 

     

 

ihﬂﬁunﬁd

.103...

 

    

       

v 3.! . - Pol-nip”. ....l .8
a i. = I...
‘0'. (9.. 2. III: ((5.3.-

S: (.511 «53:13;
so. .

      

     

 

 

.fgi‘

 

I

  

\

  

 

,i

         

 

J
sunru»

9'

.4 u

r .I 5m 53...“ t!

x .v. , m.
inf: l‘luxwlniv; ‘r VIII"...

u! .
2'
f.

.9
t .
.-

 

s
35:... : . .s, .. x.

~ 5 {‘1‘
z...d.h«.mwrvum”ﬁnwnnmln$v .um
. . ﬁght»: .

    

 

lg.)
‘1‘.- .
I

5 Wk“.

 

 

  

(I. ail-3.: {5‘
. . J§2l§xttd~mnlb£ﬁ
. . P . . LIZnIJuOr'ui‘ cm!!! ('4-
..n.0....\.alc. ‘ . . . u. ., . ‘ . . .
\MsﬂcﬂJMP. 3W”... } ‘ . ‘ . ‘
. fl ..
\- Hgntul 472‘. . .1

       

C \‘u‘in 3 $1.
I. 911
1st.|)!a .

All.»

    

 

 

   

A ‘50‘54‘3f5: to: II
. .(ul tall..1..<..:4.!.u4lt‘lo’\rl.r
14.2.!If.‘ IECE'J... . rlfﬂli 59.51
. 2 ‘1’: £11.? _

.gvi.

 

in H1. ,-

               

,.

 

3;.

    

 

em .
. rail

  

            

(Tug-’1. 1
. .Hﬁiﬁzizai...‘

      

 

     

 

. .3 .x «I!
4 {xyuuﬁbxux .1! . Sully-ng... M
J... )y ‘ , , I .2‘ .55.... . . .3; Trivia:
. #1.“. 2.. .agniuﬁkié ..
. .n..1 s3. , ‘ ., . éitéw up; .

. . ‘ » . I..- . n1 . .

   

              

 

.l

 

q . r .
. .1541, .0... 152,88;

 

 

    

   
     

        

   
    

     
     

I
. Iii}! ’(Ilzp. 1:6..‘0- VIII-13)!
‘ y .. .51: v‘r..1(.u{)r'.ltf.nllb}.
L'ieitiu. .....: ice?! 5.
. . . . (3!. L i. «‘3‘:
. ‘ .h).
, _ ._. . S . I.
- 'll‘4 u H
‘5OIDA\!L. 0. r I 17! . z r
. £59! 1? J i...“ . 3. ,
30.5 ‘ txtqh A! ulnarulfJ.
I!!! x a . til) 91.;
b 1.? . d :35: I
I. {1.5.531
} r» ‘erf. t. 3.
). w». ol..f.,1:.
-1, . vi i 1.11...
.r . \ fiersJ
, a4. l);..;i.l:

            

             

      

        

        

           
   

   

   

. .. . ,. , u Jhwdu (is lbw
‘ v . ! . . . tiriﬂw‘lx Ex .33.}. .rtc c . .1: full... ll!

. s? l . ., F; Jiﬁﬂliuv 2;mk.25:.:bo::.u.{:in.vt.nrdﬁ. 2.. um
.9“an $an .w. . 9&1: ) - aversrnnrin 2:492». ..T...n«...n..lé.z..n.....r...uu...i . 2...... Ihvu
Patti; . . «=4 2. ‘ tulldunha 2.. . . |thva ... .E if, .4. 1:5!» .5 tilde”. “1...... a c! )rll .531. :6... ‘13.
.3 $45.“ . :ﬂHLW. r. ’1'. z . 1:15)!" Lab” II): 2 . M... 'nd ‘4. pl twat-9dr"? .a V v 21- 27%.» . 31‘ ‘94”
._ 5 I .(N‘héx‘ A n . . a 33.121 . ... {Sludﬁquiwx .L .43 » .1. 7,7 :3, n) :3 ‘ovllrr.r.|u . I: u.(.: 'ZIl L :00 .I’. In!!! i.

1 . ‘5 v x . I 1 .. . .
bf} Jab. a, {is

L
l
i

. .. ~vt1.

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE I

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MSU Is An Affirmative Action/Equel Opportunity Institution
cMMuna-QJ

 

A TRANSACTIONAL ANALYSIS OF MARITAL GAMES
IN A SELECTED GROUP OF MODERN AMERICAN PLAYS

BY

Carlo Vincent Spataro

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department of Theatre

1 990

ABSTRACT
By
Carlo Vincent Spataro

In the preparation of production a major problem facing actors and directors is
determening the psychological motivation for each character in the play. In acting
this process is often refered to as the development of inner technique. Each actor
must decide for him or herself what the motivation is that causes his or her character
to interact in specific ways with others. Directors have the responsibility of helping
actors make appropriate choices for character behavior and motivation.

Transactional Analysis developed by Eric Berne, is atheory of human personality
and behavior that was used as a method of discovering character motivation.
Berne’s psychological Game Analysis was used to determine speciﬁc motivation
of the married couples in five post World War II American dramas. The transactions
of married couples were analyzed based on the social transactions found in the
dialog as well as the psychological transactions found in the nonverbal subtext.
The Game Analysis model devleoped by Berne and the Drama Triangle developed
by Stephen Karpman, were used to determine and analyze the psychological
games being played. The transactional dynamics of the games were both
described and illustrated.

Transactional Game Analysis is an effective tool for providing actors and
directors with insight into the psychological life of characters and with concrete
verbal and non-verbal interpretative choices as well. In the plays chosen for
analysis, games played by married couples tend to be repetitive. The game of

ALCOHOUC is the most repetitive of the games played.

ii

FOR MY FATHER

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank the theatre faculty at Michigan State University for their
continued encouragement and support. In particular I wish to thank Dr. Jon Baisch

for his insight and kindness.‘

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction ............................. 1
Chapter 1

A Brief Overview of Transactional Analysis ........... 9
Chapter 2

An Analysis of Transactional Games .............. 22
Chapter 3

Identiﬁcation and Analysis of Marital Games .......... 30
Conclusions ............................. 70
Appendix .............................. 74
A Selected List of Works Consulted ................ 76

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 ............................... 12
Figure 2 ............................... 13
Figure 3 ............................... 15
Figure 4 ............................... 16
Figure 5 .......... . ..................... 17
Figure 6 ............................... 18
Figure 7 ............................... 18
Figure 8 ............................... 28
Figure 9 ............................... 34
Figure 10 .............................. 36
Figure 11 .............................. 42
Figure 12 .............................. 45
Figure 13 .............................. 51
Figure 14 .............................. 60
Figure 15 ............................... 67
Figure 16 .............................. 69

INTRODUCTION

When embarking on this study I was intrigued with the possibilities of applying
Transactional Analysis theory to the analysis of the psychological games played by
speciﬁc married characters in a selected group of modern American plays. Speciﬁ-
cally, what i set out to show is that Eric Berne’s game analysis can be used to reveal
the set patterns of behavior or symbiotic relationships that exist between married
characters. By using game analysis the actor and director can better understand
the sub-textual motivation of the transactions between characters. I plan to
demonstrate that this approach will assist the actor in understanding the existential
life position of the character being created. Existential life position is defined as the
positive or negative feelings one holds about oneself and others as one exists in
the world. Each actor ﬁnds his own way of working and it is advantageous to have
many different ways to analyze character. The way an actor thinks about analysis
affects the way he acts. Using this approach can also aid the actor in more
accurately preparing an inner monologue. I chose the marriage relationship as the
focus of my analysis for the following reasons: 1) there exists the generally held
psychological belief that, in our culture, marriage is the most complex of all
interpersonal relationships and 2) there exists a rich store of modern American plays
dealing with the complexity of marital relationships. According to Campos and
McCormick marital games pay off in at least ﬁve ways:

1. You play to keep your self in a racket where you feel you can best maintain
your emotional "balance" (both within yourself and in your relationship).

2. You play to avoid facing up to Adult responsibility for your actions and

feelings. which you cover up, sensing they are ”not-OK."

3. You ﬁll your time with your partner without getting too close. Intimacy may
seem risky to your Child.

4. You play for strokes, although they may be negative.

5. You "prove" that your basic position is "right“; e.g. "You can’t trust men"
(Campos and McCormick 21).
You can regognize your games by their pay-offs, like feeling one- up [on the person

with whom the game is being played] or one down (Campos and McCormick 22).

When Freud published his studies on hysteria in 1895, he launched his
psychoanalytic theories. As his influence began to impact on European society, a
shift in the style of playwriting and theatrical production began which, by the turn
of the century, became dominated by the realistic style. Oscar Brockett states that
Freud’s pervasive inﬂuence on modern drama is also explained in part by his
quasi-scientiﬁc explanation of behavior that in idealist drama had been attributed
to "the mystery of fate," "intuition,” or other equally vague and subjective concepts.
By locating the source of behavior within the human mind, Brockett contends that
Freud made it possible for realistic dramatists to portray behavior previously
considered nonrealistic or irrational because it had no veriﬁable basis (Brockett,
Mm 30)-

Freud himself wrote an essay detailing the link between the science of psychol-
ogy and the art of the stage. Entitled, WW9; it ﬁrst
appeared in translation in W volume XI, 1952, 459-464.

. . . we may now follow the drama to still another arena where it becomes the
psychological drama. For it is within the soul of the hero himself that there takes
place an anguished struggle between various impulsesua struggle which must
end, not with the downfall of the hero, but with that of one contending impulse,
in other words, with a renunciation (Corrigan, W 210).

Freud suggested that much human behavior is the result of human impulses which
may be unconscious behavior of the individual. He used the play ﬂamjet to illustrate
this point:

The foremost modern drama of this kind is 11mg, which deals with the theme
of a normal man who, because of the particular nature of the task enjoined upon
him, becomes neuroticua man in whom an impulse hitherto successfully
repressed seeks to assert itself. Hamlet is distinguished by three characteristics
which seem of importance to our discussion: 1) that the hero is not
psychopathic, but becomes so only in the course of the action we are going to
witness; 2) that the repressed desire is one of those that are similarly repressed
in all of us, the repression of which belongs to an early stage of our individual
development, while the situation arising in the play shatters precisely this
repression. Because of these two features it is easy for us to recognize
ourselves in the hero. For we are victims of the same conflict as he; since "he
who doesn’t lose his reason under certain provocations has no reason to lose."
3) But it appears to be one of the prerequisites of this art form that the struggle
of the repressed impulse to become conscious, recognizable though it is, is so
little given a deﬁnite name that the process of reaching consciousness goes on
in turn within the specataor while his attention is distracted and he is in the grip
of emotions, rather than capable of rational judgment (Corrigan 211).

The continued inﬂuence of psychology in modern theatre can be traced from
the Method of Stanislavsky with its emphasis on internal preparation by the actor,
to the bizarre, highly neurotic behavior of the characters created by Sam Shepard.
Certainly, even before Freud’s research the Norwegian and Swedish playwrights
Ibsen and Strinberg were fascinated by the interpersonal machinations in marriage.
Who can argue against the psychological complexities of characters such as
Rosmer and Rebecca in Rosmershgjm destroyed by the release of their repressed
feelings and accumulated excessive guilt? Nora and Torvald in Ibsen’s my;
muse, square off in complex scenes of psychological marital games. Strindberg

has plays ﬁlled with psychological (ulterior) transactions in the battle of the sexes

including Mia and M-

In W a play considered by many critics to be the classic
American tragedy. Arthur 'Miller exposes the existential life position of the
protagonist, Willie Loman. In his essay, Iraggm md the Common Man, Miller calls
Wu a modern tragedy. In that sense the post-Freudian influence
can clearly be observed. Willie is not a noble hero whose fate is being tossed about
by the gods. He is clearly held accountable for the choices he makes thus
determining the course of his marriage and his life. The audience is left to decide
whether or not what Willie reveals about himself is reality or illusion. Of one thing
we can be sure and that is that Willie may be a victim but not of fate. Willie "sets
himself up to fail" by allowing himself to be victimized by an uncaring social system
and a false sense of values.

Every one of Tenessee Williams’ plays could be a textbook study in the
psychology of the human personality. Willams was fascinated with characters who
were often in deep personal torment, what might be called today severely nuerotic.
He probes with surgical precision the complexity of their struggles to understand
themselves and the word in which they exist. Two short examples will illustrate this
point. In Wage, we are presented with Laura, a young woman
psychologically traumatized by her physical handicap and abandonment by her
father. Laura's mother, Amanda, is totally insensitive and places unrealistic expec-
tations on her. Laura feels inadequate, insecure and consequently sees herself as
inferior in the eyes of the world. In AW Williams creates a
positive physical symbiotic relationship between Stanley and his wife Stella while
contrasting it with the negative psychological struggle between Stanley and

Blanche. Stella survives the games Blanche does not.

 

 

While playwrights were creating plays strongly inﬂuenced by modern
psychological principles, directors such as Elia Kazan and teachers of acting like
Lee Strasberg were reinforcing these same principles of psychology in their work.

In S. Loraine Hull’s book, WM, she presents a rationale for
behavioral psychology as a basis for the acting Method used in The Actors Studio.
According to Michael Schulman, a practicing psychologist, members of his profes-
sion recognize the scientific facts prevalent in the Method. Schulman wrote
extensively about Stanislavsky’s and Strasberg’s principles and procedures of
responsive acting. Stanislavsky was also aware of Freud’s theories, including the
psychologist’s conclusion that the ultimate forces at work in a personality were
instinctual (Hull 233).

Method actors and behaviorial psychologists have a common intention: they
are both in the business of controlling behavior of others, but where the
psychologist observes the behavior of others, the actor’s only subject is himself.
He must learn which stimuli to apply to himself so that, on cue, he will experience
the proper feeling and give the proper response (Hull 233).

In 1931, Lee Strasberg along with Cheryl Crawford and Harold Clurrnan founded
The Group Theatre, noted for its sharply oriented political plays. Strasberg was
fascinated by the work of Stanislasvsky and directly inﬂuenced by one of
Stanislavsky’s students, Richard Boleslavsky. Strasberg often used Boleslavsky’s
book, Aging, The First Six Le§§gn§ in his acting classes. Lee Strasberg also
became artistic director of The Actors Studio which he helped found in 1947 with
Robert Lewis, Elia Kazan and Cheryl Crawford . The Actors Studio was a school
for professional actors using a modiﬁed Stanislavsky method that placed the major
emphasis in training and discovering the "inner truth" of characters. Many post-
World War II plays by Williams and others were either produced, directed or acted

by individuals connected to the Actors Studio.

