\chapter{Verbal communication}
The main form of communication between dramatic figures is verbal
. It is therefore quite appropriate to include a chapter on
this form of communication. The main forms of verbal communication are
monologue and dialogue (polylogue). If we take a closer look at verbal
communication we find that in contrast with what we intuitively think,
there are, within dialogue, always at least {\em two} senders and at least {\em one} receiver.
\begin{figure}
\caption{Dialogue}
\label{dialdiag1}
\center{\input{diagcom.tex}}
\end{figure}

From diagram~\ref{dialdiag1} we see that the author and ${\rm P}_1$ form the senders and ${\rm P}_2$
and the audience form the receivers. This diagram needs only small
modifications in to simulate a monologue (one receiver instead of
two). Or as, Muka\v{r}ovsk\'y writes: 
\begin{quotation}
Dramatic speech is semantically much more complex \ldots because there
is yet another factor: the audience. This means that to all the direct
participants of the dialogue\footnote{Or verbal communication in
general} is added another participant silent but important, for
everything which is said in a dramatic dialogue is orientated towards
him affecting his consciousness.\footnote{J. Muka\v{r}ovsk\'y {\em The
Word and Verbal Art}, 80}
\end{quotation}

Therefore, a dramatic speech does not only have at least one recipient,
it always has two expressive subjects. The common habit of confusing the
two expressive subjects in such a manner equating an utterance by a
dramatic figure with the proverbial word of authorial wisdom, coupled
with the corresponding tendency of authors to transform a character into
a 'mouthpiece' for their own opinions and views, a habit which is common
in the {\em drame a th\`ese}, only proves that this distinction exists.
In naturalist plays like such as Ibsen's, the author tries to
eliminate all references to himself whereas the wit expressed in an Oscar-Wilde-comedy draws the audience's attention to the author
immediately.

Dramatic speech differs from normal speech in a number of ways. The most
substantial differences are the use of novel or unusual word formations,
archaisms, rhetorical stylization and the use of meter. I should add that
not all of these differences need to be found in one play. 

Language may also characterize a figure. In Bond's original
play, for instance:
\begin{quotation}
\label{iamb1}
All the speeches of the Judge, Todd and the two young lovers are
written in iambic meter, and the lower class characters are given
non-metered dialogue. This produces a very subtle effect when you read
the play. Beyond the formality of diction, there is a kind of
stateliness in some of the characters that creates an odd juxtaposition
with the rag-tag rhythms in the lower class figures\footnote{Sondheim
"Larger than Life: Reflections on Melodrama and Sweeney Todd" in {\em
Melodrama} ed. D. Gerald New York Literary Forum, 1980, p.3-14}
\end{quotation}
This is one of the many subtle ways to characterize a figure. I shall discuss
the use of music in characterizing a figure in a later section.
\section{The functions of speech and language}

Language has many functions, far too many for me to describe here to understand
those deployed in our play, it is imperative for us to refine our
communication model(see figure~\ref{diagcom} on p.~\pageref{diagcom}).
\begin{figure}
\caption{communication model of verbal communication (from Pfister)}
\label{diagcom}
\input{extcom.tex}
\end{figure}

The establishment of communication of any kind does not depend solely upon
the presence of a sender and recipient. A channel is also required. A
channel is the physical {\em and} psychological connection between sender
and recipient. The presence of a message is also required. A message is a
complex of signs transmitted through the channel. And there is off course the need
for a (common) code which enables both the sender and the receiver to en- or
decode the message. In doing so the content is revealed. 

It must be noted that the sender's and recipient's code(s) are identical only in an ideal situation. In
reality, they overlap, to a greater or
lesser extent. Hence, the content decoded by the recipient is not
identical with the content which the sender encoded in the message. And the
message itself may be distorted by the channel's own noise. 

Each of the positions in figure~\ref{diagcom}, namely sender, recipient,
message, channel, code and content, corresponds with a communicative
function of speech. The emotive or expressive function is linked with
the sender. The appellative or 'conative' function  which is used to
influence the receiver, is linked to the receiver. The referential
function is linked to the content and the poetic function which refers
back reflexively to the specific essences and structures of the sign
corresponds with the message. The phatic function is used to create and
maintain communication is associated with the channel. And finally the
metalingual function is associated with the code. All of these functions are
clearly explained in the next figure:
\begin{figure}[ht]
\caption{The functions of language}
\centerline{\epsfysize=10cm\epsfbox{vb6.ps}}
\end{figure}

I must emphasize that all of these functions work in the internal {\em
as well as} the external communication systems. However, the function of a
particular speech has within the internal communication system is not
neccesarily the same as its counterpart in the external
communication system. In the following sections all these
function will be discussed in greater depth.
\subsection{Referential function}
This function figures strongly in the expository narrative, a
messenger's report and the teichoscopy. For an illustration of the use
of this function I will take a closer look at {\em Poor thing\footnote{Number
4 in the score}} in which the referential function dominates both the
external and internal communication systems. I'll discuss the structure
of the verbal communication in this song in the next
chapter.

\subsection{Expressive or emotive function}
\label{epi}
As I mentioned in the previous section, differing functions of speech
may occur in different amounts simultaneously. I can with a good degree
of certainty state that the emotive function is present in the
large majority of dramatic utterances.

The main characteristic of the expressive function is that it is
speaker-reflexive.
The speaker wants to articulate his own position so as to
clarify his own position it for himself, to justify his
actions or to reach a decision. The main projections within the dramatic
structure, where the expressive function predominates, are sudden
exclamations and soliloquy. The latter has an intrinsic element of
reflection and deliberation. 

