Analysing 'Whose Life Anyway?'

no longer able to uses his immense talent and intellect while he is confined to a bed. The contrast between his highly active mind and his inactive body creates interest and sympathy. The audience may also experience feelings of anger and frustration due to ken’s mistreatment in hospital, such as the administration of sedatives without his permission: “Dr Emerson, I am afraid I must insist that you do not stick that needle in me”. This enhances the dramatic content and creates tension, which further entertains and intrigues the audience, whilst making them angry and frustrated. The conflict of opinions in this play creates tension, which excites the audience and maintains the inter-personal relationships between the characters which, in turn, create the overall atmosphere needed to keep the audiences attention. The members of staff responsible for Ken’s care are largely against his death, particularly Dr. Emerson: “But he isn’t capable. I refuse to believe that a man with a mind as quick as his, a man with enormous mental resources, would calmly choose suicide.” Their ethical agreement insists they must sustain life with whatever means necessary, but a small proportion of staff, including John and Dr. Scott, begin to support Ken’s campaign and of course, Ken’s solicitor, Mr. Hill supports the case. Ken creates two opposing sides by enlisting the help of a lawyer: “And you want me to represent you?” The two main characters are Dr. Scott and Dr. Emerson. Dr. Scott believes that there may be some positive gain for Ken, and she is a more flexible doctor, incorporating new ideas into her work. Her views on Ken’s treatment, particularly his sedation and condition are important, as they mirror how the audience are expected to feel, she has sympathy for him and makes every effort to help him. The play is set mainly in the hospital where Ken lays, apart from a few scenes in the surrounding areas of the hospital grounds for example, the restaurant: “Thank you for a lovely meal” This emphasises the feelings of isolation that ken is experiencing. The hospital environment is visually uninteresting and has a ‘clinical’ appearance. It is also not mentally stimulating enough for Ken, as his intelligence is not being used to its full potential. During Act One, the audience is introduced to most of the characters, the setting and Ken’s unfortunate situation. The ‘subplot’ involving Kay Sadler and John also becomes apparent, and continues to develop throughout the play. The audience begin to form their own opinions on the issue, and the statement: “I’ve decided not to stay alive” Is very powerful. It increases the tension within the hospital and gives the audience ‘food for thought’ as they experience the emotions brought on by such a cutting statement. In Act One, Ken’s feelings are at their lowest point He feels lonely and depressed and this negativity eventually peaks when he makes the decision to end his life. Tension is a crucial part of the atmospheric progression in the play. The part where Ken receives ‘Valium’ against his will is a major point of tension: “I specifically refused permission for you to stick that needle in me and you didn’t listen.” Both this incident and the meeting with Mrs Boyle create tension. The meeting with Mrs Boyle make the audience feel sympathetic towards ken as he becomes very frustrated and upset: “You’re very upset” At the end of Act One, a debate is in progress over Ken’s wish to end his life, and this heated argument develops into a ‘cliff-hanger’, which creates tension and intrigues the audience, thus making the play entertaining. The majority of the plot progression takes place in Act Two. WE see the reactions of the characters to Ken’s wishes, and the tension comes to a climax when Ken makes the decision to transform his hospital room into a courtroom, and have a judge decided his fate: “The best thing to do for Mr Hill and I is to find a judge” Ken’s emotions are significantly positive as he is becoming confident about his eventual fate, which could lead to an end to his pain and suffering. He displays this by saying: “I couldn’t stay like this for a year, I couldn’t” This illustrates the strength of characters Ken possesses, and the repetition of “couldn’t” intensifies this. When Ken’s is told he will be allowed to die, (“I’m afraid you’ll have to release your patient”) This heightens the tension and again provokes thoughts and opinions, encouraging the audience to take an active role. This moment is very dramatic and powerful, Ken is relieved that he will no longer have to suffer, and it provokes strong emotions from the audience as they feel sadness knowing that Ken will die, as they have become emotionally attached to Ken. The relationships between Kay Sadler and John progress during Act Two. Dr Emerson realises that he will probably lose the battle to keep Ken alive, so he attempts and succeeds to ‘make peace’ with Ken, and their relationship becomes friendlier: “That’s very kind…” The final plot progression is Ken’s actual death: ‘The lights are held for a long moment and then snap out’ It is short and un-descriptive, and this may be due to the writer not wanting to glorify his controversial death. The lights in the stage directions represent Ken’s life, and when they are turned off, it signifies the end of his life. John and Kay Sadler become quite attached to Ken during the play, and this makes their decision about his death more difficult. The medical ethic ‘to sustain life wherever possible’ is significant, as the medical staff also has their own opinions, and their professionalism and careers would be jeopardised should they go against this ethic. The main conflict of ethics occurs in Act One, where Dr. Emerson injects Ken with Valium, after he asks specifically not to be sedated. The decision as to whether or not Ken should be allowed to make such a decision about his own life is also morally and ethically challenging for the audience. The play is extremely thought provoking and it insists the audience challenge and discuss the issues raised about euthanasia. In conclusion, I think that Brian Clark has used sympathy and tension to intrigue and entertain the audience, as well as using a controversial issue. This maintains the attention of the audience and the constant progression of the plot, particularly the ‘sub-plots’, which add a little light relief from the main dramatic content and bring in an emotional side to the play, thus helping the audience to relate to the points being brought about. The use of humour and sexual innuendo’s is also notable, this lightens the tone and also helps the audience to build attachment to Ken as he makes them laugh and feel comfortable. The issues surrounding euthanasia are still sensitive and controversial, and even more so in the 1970’s, at the time of the play’s release. The issue is highly opinionated, and the fact that Ken fights for his own right to die questions morals and ethics, both from the audience, and society as a whole. In my opinion, Ken should have had the right to die, and others, of sound mind, should be allowed to do so if it is seen to be beneficial.