enforcer, methodical and violent.

Though their affiliation is never clarified, critics have interpreted them as representatives of totalitarian systems, religious institutions, or mental health authorities. Their very ambiguity is key to their power. As Pinter himself stated, “The absence of information increases the pressure.” This lack of clarity makes their control feel ubiquitous and total. They do not need to state their purpose because the structure of power they represent is so pervasive that their presence alone enforces obedience.

Goldberg and McCann employ several tools of control:

3.1 Interrogation:

They bombard Stanley with nonsensical but emotionally charged questions. Their tactics mimic real-world techniques of psychological torture and gaslighting, eroding Stanley’s grasp on reality.

3.2 Language: Goldberg speaks in soothing, cliché-ridden language that masks the threat beneath. His use of nostalgic and religious references ("What do you remember about your father?") gives the illusion of familiarity and comfort, but these are ultimately coercive.

Goldberg speaks in soothing, cliché-ridden language that masks the threat beneath. His use of nostalgic and religious references ("What do you remember about your father?") gives the illusion of familiarity and comfort, but these are ultimately coercive.

3.3 Silence and Ritual:

McCann’s tearing of paper and their ritualistic preparation for Stanley’s “party” reflect the ritualized violence of state or institutional control, cloaked in formal procedure.

---

4. Stanley’s Identity Crisis: The Subject under Siege

Stanley, the play’s central character, serves as a symbol of the vulnerable individual who is gradually broken down by impersonal authority. At the beginning of the play, Stanley is evasive, reclusive, and cynical. His identity is already unstable, and the arrival of Goldberg and McCann accelerates his unraveling.

During the interrogation scene, Stanley’s attempts to defend himself collapse as language fails him. He moves from defiance to silence, and finally to physical collapse. Pinter carefully structures this transformation to reflect the stripping away of identity:

4.1 Psychological Breakdown:

Stanley’s screams, his stuttered speech, and eventual muteness signify a complete psychic collapse. His individuality is not simply repressed but obliterated.

4.2 Symbolic Regression:

By the end, Stanley is infantilized—dressed in an ill-fitting suit, led away by Goldberg and McCann like a child. This regression to a childlike state is not liberating but degrading. He has been emptied of selfhood.

Critics such as Billington have interpreted Stanley as an everyman figure—an artist, perhaps, or a dissenter—who is silenced by dominant culture. The lack of backstory or motivation does not weaken this reading but rather emphasizes the universality of his victimhood.

---

5. Language as a Weapon of Control

One of the most distinctive features of Pinter’s writing is his use of language—not as a vehicle of communication, but as a means of domination, confusion, and evasion. In The Birthday Party, language is used to:

• Disorient (Goldberg and McCann's interrogative bombardment)
  
  

• Control (Goldberg’s nostalgic monologues)
  
  

• Suppress (Petey’s inability to intervene)
  
  

• Silence (Stanley's eventual muteness)
  
  

Pinter’s famous “Pinteresque pauses” are not simply empty silences but moments laden with tension. They reveal the power struggles underneath seemingly polite exchanges. Silence becomes both a refuge and a prison. When Stanley stops speaking, it is as if he is protecting himself from further intrusion—but it also signals his submission.

Language here is not a tool of expression, but of repression. It is in this linguistic battlefield that the individual is most ruthlessly attacked.

---

6. The Role of Meg and Petey: Passive Complicity

Meg and Petey, the elderly couple who run the boarding house, represent the passive society that enables oppression. Meg is infantilized herself, prone to nonsensical speech, and treats Stanley like a child. Petey is seemingly more perceptive, particularly toward the end, when he utters the quietly heroic line: “Stan, don’t let them tell you what to do.” Yet he ultimately does nothing to stop Goldberg and McCann.

Their complicity is not malevolent but banal—what Hannah Arendt famously called “the banality of evil.” They are part of the machinery that allows power to operate unchallenged. Their domesticity and ignorance are not harmless; they provide the very stage on which repression can unfold.

---

7. Ritual, Party, and Performance: Violence Disguised as Celebration

The titular birthday party is itself an ironic inversion. Rather than a celebration, it becomes a terrifying performance of dominance. The event is ritualistic, echoing both sacrificial ceremonies and show trials. Goldberg and McCann orchestrate the party not to honor Stanley but to destroy him.

This inversion of ritual reflects the absurdist dimension of the play. The party becomes a parody of communal bonding—where instead of inclusion, the individual is ostracized and broken. The structure of a party, a seemingly harmless social norm, is used to mask violent subjugation.

