Question
number 4
The main act
on Oleanna is a conflict between a upper
middle class teacher (John), and a lo middle class (Carol). In this conflict
language has an important role because the characters in the play can't
communicate clear to each other because of the difference on their languages,
we can hear on repetitive occasions that
Carol says to John "I don't understand, I can't understand". We can
take John's jargon as elitist and exclusionist that brings him some
kind of power because not everybody can understand it, and gives him a feeling
of superiority.
When carol
talks about "her group", she
says that they have been oppressed
for a long time and that they are tired of being left. We could interpret this as
her saying that her class (that could be the proletarian) feel oppressed by the
burgoise system, and also they feel oppressed by the language of the dominant
educated elite.
I agree that the language used contributed significantly to how the conflict played out. Although we can see John's language as being exclusionary, should we assume that's what he intended it to be? Carol obviously saw it that way, but I don't think the use of John's extensive vocabulary makes it intrinsically elitist or exclusionary just because it can be interpreted as such. John tried many times to explain what he was saying so that they could be on "equal" ground on a conversational level. In my opinion, if he refused to explain what he meant or insulted her for not understanding him, then that's when the language would truly grant him a sense of power.
ReplyDelete