The introduction of the psychoanalytic theory of the human personality by Freud
was a precursor to subsequent theories of personality which have had a profound
inﬂuence on representational theatre in the United States. Transactional Analysis,
a theory of human personality and behavior which has its roots in Freudian
psychology, was developed by Eric Berne. In 1969, Walter Ernest Sanders, in his
dissertation, "The English-Speaking Game Drama", presents a generalized game
analysis of Beckett’s W and gm Pinter’s W
and W and Albee's W and Who’s Afraid gf Virginia
Woolf? Genet and lonesco are discussed in passing. In 1974, Lesley K Brown
wrote her Master’s thesis, "The Use of Transactional Analysis in Directing Henrik
lbsen’s mm." Also in 1974, Scott H. Plumber developed a thesis entitled
"Transactions, Games, and Scripts In Moliere’s Theatre: A Selective Transactional
Interpretation". In 1975, Elizabeth Anne Hull wrote, “A Transactional Analysis of the
Plays of Edward Albee" which is a generalized study of a selected group of Albee’s
plays using Transactional Analysis. In 1977, Paul T. Kurtz developed the thesis,
"Transactional Analysis Of Character In Drama For The Actor“, which applies the
principles of Transactional Analysis to character in tragedy, comedy and mixed
forms in a generalized fashion. Also in 1977, Richard Mark Berlin wrote, "Theatrical
Transactional Analysis: A Model For The Director-Actor Communication Process".
In 1982, Kenneth Randall Robbins developed three original scripts in his disserta-
tion, "The Transactional Process Of Playwriting In Developing Three Scripts For The
Stage". In addition to the above titles, several articles have appeared in the
jjjrgnsagiogal Analysis Journal dealing with the use of Transactional Analysis in
theatre, including one by Dr. Arthur Wagoner, former Chairman of the Department
of Theatre at The University of California at San Diego. It is my intention to contribute

to this tradition.

To date, there has been no comprehensive study applying Berne’s transactional
game analysis theory to the interpersonal marital relationships in a selected group
of signiﬁcant American plays. "Transactional analysis is a branch of social
psychiatry, and game analysis is a special aspect of transactional analysis" (Berne,
W 51). Using Berne’s Transactional Game Diagram and Karpman’s
Drama Triangle, I intend to test the effectiveness of transactional game analysis
theory when applied to marital relationships in modern American plays.

Each play selected for this analysis is considered by many critics to be an
outstanding example revealing the psychologiocal complexities of human relation-
ships in marriage. Three plays, William’s W O’Neill’s Long
WM}, and Albee’s Wm have won the Pulitzer
Prize in Drama and the ﬁrst two also received the New York Drama Critics Circle
Award. The other sources for my analysis are, Miller’s W1, and Inge’s

m ' Ie a.

Transactional game analysis is used by psychiatrists, clinical psychologists,
psychologists, social workers, counselors, clergymen and teachers, on the
therapeutic level, as an effective tool in analyzing interpersonal problems. Trans-
actional Analysis methodology is practical and works in reality, and in similar ways
has been used as an effective tool, in the ﬁctive world of plays as indicated in other
studies I have cited. This research will emphasize ego state operations of the
married characters, an analysis of their existential life position, an examination of
dialogue reﬂecting the character’s support of life position and illustrations of marital
games played. This analysis will focus on the preparation for performance through

an understanding of the dynamics of psychological games played by the married

characters and the impact these games have on the character’s marital relation-
ships. I will demonstrate that this methodology can also be an efficacious technique
for discovering ulterior transactions which are the basis of games (sub-text).

The use of Transactional game analysis has several advantages for the actor
and director. First, the language used is easy to understand. Berne intentionally
chose to break with the medical model and use language that would not create
barriers between therapist and client. Second, the methodology is not difficult to
use. This is particularly true of Karpman’s Drama Triangle. Third, the methodology
can be directly and clearly applied to the analysis of marriage relationships between
characters within a play. A closer examination of Berne’s Transactional Analysis
theory and game model as well as Karpman’s Drama Triangle is appropriate for a

clear understanding of their application.

CHAPTER 1

A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF TRANSACTIONAL ANALYSIS

Eric Lennard Bernstein was born in Montreal, Canada in 1910. His father was
a physician and his mother a professional writer. After receiving his MD. in 1935
from McGill University, Berne changed his name, immigrated to the United States
and became an American citizen. He became a psychiatric resident at the Yale
University, College of Medicine, then a clinical assistant at Mt. Zon Hospital in New
York City and later entered the US. Army Medical Corps as a psychiatrist in 1941.
Subsequently, he moved to California where he went into private practice.

In the early 1950’s, Berne began a Transactional Analysis study group in Carmel,
California. This seminar was instrumental in spreading the principles of Transac-
tional Analysis across the United States. Muriel James, who studied with Berne
during these formative years, stated that Berne wrote for professionals and
nonprofessionals throughout his career. His writings reflected the idea that
psychology is for everyone. Berne’s ﬁrst book, W was ﬁrst
published in 1947 and later republished under the title A_Leyme|1s_qu_ige_‘l'_e
Psychiatg and Psychoanalysis. His landmark book written in 1961, Transactional
Malysie in Psyehethereey, presents the foundations of Transactional Analysis
principles and theory. A later book, Games People Pley, written in 1964, which
introduces the structure of transactional games became a national best seller.
Berne founded the Transactional Analysis Bulletin in 1962 After his death in 1970,
the m developed into a professional journal, ﬁrst published by the International
Transactional Analysis Association in January, 1971. Since then the IT AA has

10

published the Mil quarterly. Originally, Transactional Analysis or TA, as it
is generally refered to, was developed as a method of psychotherapy.
TA is many things. First, it is a philosophy-a point of view about people. Second,
it is a theory of personality development, intrapsychic functioning and interper-

sonal behavior. Third, it is an ever-expanding system of related techniques
designed to help people understand and change their feelings and behaviors

(Woollams and Brown,I[eneeetjeneLAne_lyele1).

After being rejected as a suitable candidate for psychoanalytic training by Eric
Ericson in 1947, Berne broke with the traditional practice of Freudian psychotherapy
and, based on observations of his clients, and developed his Ego-State model of
the human personality. What followed was his ﬁrst book, Iraneectieng Analysis in
Esyeﬁejhegm (1961), in which he set forth the basic theory and principles of
Transactional Analysis. .

Berne presents the thesis that the human personality is made up of three psychic
organs; exteropsyche, neopsyche, and archaeopsyche which manifest themselves
phenomenologically as identiﬁcatory, dataprocessing, and regressive ego states.
Colloquially, these are called the Parent, Adult and Child ego states (Berne,
Traneagtjenel 3). Capital letters are used to identify ego states to avoid confusion
with real parents, adults and children. He also observed that people perform in
predetermined ways--acting as if they are on stage and reading from a theatrical
script (James and Jongeward 11). Berne began his observations of ego states with
the case of his client, Mr. Segundo (pseudonym).

Ego states are deﬁned as consistent patterns of feelings and experience which
are directly related to corresponding consistent patterns of behavior;
Phenomenologically, an ego state is described as “a coherent system of feelings
related to a given subject" (James. W20).

Dr. William Penﬁeld,a Canadian neurosurgeon,had earlier conducted experiments

which supported the idea that a person’s brain stores long forgotten memories:

11

The implication is that what happens to people is recorded in their brain and
nervous tissue. This includes everything that they experience in their childhood,
and all that they incorporate from their parent ﬁgures, perceptions of events,
feelings associated with these events, and distortions they bring to their
memories (James, Techniques 21).

Berne demonstrates that Parent, Adult and Child are not theoretical constructs such
as the Freudian superego, ego and Id or the Jungian constructs but
phenomenological realities; while pastimes, games. and scripts are not abstrac-
tions but operational social realities (Berne, Traneaetienal 4).

When people transact with each other and their purpose is not to accomplish
a goal but rather to "talk about" something, they are engaging in a pastime. A
pastime is a semi-ritualized conversation in which people share opinions,
thoughts, or feelings about relatively safe topics (Woollams and Brown Trans-
Lctimai 83)-

Games, which are a series of transactions with ulterior purposes and negative
payoffs, may be played from the Parent, as the parents once played them. They
can also be played from the Adult, for example, by a therapist who goes along
with a client’s games temporarily while games are being de-escalated. Games
are also played from the Child who learned them in childhood as a way to get
strokes in order to survive (James Techgiguee 91).

A racket can be either an internal process or a series of complementary
transactions which a person uses to "justify" a not-OK position (Woollams and
Brown 84).

A not-OK position is essentially a negative feeling one holds toward oneself.

A script is a life plan which an individual decides upon at an early age in reaction
to her interpretation of both external and internal events (Woollams and Brown
Traneeetional 1 51 ).

Berne points out that the Child ego state means an organized state of mind which
exists or once actually existed, while Freud describes the id as "a chaos, a cauldron
of seething excitement...it has no organization and no uniﬁed will." The Parent ego
state is a collection of attitudes, thoughts, behaviors, and feelings which a person

has taken from outside sources who served as parent figures. The Adult ego state

12

is a data-processor which functions like a computer as it organizes information,
estimates probabilities, and makes logical statements. The Child ego state consists
of feelings, thoughts, and behaviors which are typical of children and spontaneous
adults (Woollams and Brown 7).

The model of the structure of the human personality is shown as three circles

of the same size, in vertical arrangement, as shown in [Figure 1].

Noo- _
NYC".
Archaeo-
Mich-
Organs

The Parent ego state can be refered to as the taught function of the personality,

   

Ego States
Figure 1

the Adult as the thinking function and the Child as the feeling function. The shift
from one ego state to another can be viewed as a shift in psychic energy or "the
flow of cathexis". When an ego state is dominant it is energized or cathected. Berne
thought that it is as if each person has three destinctive personalities, any one of
which can be cathected for the purpose of transacting. It is possible to exclude
two ago states and operate predominately from only one. When this happens,
behavior may be maladaptive since one ego state has effectively excluded the

cathecting of two-thirds of the human personality.

13

Ego states become contaminated when the boundary of one overlaps the

boundary of another as indicated in [Figure 2].

 

Contaminated
Adult

 

 

Figure 2

Contamination takes place when the Adult ego state is contaminated by either the
Parent or the Child. When this happens the ability of the Adult to function logically
and rationallly is impaired. For example, Parent prejudices could contaminate the
Adult. A person operating with such contaminated Adult could appear to be
transacting in a logical and rational way and yet be presenting nothing more than
Parent ego state bias.

The Parent ego state is the repository of taught values (morals, prejudices etc.)
and functions in two ways, as Critical Parent (sometimes seen as Controlling Parent)
and as Nurturing Parent. Each of these Parent behaviors uses a specific body
language, tone of voice, and vocabulary. The body language of the Critical Parent
consists of a tense musculature including such things as hands on hips, pointing
of the index finger, folded arms across chest, scowls, pushes and slaps. The tone

of voice has an edge to it'and often sounds condescending. The vocabulary

14

consists of words that either discount the other person such as dummy, foolish,
incompetent or "have to" words, such as "you must", "why don't you", “you should",
etc. The Nurturing Parent is the opposite side of the coin. The body is relaxed and
open including such things as an arm around the shoulder, smiles, hugs and kisses.
The tone of voice ls warm and supportive. The vocabulary includes words of
support and encouragement including such phrases as I know how you feel, I
understand, don’t be afraid, you’re not alone etc. The Adult functions as the human
computer processing facts. Adult ego state behavior can also be recognized by
tone of voice, vocabulary and body language. The Adult tone of voice is strong,
steady and well modulated. The body language is exemplified by an erect, relaxed
musculature reﬂecting an energized body. The vocabulary of the Adult Ego State
is expressed by the use of multi—syllabic words, and often, words that are indicative
of a particular occupation or profession such as the words auto mechanics would
use discussing the diagnosis of an automobile engine or the vocabulary used by
a physcian presenting a paper at a medical convention. The Child Ego State
functions in two ways as Adapted Child (sometimes seen as Compliant Child) and
Natural Child (sometimes seen as Free Child). The Natural Child is self-centered
and concerned with having fun. Sexual attraction takes place in the Natural Child.
Under the inﬂuence of alcohol the Parent ego state is supressed and the Adult is
decomissioned leaving the Child ego state in charge. This is why many people ﬁnd
it necessary to drink alcohol at a party in order to have a "good time". The body
language of the Natural Child is higly animated and extroverted with broad
gesticulations, laughter, and smiles. The tone of voice is elevated, often loud and
exuberant. The voabulary of the Natural Child features mono-syllabic words that

are colorful and often colloquial. Cursing or words used in sexual jokes are

examples. Adapted Child behavior is the opposite of the Natural Child in body
language, tone of voice and vocabulary. Adapted Child body language features
either a musculature that is weak and sagging with head bowed, eyes downcast
and hands crossed in front of the genitals or a tense musculature with clenched
fists and teeth. Both examples are signs of adaption. The tone of voice is either
extremely soft, sometimes barely audible or loud and shrill. The vocabulary of the
Adapted Child reﬂects the use of mono-syllabic words of appology such as I’m

sorry or forgive me or angry words such as I hate you or no. [FIGURE 3]

Critical Parent
Nurturing Parent

} Parent Ego Stats
Adult

Adapted Child
Natural Child

69°69

} Chlld Ego Stat.

Functional Ego State Model.
Figure 3

A major objective of Transactional Analysis is to develop individual autonomy.
An autonomous person is one who is non-manipulative and accepts both the assets
and liablities of him/herself and others. Whether or not a person develops
autonomy is dependent on the messages he/she receives as a child. If a person
receives positive messages he/she will develop into a winner and if the messages
are negative he/she will develop into a loser. These nonverbal and verbal messages

result in the child making an existential decision about him/herself. An exiistential

16

decision is a more or less permanent positive or negative feeling about oneself and
the outside world.

Transactions are built upon the communication model of stimulus/response.
One person initiates a stimulus, either verbally or nonverbally, and if someone
responds a transaction has occured. Transactions take place between the ego
states of one person and the ego states of another. While communication can break
down during the course of one transaction, a series of ongoing complementary
transactions indicates that the lines of communication are parallel and that com-

munication can continue indeﬁnitely, thus signaling a conversation. [See Figure 4].

 

Complementary Transaction
Figure 4

Thus, according to TA, the understanding of human behavior rests on an under-
standing of what causes people to transact (communicate verbally and non
verbally) in the ways that they do.

