Does Clark present arguments for and against 'assisted suicide' without prejudicing the audience in 'Whose Life Is It Anyway'?
Harriet French
Coursework
Does Clark present arguments for and against
`assisted suicide'
without prejudicing the audience in `Whose
Life Is It Anyway'?
The central character in `Whose Life Is It Anyway?' is Ken Harrison
who is a patient in the hospital, in which the play is set. The play
sees Ken, who has been involved in a horrific car accident, recovering
from various injuries, some of which will never heal. The accident
leaves Ken paralysed from the neck downwards permanently, which
results in him having to stay in hospital for the rest of his life.
Throughout the play Ken fights for the right to die, as he sees the
situation he is in as one that is not worth living. After many
struggles and set-backs, Ken is allowed to die, but against the
doctors' will.
The play was written in the 1970's when euthanasia, a form
of assisted suicide, was not a subject commonly discussed. An audience
watching the play in the 1970s would be far more shocked at some of
the events that take place than a present-day audience. In the 1970s
most people did not fully understand euthanasia and the effects of it
and it was certainly not talked about openly.
An audience thirty years ago would be quite shocked and
possibly offended by the language used by Ken and some of the hospital
staff. Also Ken's behaviour in general would be quite different from
the sort of behaviour people thirty years ago would expect to see in a
theatre or on stage. His sexual innuendo and his openness to discuss
sexual matters with the nurses would make a 1970's audience feel
uncomfortable.
A present-day audience would be less shocked by these
matters as euthanasia is quite a commonly heard of issue with three
high profile cases occurring in the last twelve months. One example if
this is Diane Pretty. Her fight for the right for her husband to be
allowed to help her die was heavily documented in the tabloids and
seen a great deal on television. People are generally more aware of
euthanasia and the effects it has in the present day as there is so
much more media which provides us with up-to-date information quickly
and easily i.e. the internet, radio and television.
The fact that in the 1970's euthanasia was a very closed
subject and was avoided as much as possible, people who lived thirty
years ago would not have really had a chance to make their own
decisions on the matter, so an audience going to see `Whose Life Is It
Anyway?' would have a very open mind and be persuaded greatly by what
they were seeing.
A present-day audience, however, would have already made
up their minds on euthanasia and would know for themselves the pros
and cons of the matter as it is so commonly discussed today. Therefore
they would be less easily prejudiced by the play. Nowadays people are
well aware of their rights and know what they are and are not entitled
to. For example, the Patient Charter, which informs patients of the
intentions and allocations of the government. This would not be so in
the 1970s as people were a lot less informed of their rights thirty
years ago.
There are many changing relationships in the play, e.g. Dr Scott, who,
when the play begins, is very professional towards Ken and tries not
to got too involved with him or develop any emotional attachment to
him. As the play goes on though, we see that she does actually get
personally involved with Ken, beyond the call of duty, and supports
his decision to want to die, whereas at the start of the play she was
against it as it defied her medical ethics.
But it is not only Ken that Dr Scott's relationship
changes with, but also Doctor Emerson as well. At the start of the
play Dr Scott backs Emerson's decision to keep Ken alive one hundred
percent and never questions him, but as she become more involved with
Ken her view of Dr Emerson changes completely and she begins to resent
him and questions him. "I hope you will forgive me Sir, for saying
this, but I think that is just how you are behaving, as a judge."
Clark is prejudicing his audience here by the fact that if the medical
staff changes their minds and thinks that euthanasia is the right
option to choose then there must be some degree of truth in it, as
audiences thirty years ago were easily persuaded by the opinions of
the professionals, such as Doctors.
In the opening moments of the play Ken is lying on his
back being massaged by the Nurse and the Sister. The Sister leaves and
Ken says to the Nurse "I shall call you Kay when we're alone, just you
and me, having my back caressed...." To this the nurse replies "I'm
rubbing your heels." After the audience has overheard this
conversation we can immediately tell that Ken is paralysed and we are
filled with sympathy for him, resulting in us being drawn to
supporting his argument. We cannot yet empathise with Ken as we do not
yet know him, but we feel sorry for him and warm to him straight away.
This prejudices an audience towards the case of `assisted suicide' a
great deal, and our backing of Ken's case only grows as scene one
continues.
There are a number of incidences during scene one, which
serves to prejudice the audience towards Ken and his fight for the
right to die. For example, the daily indignities he faces, such as
having his bowels flushed out and having to be moved around a lot and
re-positioned every few hours by nurses so as not to get bed sores.