An utterance always has an expressive function in the external
communication system even if this function does not dominate the
internal communication system. An example of this is {\em Poor Thing}.
An utterance with a predominantly expressive function does not
always change the dramatic situation; in some cases it is just a
clarification of the dramatic situation as seen from the viewpoint of a
certain figure. In other cases, it is as its name suggests, a display of
the emotions of a certain figure. A splendid example of the latter is
Macbeth's soliloquy after hearing his wife's suicide(V,v):
\begin{quotation}
To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,\\
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,\\
To the last syllable of recorded time;\\
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools\\
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!\\
Life's but a walking shadow; a poor player,\\
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,\\
And then is heard no more: it is a tale\\
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury\\
Signifying nothing\footnote{Shakespeare, W. {\em Macbeth} in ''The Complete Works of William
Shakespeare comprising his plays and poems'' ed. B. Hodek, Spring Books,
London}\\
\end{quotation}

Here the dramatic situation is not changed but the speaker (Macbeth
himself) displays his emotions. However if, in a predominantly expressive
speech, a decision is reached the dramatic situation is changed. And
example of this is the {\em Epiphany} from {\ST}. In this emotive speech,
Todd expresses his frustration and anger toward the rest of the world. And
during this outburst of emotion, he changes his plans: instead of wanting to kill one
 man, he now wants to kill all men. A more in-depth analysis can be found in
the next chapter.

\subsection{Appellative function}
This function is linked to the receiver and is therefore heavily
dependent on dialogue. The most characteristic forms of speeches with a
great deal of appellative content are imperatives or commands and acts of
persuasion. In most cases commands and imperatives are, from a textual
point of view, much shorter than the speeches in which some-one is
persuaded to do something or to think something. These two types of
appellative speeches have one thing in common: they change the dramatic
situation.

\label{lp1}
In {\ST} there are two major examples of this kind of speech: {\em
Pirelli's miracle elixir} and {\em A little Priest}. In this section
I'll discuss the latter because the former will be discussed in the
section on the phatic function.

In {\em A little Priest} Mrs. Lovett successfully convinces Todd that
it is better instead of throwing the bodies away to grind them so they
can be used in meat-pies. It is interesting to see how Todd accepts this
proposition, but seen in the light of the {\em Epiphany} this is not
strange. Mrs. Lovett's ideas just give Todd another reason to bring his
revenge on mankind.

It is sensible to look at the dramatic
situation. The dramatic situation is that Todd and Mrs. Lovett just
killed Pirelli and Mrs. Lovett is wondering how they could get rid of
the body. At the beginning of the song, just after Todd has sung the
{\em Epiphany}, {\em Todd drops down into the barber's chair in a
sweat\footnote{This last phrase is in the stage direction}}. And then th
e play continues as follows:
\begin{quotation}
{\sc MRS. LOVETT:} {\em (Who has been watching him intently)} That's all
very well, but all that matters now is him! {\em (She points to the
chest. Todd still sits motionless. She goes to him, peers at him)}
Listen! Do you hear me? Can you hear me? {\em (She slaps his cheek.
After a long pause Todd, still in a half dream, gets to his feet)} What
are we going to do about him? And there's the lad
downstairs\footnote{i.e. Tobias}. We'd better go and have a look and be
sure he's still there. When I left him he was sound asleep in the
parlor. {\em (She starts downstairs)} Come on! {\em (Todd follows. She
disappears into the back parlor and re-emerges)} No problem there. He's
still sleeping. He's simple as a baby lamb. Later I can fob him off
withe some story easy. But him! {\em (Indicates the tonsorial parlor
above)} What are we going to with him?\\
{\sc TODD:} {\em (Disinterestedly)} Later on when it's dark we'll take
him out of the trunk and bury him.\\
{\sc MRS. LOVETT:} Well, of course we could do that. I don't suppose
he's got any relatives going to come poking around looking for him.{\em
(After a pause. Music starts)} You know me. Sometime ideas just pop into
my head and I was\footnote{The OCR has here 'keep' instead of 'was'}
thinking.{\em (Sings)} Seems a downright shame.\\
{\sc TODD:}{\em (Spoken)} Shame?\\
{\sc MRS. LOVETT:} {\em Sung} Seems an awful waste\\
Such a nice plump frame\\
Wat's-'is-name has\ldots\\
had\ldots
Bus'ness needs a lift\\
Debts to be erased\\
Think of it as thrift\\
As a gift\\
If you get my drift\\
{\em (Todd is staring into space)}\\
{\em (Spoken)} No? {\em (Sighs)}
{\em (Sung)} Seems an awful waste\\
\end{quotation}
One of the things that struck me in this dialogue was the complete lack
of interest of both speakers in the person of Pirelli. Todd does not
really care what happens to the body and Mrs. Lovett can not even remember
the body's name. This lack of interest in one of the basic building stones
of this duet. On the other hand it can be argued that Todd's lack of
interest in the death of Pirelli is not strange when seen in the light of
the opinions he aired so strongly in the epiphany.

It has often been said that this number coming just after the {\em
Epiphany} deflates the dramatic tension built up during the previous
number. I do not share this criticism. From the perspective of dramatic
structure it is perfectly defendable to have such a seemingly
light-hearted song with such a morbid and vindictive undertone. Todd's
feelings are (ab)used by Mrs. Lovett for her own advantage. Seen from that
perspective {\em A Little Priest} is a logical consequence of the {\em
Epiphany}

One of the other misconceptions about this that Todd is the active party
. This of course is not the case. Mrs. Lovett apparently listened very
carefully to Todd while he sang the {\em Epiphany} and now tries to put
Todd's revengefulness to her own advantage. In that aspect she is not
unlike Lady MacBeth. And Todd being totally convinced of the
justice of his revenge is easily persuaded by Mrs. Lovett. 

We will now take a closer look at how this process of persuasion works in
this particular case. If we compare Mrs. Lovett's speech with a normal
rhetoric speech we will find at least some similarities, although the kind
of rhetoric employed by her, is quite crude. In a normal rhetoric
speech, the speaker begins with a so-called {\em inventio}. The {\em
inventio} is used to pose the problems. In this case there is one main
and one minor problem. The main problem is getting rid of the body. The
minor problem is the fact that Mrs. Lovett's pie-shop is not doing so
well so ''business needs a lift''. And in the course of the song, Mrs.
Lovett convinces Todd that one problem solves another.