As Pinter himself stated, “In The Birthday Party, the ritual becomes the means of punishment.” It is precisely this distortion of normalcy that makes the play so unsettling.

---

8. Interpretations of Institutional Power: Political and Psychological Readings

Scholars have long debated the nature of the power Goldberg and McCann represent. Some of the major readings include:

8.1 Political Allegory:

The play is seen as a critique of authoritarianism and surveillance. Stanley becomes a dissenter, and Goldberg and McCann the secret police or bureaucrats enforcing ideological conformity.

8.2 Psychoanalytic Reading:

The figures can be interpreted as internalized forces—the superego crushing the ego. Stanley’s breakdown is a representation of the human psyche under neurosis and repression.

8.3Religious Symbolism:

Goldberg’s language is filled with references to Judaism and morality. McCann is possibly Irish-Catholic. They represent two strands of moral authority working together to punish deviation.

8.4 Existentialist Lens:

Stanley’s oppression represents the absurdity of existence. The universe (Goldberg and McCann) is irrational and cruel, and the individual (Stanley) cannot make sense of it.

All these readings converge on the idea that the individual is vulnerable and powerless in the face of mysterious, illogical, and overwhelming systems.

---

9. The Endgame: Muteness and Erasure

The final image of Stanley is one of complete erasure. He is dressed against his will, no longer speaks, and is taken away. His personhood has been deleted.

Goldberg and McCann's exit is accompanied by yet another banal act—Goldberg complaining about the car, McCann adjusting his tie. The ordinary resumes, even as an extraordinary act of violence has just taken place. This juxtaposition reinforces the play’s core message: power does not need to be spectacular to be effective. It thrives in the everyday.

Petey’s closing words—“Stan, don’t let them tell you what to do”—ring hollow, as Stanley is already lost. Yet they also stand as the only glimmer of human resistance in a play otherwise dominated by oppression.

---

10.Conclusion

The Birthday Party is a masterclass in theatrical minimalism and menace. Harold Pinter strips down plot, character, and dialogue to their essential components, leaving behind a raw examination of power, fear, and control. Through its ambiguous yet disturbing portrayal of Stanley’s oppression, the play forces the audience to confront the fragility of individual identity in the face of larger, inscrutable forces.

Pinter’s genius lies not in providing answers but in amplifying questions—about who holds power, how it operates, and why we submit to it. The play becomes a metaphor for the human condition in the modern age: surrounded by rituals we do not understand, punished by forces we cannot name, and left to resist in silence.

In The Birthday Party, the oppression of the individual is not just a thematic concern—it is the play’s entire architecture. From setting and characters to language and silence, every element conspires to reveal the inescapable mechanisms of control that govern human life. And in doing so, Pinter not only critiques society but transforms the stage into a site of confrontation—where truth, however bleak, can still be glimpsed.

References

Mostoufi, Khorshid. “Manipulative Language and Loss of Identity in Harold Pinter’s The Birthday Party: A Pragmatic Study.” Researchgate, May 2014, www.researchgate.net/publication/263281837_Manipulative_Language_and_Loss_of_Identity_in_Harold_Pinter’s_The_Birthday_Party_A_Pragmatic_Study. 

Pourjafari, Fatemeh (elahe). “Deprived of Free Will: Antihumanism in Harold Pinter’s The Birthday Party.” English Literature and Language Review, Academic Research Publishing Group, 11 Dec. 2022, www.academia.edu/92634496/Deprived_of_Free_Will_Antihumanism_in_Harold_Pinter_s_The_Birthday_Party?utm_source=.

Pinter, Harold. The Birthday Party. Grove Press, 1994.

Sur, Shweta. “The Concept of Power and Power Struggle in Harold Pinter’s Play: The Birthday Party.” Academia.Edu, 1 Feb. 2025, www.academia.edu/25395909/THE_CONCEPT_OF_POWER_AND_POWER_STRUGGLE_IN_HAROLD_PINTERS_PLAY_THE_BIRTHDAY_PARTY?utm_source=.


Saraci, Marinela. “The Sense of Insecurity and the Language of Pinter’s Absurd Play the Birthday Party.” Researchgate, Oct. 2013, www.researchgate.net/publication/291063225_The_Sense_of_Insecurity_and_the_Language_of_Pinter’s_Absurd_Play_the_Birthday_Party.