The fact that the audience would see Ken wired up to a lot of machines
would also underline his complete helplessness, as does the fact that
he relies totally on other people for bodily hygiene, e.g. John, a
member of the hospital staff, coming to shave him. Ken says to John
"Well my gardening friend isn't it about time you got fertiliser to
sprinkle on me and get some movement going in this plant?" This shows
the audience that even Ken himself knows that he is helpless and
relies on other people completely. This makes us pity him and feel
even stronger for his wanting to ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
would also underline his complete helplessness, as does the fact that
he relies totally on other people for bodily hygiene, e.g. John, a
member of the hospital staff, coming to shave him. Ken says to John
"Well my gardening friend isn't it about time you got fertiliser to
sprinkle on me and get some movement going in this plant?" This shows
the audience that even Ken himself knows that he is helpless and
relies on other people completely. This makes us pity him and feel
even stronger for his wanting to die.
One particular scene will give the audience a mixture of
emotions, but nevertheless, make them empathise with Ken and back him
even more. When Dr Emerson, the Consultant at the hospital, and the
man who has the final say on Ken's behalf, comes to see Ken and
attempts to give him an injection containing Valium, a chemical which
will dim Ken's mind and slow down his brain activity, Ken makes his
wishes crystal clear that he does not want Emerson to inject him.
Emerson, however, completely ignores Ken's refusal to be injected and
inserts the needle in his arm. "Dr Emerson, I'm afraid I must insist
that you do not stick that needle in me." To which Emerson replies "I
think not, you do not even know what is in this syringe."Dr Emerson is
not listening to Ken and is not taking on board what Ken wants. He
thinks that his own judgement is the best one and is unquestionable.
This prejudices the audience against Emerson, who represents the
medical staff. It makes us feel more strongly towards Ken and more
coldly towards the medical staff. Ken's helplessness is again
demonstrated here as the only way he can attempt to prevent Emerson
injecting him, is verbally, which must be very frustrating as it
displays to the audience and to Ken just how vulnerable he really is.
Ken would feel a mixture of emotions at this point:
anger, that Emerson had not listened to what he wanted, frustration,
that he could not stop Emerson injecting him, and pity as this shows
he has no control over what happens to him, only other people do and
he is entirely under Emerson's power. After this scene the audience
will have empathised with Ken fully and will be irritated at Emerson
for not listening to his patient. He is being disrespectful to Ken and
this is proved in the injection incident. He is arrogant and assumes
he is always right. This is shown in a number of situations and it is
not only obvious to the audience, but to Ken as well. Ken refers to
Emerson as `God' a number of times and shows the other medical staff
what he thinks of Emerson. "I suppose he will sweep in here like Zeus
from Olympus, with his attendant nymphs and swains." Emerson is
obstinate about his medical ethics and nothing will go against them,
he believes in them above anything and he makes sure everyone knows
this. During a conversation with Dr Scott, he says "No, Clare, a
doctor cannot accept the choice for death; he's committed to life.
When a patient is brought into my unit, he's in a bad way. I don't
stand about thinking whether or not it's worth saving his life, I
haven't the time for doubts. I get in there, do whatever I can to save
a life." Emerson is very arrogant and believes that he is faultless
and does not like it if someone tries to stand in his way or questions
his medical knowledge. So, when Dr Scott questions what Emerson is
doing and shows that she is not fully behind him, Emerson lets Scott
know just what he thinks of her and threatens her. "Mr Harrison is now
physically stable. There is no reason why he should die; if he should
die suddenly, I would think it necessary to order a post-mortem and to
act on whatever was found." Here Emerson is saying to Scott that if
Ken dies, he will suspect her as she has turned her back on him and
gone to Ken's side. Emerson is very two-faced and is only satisfied if
things are going his way. If people don't go along with him he becomes
nasty and makes their lives difficult.
Emerson likes to have things his own way, and will do
anything to get it, including sneaking around and not doing things by
the book. When Emerson learns he needs two psychiatrists to sign a
form to keep Ken in hospital and only has one who will sign, he asks
Dr Travers, the psychiatrist he already has on his side, to find him
another one who he knows will already agree to sign without even
seeing Ken. "And.....do me a favour, will you? Try and find an old
codger like me, who believes in something better than suicide."
Emerson is not giving Ken a fair `trial' and not giving
him a chance to prove his sanity. He is putting Ken in a
`catch-twenty-two' situation where he cannot win no matter how hard he
tries. This shows how sneaky Emerson is and just how far he will go to
get his own way. The audience will not like Emerson's attitude at this
point and will be on Ken's side.