After the {\em inventio} Mrs. Lovett immediately gives the solution:
\begin{quotation}
{\sc MRS. LOVETT:} I mean with the price of meat\\
What it is,\\
When you get it,\\
If you get it,\\
{\em (Todd chuckles)}\\
Good you got it.
\end{quotation}

Todd is showing some understanding of the direction Mrs. Lovett's words
are going. In the music we find the seduction motive. But Mrs. Lovett
isn't done clarifying herself:
\begin{quotation}
{\sc MRS. LOVETT:} Take for instance Mrs. Mooney and her pieshop\\
Bus'ness never better using only pussy-cats and toast\\
Now a pussy's good for maybe six or seven at the most\\
And I'm sure they can't compare as far taste\\
\end{quotation}

The seduction motive figures heavily in this section, both in normal and
in inverted form. In the the lyrics Mrs. Lovett finally makes a
connection between Pirelli's body and its use as ingredient in her
meat-pies. And Todd finally shows some real understanding of Mrs.
Lovett's plans:

\begin{tabular}{l l}\\
{\sc TODD} & {\sc MRS. LOVETT}\\
Mrs. Lovett & \\
What a charming notion & \\
Eminently & Well, it \\
Practical and yet & does seem a waste\\
appropriate as always\ldots & \\
 & {\em (Spoken)} It's an idea\\
Mrs. Lovett & \\
How I did without you & \\
all these years I'll never know & \\
\hspace{3cm} How de- & Think about it! \\
lectable & Lots of other gentlemen'll\\
 & soon be\\
\hspace{2cm} Also unde- & coming for a shave\\
tectable & Won't they? \\
How & Think of\\
choice!\hspace{1cm} How & all them\\
rare! &pies\ldots\\
\end{tabular}

We see that the two of them have different motives for executing the
same plan. In the music we find that the musical motives are partial
inversion of one another.

As I said, the rhetorical style is somewhat crude for it lacks, for
instance, something as sophisticated as a {\em refutatio}. No real
argument is needed, so they jump from the {\em inventio} right on to the
{\em confirmatio}. This confirmatio is formed by a stream of social
criticism, which although much milder than in the {\em Epiphany}, still
shows the despise Todd has for society in general:
\begin{quotation}
{\sc TODD:} For what's the sound of the world out there?\\
{\sc MRS. LOVETT:} What, Mister Todd?\\
What, Mister Todd?\\
What is that sound?\\
{\sc TODD:} Those crunching noises pervading the air?\\
{\sc MRS. LOVETT:} Yes, Mr. Todd,\\
Yes, Mr. Todd,\\
Yes, all around,\\
{\sc TODD:} It's man devouring men my dear\\
And\ldots\\
{\sc MRS. LOVETT:} Then\\
{\sc Together:} who are we to deny it in here?\\
\end{quotation}

What's this section in fact is saying is: ''If you can't beat them, join
them''.

Because this section is about the appellative function I shall not discuss
the rest of this duet.

Suffice it to say that the first part of {\em A
Little Priest} and the {\em Epiphany} have a strong functional
connection. A closer look at the very beginning of {\em A Little Priest}
reveals that Mrs. Lovett, in order to convince Todd, had to arouse and to
sustain his attention. The phatic function is related with the creation and
the establishment of channels of communication.
This function will form the subject of discussion in the next section.

\subsection{Phatic function}
The phatic function is associated with the channel between speaker
and listener. It is designed to create and sustain communication between
them. That is: creating the physical as well as the psychological
channel. Consequently, it is a function which relates back to both parties
in the communication-process. What is even more particular about this
function is that it can have various guises depending on whether it is
used in the external or the internal communication systems.

If we examine the use of the phatic function in the external
communication system, one could think of such obvious things as
advertising, or the use of titles that arouse interest. Maintaining the
audience's attention can be done by increasing the audience's involvement
in the play. This goal can be achieved by the build-up of suspense, the
use of epic communication structures leading to the possibility of the
audience's
identifying with one or more of the dramatic figures. In fact, the entire
{\em Ballad of Sweeney Todd} (at the beginning of the show) may be said to
be an example of this, with its haunting harmonies, punctuated by {\em Dies
Ir{\ae}}.

In many case the phatic function in the internal communication system 
overlaps with the use of appellative function. The phatic function is
used to create dialogical contact\footnote{I will discuss the various
forms of dialogue and monologue in one of the next sections.} between the
various figures. One of the dialogue partners is addressed in order to
ensure that communicative contact will occur or when he reacts to the
former's player utterances, thus confirming the communicative contact.
Phatic function becomes especially important in the wake of disrupted
communication, as contact first has to be established, or when
`maintaining' contact becomes the predominant or even the sole concern
of such communication. 

For an example of a speech with a high phatical content is {\em Pirelli's Miracle Elixir}.
I shall discuss it in greater depth in the next chapter.
 
\subsection{Metalingual function}
The metalingual function is associated with the code and is only present
in a latent form. It only steps into the foreground when the verbal
code used is implicitly or explicitly developed as a central theme. This
often stems from a disruption in the communication-process; for example,
if two different 'languages' are used of if two different codes within
one language are used\footnote{{\em My Fair Lady} by A.J Lerner and F.
Loewe, is a musical where the
metalingual function forms part of the subject matter.}. We have already
seen some fragments with a predominantly metalingual function in {\em
Pirelli's Miracle Elixir}, although it can be argued that because of the
somewhat peculiar communication structure in this song it could could be
defended that this song is a mixture of phatic, appellative and
metalingual function.

A better example of a dialogue having a predominantly metalingual
character is this rhyming ''game'' from {\em A Little Priest}:
\begin{quotation}
{\sc Mrs. Lovett:} Now let's see\ldots we've got tinker.\\
{\sc Todd:}{\em (Looks at it)} Something pinker.\\
{\sc Mrs. Lovett:} Tailor?\\
{\sc Todd:}{\em (Shakes his head)} Something -- paler\\
{\sc Mrs. Lovett:} Potter?\\
{\sc Todd:} Something--hotter.\\
{\sc Mrs. Lovett:} Butler?\\
{\sc Todd:} Something-- subtler.\\
{\sc Mrs. Lovett:} Locksmith?\\
{\sc Todd:} Something--{\em (Slumps, defeated)}
\end{quotation}

The metalingual function often stems from a disruption in the
communication-process. When two or more figures speak different languages,
there are often many utterances with metalingual function. With
different languages I mean two things. First when two
figures really speak two languages and secondly is when two figures
use different codes within one language such as dialects, sociolects
and idiolects. Although none of this occurs in {\ST} I have to mention it for the
sake of completeness.

