
The
 greatest dialogue in plays, films, or books, manages to impart  that 
which  is  said and that which has been left unsaid. The elephant in the
 room, as it were, will keep everyone guessing. A literal definition of 
subtext describes a message which is not stated directly, but can be 
inferred. It pertains to the hidden, less obvious meaning perhaps archly
 delivered by some of our greatest actors.
How is it done? Isn't dialogue hard enough without adding this to the mix? The answer is yes.  
Studying the book entitled, Writing Subtext: What Lies Beneath,  by Linda Seger  I
 have gained some insight as to how a writer can manage to achieve this.
 If the audience is let in on a secret, there will be much that can be 
read into the  simplest of statements. A daughter may pretend to like 
the suitor her father picked out for her, but if we know that she 
secretly loves someone else, there will be a subtext to all she says. If
 a mother only wants what is best for her son, but does not want a 
daughter-in-law who is above her in social standing, she may seem to be 
welcoming this newcomer, but we will read into her attempts to be 
friendly. In some cases, such as the world of Shakespeare's Hamlet,
 the whole of Denmark can be slightly rotten.  If the road to 
power is suspect, the dialogue will be full of subtext.  Obviously, 
Shakespeare was a master at this skill. He would even have a character 
walk downstage and let the audience in on a few secrets.  A sudden 
windfall, an unlikely suitor, a change of leadership, or even a new 
invention, can put all known truths under a new microscope. Perhaps 
everyone is trying to make an adjustment, but no one wants to. There 
you will see subtext.
A 
character at odds with the  culture about which the audience is 
familiar will provide many a laugh as the poor fellow bumbles along, 
unaware of his missteps. Subtext is an essential tool in the comedian's 
toolkit. In a tragedy, the very elements left unsaid, can be the ones 
propelling everyone to their doom.
While
 thinking about this topic, my thoughts lead me straight to a much- loved
 play, namely, The Importance of Being Ernest. Oscar Wilde states it 
flat out in Act 1, Scene 1. Two characters, Algernon and Jack, have a 
discussion while waiting for guests to arrive for tea.  Discussing names
 Jack says, 
"Well, my name is Ernest in town and Jack in the country."
Algernon:
"I have always suspected you of being a confirmed Bunburyist; and I am quite sure of it now."
Jack:
"Bunburyist? What do you mean Bunburyist?"
Algernon:
"I'll
 reveal to you the meaning of that incomparable expression as soon as 
you are kind enough to  inform me why you are Ernest in town and Jack in
 the country."
"The truth is rarely pure and never simple. Modern life would be very tedious and modern literature a complete impossibility."
By
 the time the guests arrive, we have learned that both Bunbury and the 
Jack/ Ernest situation, are used as an excuse. When in town Ernest must 
leave at once as his brother Jack is in a pickle. When in the country, 
it is Ernest who calls him away, thereby providing the perfect excuse to
 escape social functions to which he is less than enthusiastic. Bunbury 
provides a similar ruse. Through the remaining scenes of this immortal 
play, all references to these characters are loaded with subtext.
Characters
 sometimes do not know themselves. Their most basic drives and instincts
 may be covered up by social convention, or self-delusion.  The stage 
may be full of actors whose roles are at cross purposes. Therein lies 
the subtext.
No comments:
Post a Comment