Mother Courage And Her Children
Essay Preview: Mother Courage And Her Children
Report this essay
“Mother Courage and her Children”, by Bertolt Brecht, is a play which can be seen from varying perspectives. Some consider it to be a comment on the socio-economic aspects of war, others as a criticism of bourgeois capitalism intended to encourage change in modern society. The somewhat tragic events of the play enable critics to consider it a “tragedy”, but one which, to some extent, diverges from the Aristotelian definition. Aristotle believed that tragedy must revolve around a central character: the “tragic hero”, on whom the plot focuses and who exhibits certain characteristics, which leads to his, though in this particular case, her, downfall. The role of such a figure is pivotal to the presentation of a play as a tragedy; yet it remains largely unclear with which character within the play this identity lies: Mother Courage herself, or her daughter, Kattrin.
Perhaps the most obvious potential tragic figure is the lead character within the play: Mother Courage. She demonstrates an ability to survive, through which the audience recognizes her strength of character and instinct of self-preservation. This links closely with her sense of capitalism, which she prioritizes over alternative, more virtuous qualities presented within the play, such as Swiss Cheeses honesty and Kattrins selflessness. Mother Courages rigid capitalist stance can be interpreted as her “tragic flaw”, or “hamartia”, the term Aristotle uses to describe the mistake leading to the protagonists downfall. It is a flaw that Mother Courage consistently exhibits and a mistake which occurs thrice in the deaths of her children, as she is absent conducting business on all three occasions. However, despite her apparent detachment towards her children, it is evident that Mother Courage harbours genuine concern for the well-being of her children: in a discussion with Cook over future prospects, she states, “all Im after is (to) get meself and children through all this with my cart”.
In the juxtaposition created by the reluctant combination of the roles of the mother and the tradeswoman, it is perhaps foremost a tragic contradiction within Mother Courages character, rather than her role as a tragic heroine, that is emphasized. Alternatively, this contrast could be interpreted as an indication that Mother Courage is morally “neither all good nor all bad”, a quality which Aristotle states as necessary in a tragic hero. Her intention of and attempt at providing for and protecting her family by her existence as a “hyena of the battlefield” is essentially good, yet it is in fact this very existence which brings about the deaths of her children and her own downfall.
According to Aristotle, the audience must witness the tragic hero undeservedly suffer great misfortune. Although the audience disapproves of Mother Courage and her attitudes, we are not presented with a feasible alternative. She is forced into living as a parasite of war by her socio-economic status: she is simply trying to provide for her family and the only crime she commits is the utilization of her gift of tradesmanship. Mother Courages misfortunes are presented as the deaths of her children, which are caused by each individuals sole virtue, so are, in effect, undeserved by Mother Courage. An element of tragedy is removed from the play as Mother Courage does not appear to experience suffering as a result of these losses. However, this does not prevent the evocation of pity from the audience, a key factor of tragedy, as we still perceive her as a consequential victim of the social and economic context; though the magnitude of this pity is significantly reduced, and it is of a more detached quality, than if the play were presented in a more emotive style.
The downfall of Mother Courage is far from orthodox in Aristotelian terms. Whereas a tragic hero would conventionally die as a result of a reversal of fortune, Mother Courage is the sole survivor of her unwavering exploits. In addition, Mother Courages actions in the final scene prove that she has learned nothing: she pays little attention to the death of her daughter and the play closes with her attitude of “Got to get back to business again”. The absence of catharsis is a direct result of Brechts alienation technique: rather than targeting the audiences emotions, Brecht focuses on increasing the audiences awareness of an aspect of society which is unjust in order to provoke change by appealing to their reasoning above their feelings and thus it would be uncharacteristic of Mother Courage to purge herself of emotion. Through her insouciance, it becomes clear that Mother Courage does not possess enough virtue to be considered even remotely heroic. This renders her distinctly dislikeable. Although many tragic heroes, such as Arthur Millers Willy Loman and Shakespeares Macbeth, may not always appear moral and righteous, there is a significant and permanent lack of compassion on the part of Mother Courage, which is displayed in Lomans suicide to provide for his family and Macbeths relationship with his wife, which hinders her status as a tragic heroine. Loman also demonstrates that, due to the effect of time and social development upon Aristotles theory, the circumstances of the “common man” can be tragic, a principle which certainly applies to Mother Courage, despite Aristotles favour towards “noble” tragic heroes, such as Macbeth.
By contrast, humanity and compassion are Kattrins upstanding qualities. This is poignantly demonstrated in Scene Five when Kattrin selflessly “dashes” into the ruins of a house to rescue a baby, while her mother refuses to donate linen to help the injured peasants claiming “IÐŽ got to think of meself”. Kattrins personality is antithetical to that