The Zoo Story is a well-known play by Edward Albee which is both simple and deep in its theme and idea with many glimpses on the inner changes inside a morally oppressed man. It was written in the year 1958, but was prohibited in the United States. Thus, the author left America for Europe in order to perform his first pay in Germany, namely at the Schiller Theatre, in Berlin in 1959. (Cody 1517) The play consists of one act and narrates about a meeting of two men in the Central park, New York. The play terrifies by its development and climax which calls multivalued reaction on how to make out the idea of play.
Though, Edward Albee describes two men, Jerry and Peter, who are strange to each other from the very beginning g of their conversation. Peter is older and works as a publisher. He has family, daughters, parakeets in the amount of two. Also he has cats and is just sitting on the bench in the park. Jerry is inclined from the very first words to extract all the information from his talker. Jerry seems to live in scrutiny in the boarding house and, thus, wants to tell his story to Peter. The story contains the facts about his landlady and the dog of hers, everything which makes Jerry annoyed. The monologue of his is too long and comp-rises almost the third part of the play. The author tends to illustrate two types of conditions and circumstances in which two characters live. The final part of the play shows some sort of fight for the “bench domination” which is started by Jerry and when he takes knife out of his pocket and tries to stick it into Peter, the further development of actions turns against Jerry who sticks it unintentionally in his body and, though, makes Peter to go out. When Jerry is broken he shouts: “it’s all right, you’re an animal.” (Albee, 1958)
The drama of these two characters is connected with their different conditions of living, but the same state of existing. “The parallel is drawn between Jerry’s excursion and Peter’s existence in a kind of domestic “zoo.” (Cody 1517) These two men did not even recognize before the world in which they lived and continue living. For Peter it is news, but Jerry is sick and tired with this and has nothing to do, but to search for escape from this madness. “What I mean is: animals are indifferent to me… like people…” (Albee 1958) The terrific anxiety of Jerry makes great impact on Peter who becomes involved into the Jerry’s story.
Peter is a middle-aged publisher who has some successes in editing books. He got accustomed with the routine development of his life. Traditionally he once married and has two daughters as a result of this very marriage. The animals which live in his house and wife with daughters are the sceneries of his territory on which he is able to move, act, speak and think. He is limited and knows about this nothing. Peter seems satisfied with his life, which is full of advantages, and pretends not to disturb somebody by his personal understanding of life. It cannot be said so in case of Jerry. Their opposition to each other urges a spectator to predict the next steps of the characters. “Because of the explicit criticism of the status quo embodied in Peter – and because the play is resonant with allusions to classical mythology, Biblical locutions (however ironical) and the atmosphere of a heroic quest, it is tempting to romanticize or glorify the character of Jerry.” (Stenz, p. 6).
Peter sits plain and shows some insignificant changes on his face due to the energetic play of Jerry on the scene. The author leaves some features of a real truth about Peter somewhere behind the screens and makes possible for a spectator to get to the point of whether the death of Jerry played an important role or not. Peter is outlined to be a narrow-minded person who needs to be put into the picture about what happens with him and where he stays at the moment. Jerry projects in the play the role of a prophet who is able to show the way for Jerry. His prophecy is terrible and not comprehensive for Peter at the beginning. Peter tries to make any attempts to get rid of Jerry’s notations and those stories which he used and told as a sort of Biblical proverb. Furthermore, as the author comments himself “If Peter could be shaken out of his “half-awake, half-asleep, safe attributes” and “average attitudes” only by participating in Jerry’s death, then Jerry has to die.” (Cited in Stenz, p. 6).
Jerry itself seems to be the dominating character within two. He grabs easily attention of Peter and intends him to listen to his stories which lead to the final proof of the fatal lives they live and that they appeared to be animals on the whole. Jerry sees no edge between animals and people in their attitudes. His character is very charismatic and full of the energy and efforts to express what he thinks of this or that thing. Thus, he does not hesitate to illustrate personal attitude towards people which surround him in everyday life. The story-telling manner of Jerry is needful in the play, because “finally, it should be noted that only the completion of Jerry’s story enables the play to resume its course towards a bloody crisis and operatic denouement.” (Ditsky, p. 148).
Jerry creates the intentions of a rather pessimistic outcomes of everybody’s life, so that to underline the nonsense in which people appeared and Peter, in particular. Loneliness of Jerry makes him dull and annoyed with bitter sadness which he experiences in his life. Many critics compare the manner of Jerry’s lifestyle and his mindset with people having made their sub-culture headquartered in San Francisco, namely beat-nick culture. The play was written actually in the end of 1950s when this culture dominated and drew to a head. “The play may be considered a brilliant dramatization of certain tragic and crucial factors which contributed to produce the ‘beat’ generation.” (Cited in Stenz, p. 7).
The problem of Jerry is in his entire desire to gain truth and then to share it with others. The point is that the example of peter demonstrated the opposing reaction on Jerry’s invoking statements. When he tells Peter the story about the dog with a sad voice he admits the phrase which critically proves the position of Jerry towards human beings: “The dog and I have attained a compromise; more of a bargain, really. We neither love nor hurt because we do not try to reach each other. And, was trying to feed the dog an act of love?” (Albee, 1958) Jerry is inclined from the first moment of his meeting with Peter to omit obstacles both inside and outside them in order to exceed the boundaries of his conversation with Peter which changes spontaneously into a bloody scene.
Thus, the play by Edward Albee The Zoo Story is a picturesque manifestation of peoples’ loneliness and madness with which they get accustomed in their lives omitting the reality of things and phenomena accepted in the universe. Two stories of life with opposite coloring are connected in the play under the general theme of loneliness and desperation. The author illustrated through his work the tendency of people living in modern society to ignore morality and values which are at the top of mankind and serve to save peoples’ identity.
Works cited
- Stenz, Anita Maria. Edward Albee: The Poet of Loss. Walter de Gruyter, 1978
- Ditsky, John The onstage Christ: studies in the persistence of a theme. Rowman & Littlefield, 1980
- Cody, Gabrielle H., Sprinchorn, Evert. The Columbia encyclopedia of modern drama. Columbia University Press, 2007
- Albee, Edward. The Zoo Story. 1958.