Jumpers by Tom Stoppard: modern or postmodern?
Diego Lacheze-Bier
Stoppard’s Jumpers , after its first performance in 1972, was met with mixed reviews. Praised as ‘Stoppard’s most ambitious work’ , 1 many appreciated the play for its attempt to tackle profound philosophical ideas, while others suggested the opposite, that these ideas where outdated, lacking nuance and that the play was far more effective in its portrayal of ‘ the collapse of a dysfunctional marriage ’ than anything else. 2 While many had, and continue to have, strong opinions on the quality of the work, none has come to a definite conclusion on its classification as a modernist or postmodernist play. While Jumpers sits chronologically in the early days of the postmodern period, it does not have the same blatant postmodernist tones as some of Stoppard’s other works, such as Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead (1966). The play shares conventional characteristics of both genres, and, problematically, while Stoppard is acutely interested in postmodernist concepts and explores them through their very own language, he is often critical of them and so one must be careful when labelling his plays as postmodernist themselves. 3 This essay aims to explore the various features of Jumpers in order to judge its position within the two fields of drama. To begin with, it is helpful to define what makes a play modernist or postmodernist, though the latter clearly exists in some relation to the former. Modernist writing is a response to the rapid and dramatic social and economic changes of the late 19 th and early 20 th century, both in Britain and internationally. The numerous wars and the problems associated with accelerated technological advancement characterize Modernism as a literature not only of change but of crisis. 4 Writers began to reject traditional, accepted ideas, choosing to explore the world and the future of humanity through new forms of expression, through a more critical, nuanced lens. Individualism emerged, which suggested both that the individual is more important than society, and that society is a threat to the integrity of the individual. There was a break from traditional literary form, in particular in the use of stream-of- consciousness narration. Absurdity, a nonsensical style of writing meant to reflect a world constantly struggling to achieve true meaning, became more common. Modernism proposed that truth could only be achieved – if at all – through reason and science. In other words, rational empiricism was seen as more trustworthy than the sorts of metanarratives which pervaded contemporary culture. The conventional notion of a hero fell away, replaced with the anti-hero, a protagonist who may act virtuously but without virtuous motivation. 5 In summary, modernism in literature discarded traditional, hegemonic literary ideas and form.
1 See Hinden 1981: 4. 2 Billington, Jumpers. 3 See Kelly 2001: 213. 4 Sarkar, Modernism: Definition, Philosophy, Characteristics, Examples in Literature. 5 Sherif, Features of Literary Modernism.
1
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator