MOTILAL NEHRU COLLEGE

(UNIVERSITY OF DELHI)

ASSIGNMENT
MODERN EUROPEAN DRAMA

NAME- ANWESHA
SHARMA ROLL NO.-
ENH22035 SEMESTER-
6
COURSE- BA. HONS ENGLISH
QUESTION 1- Critically analyze Chaplain and Yvette in Mother Courage and
Her Children.

ANSWER- Bertolt Brecht’s Mother Courage and Her Children is a landmark of epic
theatre that powerfully critiques war, capitalism, and human behavior. Two of the most
significant secondary characters in the play, the Chaplain and Yvette, play vital roles in
deepening its themes and messages. Each represents different ways individuals attempt to
survive in the chaos of war. The Chaplain, a former religious figure stripped of his clerical
role, becomes a symbol of the Church’s moral collapse during wartime. Yvette, a camp
prostitute, represents the commodification of love and the harsh reality faced by women in
a society dominated by war and commerce. Together, they reflect how people are shaped
—and often compromised—by the circumstances of conflict.

The Chaplain, who is never given a personal name, has lost his religious authority due to
the war and now travels alongside Mother Courage, offering practical help in return for
food and shelter. Rather than being a moral guide, he uses religious language to justify
violence and self-interest. His sermons, instead of offering comfort or critique, validate
war as part of divine will, exposing Brecht’s criticism of how religion can be used to
manipulate and control. The Chaplain’s behavior is marked by opportunism; he shifts his
views and alliances based on what benefits him at the moment. Although he occasionally
expresses disapproval of Mother Courage’s war profiteering, he quickly adapts to her way
of life when it proves convenient. This inconsistency reveals his lack of true conviction
and aligns with Brecht’s Marxist critique of institutions that serve power rather than
people.

Despite his religious background, the Chaplain lacks real moral strength. His dependence
on Mother Courage and his unfulfilled romantic interest in her underscore his
vulnerability. While he longs for emotional connection, she remains focused on survival
and commerce. His passivity and emotional neediness contrast with her resilience and
pragmatism, reinforcing the image of religion as ineffective in addressing real-world
suffering. The Chaplain ultimately becomes a figure of irrelevance—clinging to outdated
beliefs while the world around him is dictated by profit and survival.

Yvette Pottier, by contrast, approaches survival from a more transactional angle. She first
appears as a lively, seductive woman who sings the “Fraternization Song,” a tune that
superficially celebrates love but is steeped in irony and bitterness. Her experiences have
taught her that relationships, particularly in times of war, are not about emotion but about
economic necessity. She uses her appearance and charm to get by, fully aware that love
and affection are luxuries few can afford. Through her, Brecht illustrates how deeply
human connection has been devalued in a world shaped by capitalism and conflict.
Later in the play, Yvette reemerges as a wealthy woman, having married a colonel. Her
transformation symbolizes the rewards that come from surrendering personal autonomy
for financial gain. Though now dressed in fine clothes and enjoying a higher status, she
has not found genuine fulfillment. Instead, her new role underscores the cost of survival
for women in a patriarchal, war-driven society. Her success feels hollow, built on a
system that objectifies her and strips her of agency. Brecht uses her journey to critique
how society forces women to commodify themselves just to survive.

The relationship between Yvette and Mother Courage is also telling. Although both are
women trying to endure the brutality of war, they do so in different ways. Mother
Courage profits from selling goods to soldiers, while Yvette uses her body as a means of
survival.
Despite Courage’s judgmental attitude toward Yvette’s lifestyle, the two are more similar
than different. Courage is quick to condemn Yvette’s choices, yet fails to see how her
own actions are equally driven by self-interest. Yvette thus acts as a reflection of
Courage’s own compromises and the hypocrisy embedded in her belief that she can stay
morally clean while benefiting from war.

Chaplain and Yvette also serve as contrasts to one another. The Chaplain represents the
spiritual or ideological dimension, albeit a corrupted one, while Yvette embodies the
physical and material aspects of wartime life. While Chaplain clings to outdated beliefs
and talks of divine purpose, Yvette deals in immediate, bodily reality. Both have been cast
adrift by the war, and both find ways to adapt—one through rhetoric and dependency, the
other through calculated decisions and self-presentation. Their differing paths highlight
Brecht’s view that war forces people into roles that distort their values and identities.
Neither is portrayed as purely good or bad; rather, they illustrate the murky choices
people must make in extreme circumstances.

The play also uses these characters to explore gender in wartime. Although the Chaplain
is a man with a once-respected position, he is portrayed as weak and ineffective. Yvette,
a marginalized woman, is shown to be more resourceful and in control of her destiny.
This reversal challenges traditional gender norms, highlighting Brecht’s political intent to
disrupt societal assumptions. Importantly, Brecht does not ask the audience to sympathize
with these characters blindly. His use of the alienation effect encourages viewers to
observe them critically, recognizing the systems that shape their choices.

In the end, the Chaplain and Yvette are crucial to the ideological structure of Mother
Courage and Her Children. They represent different but equally compromised ways of
surviving in a world dominated by war and capitalism. Through the Chaplain, Brecht
critiques the failure of religion to provide moral guidance in times of crisis. Through
Yvette, he exposes the social and economic pressures that force individuals, especially
women, to commodify themselves. Their relationships with Mother Courage—and their
contrasting approaches to survival—highlight the central message of the play: that war
distorts values, erodes ideals, and turns human life into a matter of transaction and
endurance. Neither character offers easy answers, but both compel the audience to
confront uncomfortable truths about complicity, resilience, and the price of staying alive
in a broken world.

