Online Poker Forum at Full Tilt Poker

chillbot · Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2008 5:58 pm Post subject: CHILLBOT'S 1,500TH POST

Ionesco�s Rhinoceros and The Absurd Absurd Wonderful So-So Theatre1 of Individualism

by Chillbot

Eugene Ionesco is a man of a singularly unfortunate disposition, in that he seems to share enough opinions with myself for me to take up an interest in his work. His play, Rhinoceros, comically handles the hopelessness of social interaction and the effects that it has on our individual identities. What I�ll be exploring is the impossibility of individuality within society�s inevitable tyranny of the majority, which, if worded concisely as a question, would contain a string of words, �Ionesco� definitely being one of the ones near the front, and ending with the proper punctuation unique to inquiry.

The stage directions within this play are more long-winded than any I�ve encountered in my (admittedly neophytic) amateur playwreading career. Ionesco seems2 to be exercising tight control over this play as �his world�. Inanimate objects are perfectly docile, they can be arranged in any old way. They�re not the problem, they don�t pose a threat.
(Reality may be a chaotic mess, and sorry to kill Santa Claus kid but this story turns out that way also, but I�m the architect of this landfill, and the tree that stands near the terrace chairs will not be any old tree. It will be a dusty tree.)

The setting attempts to be as �normal� a cross-section of Europicana (Americana, Tropicana, whatever) as is possible: nice weather, mid-day, church bells in the background, leisure time at the caf�3 for the hard-working men who toil so valiantly during the week. Find a way to calculate the mean of a society and the answer is this exact setting. This renders the backdrop completely innocuous, which is bizarre given the meticulous laying-out of particulars. The reasoning is less bizarre: the characters are the focus, their actions and relations. The setting could have been some hobos around a bonfire, only then we�d think their behavior resulted from dementia�which underlines the necessary innocuousness.

Enter JEAN, grand bastion of all that is praiseworthy in the world. Any pretense of normalcy in character behavior is annihilated post-haste: these are not going to be characters that are rendered absurd by the environment or by some cataclysmic event. They are the beginning and the end of hopelessness. JEAN seems to suffer from echolalia of society�s party-line, only it has penetrated beyond the vocal chords and taken root deep within his soul. Every statement he makes is motivated by Berenger�s deviation from expected behavior, supplemented with moralistic disapproval like a rider on a piece of legislation. There is the pervading sense that his brain has been artificially inseminated with someone else�s thoughts, or more accurately, everyone else�s thoughts4. This is evident in the appendage tacked onto his advice against consuming alcohol, ��popular science tells us that�� Wouldn�t want to go out on a limb, JEAN. Might saw yourself off.

The import of that lemony snippet tilts at the windmills that people use as sources5 of information. How often have we heard someone with absolutely no ties to or understanding of science, feng shui6, whatever, believe something to be justified because they could blindly invoke an institution, under the illusion that it provides rock-solid verisimilitude to the entire affair? Even scarier permutation: �I saw on Oprah that�� This passes for justification, and the flip side remarks upon how easily we accept things as fact. What does it mean for popular science to say something? Perhaps we just have to use the proper noun, at which point it can be attributed to a magazine? The speaker likely acquired this information from someone else, severing ties completely with any empirical sort of justification. The correct formulation is rather, �my friend told me so.� Ionesco, lest I forget to anchor myself in his commentary, exposes the fraudulent nature of what we call knowledge7: we�re just repeating sequences of words; we have no legitimate justification for things that we do legitimately believe to be true. This is the first sighting of the soon-to-be ubiquitous Brainless Man thesis.

Back to the t�te-�-t�te8: JEAN not only disapproves of Berenger�s transgressions, but he actively tries to bring him back into the fold. Producing a tie (a friggin extra tie?), comb, and mirror in order to make Berenger look presentable(sq)9, JEAN balks at Berenger�s request for a brush: �it would make my pockets bulge.� 10
(Almost went too far there, almost implied some sort of friendly altruism among friends, which even done in the name of conformity would still be something. No, the point here is that it all springs from vanity. Man11 conforms for reasons of vanity, which is to say that his self-barometer is completely aligned with the need to conform�a frightening thought. Jean probably does want to help Berenger out of thegoodnessofhisheart(sq)12, but the values of his heart are completely perverted by the need to conform and the subsequent pride in his achievement(sq). This pride is greater than his affection for a friend, as evidenced by the laughably petty notion that he would bring along a tie, mirror, and comb to clean up his friend�s appearance, but not a brush for fear of bulging pockets.)

Enter the titular13 beast.

(Notice the uniformity of each person(sans Berenger)�s response to the sighting. They speak the same words with essential simultaneity (staggered a bit, ironically, because that�s the only way it will have the desired effect dramatically).
What is human(sq), what is individual(sq) about them? Their response is as conditioned as a hand drawing back from the lick of a flame. It is also dependent on each other. They are not listening to what the other people are saying and then consciously echoing it. Again with the echolalia: unconscious repetition, but conditioned by conformity, by groupthink, by the need to belong, some sick cog-aphilia re the machine of society. To use a word that, God bless the English language, is apt in both contexts: apery)
(�)

The percentage of times puss(sq14)
15
and pus.sy(sq) are used to refer to the HOUSEWIFE�s cat as opposed to a different term of endearment approaches REGGIE MILLER�s free throw percentage16. It�s too common to be unintentional, but I�m not even going to try to extract any relevance from it17. Maybe this is an example of purely absurd behavior, or
(another reflection of conformity in that a particular unconventional (even for 1960) word usage gets unconsciously picked up and used by different characters throughout the book. This is quite the common, Freudian-slip-like window into the effects of groupthink. Certain members of a group invent slang or simply weight word usage in an unusual manner, and their comrades pick it up and sneeze it back out like a pathogen.

The LOGICIAN wears a fa�18ade of strict rational discipline, but the very first two statements he makes expose his hypocrisy. He borderline scolds the HOUSEWIFE for fearing the rhinoceros, championing reason as its superior, then expresses at the very least nervousness at holding a cat in his arms. Later, he attempts to explain to OLD GENTLEMAN what a syllogism is, completely out of the blue, and gives a ridiculously backward account. The OLD GENTLEMAN deeplyreflects(sq) before professing the absurd conclusion: �So then logically speaking, my dog must be a cat?� Every logical platitude, spouting like Old Faithful at this point, is completely misrepresented.19

(The LOGICIAN is a critique of academia, as well as simply the learned(sq) individual. He can scarcely think of anything but his area of study. Naturally, he is completely inept, but his words to the OLD GENTLEMAN have efficacy because of his title alone. Give special notice to the fact that the O.G. would certainly not believe that he has mindlessly accepted the LOGICIAN�s teaching. He gave it plenty of thought, but the mistake that he made was that he didn�t think intherightdirection(sq), if that makes any sense. That his behavior is microcosmic of humanity may or may not go without saying, but it�s too late now to find out. One can think all that they like, but if that thought is not intellectually refined, it will result in the same nonsense as would no thought at all2021.

Strictly rational thought is somewhat more difficult when one has a stake in the matter. Just as we�re rational beings, we�re also emotional beings. Intellectual elites attempt to usurp the emotions and create a strict hierarchy, but it is a false one. Society�s notion of the intellectual drinks their KOOL-AID, and this amounts to a rejection of the individual. Berenger is caught(sq) responding emotionally to the cat�s death.)

The hypocrisy of humanity extends beyond just academia. The GROCER, seeing a business opportunity, rushes to serve the HOUSEWIFE in the wake of the snowglobe-shaking she got from the rhino.
(Surely you didn�t think love of money would escape the bright lights? Our compassion, in some sense our humanity(sq), is (at least) second to capitalistic desire. Derision changes to hospitality in the blink of an eye when money could possibly change hands.)