\subsection{Poetic function}
The poetic function is associated with the way speech reflects itself.
In normal speech, this function is virtually non-existent because all
messages refer to the object. One more particularity of the poetic
function is that it applies only to the external communication system.
For instance, the poetic function of meter in verse only refers to the
the external communication system\footnote{The discussion of the poetic function is relatively short because I found no instances
of it in {\ST} except for the fact that some of the characters use iambic
meter, as I mentioned in one of the previous sections.}.

\section{Verbal communication and Action}

In {\em Drama in der Vermittlung von Handlung, Sprache und
Szene\footnote{A. H\"ubler {\em Drama in der Vermittlung von Handlung, Sprache und Szene} 1973, 10}} A. H\"ubler gives the follow definition of
action. Action is:

\begin{quotation}
The transition from one situation to another in the sense of a
development, a transition which, depending on the kind of situation
involved, is selected deliberately from a number of different
possibilities rather than simply causally determined.
\end{quotation}

So if we look at the connection between speech and action, we can say
that speech can be the catalyst of action. For deliberate changes in the
dramatic situation often take place through the utterances of one of the
characters. These words can have different forms i.e. orders that are
given, the betraying of a secret, the uttering of a threat, the making
of a promise or an act of persuasion. Another observation we can make is
that a change in the dramatic situation changes the inter-relationship of the
characters.

Spoken action or actional speech is very common in dramatic texts, though
the `distance' between speech and action is likely to be variable.

Commentative speech is distanced from action because it does not change
the dramatic situation. It is a form of reference, a contrast between
speech and action. In my opinion, music has largely the same function as
commentative speech with the difference that music lacks the direct
referentiality of speech.

In many cases, commentative speech takes place within an epic communication
structure. In such a structure, the `distance' between the
speaker and action is at its greatest.

When speech and action are identical, the character remains completely
immersed in the situation which he hopes or tries to change by speaking. When
speech is contrasted with action, though by definition it is not identical to
it, it nonetheless still refers directly to the action. The `distance' between
speech and action can be further increased by abandoning such directives to
actions which are features of commentative speech. At this point speech and action then
run parallel to each other (Speech for the sake of speech). An example
of this is {\em The Worst Pies in London}, which will be discussed in the next
chapter.

\section{Verbal communication and the dramatic figure}
Language is critical in the portrayal and characterization of dramatic
figures, although not the only means of characterization.
There are other non-verbal signs, such as costume, body-attitude, mask,
facial expressions, etc. If we concentrate on linguistic portrayal, we
notice that there is a super-imposition of the poetic upon the expressive
function. In other words, the poetic function more or less determines
the form of the utterances while the expressive function determines the
content of the utterances. 

In naturalist theater, each figure is associated with its own verbal
style and although this idea is not really novel for it can be traced as
far back as Shakespeare. It can also be stated that when linguistic
homogeneity occurs, the poetic function predominates; when linguistic
differentiation occurs, the expressive function predominates.

If we want to analyze the idiosyncrasies of a certain
character, that is if we want to learn of his/her the psychological and
sociological make-up, and how that make-up is
represented linguistically, a sensible strategy would be to subtract
from a figure's linguistic and stylistic inventory all the utterances
that they share with other figures. In other words: to take into
account the deviations from the linguistic repertory of the other
figures. 

To show how this can be done I shall now analyze the portrayal of
the main figures (protagonists and antagonists) of {\ST}. In this
analysis I shall attempt to shed some light on the linguistic and musical
elements that are used to portray these figures.

\subsection{Benjamin Barker alias Sweeney Todd}

Benjamin Barker alias Sweeney Todd, is a bitter man, out for revenge. Todd's main musical motive is indicative of this: the
inversion of the {\em Dies Ir{\ae}} motive. And there is more: the part
of Todd is written for a bass-voice (which is used mainly in the lower
registers). We tend to associate low notes with grief, sadness etc\ldots
All things Todd feels.

The fact that Todd is using an alias is also portrayed in the music. 
For instance, if we examine {\em Pirelli's Miracle Elixir}, most of Todd's
utterances are in a higher register and void of his personal
motive. But as soon as he drops the ``mask'' in the {\em Epiphany} all
the principals come back: lower register and personal motive.

A further investigation of the linguistic characterization of Todd
reveals that he uses iambic meter\footnote{See p.~\pageref{iamb1}}. What strikes me as odd is that Todd does not speak Cockney, which
what we could expect had he lived in the vicinity of Fleet Street. In my
opinion this would have enhanced the
character of Todd, but also to the portrayal of the locale of the action.

Another aspect of Todd's linguistic repertory is that his sentences are
short and at times no more than exclamations. Furthermore, the speech
rhythm is very coarse: ``There's a hole in the world like a great black
pit and the vermin of the world inhabit it, and it goes by the name of
London''. The rhythm is very accentuated and sharp. 

When Todd thinks of Lucy or Johanna however, his rhythm becomes more
fluid. The melody suddenly seems to be based on descending semi-tones,
which lend it a more seductive tone. 

This inner division makes Todd a `tragic man' who is essentially
`divided'. It can be
argued that the {\em Epiphany} is an exposition of this essential part
of Todd's character. Therefore, it therefore has a special position in the plot and
even though it occurs near the end of Act I, it is still a part of the
exposition.

\subsection{Mrs. Nellie Lovett}
Mrs. Lovett is a middle-aged woman who dreams of retiring to a house
``by the sea''. In Todd, she sees an opportunity to fulfill that dream. I
think that this is one of the two main reasons that she tries helping
Todd achieve his goal.

An important feature of her linguistic repertory is the fact that she
speaks Cockney. There are a few Cockney references in {\em By the Sea}.
For instance when Mrs. Lovett sings: "Bring along your chopper", chopper
means apart from an axe, also ''penis''. And there are more sexual {\em double
entendres in this song}.