There are three types of transactions: complementary, crossed and ulterior.
Complementary transactions take place when a person initiating the stimulus

directs it toward a speciﬁc ego state in the other, anticipating a response from that

17

ego state. If the response comes from the intended ego state a complementary
transaction has taken place. [See Figure 4].

A crossed transaction occurs when the response does not come from the
anticipated ego state but in fact crosses the stimulus by coming from an unan-

ticipated ego state. [Figure 5].

Stimulus

f”

A‘

Crossed Transaction
Figure 5

Ulterior transactions are basically sub-text messages involving the sending of
both a social message which is verbalized and a psychological message which is
transmitted through non-verbal body language. Sub-text refers to the fact the the
true meaning of the transaction lies beneath the verbal message being communi-
cated. The psychological message is always the intended or true message. There
are two types of ulterior transactions: angular (involving three ego states) and
duplex (involving four ego states). Ulterior transactions are the foundation of
psychological games and games are one of the most common methods individuals
use to structure time. [Figures 6 and 7]. We all have the need to structure our time

in order to avoid the pain of boredom. This need is called structure hunger

 

18

 

Ulterior Transaction (Angular)
Figure 6

IeFeT E3533???”

 

Ulterior Transaction (Duplex)
Figure 7

(Woollams and Brown Iransegiegel 81).

Berne believes the need to structure time is based on three drives or hungers.
The ﬁrst is stimulus or sensation hunger, the need for positive or negative physical
stimulation. Berne cites the work done by Spitz (see Appendix A) and others

establishing the stimulus-hunger in humans. The second drive is recognition

19

hunger, the quest for special kinds of sensations which can only be supplied by
another human being. Since people rarely receive the amount of physical stimula-
tion they require, the hunger for stimulation gets sublimated into recognition-
hunger. The third hunger is structure hunger. Structure hunger can be thought of
as an extension of stimulus hunger, since the need for stimulation requires that we
establish situations in which strokes can be exchanged (Wookams and Brown
Transmional 81). Structure hunger explains why groups tend to grow into
organizations.

Two of the most popular ways of structuring time are pastimes and games. A
typical pastime used by men is talking sports. "Existentially, a pastime is a way of
warding off guilt, despair, or intimacy, a device provided by nature or culture to
ease quiet desperation" (Berne, Mega 95).

Games are sets of ulterior transactions, repetitive in nature, with a well-deﬁned
psychological payoff. Then 'both players collect their payoffs as the game ends.
The payoff, which is mutual, consists of feelings (not necessarily similar) which the
game arouses in both the agent and the respondent (Berne, l;le|_le 2325).
Psychological games are played to reinforce one’s existential life position and
almost always are negative; that is, they are played to reinforce Not-OK feelings
toward oneself or others. Psychological games are played in very much the same
way that real games are played. There must be at least two players, there are a
series of prescribed moves leading to a payoff. In a psychological game, a switch
always takes place before the payoff, meaning that the players have changed their
game positions. According to Berne, most people spend the majority of their
serious social life in playinggames because there aren’t many opportunities for

intimacy in daily life and because intense intimacy is psychologically impossible for

 

20

most people (Berne, ﬁmee 61). Berne says, "Games appear to be segments of
larger, more complex sets of transactions called scripts" (Berne, Irensagional 1 17).
Scripts are life plans that are "written" by individuals on the unconscious level.
Scripts are used to structure long periods of time, perhaps a lifetime, with ritual
activities, pastimes and games which in turn reinforce the life script. Scripts are
based on childhood messages which may not be existentially relevant:

Almost every script has roles for "good guys" and "bad guys," and for "winners"
and "losers." All scripts whether in the theatre or in real life are essentially answers
to the basic question of human encounter: 'What do you say after you say Hello?"
Life-script scenes have to be set up and activated ahead of time, just like theatrical
scenes (Berne, liellg 37-38). Berne states, "The script is what the person planned
to do in early childhood, and the life course is what actually happens." As William
Shakespeare said in & You le'ke l1, "All the world’s a stage and all the men and
women merely players."

One of the most important early decisions a child makes is the establishment of
the existential life position. Berne presents this in terms of OKness and Not-OKness
or how one feels about oneself and others. The four basic life positions are:

1. I’m OK, You’re OK

2. I’m OK. You’re Not-OK

3. I’m Not-OK. You’re OK

4. I’m Not-OK, You’re Not-OK
Generally, most people experience both happiness and depression or some form
of maladaptive behavior sometime during their life but those who feel OK about
themselves and others will that way most of the time and those who feel Not-OK

about themselves and others will also have Not-Ok feelingsmost of the time. As

21

stated previously, one of the prime reasons people play psychological games is to
reinforce Not-OK feelings about themselves or others. Writing one’s life script is
based on the messages which have formed the existential life position. The daily
choices are made out-of- awareness (unconsciously) and reinforce the life position.
Berne deﬁnes a winner as someone who succeeds in what he says he is going to
do and a loser as someone who fails to accomplish what he sets out to do.

The ﬁrst two years of life are crucial because a human being is being
"programed" by his/her parents, especially the mother: Thus the comedy or
tragedy of each human life is that it is planned by an urchin of pre-school age,
who has a very limited knowledge of the world and its ways, and whose heart
is ﬁlled mainly with stuff put there by his parents. The child is born free [OK],
but he soon learns different. During the first two years he is programmed mainly
by his mother. This program forms the original skeleton, or anlage, of his script,
the "primal protocol". Parental programing determines how and when the urges
are expressed, and how and when the restraints are imposed (Berne, ljello
97-99).

Messages from parents are often misinterpreted by the child, the implication being
that parents often communicate in ulterior transactions, saying one thing but
meaning something quite different on the psychological level.

There has evolved within the ﬁeld of Transactional Analysis a number of different
schools. Although these subgroups have contributed much original theory, they
are linked together by the original wk of Eric Berne and the common language of
Transactional Analysisitself which is designed to be understood by all and to
eliminate barriers between client and therapist. In TA terms Berne was a "cowboy",
meaning a relaxed therapist, who walked into any room where any group of patients
were collected, without regard to selection, and proceeded to attempt to cure as

many as he possibly could in the shortest period of time (James 22).

 

22

CHAPTER 2

AN ANALYSIS OF
TRANSACTIONAL GAMES

In the process of transacting, psychological games are played in very much the
same way as recreational games. There must be at least two players, there are a
series of prescribed moves, and there is a switch in player positions leading to a
payoff. Transactional games are named by researchers as they are discovered
and determined to be played by signiﬁcant numbers of people. Rackets, on the
other hand, are played solitary and are used to reenforce Not-OK feelings toward
oneself.

The signiﬁcance of games: 1. Historical: games are passed from generation
to generation with inbreeding of games within the same family. 2 Cultural:
raising kids=teaching games, and [the signiﬁcance] varies with families, social
classes, tribes, cultures. 3. Social: games are a compromise between the
ennui of pastimes and the stringent circumstances of intimacy. 4. Personal:
games determine friends, associates, and intimates. People belonging to a
social circle play the same games (Stuntz, Review 5).

Games are part of the life script that individuals write for themselves on a daily basis.
The roots of these habitual and repetitive patterns of behavior are often found in
the negative injunctive messages that a person receives in childhood. For example,
a negative injunction directed at a young girl such as, "All men are beasts!" may be
countered later in life with a counter-script message such as, 'When are you going
to get married?". When a negative injunction and a counter-script message are in
conﬂict, it is always the earlier negative injunction that prevails. Games are a part
of larger life plans called scripts. Transactionally, life scripts are very much like
theatrical scripts. Just as the screenwriter writes a daily episode for a character in
a soap opera, an individual writes a daily script for him/herself to reinforce his/her

existential life position, althoUgh usually at a level below conscious awareness.

The sequence of events occuring in a game is expressed by Berne as Formula
G . This formula: C + G = R - S - X - P, represents a series of ulterior transactions
with a Con + a Gimmick = Response - Switch - Crossup - Payoff. The con is the
bait used by the person initiating the game to attract a partner. The gimmick is the
hidden advantage derived from playing the game. The switch involves the players
changing game positions which leads to a crossup for one of the players, that is,
a change of events that is not consciously anticipated which leads to the payoff.
As stated previously, the payoff is almost always rooted in Not-OK feelings either
toward oneself or others.

Games are passed on from generation to generation. The favored game of any
individual can be traced back to his parents and grandparents, and forward to
his children; they in turn unless there is successful intervention, will teach them
to his grandchildren (Berne Qemee 172).

In Qemes Alenelig Play, Steiner indicates that games are of social as well as
personal importance. He states that games and scripts have a profound personal
signiﬁcance to persons engaged in them. But to regard them as strictly personal
and to ignore their larger social ramiﬁcations would be to ignore another extremely
important aspect of them.

People play games with different degrees of intensity from the socially accepted,
relaxed level to the criminal homicide/suicide level. Berne writes: a) A First-De-
gree Game is one which is socially acceptable in the agent’s circle. b) A
Second-Degree Game is. one from which no permanent, irremediable damage
arises, but which the players would rather conceal from the public. c) A
Third-Degree Game is one which is played for keeps, and which ends in the
surgery, the courtroom, or the morgue (James m 15- 16).

In W Berne identified the following marital games by name:
CORNER, COURTROOM, FRIGID WOMAN, HARRIED, IF IT WEREN'T FOR YOU,
LOOK HOW HARD ITRIED, and SWEETHEART. CORNER is a game that is played

to avoid intimacy. It involves a planned event, such as going to the movies, which

24

is sabotaged by either the husband or the wife. The payoff involves the husband
going off by himself and the wife remaining home alone. COURTROOM is a
three-handed game (although it can be played by more) in which the husband plays
the persecutor, the wife the victim, and the marriage counselor or therapist the
rescuer. When the shift takes place, the husband becomes the victim, the therapist
the persecutor and the wife the rescuer. Although the husband fervently desires
victory, he knows he is wrong. If the game ends at this point, it ends in depression,
however, the couple can shift into other games. FRIGID WOMAN is a game in which
the physical advances of the'husband are rebuffed by the wife with the accusation
that, "All men only want one thing," and that he isn’t interested in affection only sex.
A long period of time may take palce in which the wife parades around the bedroom
in the nude or asks for a towel while taking a bath. She may ﬂirt with other men or
drink heavily at parties. If the husband tries sexual intimacy again, he is again
rejected. Eventually, this behavior leads to a game of UPROAR in which charges
and countercharges are made, not the least of which is the condition of the family
finances. If the wife should ever initiate a sexual advance, say by kissing the
husband, when he responds, she will reject him with the same verbal accusations
that she uses when he tries to go "too far". This game can be repeated over again
since the UPROAR takes the place of sexual intimacy. Berne says, "It should be
noted that in spite of his protestations, the husband is usually just as afraid of sexual
intimacy as his wife is, and has chosen his mate to minimize the danger of overtaxing
his disturbed potency, which he can now blame on her (Berne Gemee 99)."
HARRIED is a game in which the wife takes on too many functions or tries to
accomplish too many things in a short period of time. When she collapses in a

state of fatigue, nothing gets ﬁnished, disappointing both her husband and her

 

 

In

children. She is driven by Parent messages in her head which are reinforced by
her husband. Eventually, she will have to seek the help of a therapist. IF IT
WEREN’T FOR YOU is essentially a game of manipulation. A woman is dominated
by her husband preventing her from doing activities which really frighten her.
However, instead of being greatful she accuses her husband of being overly
restrictive. He feels guilty which allows her to become highly manipulative. LOOK
HOW HARD I'VE TRIED is a three-handed game played by husband, wife and
therapist. The husband reluctame agrees to go to marriage counseling with his
wife and after a period of stability in the marriage and a number of visits, he refuses
to return. The wife is forced to go alone and ﬁnally files for divorce. The husband,
on the other hand, can tell his friends, "Look how hard I triedl" SWEETHEART is a
game played in a group by a husband and wife. The husband tells a deprecating
story about his wife in the group which is essentially true. He ends the negative
statement with the phrase, "Isn’t that right sweetheart?" The wife agrees in order
to maintain her Not-Ok feelings about herself since she has received similar criticism
from her parents especially as a child.

In addition to marital games, Berne also identifies a number of sexual games
which may in fact directly relate to marriage. These sexual games are: LET’S YOU
AND HIM FIGHT, PERVERSION, RAPO, THE STOCKING GAME and UPROAR.
LETS YOU AND HIM FIGHT is a three-handed sexual game usually played between
a woman and two men. The payoff occurs when the women gets the two men
fighting with each other over her and she leaves with a third. PERVERSION is a
sexual game that involves such heterosexual perversions as sadism and
masochism. The individual, who often convinces him/herself that he/she is over-

sexed, is far more interested in the payoff, which is the humilation experienced in

26

foreplay, than the sex act itself. RAPO is a sexual game played between a man and
a woman. A woman who is provocatively dressed will enter a bar and sit alone.
She "baits" the hook by sending out a nonverbal message that she is alone and
willing to play. A man sitting alone in a booth or at a table and wishing to play the
game will approach her and things will progress amicably until he suggests they
go to his appartment to get to "know" each other better. At this point the woman
storms out loudly proclaiming, 'What kind of a woman do you think I am?" leaving
him red-faced and embarressed. In the second degree version of this game she
would slap him across the face thus heightening her indignation and his shame. In
the third degree version of the game, she would accompany him to the parking lot
where she would become hysterical. The police would be called and the payoff for
the game would be intensiﬁed. Her payoff is the reenforcement of the belief that
"All men are beastsl" (You’re Not-OK) and his pay off is "See, I'm not loveable." (I’m
Not-OK). THE STOCKING GAME is a sexual game played by a woman in a group.
Wrthout giving much consideration to where she is or the group itself, she will raise
her dress or skirt provocatively revealing a great deal of leg. Her excuse is that she
has a run. This behavior sexually stimulates the men in the room but angers the
other women and is ultimately self-defeating. There are a number of variatons on
this game that a woman can use. UPROAR, which has been mentioned before, is
a sexual game which can be played " between any two people who are trying to
avoid sexual intimacy (Berne Me 131)."