Emerson is also a dedicated doctor who works hard for his
job and is always aiming to improve the state of his work place. We
can tell this through a conversation between him and Dr Scott. When Dr
Emerson tells Dr Scott he has a committee meeting to go to she says "I
thought you hated those." He replies, "I do, but there's a new heart
monitoring unit I want...very much indeed." This shows Emerson is
willing to do things that he doesn't like in order to improve the
hospital and also cares a lot about the patients. His kindness is
shown once again at the end of the play, after Ken has been allowed
the right to die. Emerson asks Ken where he will go in his last few
days and when Ken tells him he plans to get a room somewhere Emerson
says "There's no need. We'll stop treatment, remove the drips. Stop
feeding if you like." Here Emerson is showing Ken his kind side, and,
although Emerson is still holding on to hopes that Ken will change his
mind, he wants Ken to be in a familiar environment, with people he
knows for his last few days.
Emerson is what is called a `functional character'. Clark
is again prejudicing his audience not only through what we see but now
by whom we see and the way the people we see act. A functional
character is a character in a play that is there to serve a purpose,
to persuade the audience into a certain way of thinking or to
demonstrate something to an audience. There are a number of functional
characters in `Whose Life Is It Anyway?' Emerson is one of the main
functional characters. Ken also plays a big role in being a functional
character, putting across a lot of thoughts and feelings to the
audience.
Ken is strong willed and determined and fully believes in
what he is fighting for, which makes the audience believe in him and
back him up a lot more than if, for example, he was only half-hearted
towards his fight and wasn't really bothered whether he won or lost.
"I know that our hospitals are wonderful. I know that many people have
succeeded in making good lives with appalling handicaps. I'm happy for
them and respect and admire them. But each man must make his own
decision. And mine is to die quietly and with as much dignity as I can
muster." Here, Ken puts across his argument clearly, and with feeling,
which makes the audience have confidence in him and empathise with
him.
Ken is also clever and witty and has a way with words. He
can turn around what people are saying, and twist their words. For
example, when he is talking to Emerson and he is not giving Ken any
straight answers. Ken wants to know if he will have to be hospitalised
for the rest of his life but Emerson keeps fobbing Ken off with
medical jargon. "You mean you only grow the vegetables here-the
vegetable store is somewhere else." Ken is twisting Emerson's words to
get what he wants; he is using his wittiness to get Emerson to admit
the real situation to him.
Ken is also clever in the way he speaks because he can
present himself very eloquently and persuasively. For example, when he
is putting his case forward to the judge. "It's a question of dignity.
Look at me here. I can do nothing, not even the basic primitive
functions. I cannot even urinate; I have a permanent catheter attached
to me. Every few days my bowels are washed out. Every few hours two
nurses have to turn me over or I would rot away from bedsores. Only my
brain functions unimpaired but even that is futile because I can't act
on any conclusions it comes to. This hearing proves that." Ken has a
way of asking thought provoking, rhetorical questions and making
people see his way of thinking.
Ken's function in the play is mainly to put across the
arguments for assisted suicide and to show an audience what it is like
to be in Ken's position. Ken shows the frustrations and daily
indignities of a person who is severely paralysed. Ken also adds some
humour to the play, between the intense scenes so the play is easier
to watch for the audience. When asked if his bed is comfortable enough
Ken replies, "Sister, it's so beautifully made, I can't feel a thing."
This humour is funny but tragic at the same time, making the audience
laugh but also feel sorry for Ken.
Ken is in the play to persuade people for assisted suicide, whereas
the medical staff are there to show it is not all a black and white
issue, and it's a hard case for them, too.
Mrs Boyle, another highly functional character, is only
seen once in the play, but serves a great purpose. Mrs Boyle, really,
represents people in general. She reacts to Ken in a way, that, if we
think about it, the majority of us would react to a person who was
severely disabled. Mrs Boyle doesn't set out to deliberately offend
Ken, but just her mannerisms and patronising ways annoy Ken, because,
she isn't talking to him like he's a normal adult and regards him as
more of a child, who needs humouring. "Try not to dwell on it. I'll
see what I can do to get you on some occupational therapy. Perhaps we
could start on the reading the machines."
Mrs Boyle treats Ken in the way most people treat him, by
ignoring him when he says something awkward or serious, or by changing
the subject. This is not surprising as Mrs Boyle herself feels
uncomfortable and awkward around Ken, as he can be manipulating when
he's angry and quite rude at times. This is typical of how most people
would feel around a paralysed person, and that is the function or Mrs
Boyle, to show the audience that this is how most paralysed people are
treated, even if they are completely sound of mind, like Ken is. This
makes Ken annoyed as he is not being treated as the mature adult he
is. "All you people have the same technique. When I say something
really awkward you just pretend I haven't said anything at all!" Mrs
Boyle prejudices the audience in favour of Ken but also shows how
frustrating it is for disabled people when other people do not treat
them as equal.