There is yet another aspect of Mrs. Lovett's linguistic repertory. To
understand this I will first take a look at the following
description of {\em \'ecriture feminine}:
\begin{quotation}
The texts are characterized by play, disruption, excess, gaps,
grammatical and syntactic subversion, ambiguities; by endlessly shifting
register generic transgression; by fluid figurative language and myths.
They are anti-authoritarian, questioning, unsettling\footnote{Elizabeth
Guild, in Wright, 1992:75}.
\end{quotation}

If for example we take a look at {\em The Worst Pies in London} we, can find
many of these aspects in the lyrics as well as the music. The most
prominent aspects are play (the song on its own would be a
virtuoso-comedy song) and the use of figurative language and myths:
\begin{quotation}
Take for instance Mrs. Mooney and her pie-shop\\
Business never better using only pussy-cats and toast\\
And a pussy's good for maybe six or seven at the most\\
\end{quotation}

Furthermore, the use of gaps is apparent in the music. Could this whole
song be an example of {\em \'ecriture vocale feminine}?

There is one aspect which appears only in the music: the use of the {\em
seduction motive}. Mrs. Lovett is the first character to introduce this
motive, and therefore, it can be said that this motive is associated with
her. It is true that the motive is sung by others but in most cases this
is just in response to Mrs. Lovett. The seduction motive could be seen
as derivative of the {\em Dies Ir{\ae}}-motive, which gives sheds some
light on her relationship with Todd.


\subsection{Anthony Hope}

The information given about this figure is minimal, to say the least. It
becomes apparent that he is a young sailor who rescued Todd when his
ship was wrecked. During the piece, Anthony
falls in love with Johanna, Todd's daughter.

He speaks like Todd in iambic meter which provides him a
place among the protagonists. His way of expressing is polite, almost
timid, even when he talks to the beggar woman to whom everyone is rude.
This friendliness renders him the goodwill of the audience. He, together
with Johanna, are the only really friendly characters in the play. This puts
them in a sub-plot.

If we look at Anthony's
musical motive, we see that it consists of an ascending sixth, followed by a descending
semi-tone. It is related to two other themes. First of all it is a
permutation of the seduction-motive, and secondly the motive is related (in a
way) to Lucy/Johanna who both have a descending semi-tone motive.

In his music Anthony shows more feminine characteristics than Todd. If,
for instance we examine the playful rhythms and the meter changes in
{\em Look At Me} we see some typically effeminate, aspects of his music. Even
the composer's use of the
descending semi-tones, a motive which is clearly derived from the
Lucy/Johanna motives present an other ''effeminate'' aspect of his personality.

Altogether he is portrayed as a man who is passionately in love, and
exposing much of the feminine side of his character. 

\subsection{Johanna}

Johanna, Todd's daughter, is a rather na\"{\i}ve young girl, who has lived
rather a sheltered life. She longs to be free, a thought which she expresses in
{\em Green Finch and Linett Bird}. This song stands stylistically apart
from the rest of {\ST}. Considering that Sondheim at various occasions
aired his dislike of opera, this song shows that he can indeed write in an
operatic style. This small, yet pretty coloratura-aria has been written
mainly, I think to imitate the various birds Johanna sings about. Her
na\"{\i}evet\'e and innocence  are reflected and indicated by the relatively
relaxed harmonic scheme, and the limited use
of dissonants. She really is still a child who likes to play and who yearns
for some freedom. Yet, she must be 19 or older, but because the Judge has
forced her to live a sheltered, not to say captive, life, she has been
estranged from the real world.

Perhaps it is this innocence which attracts Anthony. In the play, she is
like Anthony speaking in iambic meter. This is indicative of her
relationship with both Todd and Anthony. In {\em Kiss Me} we note that
her utterances are very short and {\em staccato}, not totally unlike
Todd's.

Musically, she really can not develop her own personality because she is
involved in
only a few numbers and in most of them she remains in the background; this
concurs with her na\"{\i}vet\'e. Johanna's personality is not strong so it
can not be portrayed distinctly through music.

\subsection{Judge Turpin}
\label{charjud}
The Judge is a man torn apart by guilt over what he has done to Todd on the
one hand, and on
the other, about the fact that he finally got what he wanted. In the show
he has only one song to himself, not much to characterize such
a complex personality.

His linguistic repertory is, like Todd's, written in iambic meter. But
contrary to Todd his speech is posh: \begin{quote} Maybe I've been a bit
hasty with my morning ablutions\end{quote}. His words are chosen with
care and have a more extended vocabulary than do Todd's. His phrases are
longer, generally speaking and he's is portrayed as a well-educated,
upper-class man.

To describe how the Judge is portrayed in music, I will analyze the
Judge's only solo-song. This song was originally cut from the show\footnote{The
only cut in the show(!).}. Or as the score indicates:
\begin{quotation}
The following scene was cut from the production during previews for
reasons of time. It took place immediately after number
10B(i.e. the Ballad of Sweeney Todd) and is included here
because the authors feel it help particularize the character of Judge
Turpin.
\end{quotation}

The piece begins with a confession of guilt:
\begin{quotation}
{\sc Judge:} Mea culpa,  Mea culpa,  Mea maxima culpa,\\
Mea maxima, maxima culpa\footnote{Transl: My fault, My great fault, My
great ,great fault}\\
\end{quotation}

This is proper liturgical form, enunciated by the congegration at the
beginning of Mass as a confession of sin. The whole song seems to develop as a prayer,
first to God, than to Johanna. The music of the above two phrases
consists mostly of repeated notes, remindful of plain-chant (the
psalm-formula with its flexa) (figure~\ref{ju1} on p.~\pageref{ju1}.). In m. 2a we
observer once again the {\em Dies
Ir{\ae}}-motive.

\begin{figure}[ht]
\caption{Johanna(Judge)}
\label{ju1}
\centerline{\epsfysize=60mm\epsfbox{ju1.eps}}
\end{figure}

Why is the Judge feeling guilty? We learn more of the cause of this
feeling as the song continues:
\begin{quotation}
{\sc Judge:} God, Deliver me!\\
Release me!\\
Forgive me!\\
Restrain me!\\
Pervade me!\\
{\em (He peers through the keyhole of the door to Johanna's room)}
\end{quotation}

Apparently, his guilt is related to Johanna's presence in his
house. The melody he sings consists of large leaps which are accompanied
by dissonant chords on an organ-point e-flat. His exclamations form an
ascending sequence, as though the pain of his yearning is growing.