An interesting consequence that arises from Berenger as free individual: he seems pockmarked with flaws. Regardless of the shortcomings of rationality, he can�t even suggest a reasonable cause for the rhinoceric appearance. There is a unique, context-free rationality to his thoughts: if all that was known were the depicted events of the play, the most rational explanations for the rhino would be the ones Berenger gives: the zoo, a traveling circus, etc. However, the particulars of their town: the banning of circus performers, closing down of the zoo, etc., refute all of Berenger�s attempts. Just as I�m about to classify the man an imbecile, he lays down the phrase �wretched perissodactyle22�, and seeing as I thought the correct word was cephalopod(sq) and was all set to use it about 4 pages ago, belittling the man�s intellect would indict my own to an even greater degree.

(He is not a member of society; his individualism prevents it. As such, he would have no way of knowing, save overhearing by chance, what was goingon(sq). There is an isolation in individualism due to its persistent unpopularity, and rejecting conformity and assimilation into community(sq) structures leads to what would be perceived as stupidity, since so much of our information is contingent upon events, and the individual would only personally witness a precious few. His word usage betrays a failure to conform to the general vocabulary of common speech.)

JEAN ascribes neatness and being well-dressed to �a keen intellect�. He suggests the complete use of free time to work on this intellect(sq), and Io.uses language that emphasizes the meager magnitude of that leisure time.
(The standards of everything are filtered through the collective standards of society. Nothing has any meaning unless it conforms, and conforming is most important in the meaning of everything.)

JEAN suggests Io.�s play.
(THIS is the naked absurd.)

And in some undefinable way, it�s brilliant, because
(Nobody can escape the communal vice-grips, and if you think you�re somehow above it, you�re worse than insane, because insanity is exactly what we�re gunning for here. It�s how you�d be viewed, anyway. Look at how this play was accepted: first performed in London by ORSON WELLES! An explosion of popularity for a play of which there is no way on Earth more than 10% or so of the audience understands the ramifications. Insert decimal point wherever.)

Don�t overheat there, Io. Nietzsche, Kerouac, etc. Same problem. The company could be worse.

[I�m diverging from the theme here but DAISY�s description of �young blonde� versus the 50 or so words given DUDARD and BOTARD really jumps out. Underdetermination is of such royalty with this project(sq) that I�ll just overtly state that I choose to take Io. to be parodying the way women are viewed in society by distilling her existence to those two words. Also, to assure over-analysis, I�m tickled to point out the assonance between that and dumbblonde(sq).]

BOTARD seems to be a logical positivist, which makes historical sense given the time that the play was written. He�s a walking contradiction, at times skeptical of seemingly obvious truths, at other times holding tightly to the most ridiculous claims. Here is another learned(sp) man adhering to the intellectual standards of the day. An example of a radical, but simplified: he�s not Marxist, he just knows how to recite the one line that makes(sq) him a Marxist.
(Notice that he rejects academia. The two sides are opposed but both are equally backward. You�ll never find a school of thought that isn�t run by ideologues. Ideologies23 naturally create ideologues, and people, in their incessant need to have their hands patted, scramble to fall into line with one or another, and there�s no good reason to choose one over any other, though everyone is convinced that they�ve chosen theirs for the best of reasons.)
(Further, BOTARD�s regurgitation of Marx�s �opiate of the masses� statement is of prime importance24. BOTARD is a philosopher parody, and this seemingly isolated one-liner is really a critique on knowledge once it becomes socialized(sq). Clich�-dropping. You�ve got his/her work down pat if you can just belt out that one string of words!]

�You like Nietzsche?�
�Hell yeah, GOD is dead, dude!�

[High-fives for all. This masquerades as knowledge, or worse, as understanding. The need for knowledge to be displayable in conversation, the desire to be able to show the other(s) something that speaks highly of one�s intellect, overwhelms any notions of honesty that might expect there to be some substance beneath.]