QUESTION 2- Justify the title, Rhinoceros, supporting your answer with

examples from the text.

ANSWER- Eugène Ionesco’s Rhinoceros is a key work in the Theatre of the Absurd that
uses its unusual title to convey deep symbolic meaning. At first, the idea of naming a play
Rhinoceros might seem strange or even humorous, but as the narrative unfolds, it
becomes clear that the rhinoceros serves as a powerful metaphor for mass conformity, the
loss of individual identity, and the rise of oppressive ideologies. The transformation of
people into rhinoceroses throughout the play represents how easily individuals can
abandon their morals and critical thinking when influenced by social or political
pressures. Through bizarre imagery, escalating absurdity, and symbolic storytelling,
Ionesco critiques the human tendency to give in to collective thinking at the cost of
personal integrity.

The play begins with the unexpected appearance of a rhinoceros running through a quiet
town, causing panic and disruption. What seems like a random and absurd incident
gradually reveals itself to be a metaphor for something far more alarming: people are
actually turning into rhinoceroses. This transformation isn't treated as a physical anomaly
but as a form of ideological infection. One by one, the characters undergo this change,
both physically and mentally, illustrating how individuals can surrender their humanity in
exchange for power, security, or belonging.

The rhinoceros becomes a clear symbol of conformity. Initially, many characters are
horrified by the transformations, but over time they begin to accept—and even embrace—
becoming part of the herd. Jean, a character who starts off as Berenger’s rational and
confident friend, initially condemns the rhinoceroses but later becomes one himself. His
transformation is significant because it shows that even those who appear intelligent and
morally sound can fall under the influence of mass ideology. Jean’s change into a
rhinoceros suggests that no one is entirely immune to the pressures of the collective.

This idea is particularly poignant considering the historical context in which Ionesco
wrote the play. He was deeply disturbed by the rise of fascism and communism in Europe
and the way people—many of them intellectuals—quickly aligned themselves with
totalitarian regimes. The rhinoceros, then, is a metaphor for how people can become
dehumanized when they stop thinking for themselves and begin to follow ideology
blindly. The play shows that such transformation affects not just beliefs, but the very
essence of who a person is.

The central character, Berenger, represents the individual who resists this wave of
conformity. At the beginning of the play, he seems like an unlikely hero—disheveled,
insecure, and socially disconnected. However, as everyone around him becomes a
rhinoceros, including his love interest Daisy and his friend Jean, Berenger begins to stand
apart. His refusal to join the herd is not based on a grand ideological stance but on a
deeply personal need to remain human. Despite his flaws, he ultimately chooses to hold
onto his identity, crying out, “I’m not capitulating!” at the end. This marks his
transformation from a passive figure to someone who chooses individualism over the
comfort of conformity.

The destruction caused by the rhinoceroses is also telling. They rampage through the
town, causing chaos and even death. This destruction reflects how dangerous collective
ideologies can become when they are followed without question. One of the characters,
Dudard, tries to justify their behavior, suggesting that perhaps their way of life isn’t so
different. This reflects how people often rationalize violence or injustice when it comes
from those in power or from the majority. Through this, Ionesco criticizes the way
society tends to excuse harmful behavior in order to maintain unity or avoid conflict.

The choice of a rhinoceros, rather than a more traditionally symbolic animal like a wolf or
lion, adds a layer of absurdity that is central to the play’s message. The idea of people
turning into giant, horned beasts is ridiculous, but that absurdity highlights how illogical
and surreal real-life conformity can feel. Ionesco uses humor and strangeness to force the
audience to see familiar social patterns in a new and unsettling way. The rhinoceros is
funny and terrifying at the same time—a perfect image of how mass movements can strip
people of their humanity while seeming oddly normal.

What makes the title even more effective is its universality. The play takes place in a non-
specific town with no defined culture or nation, which makes the rhinoceros a symbol that
applies across societies. The title suggests that the dangers of conformity and
authoritarianism are not confined to one place or time—they are ever-present and can
appear anywhere. Ionesco implies that anyone, anywhere, can become a rhinoceros under
the right conditions, making the metaphor all the more chilling.

The simplicity of the title Rhinoceros also mirrors the overwhelming force of the
transformation in the play. Once the change begins, it dominates everything, leaving little
room for nuance or complexity. The rhinoceros becomes a totalizing force, just like the
ideologies it represents. The fact that the play is named after this creature shows how
central this metaphor is to the story’s meaning. It is a warning, a symbol, and a summary
of the play’s core theme: that the greatest threat to humanity may be the urge to stop
thinking and start following.

In summary, Rhinoceros is a title that perfectly encapsulates the play’s message. It

reflects the absurdity, danger, and pervasiveness of mass conformity and the ease with
which people can surrender their individuality. Through the character transformations, the
chaos caused by the rhinoceroses, and Berenger’s final stand, Ionesco urges the audience
to recognize the value of independent thought and moral courage. The rhinoceros
becomes a symbol of everything that threatens those values—mindless power, blind
ideology, and the loss of personal integrity. By choosing such a unique and memorable
image for the title, Ionesco leaves a lasting impression, encouraging reflection on how
easily people can be swept up in destructive movements, and how vital it is to resist, even
if one must stand alone.