In m.11 we see an accompaniment motive not totally unlike that of the
{\em Ballad}. The words to this accompaniment are:
\begin{quotation}
{\sc Judge:} Johanna,\\
Johanna,\\
The light behind your window,\\
It penetrates your gown.\\
\end{quotation}

Instead of the large melodic leaps we saw in the previous section, we note
here a melody with an extremely limited range: a minor third. And
the same sequence is repeated up a major third with the following
words:
\begin{quotation}
{\sc Judge:} Johanna,\\
Johanna,\\
The sun,\\
I see the sun through your\ldots\\
\end{quotation}

At this juncture the judge realizes that his yearning basically is wrong. His
exclamations: \begin{quote} No! God! Deliver me! Deliver me! \end{quote}
which are accompanied by dissonant chords which in my view symbolize the
whiplashes indicated in the stage directions: {\em Naked to the waste, he
picks up a scourge from the table}. While he says the word "Down" three
times, his melody, quite predictably, has a descending character. The
accompaniment remains still extremely dissonant.

Then there is a reprise of the limited range melody from m.14. The Judge
explains more of his yearning. It becomes clear that the limited ambitus
of this melody is a symbol of the restraint of the Judge in
opposition with the wide melody leaps which suggest unbound
lust. The Judge continues to explain his yearning:
\begin{quotation}
{\sc Judge:} Johanna,\\
Johanna,\\
I watch you from the shadows,\\
You sigh before your windows,\\
And gaze upon the town\\
\end{quotation}

What now becomes clear is that the erudition of the Judge is has
disappeared and that the Judge is speaks more directly. There may be two
reasons for this: the first is that the Judge thinks no-one can hear him; the
second is that he talks about his innermost feelings, and therefore
has no need for mask of erudition. His fantasies
turn more erotic:
\begin{quotation}
{\sc Judge:} Your lips part,\\
Johanna,\\
So young and soft and beautiful\footnote{Both Todd and the Judge use
this description of Johanna}
\end{quotation}

Once again he cries out:
\begin{quotation}
{\sc Judge:} God!\\
Deliver me!\\
Filth!\\
Leave me!\\
\end{quotation}

The Johanna motive is now transformed into a melody with a much wider range.
The motive now shows a remarkable resemblance to the {\em Maria}-theme
from {\em West Side Story} with one major difference: in the {\em
Maria}-theme, the tritone is resolved to a perfect fifth, while here
a perfect fourth is ''resolved'' to a tritone(see figures~\ref{ju2}
on page~\pageref{ju2} and figure~\ref{ma1} on page~\pageref{ma1}). This marks the
difference between Tony, who sings {\em Maria}, and the Judge. While Tony's
love is pure and innocent, the Judge's is little more than
perverted lust with somewhat of diabolical atmosphere to it.
That is why Sondheim probably used the tritone, the {\em diabolus in
musica}. What strange is in the lyrics, is that Judge seems to blame
Johanna for his lust:
\begin{quotation}
{\sc Judge:} Johanna!\\
Johanna!\\
I treasured you in innocence\\
And loved you like a daughter\\
You mock me\\
Johanna\\
You tempt me with your innocence\\
You tempt with those quivering\ldots\\
\end{quotation}

\begin{figure}[ht]
\caption{Johanna(Judge)}
\label{ju2}
\centerline{\epsfysize=40mm\epsfbox{ju2.eps}}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[ht]
\caption{{\em Maria} from {\em West Side Story} (Bernstein)}
\label{ma1}
\centerline{\epsfysize=40mm\epsfbox{ma1.eps}}
\end{figure}

It seems as though  he is trying to justify his yearning by lying to himself.
The Judge
sees Johanna as a seductive woman, which she is not as we have seen in the
previous section. The melody re-assumes the same limited range as earlier in
the song, as the Judge tries to restrain himself further. Again lust
gets the better of him:
\begin{quotation}
{\sc Judge:} No!\\
God!\\
Deliver me!\\
It will!\\
Stop!\\
Now!\\
It will\\
Stop\\
Right\\
Now\\
Right\\
Now\\
Right\\
Now\\
\end{quotation}

The melody oscillates with by a major second and as the
judge slowly becomes calmer, the melody develops into a descending
chromatic 
scale. The limited range of the first part of this section may have
something to do with the Judge flailing himself: extreme self-restraint. This
flailing appears to have the desired effect: the Judge regains his sense of
reality and sees what Johanna is up to:
\begin{quotation}
{\sc Judge:} Johanna,\\
Johanna,\\
I cannot keep you longer\\
The world is at your window\\
You want to fly away\\
\end{quotation}

In the judge's mind it is Johanna who now needs restraining. One hears the same sort of
protracted melodic
live, but the mere thought of Johanna systematically arouses the
Judge's lust:
\begin{quotation}
{\sc Judge:} You stir me, Johanna\\
So suddenly a woman\\
I cannot watch you one more day\\
\end{quotation}

Restraint is heard through the judge's melody. As he again
flails himself, we can hear an inversion of the {\em Johanna}-theme:
\begin{quotation}
{\sc Judge:} God!\\
Deliver me!\\
God!\\
Deliver--\\
God!\\
\end{quotation}

The last ''God!'' is sung on a high ''f'' which for the its four beats, must be sung
triple forte 
and after that must be sustained for another 12 beats at mezzo-piano level.
Since the role of the Judge most probably will be sung by a bass or a low
baritone, the last twelve beats most probably will be sung
using the falsetto-register. This simulates a cry
for help, and the judge's anguish, is effectively expressed. The
accompaniment with this note is an ostinato-pattern with an f-c organ
point, including some subtle dissonances. The whole tone becomes milder as the
judge reaches a decision:
\begin{quotation}
{\sc Judge:} Johanna\\
Johanna\\
I'll keep you here forever\\
I'll wed you on the morrow\\
Johanna,\\
Johanna,\\
The world will never touch you\\
I'll wed you on the morrow\\
As years pass,\\
Johanna\\
You'll tend me in my solitude\\
No longer as a daughter\\
As a woman\\
\end{quotation}