When MR. BOEUF appears, accompanied for the first time by the understanding that people are actually becoming the rhinoceri25, the witnesses, specifically his wife, completely fail to understand the magnitude26 of the changes, treating him basically like they would an ill human. MRS. BOEUF is the first to choose to go off with a rhino rather than stay with those who are still human.

[MRS. BOEUF identifies the rhino as her husband, even though his capacity to actually be her husband is little more than that of any other domesticated animal. She behaves as if he had simply suffered a temporary nervous breakdown. The difference between her and the rhino really is as subtle as she lets on. She, and many others to follow, have strayed so far from whatever the hell humanity(sq) is that the behavior of a rhinoceros fails to seem too far out of the ordinary.]

MR. BOEUF�s co-workers remain more preoccupied with the damaged staircase and the reaction of management than the occurrence of an event unprecedented in the entire history of mankind!
[We allow our jobs to devour us and become the entire universe, and society requires that we work the 40-hour week, respect our superiors(sq), mind the bureaucracy, etc. The rhinoceros population is exploding all over town, but there�s no way management will accept that as an excuse to stall the eternal production process.]

JEAN fails to take notice of his transformation to rhinohood, and protests narcissistically to Berenger�s fearful remarks. JEAN renounces every element of humanity as he becomes the rhinoceros. He also, curiously, renounces truth.
[JEAN�s transformation hints at individuality as illusion. He makes a few radical statements as the change is occurring27, but the final process sees him meet the same end as the rest, and the rest band together into a herd just as they did previously, as men.]

Berenger remains the only person who fears the change, but he is showing signs of confusion. He believes that willpower will protect him from the disease, which is mere mimicry of JEAN�s earlier advice, given in an attempt to assimilate Berenger into proto-yuppie society. The peculiar connection remains between the embracing of contemporary intellectual(sq) ideals of tolerance, perspectivism, again, relativism, and the onset of the ultimate transformation.28
DUDARD loses all conviction prior to siding with the rhinos, making laughable wishy-washy remarks that become more and more sympathetic to the rhinoceri. His responses are clearly emotionally motivated, and that motivation derives from, basically, a ratio. The rhinos are increasing in number, becoming a majority, becoming a society.

(Berenger and DAISY are out like Jacko, and DUDARD�s sense of group identification shifts with the demographics. Most disturbingly, so does his belief system. Our beliefs are all conditioned by group identification. This is why DUDARD and then DAISY lapse into relativism while in limbo, attempting to choose sides. If anybody speaks rhino, they can confirm this, but I�ll let you in on a little secret�they snap right back into a conclusive, but pro-rhino, ideology, once the transformation is complete.)

There are no heroes of this story: ultimately, the only reason Berenger takes pride in being a man is because he doesn�t have a choice. He has attempted to (there�s that failed willpower again) bring upon the transformation, and has renounced humanity in every conceivable way. However pure(sq) his individuality has been from the beginning, it has resulted in his rejection by the rest of society. At the bitter end, he is as unwillingly bound to his individuality as the rhinos are unknowingly bound to their group identification. And nobody�s there to comfort him. Ignorance is bliss, rhinos and gentlemen. The clich� tells me so.

(1) Inverted �er� (British?) enhances perception of authorial intelligence.

(2) This is the last time I use limp language like �seems�, or any of its nuclear family members: �might be�, �appears�, �possibly�, or extended family: �in my opinion�, �could be�, and the black sheep of the genealogical dogwood: �maybe�. Not because I�m some deadeye dick Ionesco scholar, but because the entire undertaking should have a huge �no kidding, this is just my attempted rational interpretation� sign trailing behind a biplane and circling overhead each sentence I�m writing. Actually checking myself to avoid saying anything that sounds definitive is tedious. All of which is to say, the �I think� must accompany all of my representations. (Fist pump)

(3) Better put the ol� accent aigu in the clipboard for future use. That�s thinkin�!

(4) It�s probably about time for a quotation.