The above mentioned marriage and sexual games are those which Berne
originally identiﬁed in Way. Life games that may also relate to
marriage include: ALCOHOLIC, DEBTOR, KICK ME, NOW I’VE GOT YOU. YOU
SON OF A BITCH, and SEE WHAT YOU MADE ME DO. There are other games

 

27

that can also be played in marriage. The following is a partial list of additional
popular games in marriage: BEAT ME DADDY,BLEMISH, I TOLD YOU SO, I’M
ONLY TRYING TO HELP, LOOK WHAT YOU’VE DONE TO ME, LUNCH BAG,
STUPID, TRY AND GET AWAY WITH IT, and YOU GOT ME INTO THIS (Campos &
McCormick W 21). These games and any others will be
analyzed in detail should they appear among the transactions of the married
couples in the plays that l have chosen . It should be noted that games often appear
seemingly modiﬁed by the situation that produces the game. However, these
modiﬁcations do not alter the dynamics of the game. For example, the game LET’S
YOU AND HIM FIGHT could just as easily be played by two women and a man as
two men and a woman. A variant of the game ALCOHOUC would be abuse of
some other substance.

There are ﬁve different methods that can be used to analyze the process of a
game; they are: Beme’s Formal Game Analysis, Karpman’s Drama Triangle,
Berne’s Transactional Game Diagram, English’s Symbiosis Diagram and Berne’s
Formula G. I will use Berne’s Transactional Game Diagram and Karpman’s Drama
Triangle since of the ﬁve methods of game analysis, these two are the easiest for
actors and directors to use.

According to Berne, a game is an ongoing series of complementary ulterior
transactions progressing to a well- deﬁned, predictable outcome. "Every game, on
the other hand, [when compared with procedures, rituals and pastimes] is basically
dishonest, and the outcome has a dramatic, as distinct from merely exciting, quality"
(Berne, Games 48). These ulterior transactions require a stimulus/response be-
tween two different ego states in each person playing the game; one ego state for

sending or receiving the social message and another ego state for sending or

' TI

receiving the psychological message. This stimulus/response, is the heart of
communication. [See Figure 7 CHP.1]

Karpman, developed the Drama Triangle as a means of analyzing the dynamics
of a game. Karpman’s methodology is based on the view that all games are played
from one of three basic positions, the Victim, the Rescuer and the Persecutor. The
ego state switch in positions that occurs during the course of a game can be
diagrammed when using the Drama Triangle. This switch in roles or dramatic

reversal is very similar to the concept of peripeteia described by Aristotle in his

essay, The Eogig. [See Figure 8]
Kerpmen'e Drama Tnande

A

P R
spereecutor areecuer

 

V
=Vlct|m

Showing minutes In Position
During A Pewhologlcal Game

Figure 8

Karpman elucidated the mechanics of the dramatic shift of roles which occurs
in games and scripts. He postulates that only three roles are necessary to depict
the emotional reversals of a tragic drama (Steiner Games 160).

Karpman’s formulation was presented in 1968 in "Fairy Tales and Script Drama
Analysis". Berne states that it (the Drama Triangle) illustrates how during the course
of the game each player switches roles so that at the conclusion of the game they

are in different positions, which is the essence of drama in real life and in the theatre

 

29

(Berne Sex 154).

The Drama Triangle depicts the racket and game positions which a person
assumes when she is playing a game: Persecutor, Rescuer ,or Victim. Any
game player knows all the positions, and may switch from one side of the game
to another. Most people have a favorite position where they spend most of their
time. A game switch occurs when either or both players initially assume or
switch positions on the triangle, thereby providing a stroke payoff for each player
in the game (Woolams and Brown Ireneeejjenel 136).

The roles of Persecutor, Rescuer and Victim in a psychological game resemble
characters in dramatic scenes. The three game positions are manipulative. Per-
secutors operate from the Critical Parent of the Parent ego state. They often take
sadistic delight in enforcing rules. Victims are individuals who feel unjustly wronged
and often switch to the Persecutor role during the game. Rescuers are individuals
who over-nurture and foster dependency. In games they too may switch to the
Persecutor position (James IQQDDIQILQS. 69-70). Karpman's Drama Triangle focuses
on the positions of the individuals playing the game while Berne’s Transactional
Game Diagram illustrates the use of ego states transactions, emphasizing the
psychological (sub-text) level of communication (Woollams and Brown, Ireneec;
tjegel 135). Understanding the dynamics of the games his/her character is playing,
enables the actor to more easily and believably bring to the stage the psychological
life of the character being played. An analysis of the marital games in the selected

plays will elucidate the advantages of this technique.

 

30

CHAPTER 3
IDENTIFICATION AND ANALYSIS OF MARITAL GAMES

This chapter uses Transactional Game Analysis to discover sub-text and inner
monolgue. By analyzing, within the text, the ego state operations of a character a
determination of his/her existential life position can be made. This analysis leads
directly to an understanding of sub-text (ulterior transactions) and inner
monologue, two crucial concepts for actors and directors working in realistic drama.
Sub-text (ulterior transactions) refers to hidden or psychological messages com-
municated by the character. Inner monologue is a technigue used by an actor to
speciﬁcally determine character motivation when not speaking the playwright’s
words. The actor writes a daily psychological script for his/her character to reinforce
his/her life position. Since, from a transactional standpoint, games are played to
reinforce bad feelings about oneself or others, they promote conﬂict, the prime
ingredient of drama. In order to avoid redundancy in the analysis section of this
chapter I will refer to transactional games simply as games. Ulterior transactions
are the backbone of games. In an ulterior transaction there are two distinct
messages, one social and the other psychological sometimes referred to as secret.
The latter is the ulterior message and is always the true message. According to
Woollams and Brown, ulterior transactions are not inherently dishonest, but at times
the psychological message is used to invite people into games and their ensuing
payoffs. The psychological message is usually nonverbal and is communicated via
facial expressions, gesturesrpostures, and changes in tone of voice and/or tempo.
These external cues are the same as those chosen by actors to shape the outer
life of their characters. The psychological message may also be communicated via

syntax, word selection, slips of the tongue, etc. In a play, syntax and word selection

31

are provided by the playwright. In my analysis I will use the marital games identified
by Berne.

Knowing the ego state operations of a character in a play is important in helping
identify the games he/she plays and is also enormously advantageous as an acting
tool. Understanding ego state operations leads to an understanding of psychologi-
cal (existential) life position. Once the life position is determined the actor knows
that all the games played by that character (as a matter of fact everything he/she
says and does) is motivated by the unconscious desire to reinforce his/her life
position.

Quentin in Arthur Miller’s, Atler_tlt_e_F_alL operates most frequently from the
Adapted Child function of the Child ego state. Using Transactional Analysis, an
actor would know that playing Quentin as a man of high energy and extroversion
would be inappropriate. Quentin should be played "laid back" because this quality
reveals his Adapted Child behavior. What often passes for Adult Ego State
behavior, a reserved, introverted demeanor, is in reality withdrawal which is another
form of adaption. Quentin’s judgmental attitude toward others and his constant
quest for perfection, which is often accompanied by anger, is only an I’m OK, You’re
Not-OK mask. Quentin uses his judgmental anger of others as a mask against his
own Not-OKfeelings. He feels "down" frequently, which is a sign of depression and
a strong indication of I’m Not-OKfeelings. In the opening of the play, Quentin has
a long monologue to the Listener in which he reveals a great deal about himself
including his Not-OK feelings about himself.

Quentin: Which, of course, is another way of saying— despair. And, of course,
despair can become a way of life; but you have to believe in it, pick it up, take

it to heart, and move on again. Instead, I seem to be hung up. And the days

32

and the months are draining away. A couple of weeks ago I suddenly became
aware of a strange fact. With all this darkness, the truth is that every morning
when I awake, I’m full of hopel With everything I know--I open my eyes, I’m like
a boyl For an instant there’s someuunfomied promise in the air. ljump out of
bed, I shave, I can’t wait to ﬁnish breakfastuand then, it seeps in my room, my
life and its pointlessness (Miller, Aﬂeﬁbeﬁell 5).
Quentin continues to berate himself throughout the play providing additional
evidence that he operates from his Adapted Child much of the time and harbors
strong Not-OK feelings toward himself. Again, the feelings of inadequacy, in-
security, inferiority and guilt are expressed in what Quentin says and does.
Transactional Analysis refers to this condition as "helpless, hapless, hopeless and
humpless". The label of "humpless" as a reﬂection of his self image helps to explain
Quentin’s seeming lack of sexual interest. Quentin is not impotent but he does
seem to have difﬁculty in maintaining an ongoing sexual relationship with women
that get close to him. In essence, he is fearful of intimacy. One speech in particular
by Quentin’s ﬁrst wife Louise emphasizes his difﬁculty in connecting with others on
an intimate level.
Louise: You have to decide what you feel about a certain human being. For
once in your life. And then maybe you'll decide what you feel about other human
beings clearly and decisively (Miller, 77).
Although he does operate from his Parent, Adult and Child Ego States, based on
an analysis of what Quentin says and does, his most predominate behavior,
supported by accompnied feelings, comes from his Adapted Child. Quentin holds
the I’m Not-OK, You’re OK existential life position.

33

Quentin plays games with both of his wives. This is not surprising since as
previously stated conﬂict is at the heart of games. The first game played between
Quentin and Louise (his ﬁrst wife) is called, IF IT WEREN’T FOR YOU. The following
is the spoken or social transaction.

Quentin: Look, you’re not to blame, hey?

Louise: But how?

Quentin: Well, for example - you never turn your back on me in bed?

Louise: I never turned my--

Quentin: You have turned your back on me in bed, Louise, lam not insanel

Louise: Well, what do you expect? Silent cold, you lay your hand on me?

Quentin: Well, I-l’m not very demonstrative, I guess.

Louisezul worry about you all day. And all night. (Miller, 40)
In this game of, IF IT WEREN’T FOR YOU, Quentin plays the domineering husband
and Louise the restricted wife. At the social level the transaction between Quentin
and Louise is as follows:

(Quentin) Parent: Why aren’t you adequate?

(Louise) Child: If it weren’t for you.
The ulterior psychological message is:
(Quentin) Child: Keep the status quo so I won’t have to face sex problems.
(Louise) Child: Keep accusing me so I can stay angry at you.
Quentin plays the game to prove that he is Not-OK and Louise plays the game to
prove that Quentin is Not-OK The following illustrates the game using Beme’s
model. [FIGURE 9]
The following twoscenes between Quentin and Maggie illustrate two versions

of the psychological game NIGYSOB (NOW I’VE GOT YOU, YOU SON OF A

34

 

 

(9 "Why can you adequate?" CD “If It weran'i for you."
9 ("Keep the stems we so I ‘Kee mm
wen’thaveloieceeeaprobhnua') G) I'cenzteyma'tuyot“)
Figure 9
BITCH).
Scene 1

Maggie: And you-you won’t ever look at any other woman, right?
Quentin: Darling, a wife can be lovedl
Maggie: Before, thoughuwhy did you kiss that Elsie?
Quentin: Just hello. She always throws her arms around people.
Maggie: But—why’d you let her rub her body against you?
Quentin: She wasn’t rub-
Maggie: I saw it. And you stood there.
Quentin: Maggie, it was a meaningless gesture-
Maggie: You want me to be like I used to be-like it’s all a fog? You told me
yourself that l have to look for the meaning of things, didn't you? Why did you
let her do that?

35

Quentin: She came up to me and threw her arms around me, what could I do?
Maggie: Just tell her to knock it offl
Quentin: I . . . don‘t think you want to sound like this honey. (Miller, 89)
Scene 2
Maggie: What about your hatred? You know when I wanted to die. When I
read what you wrote, kiddo. Two months after we were married, kiddo.
Quentin: Let’s keep it true-you told me you tried to die long before you met
me.
Maggie: So you’re not even there, huh? I didn’t even meet you. You coward!
What about your hatredl I was married to a king, you son of a bitchl I was
looking for a fountain pento sign some autographs. And there’s his desk----and
there’s his empty chair where he sits and thinks how to help people. And there's
his handwriting. And there’s some words. "The only one I will ever love is my
daughter. If I could ﬁnd an honorable way to die." When you gonna face that,
Judgey? Remember how I fell down, fainted? On the new rug? That’s what
killed me, Judgey. Right? "Zat right? (Miller, 107-108)
In both series of transactions Quentin begins in the Rescuer role and Maggie in the
Victim role. When the switch takes place, Quentin moves to the Victim position and
Maggie to the Persecutor position. In the ﬁrst example, Maggie is provoked because
Quentin has allowed Elsie to kiss him. Maggie accuses Quentin. He defends himself
and her accusations grow. Quentin defends himself again and Maggie threatens
punishment, "Just tell her to knock it off." (The implied threat is, "or else.") On the
social level the transactions between Maggie and Quentin are as follows:
(Maggie) Adult: See, you’ve done wrong.

(Quentin) Adult: Now that you mention it, I guess I have.

WEE

36

(Maggie) Parent: Now you’ll get it from me.
The following are the ulterior or psychological tramsactions.
(Maggie) Parent: I’ve been watching you, hoping you’d make a slip.
(Quentin) Child: You caught me this time.
The second series of transactions beginning with Maggie’s line, 'What about your
hatred?" is a repeat NIGYSOB. Both games are illustrated below using Karpman’s
model. [FIGURE 10]

 

 

NIGYSOB
Quentln a"...
Doc Lu.
. o ’6
0 ’I” I,
4 I‘D' /’ A
’I ’I 0
I/ I”
’E
O “"0. M as
i guess I he’s'w u' G) ’ you've done “"9"

G um men “ u mm m.”

0 (“I've been watching you.
WW m’d make a slip")

G) ("You mm the lids in»,

Figure 10

The theme of NIGYSOB is to get even. Maggie winds up in the Persecutor role
directing her Not-OK feelings toward Quentin while he directs is own Not-OK
feelings toward himself. What must be remembered in NIGYSOB is that psychologi-
cally the victim (Quentin) wants to be caught. He lets Elsie kiss him when Maggie
is watching and he leaves the note about his love for his daughter in plain view on

his desk where Maggie can see it.

37

As stated previously, games are played to reinforce the existential life position.
In Quentin’s case he carries around a great deal of Not-OK feelings and playing
the games helps him to maintain his negative self image. This transactional
approach provides the actor with a great deal of sub-text material from which he
can begin to understand how the character of Quentin feels about himself. Trans-
actional Analysis also provides the actor with very speciﬁc external qualities (bodily
attitude, tone of voice and vocabulary) which should prove invaluable in bringing
the character of Quentin alive on the stage. Of course, I have dealt with only a very
speciﬁc portion of the text, the marital games of Quentin, Louise and Maggie. A
further analysis could include all the transactions and games in which Quentin and
the other characters are involved.