Now, the melodic line in this section shows the same narrowness of ambitus,
while the melody works sequentially towards a climax. As the judge gets
fully dressed, he reaches a climax of decisiveness:
\begin{quotation}
{\sc Judge:} Johanna,\\
Johanna,\\
I'll hold you here forever then\\
You'll keep away from windows\\
\end{quotation}

But the lust that burns inside the Judge is too strong:
\begin{quotation}
{\sc Judge:} You'll\\
Deliver me\\
Johanna,\\
From this,\\
Hot,\\
red,\\
devil,\\
With your,\\
soft,\\
white,\\
cool,\\
virgin,\\
palms
\end{quotation}

The Judge is portrayed in this song as a man with two completely different
sides. The first of these, is that of the well-educated
magistrate, the other is a man consumed by lust. This reflects the duality
of the human nature as most extremely reflected in {\em Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde} by R.L. Stevenson.

\section{The super-imposition of epic communication structures on figure reference}
A character can not only be referenced to by other dramatic figures. The use of
epic communication structures is also a frequently used method of figure
reference.

We find a perfect example of this in the {\em Ballad of Sweeney
Todd} which will be discussed in the next chapter. This is song is not part of any dramatic action and is sung by
figures who at the moment they sing this ballad become detached from the
action. Yet it has a huge referential function, since it refers to Sweeney Todd
himself. Sweeney is not characterized by his own utterances but also by
this form of reference.

This form of both verbal and musical reference to a dramatic figure by
using epic communication structures is not an uncommon technique. I dare even
suggest that this is the main application of these structures. There is
another example of this in a song I shall also discuss in the next chapter namely {\em Poor
Thing}.

The degree of a figure's awareness always remains within the bounds of what
is possible in the psychological, spatial and temporal context. Hence a figure's
speech capability or level of articulation never transgresses these
boundaries. A dramatist must therefore avoid any further {\ae}sthetical
structuring of the language that is not motivated in the internal
communication system. 

That is why Mrs. Lovett's discourse on what happened
after Todd had been deported shows some rhetorical errors. First of all
she digresses quite often, and Todd has to remind her that she is telling only one
story. And then there is the fact the she is very direct, offering no
metaphors to beguile the mind: only the story, plainly and clearly. On the
other hand one could argue that this enough to move the mind. Apparently
she does not have the articulation-skills to create such an esthetic
discourse and even as she sings, her skills of articulation do not increase.
Thus, although {\em Poor Thing} has its main function in the external
communication system, Mrs. Lovett never transgresses the boundaries of her
own level of articulation.

\section{The super-imposition of references to the situation on figure
reference}

Although the character is characterized by verbal utterances there is an
other factor restricting the correspondence between speech and figure
and thus the possibility of inferring of a dramatic figure's
from
its utterances is a result of the the being determined not by disposition alone but also by
the situation in which it finds itself at any given moment. Thus, the
utterances need not be homogeneous and may vary stylistically
according to the particular dramatic situation and the intention behind a
particular utterance.

We have seen an example of this in the Judge's song, where he shows
himself to be both a well-educated, well-spoken man, and consumed by lust. The people around
perceive him a well-educated
magistrate, while in his inner sanctum, when he thinks no-one can hear him,
his speeches become more direct, more natural.

Even Todd himself adopts different ways of addressing to the situation with
which he is faced. An excellent example is the
{\em Epiphany} and the manner in which he addresses the Judge.
Circumstantial linguistic alteration of style is also a form of characterization.

\section{Characterization through language}

I have already discussed the use of language to outline the character of a
dramatic figure, and I provided some characterizations of the different
dramatic figures in {\ST}. At this point I will discuss some more distinctions of this
form of characterization.

There are two fundamental distinctions we can make: there is implicit
and explicit self-representation. And when we discuss
about explicit self-representation, we can also distinguish between voluntary and
involuntary self-representation.
\subsection{Explicit self-representation}
The character consciously outlines a figure of itself, and this may happen
within
the context of either monologue or dialogue. The information acquired is
neither objective nor binding, and does not co-incide with the
authorially intended receptive forum for this particular figure.

\label{selfr1}
A form of explicit voluntary self-representation we find in the contest
between Todd and Pirelli. As Pirelli has an Italian accent, this part of
his characterization is voluntary. But as soon as he begins to recount 
his successes, the outline of the character is complete. Pirelli's form of
self-representation is voluntary, and he turns out to be Irish:
\begin{quotation}
{\sc Pirelli:}{\em (Reverting to Irish)} Ow, call me Danny, Daniel
O'Higgins the name when it's not perfessional. {\em (Looks around the
shop)} Not much, but I imagine you'll pretty it up a bit. {\em (Holds out
his hand)} I'd like me five quid back, if'n ya don't mind\footnote{Vocal
Score p. 121}.
\end{quotation}

The first observation we can make, is that we have been misled when as to
Pirelli's identity. As earlier stated: explicit voluntary
self-representation is neither objective nor binding. Our second
observation is that a transition from voluntary explicit
self-representation to {\em involuntary} explicit self-representation, is closer to the truth.

