Essay on Arcadia: How does Tom Stoppard explore the relationship between chaos and order in Arcadia?

Résumé du document

As a postmodernist play, Arcadia appears to be a ‘melting-pot' of contrasting themes, ideas and theories resulting in an intellectual reflection on life in its diversity. In this sense, there is a clear attempt from the author to extract order from utter chaos. Nonetheless, the opposite movement is also noticeable: as the play evolves, the apparent rationality and order of its structure develops into confusion and disorder; chaos. Consequently, the relationship between chaos and order in Arcadia can be examined through the study of these two opposing movements throughout the play: chaos towards order on one hand, and, at the same time, order towards chaos on the other. Tom Stoppard makes use of the different theatrical devices available to portray this double correspondence, such as the structure of the play, its theatricality – through the use of props and staging decisions – and of course the plot itself with the themes highlighted through the characters' exchanges and actions.

The structure of the play is important, as Stoppard's choice of two separate but interacting plots is not innocuous: having to follow the constant leaps through time and understand which characters belong in the 19th century and which in the late 20th century gives a feeling of chaos and disorganisation to the play as a whole. The choice of using the same character to play Augustus in the 19th century and Gus in the 20th further reinforces the confusion of the spectator, as do the many links between the modern characters and their ancestors. Indeed, blood ties link Valentine, Chloë and Gus to the 19th century Coverly family; the house which is home to both sets of characters acts as a constant reminder of their family ties. Moreover, distinctive personality traits connect the characters from both time-periods together. For instance,

Extraits

[...] However, from this chaotic setting a defined order is determined. The play starts in the 19th century, so that the chronological order is respected, and from then on the scenes seem to follow a set pattern, alternating between the two time-frames evenly. The stories complement each other to provide on one hand a satisfactory explanation of what actually happened to the early 19th century characters; on the other a lesson for the 20th century protagonists, who evolve through their discoveries and experience the flaws of their respective research methods. [...]

[...] Essay on Arcadia: How does Tom Stoppard explore the relationship between chaos and order in Arcadia? As a postmodernist play, Arcadia appears to be a ‘melting-pot' of contrasting themes, ideas and theories resulting in an intellectual reflection on life in its diversity. In this sense, there is a clear attempt from the author to extract order from utter chaos. Nonetheless, the opposite movement is also noticeable: as the play evolves, the apparent rationality and order of its structure develops into confusion and disorder; chaos. [...]

[...] Certainly, one of the most important elements to explain the relationship between chaos and order in the play is the use of props, which he describes in great detail on several occasions. For instance, the fact that there are no changes of scenery between cross-overs to another century causes an impression of blurred boundaries, thus disorder. The table in the centre of the room is probably the most representative of this phenomenon; objects used in either time- frame are left there to be used in both centuries despite possible anachronisms. [...]

[...] These movements chaos to order and order to chaos reflect some of the main themes evoked in Arcadia. Indeed, a recurrent idea throughout the play is the seemingly impossible cohabitation of a ‘classical' scientific, intellectual way of thinking inherited from the 18th century Enlightenment movement, and Romanticism ideology, which was starting to appear at the time when the earlier plot takes place (early 19th century). In the same way that the first act is well structured and organised whereas the second act is more chaotic, so was the artistic current of the time moving away from intellectual rigour into the more feelings-based attitude of Romanticism. [...]

[...] This is therefore Stoppard's way of exploring the relationship between chaos and order; through the metaphor of Sidley Park's garden for example, he identifies these two important artistic movements, and how they opposed each other. The “pastoral refinement of an Englishman's garden” is to be replaced by a modern Gothic garden (“picturesque of which “irregularity is one of the chiefest principles”. In the same way, the constant competition between art and science put forward in Arcadia opposes once again Romantic and Enlightenment ideas, thus chaos and order. [...]