Ken himself is a very diverse character; he has so much obvious intelligence that it hinders him. The fact that he can think for himself, use his intelligence to analyse and interpret his situation causes the audience to think: oh. Well perhaps if he’s this obviously intelligent, perhaps he has a point. His dialogue, and the way that Brian Clarke portrays him, shows that perhaps doctors are the ones who are blinkered; they keep you seeing straight ahead; yet you can’t see the whole picture. An example of this is when Ken asks Dr. Emerson if he will ever be discharged from the hospital.
“Ken: So when are you going to discharge me?
Dr. Emerson: Difficult to say.
Ken: Really? Are you ever going to discharge me?
Dr. Emerson: Well, you’ll certainly be leaving us soon I should think.
Ken: Discharged or transferred?
Dr. Emerson: This unit is for critical patients; when we have reached a position of stability, then you can be looked after in a much more comfortable, quiet hospital.
Ken: You mean you only grow the vegetables here; the vegetable store I somewhere else.
Dr. Emerson: I don’t think I understand you.
Ken: I think you do. Spell it out for me please. What chance have I of only being partly dependant on nursing?
Dr. Emerson: It’s impossible to say with any certainty what the prognosis of any case is.
Ken: I’m not asking for a guarantee on oath. I am simply asking for your professional opinion. Do you believe I will ever walk again?
Dr. Emerson: No.
Ken: Or recover the use of my arms?
Dr. Emerson: No.
Ken: Thank you. “
This insight into Ken’s character comes accurately and shows us exactly, the extent of his injuries, and the seriousness of them. So this, in turn with many other statements makes us think that in calmly choosing to die, he is making the wrong decision, that he is going mad. However perhaps, by choosing to stay alive, with his level of intelligence, and no means to function as a human being, perhaps that in itself is insanity. He lies in his bed, calmly thinking, making his choice to die, watching time just drift by, slowly, and he is powerless to stop it. He is trapped in a limbo; a strange half life with no means to do anything, and the knowledge that in his soul, he is dead.
The medical profession represents a very controversial view of moral and ethics in relation to the medical world and the way that its passion to save life occasionally interferes with freewill. Supposedly God decides when you live or when you die. So when medicine intervenes in issues that shouldn’t be changed, especially against the will of those involved. So where Ken is involved, he is definitely being kept alive against his will which is an intolerable act of cruelty. Though primarily, the medical profession must save lives, surely moral/freewill issues must have some component to the life death decisions which doctors so frequently have to make.
The stage crafting around Ken acts as another component of the way that it captures the audience. The symbolism in the fact that its bed bound and the fact that his world moves fast around him, showing us simply how helpless he really is, and how much he lost, just in a split second, a pivotal moment. It shows the way that he is suffering and how by keeping him alive, it’s cruel.
A key point in Ken’s supposed survival is the character of Sister Anderson. She is the fundamental carer who does exactly what he is unable to do himself. She changes him and just generally mothers him. The language she uses in relation to Ken is kind of condescending; “There. That’s better. Comfortable?” it babies him, causes him to be slightly uncomfortable in that he can’t do these things himself. She is a stable character, throughout the duration of the play, and she emulates a motherly figure; however, she has no control over his destiny. Sister Anderson is a representation of what he lost and what he can no longer do himself.
In comparison, Nurse Sadler is a tonic for him. She is a “breath of fresh air” her innocence making the audience sees her with a renewed interest. She is a new fresh face, and her youth seems to be very attractive to Ken. Because she’s young and innocent, Ken doesn’t get as annoyed with her, in the way that the others do, because unlike Sister, her heart isn’t made of “stainless steel”. The seriousness and intensity of Ken’s situation affects her more than the others, because of her youth and innocence.
Dr. Emerson is almost Ken’s nemesis; he is almost cruel in his passion to keep Ken alive. This is interpreted by the audience as the will to do right, almost becoming inhumanely right, if that even truly makes sense. His will to impress what is supposedly right upon other people provokes us to believe the worst in the medical profession. Ken’s character collides colourfully with these issues of euthanasia, and when his decision is reached to decide to die, we see a kind of perpetual hopelessness in Ken, which we don’t see in Dr. Emerson. When he enters a psychiatric element into the play, we are shocked; it’s ironic that we are shocked, yet, somehow, the authority of a doctor always seems sensible to us. So if we are perceived as mad, we believe it on opinion of a doctor. However, in Ken’s case, he simply asks “How does anyone prove that they’re sane”. He has a valid point; and his obvious intelligence which he uses to challenge Dr. Emerson and his team of professionals weakens his case; he could be portrayed as insane for the simple questioning of a doctor.
Professionalism plays an important part of this play; Brian Clarke incorporates a kind of element of scepticism, because of the way paranoia is presented in each case. Ken is presented as paranoid, because of his reaction to the prescription of valium; in comparison, Dr. Emerson’s obsession with Ken’s psychiatric state, is simply professionalism. It seems to be a double standard; it all depends on where you put it.
Clare Scott, the doctor below Dr. Emerson is another key component to this magical piece of drama. She is more compassionate, and as the play evolves around the situation, we see a kind of understanding that she develops in relation to the situation surrounding Ken. She is effectively a softer, more sensitive version of Dr. Emerson. She seems to understand Ken more emotionally, and perhaps since she has been portrayed as a very soft touching, professional woman, perhaps she is meant to be portrayed as his fairy god mother.
In conclusion, “Whose Life Is It Anyway” is a dynamic, play. The way in which Brian Clarke portrays each character, in their own way, causes an audience to think beyond the obvious, where euthanasia is concerned.
[MRS WALLIN: I think that it’s a little bit incomplete...could I tweak it?]]