Because there are three married couples in Tennessee Williams’ 9% Qn A Hg
Tin Beef, there are several different marital games played. The married couples
are: Maggie and Brick, Big Daddy and Big Momma and Gooper and Mae, although
in the latter case the games that Gooper and Mae play are not with each other but
with other members of the family and will be excluded. Actually, there are two plots
in the play. The main plot revolves around the conﬂict between Maggie and Brick
who are estranged from one another since the suicide of Brick’s best friend Skipper.
Skipper was a homosexual and Brick is struggling on the unconscious level
(out-of-awareness) with the fact that he also may be "gay". The sub-plot revolves
around Big Daddy and his ignorance about the fact that he has incurable cancer.
Big Daddy’s son Gooper and his wife Mae want to control his land and wealth after
his death but Maggie, the wife of Big Daddy’s younger son Brick, opposes Gooper
and Mae. Since Maggie is the protagonist, the majority of the games are played

between her and Brick. Maggie is full of sexual energy. She should be played

38

strong and physically agressive with a vocal quality that is loud at times and ﬁlled
with vibrancy and agressive self- centeredness. Maggie operates from her Natural
Child. Brick, however is the complete antithesis. He is withdrawn, and should be
played passively, both physically and vocally, reﬂecting his alcohol induced
Adapted Child behavior. However, their existential life positions are different.
Basically, Maggie feels OK about herself and others. Even though she expresses
many negative comments about her husband’s drinking and the behavior of
Gooper and Mae she really does not hate them. As a matter of fact, her criticisim
of Gooper and Mae is wrapped up in her conﬂict with her husband. An actress
playing Maggie would be making a mistake if she thought Maggie’s sexual energy
is motivated out of the fear of losing Brick. Maggie’s sexual feelings come from her
strong Child ego state. She wants Brick sexually and she will go after what she
wants because she has strong OK feelings about herself. Maggie is not an
incapacitated neurotic. Her stand on "the hot tin roof" is a testimony to her strength
not her weakness.

Brick, on the other hand, has strong Not-OK feelings about himself. He is an
excellent example of "hapless, helpless and humpless". His excessive drinking
allows him not only to be detached and unfocused but also to be physiologically
impotent thus having an excuse to avoid physical intimacy with Maggie. He drinks
to paralyze himself. His complete passivity helps him to avoid dealing with the real
issue which is his homosexuality. The fact that he has fallen while intoxicated and
broken his leg allows him to be dependent on others for help, but his Not-OK
feelings are primarily fueled by fears of being a latent homosexual. Brink excludes
his Parent and Adult, operating almost exclusively out of his Child ego state. He is
searching for escape and is hiding out in his Adapted Child. His alcoholic binges

39

and stupors distance him from other members of his family. Drinking is his primary
means of withdrawal from the real world. This "don’t be close" mental attitude helps
Brick avoid sex with Maggie and is expressed in the following speech.
Brick: [Brick turns and smiles at her cooly over his fresh drink.] It just hasn’t
happened yet, Maggie.
Margaret: What?
Brick: The click I get when I have had enough of this stuff to make me peaceful.
. . . (Ce; 31).

Maggie, is not a loser. She can adapt, she can be critical, she can reason
logically but most of all she is a ﬁghter and this latter behavioral quality comes from
her Child ego state. Her entire personality is energized by her Natural Child. The
following speech reveals how Maggie feels about herself.

Maggie: But one thing I don’t have is the charm of the defeated, my hat is still

in the ring, and I am determined to winl (Williams, 931 28)
Maggie’s character is more three-dimensional than Brick’s because she operates
out of all three of her ego states. She can be both Critical and Nurturing; she can
think logically from her Adult; she has a very strong Child which energizes her entire
personality. The principal marital game played between Maggie and Brick is
ALCOHOUC. According to Berne, in game analysis "alcoholism" does not exist.
However the role of "Alcoholic" exists in a certain kind of game and when an
alcoholic plays this game, .we call the game ALCOHOLIC. "If biochemical or
physiological abnormality is the prime mover in excessive drinkinguand that is still
open to some question-then its study belongs in the ﬁeld of internal medicine"
(Berne Games 73). In Brick’s case however his alcoholism is clearly rooted in his

unconscious (out-of- awareness) behavior. Brick’s relationship with his wife and

family is an example of the game ALCOHOUC in full ﬂower. There are ﬁve players,
the principal one being the alcoholic, in this situation Brick. The other principle
player is his wife, Maggie, who plays the role of Persecutor. The third role is that
of Rescuer, played by Brick’s father, Big Daddy and the fourth role of Patsy or
Dummy is played by Big Momma, Brick’s mother. The ﬁfth role is that of Agitator
a "good guy" role played by Brick’s brother, Gooper. It is also possible for Maggie
to play the three roles of Patsy, Persecutor and Rescuer although the role of
Rescuer is her most predominant. Since the emphasis in this study is on marital
games I will limit my discussion in the following scenes to the game of ALCOHOLIC
with Brick as victim and Maggie playing Persecutor, Patsy and Rescuer.
Scene 1 [PERSECUTOR]
Margaret: Well, this is Big Daddy’s last birthday. I’m sorry about it. But I’m
facing the facts. It takes money to take care of a drinker and that’s the office
that I’ve been elected to lately.
Brick: You don’t have to take care of me.
Margaret: Yes, I do. Two people in the same boat have got to take care of each
other. At least you want money to buy more Echo Springs when this supply is
exhausted, or will you be satisﬁed with a ten-cent beer? Mae an’ Gooper are
plannin’ to freeze us out of Big Daddy’s estate because you drink and I’m
childless. But we can defeat that plan. We’re going to defeat that plan (Cit
51-52)I
Scene 2 [RESCUER]
Margaret: You know this is Big Daddy’s birthdayl
Brick: No, I don’t," I forgot.
Margaret: Well, I remembered it for you. . . .

41

Brick: Good for you, Maggie.

Margaret: You just have to scribble a few lines on this card.

Brick: You scribble something, Maggie.

Margaret: It’s got to be in your handwriting; it’s your present, I’ve given him my

present; it’s got to be in your handwritingl

Brick: I didn’t get him a present.

Margaret: I got one for you.

Brick: All right. You write the card, then.

Margaret: And have him know you didn’t remember his birthdaY?

Brick: I didn’t rememberhis birthday.

Margaret: You don’t have to prove you didn’t!

Brick: I don’t want to fool him about it.

Margaret: Just write "Love, Brickl" for God’s--

Brick: No.

Margaret: You’ve got tol

Brick: I don’t have to do anything I don’t want to do. You keep forgetting the

conditions on which I agreed to stay on living with you (Ca 31-33).
Scene 3 [PATSY]

Brick: What did you lock the door for?

Margaret: To give us a little privacy for a while.

Brick: You know better, Maggie.

Margaret: No, I don’t know better....

Brick: Don’t make a fool of yourself.

Margaret: I don’t mind makin’ a fool of myself over youl

Brick: Imind, Maggie. Ifeel embarrassed for you.

42

Maragret: Feel embarressedl But don’t continue my torture. I can’t live on
under these circumstances.
Brick: You agreed to-
Margaret: I know but--
Brick: «Accept that condition.
Margaret: I CAN'T! CAN'T! CAN’T (Cat 38-39)l
The following is an example of the social message being transacted in the examples
cited which appears to be an Adult to Adult transaction.
(Brick) Adult: "Tell me what you really think of me."
(Maggie) Adult: "I’ll be frank with you."
The following Child to Parent transaction is the psychological message.
(Brick) Child: "See if you can stop me."
(Maggie) Parent: "You must stop drinking because. . . ." [FIGURE 11]

ALcoi-iouc
Unsal-

 

 

 

 

CD “Teﬂmewhetyou really @“l’llbelrsnk with you."
think of me."

Q) ("You must
(9 ("see If you can stop me.") annual. mm . . .")

Figure 11

43

As Persecutor, Maggie berates Brick for drinking and cutting himself off from Big
Daddy and his financial future. Maggie as rescuer makes choices for Brick that he
should make for himself while pleading with him to stop drinking and re-establish
an intimate life with her. As a wife who plays Patsy to her husband’s Alcoholic,
Maggie waits up late for Brick, dresses him and allows him to abuse her. On the
other hand, Brick reenforces his Victim role by continuing to drink. Maggie also
wants him to stop drinking so that he can face his unconscious fear of being
homosexual. Maggie’s desire to have a child by Brick is partly motivated from love
and partly pragmatic. She is afraid that they will be disinherited if Big Daddy dies
and Brick hasn’t given him an heir. Maggie knows the key to her wishes is to get
Brick to stop drinking and face the truth about Skipper’s homosexuality.

The secondary plot revolves around the character of Big Daddy and whether or
not he is dying of cancer. Big Daddy and Big Mamma are Brick’s parents and offer
another source of marital transactions for game analysis. Big Daddy operates
almost exclusively from his Critical Parent which reinforces his I’m OK. You’re
Not-OK existential life position. Since Big Daddy is a large man his physical attitude
must reﬂect the bodily stiffness that is associated with Critical Parent. Vocally he
should sound vociferous, forceful, and condescending. Others simply do not live
up to Big Daddy’s expectations. This is particularly true in the case of Big Momma.
She exists in a symbiotic relationship with Big Daddy, playing Adapted Child to his
Critical Parent thus reenforcing her existential life position which is I’m Not-OK,
You’re OK. Big Momma is also big but since she operates from Adapted Child her
physical attitude is the opposite of Big Daddy. She is self-conscious and often
laughs to cover up her true feelings. Vocally she is must be softer than Big Daddy,

often fumbling words, thus revealing her sense of insecurity. There is an excellent

Fail Tam—j

example of the game NIGYSOB (NOW I'VE GOT YOU. YOU SON OF A BITCH)

played between Big Daddy and Big Momma as illustrated in the following scene.
Big Daddy: Ain’t that so; Ida? Didn’t you have an idea I was dying of cancer
and now you could take control of this place and everything on it? I got that
impression, I seemed to get that impression. Your loud voice everywhere, your
fat old body butting in here and therel
Big Mamma: Hushl The Preacherl
Big Daddy: Fuck the goddam preacherl Did you hear what I said? I said fuck
the goddam preacherl
Big Mamma: I never seen you act like this before and can’t think what’s got in
youl
Big Daddy: I went through all that laboratory and operation and all just so I
would know if you or me was boss herel Well, now it turns out that I am and you
ain’t--and that’s my birthday presentuand my cake and champagneI—because
for three years now you been gradually taking over. Bossing. Talking. Sashay-
ing your fat old body around the place I madel I made this placel . . . . I did
that myself with no goddam help from you, and now you think you’re just about
to take over. Well, I am just about to tell you that you are not just about to take
over, you are not just about to take over a God Damn thing. Is that clear to you,
Ida? Is that very plain to you, now? Is that understood completely? . . . . nothing
is wrong with me but a spastic colon--made spastic, I guess, by disgust! By all
the goddam lies and liars that l have had to put up with, and all the hypocrisy
that I lived with all these forty years that we been livin’ together (Cat 74-75)l

In the above example Big Mamma ends in the victim position and Big Daddy ends

in the Persecutor position. Big Daddy feels Not-OK about Big Momma and Big

45

Momma feels Not-OK about herself. The payoff for both of them is bad feelings
which strengthens their life position. The dynamics of the game which are jealous
rage are clearly revealed. The social message appears to be a Parent to Child
masking and Adult to Adult transaction.

(Big Daddy) Adult: "See, you have done wrong."

(Big Mamma) Adult: "Now that you draw it to my attention, I guess I have.’'

(Big Daddy) Parent: "Now you’ll get it from me."
The psychological message is clearly Critical Parent to Adapted Child. Using
Karpman’s Drama Triangle,-Big Daddy starts out in the Victim position and Big
Momma in the Rescuer position. When the switch takes place, Big Daddy moves
to the Persecutor position and Big Momma to the Victim position. The social or
verbal transactions are indicated by solid lines of communication while the
psychological or non-verbal transactions are indicated by broken lines of com-

munication. [FIGURE 12]

NIGYSOB

 

Homer
(Ilg llama)

 

Big Daddy ' Ilg atom
CD "See you've done me wrong." (9 “Now that you drew
It to my “tion
(9 “Now you'll get It from me." I goose l have.”
Q) ("I've been watching you. hoping CD (“You caught mo
you'd make a clip") this time.")

Gr‘Yu, and I'm going to lot you
tool tho lull tom- of my harm”)

Figure 12

(Big Daddy) Parent: "I’ve been watching you, hoping you’d make a slip."

(Big Mamma) Child: "You caught me this time."

(Big Daddy) Parent: "Yes, and I’m, going to let you feel the full force of my fury."
Big Daddy has just been waiting to spring the trap on his wife. His trip to the lab
for medical tests has provided him with the information that allows him to “get" Big
Mamma. Once again Big Mamma fails to live up to Big Daddy’s expectations.
Big Daddy is a excellent example of the I’m OK, You’re Not-OK personality. Often
what appears to be I’m OK. You’re Not-OK behavior is in reality the mask of an
I’m-Not Ok, You’re OK personality. In Big Daddy’s case however he truly believes
himself to be superior to others and therefore incapable of making a mistake. His
relationship to Big Momma is a perfect symbiotic marriage. He is constantly upset
with her not living up to his expectations (I'M OK, You’re Not-OK) and she constantly
feels inadequate and inferiorto him (I’m Not-OK, You’re OK). So the payoff for both
of them, in their marital relationship, is bad feelings. It would be an incorrect
interpretation to play Big Momma as simply being afraid of Big Daddy. On the
contrary, she sets herself upto fail in her transactions with him in order to reinforce
her Not-Ok feelings about herself. Big Daddy has bad feelings towards Big Momma
and she has bad feelings towards herself.