Mrs Boyle has a physical and emotional impact on both the
audience and Ken. She makes Ken feel angry, gets him wound up, and
makes him pity himself even more when she proves to him that that is
just how most people would treat him, as if he wasn't equal to
everyone else, even though his brain functions perfectly. The fact
that she gets Ken so angry makes him start to hyperventilate and this
would be quite a drastic thing to happen on stage and the audience
would see Ken struggling to breathe. We can tell this is quite a bad
situation for Ken to be in as the stage directions after Mrs Boyle
leaves are "SISTER hurries in to KEN. He is very distressed, rocking
his head from side to side, desperately short of breath." Also Mrs
Boyle makes has an impact on the audience as well. She makes them
think about how they would react around a person in Ken's situation
and allows them to see how a disabled person really feels when people
treat them less equally than they should be treated.
The constant love affair we see between John and Nurse
Sadler also is a part of the play to provide some humour to what is a
very controversial play with a subject like euthanasia as its topic,
which is so intense. The audience need some light humour to be able to
cope with all the heavy-handed issues in the play, and this is
provided by John, with the help of Nurse Sadler.
John also puts across another one of the key arguments for
assisted suicide. He is the only person who speaks openly to Ken, and
who isn't afraid to discuss the real issues surrounding Ken's
positions. During a conversation with Nurse Sadler he says, "How much
does it cost to keep him here? Hundreds of pounds a week." "In Africa
children die of measles. It would cost only a few pounds to keep them
alive. There's something crazy somewhere." Only John would be able to
raise these kinds of points as he sees Ken as a real person and is
able to discuss such controversial issues openly without feeling
uncomfortable like everyone else in the play does. He also talks to
Ken about his quality of life and asks Ken what the point of him
staying alive is if the quality of life he is leading is next to none.
This prejudices the audience as it brings in some of the issues that
otherwise would not be brought up as all the other characters in the
play are to afraid to discuss such matters.
The use of expletives throughout `Whose Life Is It
Anyway?' would shock a 1970's audience, as using `swear words' so
freely was not something that was done thirty years ago. The
expletives, however, are not merely there for the sake of it: they
serve a purpose. Using strong language displays Ken's helplessness and
his need to express himself in the absence of working limbs. They show
his frustration at his situation and his anger at nobody being able to
help him.
However, Ken's constant use of expletives is not always a
good thing. The regular swearing would possibly offend an audience
thirty years ago and would certainly make them uncomfortable. "Christ
Almighty, you're doing it again. Listen to yourself, woman!"
Ken may go down in the audience's opinion because of his swearing,
they may think less of him because he can find no other way of
expressing his feelings, or releasing his frustration. Ken can also be
inconsiderate to other people's feelings at times, as is shown when he
makes reference to his fiancée. When asked if he had any family who
came to see him he casually replies "A fiancée actually. I asked her
not to visit me anymore. About a fortnight ago." This doesn't sound
like Ken has given much consideration for his fiancée and makes him
some across as uncaring and selfish. He also has a nasty habit of
letting his bitterness get the better of him and taking it out on
innocent people, such as Nurse Sadler. "Because in an hour's time
you'll be bringing around a little white pill that is designed to
insert rose coloured filters behind my eyes. It will calm me and
soothe me and make me forget for a while that you have a lovely body."
Ken's sarcasm can have a horrible affect on people that have done
absolutely nothing to Ken, such as Nurse Sadler, and Ken's
incapability to control his outbursts make people resent him. Another
example of Ken's bitterness getting the better of him is during an
incident with Dr Scott, whereupon he remarks on her breasts. "You have
lovely breasts" Here Ken is being bitter about his situation and is
trying to make Scott feel bad and embarrass her. "I watch you walking
in the room, bending over me, tucking in your sweater. It's surprising
how relaxed a woman can become when she is not in the presence of a
man." This is unfair of Ken and he is being very nasty towards Dr
Scott when she has done nothing to provoke him.
This also is an example of Ken's sexual innuendo. His
openness to discuss sexual matters so freely may also offend a 1970's
audience, as sexual matters were not so openly discussed thirty years
ago. Ken's constant references to sex and masturbating would make an
audience thirty years ago uncomfortable and dislike Ken's attitude
toward it. "From where I'm lying, if you can make it at all-even with
your right hand-it would be heaven." Ken may be frowned upon by the
audience for talking like this, and it may not be expected of somebody
in his condition. He does this because he is desperate to prove to
everyone that he is still a man and still thinks and feels like a man,
despite being paralysed. He wants to prove this point because the
charters in the play, Mrs Boyle in particular, forget this fact so
easily and treat him as a child, which angers Ken immensely.