(5) While we�re on the topic of quotes, I could put scare quotes here, but I can�t keep from picturing a politician making the air quote motion whenever I use them, so I�m going to cut them out altogether, at least until that vision goes away. I�ll test it out at semi-regular intervals.

(6) Not sure what there is to understand with this one but it�s neither the time nor the place.

(7) The three preceding words being a way to circumvent the scare quotes�

(8) No amount of aigu is gonna help me with this one.

(9) An airless solution to the scare quote dilemma�I really need them here.

(10) Geez, I hope the parentheses and the quote don�t kill the flavor of Donleavy I was going for with that sentence, which would be a pungent ginger laced with mildew. I hate Donleavy.

(11)Using �Man� here and elsewhere as an abbreviation for a completely androgynous and tenderly sensitive term.

(12) Just ran into the problem of newfangled square quote indicator when wanting to apply it to more than one word�Ah, that�ll work.

(13) No critic worth his salt misses an opportunity to use titular(sq).

(14) Denotes scared quotes(sq ) for this usage and the one immediately following.

(15) Oh ****. Moebius strip.

(16) Not sure what I was thinking, it becomes more like that of SHAQUILLE O�NEAL, which is laughable as far as FT% goes but still makes the point.

(17) Message from future hindsight: lie detected, student will inevitably and brashly find a pearl in that oyster if it means taking a marble out of his personal stash.

(18) Word automatically inserts the c�dilla. Repent, ye Luddites!

(19) Maybe the one moment I�ve been most glad to be a Philosophy major: the knowing laugh at the Socratic feline syllogism.

(20) *Wink*

(21) *Wink*Wink*

(22) Emp. mine

(23) Sticking to that negative connotation that many contemporary thinkers(sq) would have us believe is the only connotation.

(24) (I�ve no way of knowing how important it is, but I may as well dub it earth-shattering if I want to elaborate on the issue by putting my words into Io.�s mouth.)

(25) Or as one of the characters surprisingly did not say, �The rhinos are people!�

(26) The �magnitude vs. enormity� difficulty rears its polycorned head. I plead ignorance.

(27) And quite a few relativist statements to boot�

(28) To be honest, and to attempt to avoid injecting my antirelativism bias into my take on Io.: whatever-you-want-to-call-the-opposite-of-relativism isn�t any good either.

cubbies760 · Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2008 6:16 pm Post subject:

Flying_Kiwi · Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2008 6:20 pm Post subject:

I can't really abide the misuse of the reflexive pronoun "myself" in the first paragraph.

KronX · Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2008 6:31 pm Post subject:

There is a typo in the second paragraph "amateur playwreading".Please fix it. It's just killing me.

chillbot · Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2008 6:56 pm Post subject:

Big Slick x13x · Forum Icon Joined: 18 Jun 2006 Posts: 4115 Location: ROK

drtre1987 · Message Board Junkie Joined: 07 Nov 2006 Posts: 1762

STANDARD IMO

spike420211 · Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2008 7:17 pm Post subject:

ok i'm confused...
wtf is the difference between a BOTARD and a LAGTARD?

[Excuse the lack of culture, as I only have an AA degree...
you know, high school w/ ashtrays? Razz

]

congrats on ur 1500th post chill!

Riddim · Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 3:48 am Post subject:

Wow. Why did you write all that for your 1500th post after hardly posting lately?

girlypro · Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 1:58 pm Post subject:

Bravo, chillbot!

Are you familiar with memes?

Riddim · Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 3:06 pm Post subject:

CompleteDonk · Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 3:07 pm Post subject:

PokerAA · Message Board Junkie Joined: 24 Nov 2006 Posts: 1610

I will use my 1,500th post to congratulate you on your 1,500th post.

wwcd5215 · Message Board Junkie Joined: 16 Feb 2007 Posts: 1583

wwcd5215 · Message Board Junkie Joined: 16 Feb 2007 Posts: 1583

	Full Tilt Poker is licensed by the Kahnawake Gaming Commission. © Copyright 2004 - 2005 FullTiltPoker.com., All Rights Reserved