In William Inge’s Wme married couple is Doc and Lola.
Doc’s ego state operation originates principally from his Parent and his Child. When
in Critical Parent he ﬁnds fault with the behavior and choices others make. Doc
feels like a failure for getting his high school sweetheart Lola pregnant. He marries
her out of a sense of obligation, thus dooming his dreams of becoming a medical
doctor. Complicating Doc’s behavior is his alcoholism. On the conscious level Doc

is trying hard to stay on the wagon and be a good husband but trying hard is not

47

doing. On the unconscious (out-of-awareness) level Doc harbors repressed
feelings of anger and sexual frustration which are released from his Natural Child
when he is drunk. He can also be nurturing toward Lola vascilating between
Nurturing Parent and Adapted Child. Sometimes what appears to be Nurturing
Parent is in reality behavior that is motivated out of a sense of obligation. Obligatory
behavior comes from Adapted Child. When operating from his Child ego state,
Doc is either Adaptive or Vengeful. Doc is an alchoholic who has stopped drinking
because when he drinks he experiences absolute hate for Lola. This suppressed
rage is a primal emotion which comes from his Natural Child. It is the kind of
vengeful behavior that fuels crimes of passion. One of the reasons that Doc reacts
so violently toward the behavior of his college boarder, Marie and her lover, Turk,
is the fact that he rcognizes their lustful impulses in himself. In fact it was these
same repressed impulses that rose to the surface and caused him to get Lola
pregnant. Doc tries to create a fantasy world around Marie and to convince himself
that she is an innocent virgin when, out-of-awareness, he suspects that she is very
pragmatic and, at the very least, probably insisting that her lover wear a condom.
Doc is also capable of operating from his Adult; he recognizes that he can’t rectify
past mistakes and in order to survive he must live in the present. Ultimately, it is
his Adult that saves him. When Doc is on the wagon, his Adult keeps him living in
the here-and-now and helps him to forgive his past mistakes. An actor playing Doc
will be faced with creating a complex characterization. He must be able to create
body language and tone of voice that reflects all ego states. He must project the
tense body position and strident vocal pattern of the Critical Parent; the relaxed
body muscles and warm voice of the Nurturing Parent; the de-enrgized body and

soft voice of the Adapted Child; the violent bodily actions and raucous voice of the

Natural Child; and the upright, strong body and well modulated voice of the Adult.
The following is an example of the ability of Doc to operate from his Adult ego state.
Doc: No-no, baby. We should never feel bad about what’s past. What’s in the
past can’t be helped. You- you’ve got to forget it and live for the present. If
you can’t forget the past, you stay in it and never get out. We gotta keep on
living, don’t we? I can’t stop just ”cause I made a few mistakes. I gotta keep
goin’usomehow (Inge 38).
Doc’s existential life position is I’m Not-OK, You’re Ok (I’m Not-OK. You’re Not-OK
when he is drunk) which is masked by an I’m Ok, You’re Not-OK. The following
examples reﬂect the dynamics of Doc’s life position.
Example 1 [I’m Not-OK, You’re OK]
Lola: When I think of the'way you used to drink, always getting in to fights, we
had so much trouble. I was so scaredl I never knew what was going to happen.
Doc: That was a long time ago , Baby.
Lola: I know it, Daddy. I know how you’re going to be when you come home
now.
Doc: I don’t know what I would have done without you (Inge W
§_h_e_b_a_10-11).
Example 2 [I’m OK, You’re Not OK (Mask)]
Doc: Well, why doesn’t Turk clear out now that Bruce is coming? What’s he
hanging around for? She’s engaged to marry Bruce, isn’t she?
Lola: Marie’s just doing a picture of him, Doc.
Doc: You always stick up for him. You encourage him.
Lola: Shhh, Daddy. Don’t get upset.
Doc: All right, but if anything happens to the girl I’ll never forgive you (Inge 30-31 ).

49

Example 3 [I’m Not-OK. You’re Not OK (Drunk)]

Doc: I oughta hack off all that fat, and then wait for Marie and chop off those

pretty ankles she’s always dancing around on-then start lookin' for Turk and

ﬁx him too (Inge 63).

The fact that Doc would be arrested if he did kill Lola is a sign of his Not-Okness
when he is drunk and would be typical of the crimes of passion that are often
committed under the inﬂuence of some drug. It would be a mistake however for
an actor playing Doc to assume that his drinking is based solely on his repressed
anger toward Lola. Doc’s alcoholism is a sickness which seems to be triggered
when he is under stress. In other words, Doc would be an alcoholic whether he
was married to Lola or not. He would experience alcoholic binges and on the
psychological level justify his behavior by blaming others for his problem.

Lola operates almost exclusively from her Child ego state. Generally, she feels
insecure and that she has failed for not living up to her own expectations. Lola
adapts to Doc’s wishes. She has learned that he is particularly violent when he is
drunk and she tries to do everything to prevent him from "falling off the wagon".
Lola romanticizes the past and for the most part ignores the present. Out-of-aware-
ness she equates the loss of her dog Sheba, which was once cute but has grown
old, with her own aging and the loss of her physical good looks. She tries to
recapture the past by living it vicariously through the young college student, Marie.
Lola voyeuristically watches Marie operate with the men in her life. Lola’s existential
life position is I’m Not-OK, You’re OK. The actor playing Lola should reﬂect the weak
physicalization of the Adapted Child. Lola is overweight and ashamed of her body.
She is "humpless" in the sense that she lives out her sexual desires by observing

the sexual contact of others. She is a character with low physical and vocal energy.

50

When frightened her voice should be pitched forward to the front of her mouth and
sound like that of a frightened child. The following is an example of the underlying
feeling she holds for herself.
Lola: I'll soon be forty. Those years have just vanishedu vanished into thin air.
Doc: Yes.

Lola: Just disappeared--Iike Little Sheba Maybe you’re sorry you married me
now. You didn’t know I was going to get old and fat and sloppy- (Inge 36).
There are two principal games played between Lola and Doc. They are IF IT
WEREN’T FOR HER, which is a variant of IF IT WEREN’T FOR YOU and NIGYSOB.
The following transactions between Doc and Lola illustrate the game, IF ITWEREN’T

FOR YOU.
Lola: Doc, don’t talk that way. Bruce is a nice boy. They’re gonna get married.
Doc: He probably has to marry her, the poor bastard. Just ’cause she’s pretty
and he got amorous one day-Just like I had to marry you.
Lola: Oh, Docl
Doc: You and Marie are both a couple of sluts.
Marie: Doc, please don’t talk like that.
Doc: What are you good for? You can’t even get up in the morning and cook
my breakfast.
Lola: I will, Doc. I will after this.
Doc: You won’t even sweep the ﬂoor until some bozo comes along to make
love to Marie, and then you ﬁx things up like Buckingham Palace or a Chinese
whorehouse with perfume on the lampbulbs, and ﬂowers, and the gold-trimmed
china my mother gave us. We’re not going to use these any more. My mother

didn’t buy those dishes for whores to eat off of. (Jerks the cloth off the table,

51

sending the dishes rattling to the ﬂoor.)

Lola: Docl Look what you done.

Doc: Look what I did, not done. I’m going to get me a drink.
Lola: Oh no, Docl You know what it does to youl

Doc: You’re damn right I know what it does to me. It makes me willing to come

home and look at you, you two-ton heifer (Inge 61 -62).

On the social (verbal) level the transactions in this game between Lola and Doc are

indicative of a Parent-Child game.
(Lola) Parent: "You stay home and take care of me."

(Doc) Child: "If it weren’t for you, I could be out having fun."

The following illustrate the Child to Child transactions on the psychological (ulterior

non-verbal) level.

(Doc) Child: "You must always be here for me. I’m terriﬁed of desertion"

(Lola) Child: "I will if you help me avoid facing the present." [See Figure 13]

The following transactions illustrate the game of NIGYSOB.

 

 

IF IT WERBO'T FOR YOU
Doc Ldl
0
° -- «we; - 4°
* 4 nun-- --

(D‘ﬁfitmn'tfaryeud @“You trainee-id

Mthﬂlnﬂfun." mgdm"
@rwou must sway-'8. iii. CD ‘I we If

for me. I'm terrified of deeertlan.") II» avoid “ﬂ present")

Figure 13

52

MORNING
Doc: When did she get the news?
Lola: The telegram came this morning.
Doc: That’s ﬁne. That BnJce sounds to me like just the fellow for her. I think I’ll
go and congratulate her.
Lola: (Nervous) Not now, Doc.
Doc: Why not?
Lola: Well, Turks there. It might make him feel embarrassed.
THE SAME EVENING
Marie: My telegram’s here. When did it come?
Lola: It came about an hour ago , Honey.
Lola: I’m sorry, Doc. I’m sorry about the telegram.
Doc: Baby, people don’t do things like that. Don’t you understand? Nice
people don’t. Why didn’t you give it to her when it came?
Lola: Well, Doc, Turk was posing for Marie this morning, and I couldn’t give it
to her while he was here.
Doc: Well, it just isn’t nice to open other people’s mail (Inge 30, 40-41).
The social Paradigm is Adult to Adult.
(Doc) Adult: "See, you have done wrong."
(Lola) Adult: "Now that you draw it to my attention, I guess I have."
The psychological paradigm is Parent to Child.
(Doc) Parent: "I’ve been watching you, hoping you’d make a slip."
(Lola) Child: "You caught me this time."
(Doc) Parent: "Yes, and I’m going to let you feel the full force of my fury."

[See Figures 2 & 4]

53

A key to understanding the Not-Okness of both Doc and Lola is the fact that Doc
keeps a bottle of whiskey in the kitchen cupboard. From a behavioral point a view,
Doc has not closed the door on his alcoholism. Even though he has been on the
wagon for a year, the fact that he still has a bottle of whiskey in the house indicates
that the excitement and the other forbidden pleasures that he experiences when
drunk hold a certain allure for him. Lola, typical of the mate of an alchollc, gives
Doc tacit permission to fall off the wagon by allowing him to keep the wiskey in the
house. Thus the energy behind the ALCHOLIC game is always present in their
relationship since they both know out-of- awareness that Doc will eventually fall off
the wagon not only reinforcing the Not-OK feelings he has toward himself but also
re-enforcing Lola’s Not-OK feelings toward herself.

Eugene O’Neill is considered by many theatre historians to be the greatest
playwright that the United States ever produced. One of his great plays, Lgng Day’s
MILE—Night. which was produced in 1956, is generally thought to be
autobiographical. The father, mother and older brother in the play are in fact

representatives of O’Neill’s own immediate family. The relationship between the

father in the play, James Tyrone and the mother Mary Cavan Tyrone parallels the ‘

relationship between O’Neill’s real parents. In W James

Tyrone is a professional actor who has given up a successful Shakespearean
career in order to perform in a very popular play which he has purchased. The
popularity of the play earns him a great deal of money but Tyrone does not enjoy
it because he is plagued with fears of winding up in the "poor house". He invests
his money badly and subjects his family to a meager and tawdry lifestyle. After the
birth of Edmund, the younger son, Mary develops post-partum complications.

Tyrone, as a result of his miserliness, hires a quack hotel doctor to treat his wife.

 

=74

54

As a result of the pain she experiences, Mary becomes addicted to morphine and
remains addicted for the rest of her life. The events of the play closely parallel
O’Neill’s own life. His father, James, a successful classical actor, purchased the
production rights of W and toured the play around the
country making a tremendous amount of money. In one year he made over sixty
thousand dollars long before the tax on personal income. O’Neill’s father subjected
his family to a very second rate socio-economic life style. He had grown up
extremely poor and was fearful of endinghis life in poverty. O’Neill’s mother did
become addicted to morphine under circumstances very similar to those in the
play.

In MD], James Tyrone operates almost exclusively
from his Parent ego state. The majority of the time he rails at an unsympathetic
world and its poor ﬂawed creatures who never quite measure up to what he thinks
they should be. The following are a few examples of transactions that reveal
Tyrone’s Critical Parent.

SCENE 1

Jamie: I heard him too. (He quotes putting on a ham-actor manner.) "The Moor,

I know his trumpet."

Tyrone: (Scathingly) If it takes my snoring to make you remember Shakespeare

instead of the dope sheet on the ponies, I hope I’ll keep on with it (O’Neill 21).
SCENE 2

Edmund: I told Shaghnessey he should have reminded Harker that a

Standard Oil millionaire ought to welcome the ﬂavor of hog in his ice water as

an appropriate touch.

55

Tyrone: The devil you didl (Frowning.) Keep your damned Socialist anarchist

sentiments out of my affairsl

Edmund: Shaughnessy almost wept because he hadn't thought of that one,

but said he’d include it in a letter he’s writing to Harker, along with a few other

insults he’d overlooked. (He and Jamie laugh.)

Tyrone: What are you laughing at? There’s nothing funny-A fine son you are

to help that blackguard get me into a lawsuit!

Mary: Now, James, don’t lose your temper.

Tyrone: (T urns on Jamie.) And you’re worse than he is, encouraging him. I

suppose you’re regretting you weren’t there to prompt Shaughnessy with a few

nastier insults. You’ve a ﬁne talent for that, if for nothing else (O’Neill 25-26).
The examples above are representative of James Tyrone’s self-centered per-
sonality which manifests itself on the transactional level as I’m OK, You’re Not-OK
Typical of the I’m Ok, You’re Not-Ok personality is Tyrone’s refusal to take
responsibility for any of the choices that have had a negative impact on the family.
The following example in which Jamie and his father are discussing the reasons
why Mary is addicted to morphine illustrates this characteristic.

Jamie: She didn’t have anything to do with itl

Tyrone: I’m not blaming her.

Jamie: (Bitingly.) Then who are you blaming? Edmund, for being born?

Tyrone: You damned fooll No one was to blame.

Jamie: The bastard of a doctor wasl From what Mama’s said, he was another

cheap quack like Hardyl You wouldn't pay for a ﬁrst-rate—

Tyrone: That’s a Iiel (Furiously) So I’m to blamel That’s what your driving at,

is it? You evil minded loafer (O’Neill 39)l

I"

56

Tyrone is obssesed with dying poor. This aspect of his character is based on
O’Neill’s father, James who became the sole support of his mother and younger
brothers and sisters after their father abandoned the family. It manifests itself in
Tyrone’s Not-OK feelings toward other members of the family. In the following
example Tyrone confronts Mary over the excessive cost of owning a car and
keeping a chauffer.
Tyrone: I paid a lot of money I couldn't afford, and there’s the the chauffer I
have to board and lodge and pay high wages whether he drives you or not.
(Bitterly.) Waste! The same old waste that will land me in the poorhouse in my
old age (O’Neill 84)l
By any objective standard James Tyrone is an alcoholic. He drinks large quatities
of alcohol on a daly basis and becomes upset when he thinks someone has been
tampering with the bottle. It isn’t a question of drinking socially, Tyrone has to drink
and do so compulsively every day. Jamie, the oldest son, has already become an
alcoholic like his father and Edmund, the younger son, is a heavy drinker and well
on his way to becoming an alcoholic. Tyrone drinks from his Child Ego State which
is the antithesis to his "be perfect" Parent. It doesn’t alter his I’m OK, You’re Not-OK
life position since internally his Parent has given his Child permission to drink
making it OK behavior. The following examples illustrate his afﬁnity for alcohol.
SCENE 1
Tyrone: (forces a casual tone.) Isn‘t it dinner time dear? (With a feeble attempt
at teasing.) You’re forever scolding me for being late, but now I’m on time for
once, it's dinner that’s late. (She doesn’t appear to hear him. he adds, still
pleasantly.) Well, if I can’t eat yet, I can drink. I’d forgotten I had this. (He drinks
his drink. Edmund watches him. Tyrone scowls and looks at his wife with sharp

57

suspicion-~roughly.) Who’s been tampering with my whiskey? The damned
stuff is half waterl Jamie’s been away and he wouldn’t overdo his trick like this
anyway. Any fool could telI-Mary, answer me (O’Neill 115-116)!
SCENE 2
Mary: And I love you, dear, in spite of everything. (There is a pause in which
Edmund moves embarrassedly. The strange detachment comes over her
manner again as if she were speaking impersonally of people seen from a
distance.) But I must confess, James, although I couldn’t help loving you, I
would never have married you if I’d known you drank so much. I remember the
ﬁrst night your barroom friends had to help you up to the door of our hotel room,
and knocked and then ran away before I came to the door. We were still on
our honeymoon, do you remember (O’Neill 112-113)?
An actor creating the characterization of James Tyrone should use strong body
language consistent with someone who operates from Critical Parent a great deal
of the time. This would include such physical maniﬁstations as frowns. scowls, arms
folded across the chest and pointed ﬁnger. In general there exists a tenseness
behind the muscles. The voice should be strong with an ability to exert great power.
Often there is a tonal element of condescension in Tyrone’s voice. These physical
attitudes are supported by feelings, such as suspicion of others, which were taught
to Tyrone in his unhappy childhood.