It is not only Ken who has offensive language, but Emerson too.
Although the words he actually says are not offensive, the purposes in
which he uses them are. For example his constant use of medical jargon
to fob Ken off when he wants some straight answers will frustrate Ken
and also anger the audience because Emerson isn't keeping Ken informed
on his situation. When Ken wants to know what his chances of ever
walking again are, Emerson will not tell him straight and keeps
avoiding his questions. "It's impossible to say with any certainty
what the prognosis of any case is." This is another case where
language is being used to prejudice the audience for assisted suicide
because here Clark is making the audience resent Emerson for not being
fair with Ken and not treating him as an equal.
Ken's language, whilst he is putting his case across to
the judge to try and persuade him to allow him the right to be
discharged from the hospital to die, is very thought-provoking and
compelling. He puts feeling behind his words and really makes people
believe that what he is fighting for is right. "Then that proves my
point; not just the fact that I will spend the rest of my life in
hospital, but that whilst I am here, everything is geared just to
keeping my brain active, with no real possibility of it ever being
able to direct anything. As far as I can see, that is an act of
deliberate cruelty." When Ken puts his case across he is not just
making passing comments, he believes fully in what he is saying and
composes himself both clearly and cleverly. Language is used a lot
with the characters in `Whose Life Is It Anyway' to express the two
very different sides of assisted suicide.
The overall effect Clark wants `Whose Life Is It Anyway?'
to have on its audience is a general feeling that assisted suicide
should be legal and he wants his audience to go away with a positive
view of it, rather than a negative one. This is the reason for Clark
using such a variety of devices to prejudice his audience for
euthanasia, so he gets the outcome he aims for. However, Clark is not
totally prejudiced and makes sure the audience get to see that there
is two sides to the story, mainly through Dr Scott, who at the start
of the play does not support Ken's decision to want to die but as she
becomes gradually more and more involved with him and his case she
changes her mind as is torn between her medical ethics and the way she
feels for Ken. She demonstrates what a hard job it is for people in
the positions of doctors to have to deal with issues such as
euthanasia. The play also portrays the way assisted suicide can affect
people around the person who needs help to die. Act one is very much
to get the audience on Ken's side, although we only find out the bare
minimum about his situation, we see plenty of evidence that will make
us become completely in favour of Ken. During Act two, however, we get
have an insight into the difficult situation the doctors are in. This
is done deliberately by the writer so that the first impression the
audience gets of the situation is totally on Ken's side, and has to be
challenged by the medical staff's point of view, as apposed to Ken's
argument, having to challenge the medical staff. Mainly Clark does
want a general feeling that euthanasia should be legalised and this is
the overall effect Clark wants `Whose Life Is It Anyway?' to have on
its audience.
I think that in `Whose Life Is It Anyway?' Clark
definitely prejudices his audiences into thinking `for' euthanasia and
assisted suicide but not in a totally biased way. He puts across his
point of view but also puts across the opposing point of view, albeit
a lot less strongly. We get pushed into backing Ken because that is
Clark's point of view and that is what he wants us to think. Certain
characters in the play are purposely made to be more likable, or
dislikeable, for example Ken is a very likable who we warm to and
empathise with, whereas Emerson is intentionally irritating so that we
agree with assisted suicide because of our partiality to Ken. Certain
things Emerson does are deliberately involved in the play to prejudice
us against him, i.e. the injection where he ignores Ken and passes of
everything he says with medical jargon. "Of course not; it's perfectly
natural. Your body received massive injuries; it takes time to come to
any acceptance of the new situation. Now I shan't be a minute..."
Certain qualities Emerson has serve to prejudice us into
disliking him. For example, the way he never listens to anyone else's
opinions, least of all his patients, whom he looks upon as if they are
`under' him, and they way he thinks he is unquestionable. "But you
can't decide that." He makes decisions without consulting anyone else,
or even listening to what they think.
Ken, however, has the opposite effect. He has many nice
qualities, such as his humour, despite his situation. "Have me on the
floor Sister, please. Have me on the floor." Also we empathise with
him, and the situation he is in and the audience is very prejudiced to
warm to Ken and support him because of these qualities he possesses.
In "Whose Life Is It Anyway?" the characters and visual
aids prejudice the audience for euthanasia and assisted suicide, but
Clark does present the arguments for and against this issue using
these two aids.