Mary Tyrone plays the Adapted Child to her husband’s Critical Parent. Her
adaption has taken on the form of rebelliousness as she exhibits an "I’ll show you"
attitude toward Tyrone. This is particularly true when she is "high" on morphine.
Since, out-of- awareness, Mary blames Tyrone for her unhappy life, she does just

the opposite of what he requests when it comes to taking morphine. He bags and

58

pleads with her not to take the drug so she does.

Edmund: For God’s sake, Mama! You can’t trust her! Do you want everyone
on earth to know?

Mary: (Her face hardening stubbornly.) Know what? That I suffer from
rheumatism in my hands and have to take medicine to kill the pain? Why should
I be ashamed of that? (T urns on Edmund with a hard, accusing antagonism-
almost a revengeful enmity.) I never knew what rheumatism was before you
were boml Ask your father! (Edmund looks away, shrinking into himself.)

Tyrone: Don’t mind her, lad. It doesn’t mean anything. When she gets to the

stage where she gives the old crazy excuse about her hands she’s gone far

away from us.

Mary: (T urns on him-with a strangely triumphant, taunting smile.) I’m glad you

realize that, James! Now perhaps you’ll give up trying to remind me, you and

Edmund (O’Neill 116-1 17)!
Since Mary operates almost exclusively from her Adapted Child her body should
reﬂect weakness not strength and her voice should be soft. The actor will be
challenged by the neeed to sound almost imperceptible at times and yet project
that quality to the audience 'so that they can hear. Mary’s looking down at and
rubbing her hands is not strictly a result of her arthritic condition but is motivated
from feelings of inadequacy and inferiority.

The three principle games played between Tyrone and Mary are IF IT WEREN'T
FOR YOU, LOOK HOW HARD I WAS TRYING and ALCOHOUC. The ﬁrst two
games mentioned have a distinct advantage in being played by Mary. First, she
can blame Tyrone for her drug addiction and secondly, she can rationalize her

continued use of the addictive drug. Tyrone’s alcholism is not based on guilt or his

 

 

59

acceptance that somehow he is responsible for Mary’s drug addiction. On the
contrary, his Parent gives his Child permission to drink as a reward for the "suffering"
he has had to endure as a result of living with a "dope" addict. Thus, both Mary
and Tyrone have perfect excuses for self-pity and playing IF IT WEREN'T FOR YOU
with his each other. The following dialog illustrates the transactions of the game,
IF IT WEREN’T FOR YOU.
Mary: If there was a friend’s house where I could drop in and laugh and gossip
for awhile. But, of course, there isn’t There never has been. (Her manner
becoming more and more remote.) At the Convent I had so many friends. Girls
whose familes lived in lovely homes. I used to visit them and they’d visit me in
my father’s home. But, naturally, after I married an actor-you know how actors
were considered in those days-a lot of them gave me the cold shoulder. And
then right after we were married, there was the scandal of that woman who had
been your mistress, suing you. From then on, all my own friends either pitied
me or cut me dead. I hated the ones who cut me much less than the pitiers.
Tyrone: (With guilty resentment.) For God’s sake, don’t dig up what’s long
forgotten. If you’re that far gone in the past already, when it’s only the beginning
of the afternoon, what will you be tonight?
At the social level the transaction between Mary and Tyrone is as follows:
(Mary) Parent: Why aren’t you adequate?
(Tyrone) Child: You are accusing me falsely.
The ulterior psychological message is:
(Mary) Child: Keep the status quo so I won’t have to face my drug problem.
(Tyrone) Keep accusing me so I can stay angry at you.

[SEE FIGURE 1]

The following dialog illustrates the game LOOK HOW HARD I’M TRYING.
Mary: ". . .She’ll never make him a good wife." Poor mother! But she was
mistaken, wasn’t she James? I haven't been such a bad wife, have I?
Tyrone: I’m not complaining, Mary.
Mary: At least, I’ve loved you dearly, and done the best I coulduunder the
circumstances.
The following are the social transactions of the game.
(Tyrone) Adult: "It’s time to kick the habit."
(Mary) Adult: "All right, I’ll try it."
The following are the psychological transactions of the game.
(T yrone) Parent: "I’m going to make you kick the habit."
(Mary) Child: "See, it doesn’t work." [FIGURE 14]

 

 

 

 

(Dun-emaciaeiiinem" ©“Almrlltryit.”
GC‘I'N when alleys» G) can. ii ennui-i m")
ldckttiehablt.") .

Figure 14

 

JT—‘L‘i

 

61

The ALCOHOUC game is illustrated by the following transactions. This scene takes
place between Mary and Tyrone and is a reversal of her "Drug Addict" game.

Edmund: Papal Are we going to have this drink, or aren’t we?

Tyrone: You’re right. I’m a fool to take notice. Drink hearty, lad.

Mary: Do you know what I was telling her, [Kathleen] dear? About the night my

father took me to your dressing room and I ﬁrst tell in love with you. Do you

remember?

Tyrone: Can you think I’d ever forget, Mary?

Mary: And I love you, dear, in spite of everything. But I must confess, James,

although I couldn’t help loving you, I would never have married you if I’d known

you drank so much. I remember the ﬁrst night your barroom friends had to help

you up to the door of our hotel room, and knocked and then ran away before I

came to the door. We were still on our honeymoon, do you remember?

The social message is Adult to Adult.
Tyrone (Adult): "Tell me what you really think of me.
Mary(Adult): "I’ll be frank with you."
The psychological message is Parent to Child.
Tyrone (Child): "See if you can stop me."
Mary (Parent): "You must stop drinking because you have hurt me so" (O’Neill

111-113). [SEE FIGURE 11]

The last scenes in my analysis are in Albee’s W. In his plays,
Albee believed in attacking the unconscious not the conscious as a means of
understanding motivation and behavior. There are two married couples in A
Qelieatejeﬂjee, Agnes and Tobias and Harry and Edna. Only Agnes and Tobias

are involved in marital games. Occasionally, they play a three handed game of

62

ALCOHOLIC with Agnes’ sister Claire. Agnes and Tobias also play a second degree
game of SEE WHAT YOU MADE ME DO. The symbiotic relationship between Agnes
and Tobias is the familiar Critical Parent to Adapted Child. Agnes has a strong, be
perfect driver. She is cumpulsively driven as a perfectionist. According to Woollams
and Brown, while injunctions are phrased negatively and begin with "Don’t" e.g.,
Don’t Be Perfect; drivers are phrased positively to begin with "Do" or "Be" e.g., Be
Perfect (Woollams and Brown 161). This latter attitude is displayed by Agnes
because she thinks she is the only person capable of holding the family together.
Agnes operates almost exclusively from her Parent ego state. She thus reinforces
her "I’m OK, You’re Not-OK" life position. Tobias, Claire and daughter Julia fail to
live up to Agnes’ expectations. The following examples illustrate the Critical Parent
behavior of Agnes.
Agnes: It would serve you right, my dear Tobias, were Ito go away, drift off.
You would not have a woman left about you-only Clare and Julia . . . not even
people; it would serve you right ( Albee 27).
The following is another example of Agnes’ Critical Parent.
Agnes: If I am a stickler on certain points-a martinet, as Julia would have it,
would you not sweet, in fact, were you not about to?-if I am a stickler on points
of manners, timing, tact-the graces, I almost blush to call them—it is simply that
I am the one member of this . . . reasonably happy family blessed and burdened
with the ability to view a situation objectively while I am in it (Albee 81).
The relationship between Tobias and Agnes is one of accommodation. If they were
once connected by love they probably no longer are. There is "no meeting between"
them. At one point Tobias is commenting on the impending fourth divorce of his

daughter, Julia, when Agnes interjects a statement about the absence of love in

63

their lives.

Tobias: if I saw some point to it, I might—if I saw some reason, chance. If I

thought I might . . . break through to her, and say, "Julia . . .," but then what

would I say? "Julia. . ." Then, nothing.

Agnes: If we do not love someone . . . never have loved them . . . (Albee 33).
Later, after Tobias confesses that he has had a favorite cat destroyed because it
no longer loved him, he echos the earlier remark of Agnes.

Tobias: I had her killed. I took her to the vet and he took her . . . he took her

into the back and he gave her an injection and killed her! I had her killed!

Agnes: Well, what else could you have done? There was nothing to be done;

there was no . . . meeting between you.

Tobias: "If we do not love someone . . . never have loved someone . . ." (Albee

37).

Albee has stated that he writes plays about how people waste their lives. It is this
malaise of the spirit that pervades AM. The terror of being alone that
Harry and Edna experience is only another manifestation of the existential paralysis
that Tobias and Agnes are living, lives of quiet desperation. Tobias operates from
his Adapted Child, compliant to Agnes’ wishes. Occasionally, he bursts forth with
rage from his Natural Child, but for the most part his anger is repressed. His drinking
seems to help him accomplish his repression. Tobias is capable of cathecting his
Adult and also operate from Nurturing Parent, but for the most part lives out a
passionless existence in the quiet sameness of the status quo. Albee makes several
allusions to this kind of loveless existence. The long story that Tobias tells about
his cat can be viewed as an analogy of the relationship between Tobias and Agnes.

it may be a comment on Albee’s views about the eventual loss of love in human

relationships.

Tobias: No, it wasn’t that. She didn’t like me any more. I tried to force myself on

her.

Agnes: Whatever do you mean?

Tobias: I’d close her in a room with me; I’d pick her up, and I’d make her sit on

my lap; I’d make her stay there when she didn't want to. But it didn’t work;

she’d abide it, but she’d get down when she could, go away.

Claire: Maybe she was ill.

Tobias: No, she wasn’t; I had her to the vet. She didn’t like me anymore. One

night-I was fixed on it now-I had her in the room with me, and she wouldn’t

purr, and I knew: I knew she was just waiting till she could get down, and I said,

"Damn you, you like me; God damn it you stop this! I haven ’t done anything to

you." And lshook her; . . . and she bit me; hard; and she hissed at me. And so

I hit her. With my open hand, I hit her, smack, right across the head. I . . . I hated

her (Albee 35)!
The point Albee is making is that Agnes and Tobias are long past the point of being
able to "do anything" to each other and consequently are incapable of touching
each other in any genuine Way. They are no longer able to give each other the
"blessing" of positive afﬁrmation if in fact they ever were. Actors playing the parts
of Tobias and Agnes should capture the somnambulistic quality of their lives.
Agnes should have a ramrod quality about her physically and a caustic,
authoritarian tone of voice to reﬂect her Critcal Parent operation. Tobias should be
played physically contained and subdued with a soft tone of voice reﬂecting his
Adapted Child operation. Occasionally, a glimmer of rage eminates from his Child.
The fact that Tobias once loved Claire only exacerbates his l’m Not-OK, You’re OK

65

life position.

An interesting three handed game of ALCOHOUC is played between Agnes,
Tobias and Claire. The dynamics of the game as they play it involve Claire in the
Victim role being Rescued by Tobias. Agnes presents herself as the Persecutor.
When the switch takes place, Claire becomes the Persecutor, Agnes the Victim,
and Tobias the Patsy. In the following scene, Agnes has left the room and Tobias
has poured Claire a brandy even though he knows that this will upset Agnes. Claire
is an Alcoholic even though she denies it When Agnes returns she immediately
reacts to Claire’s drink.

Agnes: (Walking by Claire) My, what an odd glass to put a soft drink in. Tobias,

you have a quiet sense of humor, after all.

Tobias: Now, Agnes . . .

Claire: He has not!

Agnes: (Rather heavy-handed) Well, it can’t be brandy; Tobias is a grown-up,

and knows far better than to . . .

Claire: (Harsh, waving her glass) A toast to you, sweet sister; I drink your- -not

health; persistence-4n good, hard brandy, age inconnu.

Agnes: (Quiet, tight smile,ignoring Claire) It would serve you right, my dear

Tobias, were I to go away, drift off. You would not have a woman left about

you-only Claire and Julia . . . not even people; it would serve you right.

Claire: (Great mocking) But I’m not an alcoholic baby!

Tobias: She. . . she can drink . . . a little.

Agnes: (There is true passion here; we see under the calm a little) I WILL NOT

TOLERATE ITII I WILL NOT HAVE YOU! (Softer but tight-lipped) Oh, God. I

wouldn‘t mind for a moment if you ﬁlled your bathtub with it, lowered yourself in

it, DROWNEDI I rather wish you would. It would give me the peace of mind to
know you could do something well, thoroughly. If you wanted to kill yourself-
then do it right!
Tobias: Please, Agnes . . .
Agnes: What I cannot stand is the selfishness! Those of you who want to die
. . . and take your whole lives doing it.
Claire: (Lazy, but with loathing under it) Your wife is a perfectionist; they are
very difﬁcult to live with, these people (Albee 27-28).
The the following illustrates the dynamics of this three handed game of AL-
COHOLIC.
Social Paradigm: Adult-Adult
Claire: (Adult) "T all me what you really think of me.
Tobias: (Adult) "I won’t be honest with you."
Agnes: (Adult) "I’ll be frank with you."
Social Paradigm: Parent-Child
Claire: (Child to Agnes) "See if you can stop me."
Agnes: (Parent to Claire) "You must stop drinking because. . . ."
Agnes: (Parent to Tobias) "You must stop being irresponsible because. . . ."
[See Figure 15]
Berne states in ﬁamee People Elm that Second-Degree SEE WHAT YOU MADE
ME DO can be the basis for a way of life, rather than being used occasionally as a
protective mechanism. Tobias has defered to the "help"of Agnes. Berne says this
kind of behavior may be done in the guise of considerateness or gallantry. If things
go well, Tobias can enjoy them. If they don’t go well, he can play SEE WHAT YOU
MADE ME DO and blame Agnes. The following are examples that illustrate the

67

 

 

Cilia Tobie Agnes
O'ﬁelmeuhetyouredly @‘taien'tliehoneet @‘t'ﬂhetankalliyn"
dilute! me." Iilhyeu.” 0 (“You
QMNMMMM”) because..."l
Grimm-nomadic
.IW*WOOO.
Figure 15

game.
Agnes: Tobias, you will be unhappy to know it, I suppose, or of mixed emotions,
certainly, but Julie is coming home.
Claire: Naturally.
Tobias: Yes?
Agnes: She is leaving Douglas, which is no surprise to me.
Tobias: But, wasn’t Julia happy? You didn’t tell me anything about. . .
Agnes: If Julia were happy, she would not be coming home. I don’t want her
here, God knows. I mean she’s welcome, of course. . .
Claire: Right on schedule, once every three years. . .
Agnes: (Closes her eyes for a moment, to keep ignoring Claire) . . . it is her
home, we are her parents, the two of us, and we have our obligations to her,

and l have reached the age, Tobias, when I wish we were always alone, you and

I, without . . .hangers-on . . . or anyone.

Claire: (Cheerful but firm) Well, I’m not going.

Agnes: . . . but if she and Doug are throughnand I’m not suggesting she is in
the rightuthen her place is properly here, as for some it is not.

Claire: One, two, three, four, down they go.

Tobias: Well, I’d like to talk to Doug.

Agnes: (As if the opposite answer were expected from her) I wish you would!
If you had talked to Tom, or Charlie, yes! even Charlie, or . . uh . . .

Claire: Phil?

Agnes: (No recognition of Claire helping her) . . . Phil, it might have done some
good. If you decided to assert yourself, ﬁnally, too late, I imagine . . .

Claire: Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

Agnes: . . . Julia might, at the very least, come to think her father cares, and that
might be consolation-4f not help.

Tobias: I’ll . . . I’ll talk to Doug.

Claire: Why don’t you invite him here? And while your at it, bring the others
along.

Agnes: (Some reproach) And you might talk to Julia, too. You don’t, very much.
Tobias: Yes (Albee 30-32).

In the above scene if Tobias does talk to Doug and Julia and is successful in

reuniting them, then deferring to Agnes’ advice will have gotten the monkey off his

back since he had to make no decision in the situation at all. If, however the talk

does not work or a "blow-up" occurs, Tobias can play SEE WHAT YOU MADE ME

DO with Agnes.

Social Paradigm: Adult-Adult

69

Agnes: (adult) I advise.

Tobias: (Adult) What you advise doesn’t work.
Psychological Paradigm

Agnes: (Parent) Only I know what’s best for you.

Tobias: (Child) See what you made me do. [SEE FIGURE 16]

IEEWHATYOUWIEDO

 

 

 

 

Q) "m you advise doesn't m" 0 “I advise."
Grummmmun') @P‘Onlylbioerwhatlebesttaryou.”)
Figure 16

Using Transactional Game Analysis affords the actor with a useful process for
determining sub-text meaning as provided by the playwright (Ulterior Transactions)
and inner monologue which is the psychological motivation the actor provides for
him/herself when not speaking the playwright’s dialogue. Transactional Game
Analysis can also be used by directors as an insightful tool for character analysis

and to provide actors with meaningful feedback for choices that they make.

70

CONCLUSIONS

Transactional Game Analysis is a practical process for understanding the
psychological life of characters in plays. It is a process of anaylsis that is based on
external observation and therefore is not highly theoretical. More speciﬁcally
Transactional Game Analysis provides actors with an additional means of bringing
a character to life on the stage. I have shown that the analysis of speciﬁc games,
in the case of this study marital games, not only provides insight into understanding
the psychological life of the character but actually provides the actor with concrete
non-verbal body language clues, verbal clues (such as the use of tone of voice)
and an understanding of the feelings used to support verbal communication which
can be used to better aid the actor in the creation of characterization and inner
monologue. Directors aware of the process of game analysis can provide actors
with speciﬁc feedback that will facilitate making choices that are appropriate for the
behavior of the character on stage.

One interesting fact which has surfaced in the plays chosen for this particular
study is the role that substance abuse plays in the dynamics of many of the marital
games and ultimately in the development of the characters themselves. The
substance most predominately abused is alcohol. In O’Neill’s Long Qey’e Joemey
Into Night, both James Tyrone and his wife Mary are substance abusers. Tyrone
is a heavy drinker and while he may not qualify as a bonaﬁde alcoholic in the clinical
sense, there are times he simply has to have a drink. It certainly affects his behavior
and the games he plays with his wife. Mary is addicted to morphine which colors
every choice she makes. In \Mlliams’ Qet On A ljot Ijn Boof, Brick is involved in a
hard game of ALCOHOUC with his wife and parents which prevents him from
confronting his latent homosexual feelings. In Inge’s Qeme Back l_.,ltt' le Sheba, Doc

71

uses his alcoholism against his wife Lola because he blames her for being trapped
in an unhqappy marriage and for the failure of his life in general. In Albee’s A Delicete
_B_a_lame_e_ both Tobias and his wife Agnes and their friends Harry and his wife Edna
regularly use alcohol as a social means of coping with what Alvin Tofﬂer calls future
shock, an inability to cope with a rapidly changing social and technological culture.
Claire who lives with her sister Agnes and Tobias is a bonaﬁde alcoholic. She acts
as a catylist for some of the marital games played between Tobias and Agnes.
Maggie, in Miller’s After The Fall, is an abuser of perscription drugs, so much so
that she refers to herself as being in a "foggy" condition. Her drug addiction directly
contributes to the marital games she plays with her husband, Quentin.

Another fact that has emerged as a result of this study is that a repetitveness of
certain games exists from play to play. I realized as I began that Berne, in his original
work on game analysis, Wm identiﬁed only seven marital games
but I also knew that there are tangential life and sexual games that are often played
by married couples, that either reenforce or augment marital games. Since
substance abuse is a dominant and common theme that runs through all of the
plays chosen for analysis, the game of ALCOHOUC and its variant which is
substance abuse dominates the study. Other repetitive games such as NIGYSOB
and IF IT WEREN’T FOR YOU appear in more than two of the plays chosen for
analysis. Perhaps this is not as suprising as it ﬁrst appears. All of the plays chosen
for analysis are reflective of modern marital relationships. Since in reality marital
games tend to be repetitive, it stands to reason that consciously or othenivise the
playwrights whose plays have been chosen for analysis have created similar

situations in their plays.

72

In addition to the repetitveness of certain games, another similarity that exists
within the games are the symbiotic relationships between the married couples. The
most common of which is Critical Parent to Adapted Child. Mary plays Adapted
Child to Tyrone’s Critical Parent in WM. The same
relationship exists between Big Daddy and Big Momma in Get On A ﬂet Tin Reof,
however the symbiosis is reversed in the relationship between Maggie and Brick;
Maggie assumes the role of Critical Parent and Brick that of Adapted Child. In
Come Baek Lyle Sheba, Doc often plays the Critical Parent to Lola’s Adapted Child.
The relationship is again reversed in Aﬁeﬁhejell with Maggie playing the Critical
Parent and Quentin the Adapted Child. The conclusion reached, at least on the
basis of this sample, is that when psychological games are played between married
couples, they often originate out of a Parent to Child symbiotic relationship.

An understanding of thevarlations of the same games played within different
plays clarifies motivation and enlarges understanding of character development.
Subtle differences in the games played that exist among the plays analyzed such
as Maggie’s substance abuse in After The Eall or the differences between the
motivation behind Brick’s alcholism in Cat On A ljet Tjg Roef and Tyrone’s in ngg
Day’e Jogrney lgte Night yields speciﬁc results for the actor and the director. This
study lays the groundwork for the possible following additional exploration: 1) the
transactional anlaysis of all the games played by all of the characters in a speciﬁc
play and 2) the application of transactional game analysis to Elizabethan/Jacobean

plays, particularly the comedies and tragedies of William Shakespeare.

APPENDIX

74

APPENDIX

Rene Spitz researched with infants raised from birth in institutions who had
sufﬁcient food and health care, but did not receive the affection that most children
get from their parents. Spitz observed that infants that are deprived of physical
contact in the ﬁrst six months of life frequently become apathetic, dejected, and
detached. In later life they continue to manifest lack of appetite, retarded physical
development and stupor (James 308). According to Berne, these observations
give rise to the idea of stimulus-hunger, and indicate that the most favored forms
of stimuli are those provided by physical intimacy, a conclusion not hard to accept

on the basis of everyday experience (Berne Gemee 13).

A Selected List of Works Consulted

 

76

A Selected list of Works Consulted

Albee, Edward. AM. New York: Atheneum, 1966.

Bell and Groder. 'What’s in the Bow! Bitch?" Iransagiogel Anebgje Jegmel 3:2
April 1973: 35-36.

Berlin, Richard M. "Theatrical Transactional Analysis: A Model For The Director-
Actor Communication Process." Diss. Temple U, 1978.

Berne, Eric. Qamee Peogle Play. New York: Ballantine, 1964.

Berne. "Pathological Signiﬁcance of Games." W312
October 1964: 160.

Berne, Eric. Wm. New York: Ballantine, 1961.

Berne, Eric. What m you Say After Yeg Sey Helle. New Yorszantam, 1974.

Brockett, Oscar G. W193. New York: Holt, Rinehart and
Winston, 1974.

Brockett, Oscar G. W Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1982

Brown, Lesley K. "The Use of Transactional Analysis in Directing Henrik lbsen’s A
WM." Master’s thesis. San Diego State U, 1974.

Brown, Michael, and Stan Woollams. I_ren_s_a_gt_ienel_Agely§j_s_. Dexter: Huron Valley
Institute, 1973. °

Capers and Holland. "Zapped by Getting Better-Sorry, Too Late (NIGYSOB)."

Transactional Analysis Journal 1:2 April 1971: 22-23.
Cheney. "Hamlet: His Script Check List." Trmsagionﬂ Aneueie Belletig 7:27 July
1968: 66-68.

Corrigan, Robert W. W. New York: Grove, 1963.
Dodgion. "Love Me or Leave Me: A Third Degree Variant of Schlemiel." Iageeg

tjonel Ageysie Jogrnel 3:3 July 1973: 25.26.

77

Frumker. "Hamaratiia-Aristotle’s Meaning of the Word and Its Relation to Tragic
Scripts." ﬂageeetjegeLAeelyejeJegmel 3:2 January 1973: 29.

Goulding. "Games Played By Alcholics." Wight 2:6 April
1963: 58.

Groder. "Four Contributions: Let’s You and Him Fight." IregeeeﬂegeLAnetyeis
ﬁlmetie 7:26 April 1968: 49-52.

Groder. ""Kick Me - NIGYSOB." 8:30 April 1969: 35-36.

Harding. "The Face Game." W 6:22 April 1967: 40-53.

Hart. "Symbiotic Invitations." W63 July 1976: 253-254.
Hull, Elizabeth A. "A Transactional Analysis of The Plays of Edward Albee." Diss.

Loyola U of Chicago, 1975.
Hull, S. Loraine. W. Connecticut: Ox Bow, 1985.
Inge, William. W. New York: Samuel French, 1979.

James, Muriel et aI., Ieehniguee ln Itansegiogal Agmeie. Reading: Addison-
Wesley, 1977.

James, Muriel, and Dorothy Jongeward. mm. Reading:Addison- Wesley,
1976.

James, Sydney. "Transactional Analysis In Criticism." Diss. Tulane U, 1968.

James. "The Game Plan." Iteneeetlmeljgelystséleumel 3:4 October 1973:
14-17.

Kerr. "TA and Sex Therapy for Women, Non-Orgasmic Scripts." mm
Analyeis Jgurnal 6:1 January 1976: 28-36.

Kuritz, Paul T. "Transactional Analysis of Character In Drama For The Actor." Diss.
Indiana U, 1977.

78

Maizlish, L I. "The Orgasmic Game." W 4:16 October
1965: 75-76.

McKinney. "Look, Ma! She.(He) Likes Mel" Irmeegiond Aneysis Journal 4:4
October 1974: 26-28.

Miller, Arthur. Aftetlne Eell. New York: Bantam, 1965.

O’Neill, Eugene. W. New Haven: Yale University
Press, 1966.

Park. "Sir Lancelot, or The Beautiful Wife Game." WM
1 :2 April 1971 : 17-18.

Paul. "A Game Analysis of Albee’s Who’s Afraid of Virginia Wolf?" Iteeseetieﬂa
Agaiyeis Bulletin 9:36 October 1970: 122-127.

Plummer, Scott H. "Transactions Games, And Scripts In Moliere’s Theatre: A
Selective Transactional Interpretation." Diss. Rice U, 1974.

Robbins, Kenneth R. "The Transactional Process of Playwriting In Developing Three
Scripts For The Stage." Diss. Southern Illinois U, 1982

Sanders, Walter E. "The English Speaking Game Drama." Diss. Northwestern U,

1969.

Schiff. "Frames of Reference." MW 5:3 July 1975:
290-294.

Steiner. "The Alcholic Game." Iraneactiong Anelyeie Bulletin 7:25 January 1968:
6-16.

Steiner, Claude M. W. New York: Bantam, 1974.
Stuntz. "Classiﬁcations of Games by Positions." Ttensaetional Ageueie Jegrnal 1:4
October 1971: 57-60.

Stuntz. Edgar C. Beview Qi Gemee 1%2—1919. n.p.: n.d.

79

Uecker. "Ihe Game of Nobody Understands Me." W
9:33 January 1970: 5-7.

Wagner. "The Blaming Game." ImeeetleeeLAgelLsierei 2:4 October 1972:
31-35.

Williams, Tennessee. W. New York: New Directions, 1975.

Zechnick, "’NIGYSOB’ Revisited." WW 6:2 April 1976:
173-176. '

"llllllllllllllllllllllls