During the contest the music supports O'Higgins' self-representation as an
Italian. A few examples: first of all, O'Higgins is a high bel-canto tenor,
a typically Italian type of voice. Then there is of course, the Italian
accent (figure~\ref{co1} on p.~\pageref{co1}.) And then there is the music.

\begin{figure}[ht]
\caption{The Contest}
\label{co1}
\centerline{\epsfysize=50mm\epsfbox{co1.eps}}
\end{figure}

If we look at the first part of the contest\footnote(No. 10 in the vocal
score) we see a kind of {\em bel-canto} aria:
\begin{quotation}
{\sc Pirelli:} Now signorini, signori,\\
We mix-a da lather\\
But first-a you gather\\
Around\\
Signorini, signori\\
You looking a man\\
Who have had-a da glory\\
To shave-a da Pope!\\
{\em (Lathering his man)} Mister Sweeney whoever\\
{\em (To the customer, as he accidentally lathers his nose)} I beg-a your
pardon'll\\
Probably say it was only a cardinal.\\
Nope! {\em (\em Finishes lathering the man)}\\
It was-a da Pope!\\
\end{quotation}

This whole section is set on a constant movement of semi-quavers, and I
am led to assume that it must be sung in one breath. At the end of this
section the word ''Pope'' ends on a high C\footnote{And I must say that on the
OCR, the role of Pirelli is sung by a tenor, who is using a mixed voice,
which has a very strange effect.}, one of the highest notes
for a tenor, and difficult to accomplish without the use of the falsetto-register. This
kind of fast rhythmic singing reminds me of Rossini, for instance his {\em
Largo al factotum} from {\em Il Barbiere di Siviglia} which provides with an
even more obvious example of this. I think that in this case, the music helps
Pirelli/O'Higgins convince the audience, both on stage and off-stage
that he is Italian.

\subsection{Implicit self-representation}
In the case of implicit self-representation the receiver is faced with the
task of interpreting symptoms rather than decoding signs. One is paralinguistic: voice quality. For example: Tobias is just a boy,
not too bright, his voice high and effeminate. Anthony's voice is
high but never effeminate. Todd wants his revenge, so his voice is low and
booming.

There are other symptoms. Does the language of particular
dramatic figure approximate that of a social or regional subcode? We have
had several examples of this: Mrs. Lovett speaks Cockney, as does Tobias, and O'Higgins/Pirelli has an Irish accent. 

A transphrastic question\footnote{One which transcedends individual
sentences} is a question of how an individual sentences relates to 
another: strictly logical, by association or just a loosely knit jumble.
Every figure in {\ST} can be places in one or more of these categories. The
table on page~\pageref{trans1} will clarify this.

\begin{figure}[ht]
\caption{Transphrastic figure-characterization}
\label{trans1}
\begin{tabular}{||l|l|l|l||}\\ \hline\hline
{\sc Figure} & {\sc Logical} & {\sc Association} & {\sc Loose}\\ \hline
Sweeney Todd & x & x & x\\ \hline
Mrs. Nellie Lovett & & x & x\\ \hline
Anthony Hope & & x &\\ \hline
Johanna & & & x\\ \hline
Pirelli & x & x &\\ \hline
Tobias & x & x &\\ \hline
Judge Turpin & x & & x\\ \hline
The Beggar Woman/Lucy & & & x\\ \hline
Beadle Bamford & x & & \\ \hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{figure}

Also, the use of differing speech figures in varying frequencies can
delineate one figure from another: certain sentence types (statements and
questions), the predominance of hypotaxis and parataxis, active or passive
forms, the use of parallellisms and antitheses, an abstract to concrete
vocabulary, figurative or literal speech, the emphasis on certain semantic
ways and frequency of certain idiomatic or clich{\'e}'d expressions, the
length of phrases and speeches etc. These also serve to expose a figure's
temperament and various dispositions.

For instance Mrs. Lovett uses short phrases (in general), while Todd's at
times are even shorter (cf. {\em Epiphany}), but normally his phrases
are longer than Mrs. Lovett, who also uses some figurative speech in her
utterances. In the following tables, I hope to clarify the different
temperaments and dispositions:

\begin{figure}[ht]
\caption{Speech figures: statements and questions}
\begin{tabular}{||l|l|l||}\\ \hline\hline
{\sc Figure} & {\sc Statements} & {\sc Questions}\\ \hline\hline
Sweeney Todd & x & \\ \hline
Mrs. Nellie Lovett & x & x \\ \hline
Anthony Hope & x & \\ \hline
Johanna & & x \\ \hline
Pirelli & x & \\ \hline
Tobias & x & \\ \hline
The Beggar Woman/Lucy & & x \\ \hline
Beadle Bamford & & x \\ \hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[ht]
\caption{Speech figures: active and passive forms}
\begin{tabular}{||l|l|l||}\\ \hline\hline
{\sc Figure} & {\sc Passive} & {\sc Active} \\ \hline\hline
Sweeney Todd & & x \\ \hline
Mrs. Nellie Lovett & x & x \\ \hline
Anthony Hope & & x \\ \hline
Johanna & x & \\ \hline
Pirelli & & x \\hline
Tobias & & x \\hline
The Beggar Woman/Lucy & x & \\ \hline
Beadle Bamford & & x \\ \hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[ht]
\caption{Speech figures: abstract and concrete vocabulary}
\begin{tabular}{||l|l|l||} \hline\hline
{\sc Figure} & {\sc Abstract} & {\sc Concrete} \\ \hline
Sweeney Todd & x & \\ \hline
Mrs. Nellie Lovett & & x \\ \hline
Anthony Hope & x & \\ \hline
Johanna & & x \\ \hline
Pirelli & & x \\ \hline
Tobias & & x \\ \hline
The Beggar Woman/Lucy & & x \\ \hline
Beadle Bamford & & x \\ \hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[ht]
\caption{Speech figures: figurative and literal speech}
\begin{tabular}{||l|l|l||} \hline\hline
{\sc Figure} & {\sc Figurative} & {\sc Literal} \\ \hline
Sweeney Todd & x & \\ \hline
Mrs. Nellie Lovett & & x \\ \hline
Anthony Hope & x & \\ \hline
Johanna & & x \\ \hline
Pirelli & & x \\ \hline
Tobias & & x \\ \hline
The Beggar Woman/Lucy & x & \\ \hline
Beadle Bamford & & x \\ \hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[ht]
\caption{Speech figures: length of speeches and phrases}
\begin{tabular}{||l|l|l||} \hline\hline
{\sc Figure} & {\sc Speeches} & {\sc Phrases} \\ \hline
Sweeney Todd & Long & Short to very short\\ \hline
Mrs. Nellie Lovett & Long & Short\\ \hline
Anthony Hope & Long & Long \\ \hline
Johanna & Long & Short\\ \hline
Pirelli & Long & Long\\ \hline
Tobias & Long & Short\\ \hline
The Beggar Woman/Lucy & Short & Short \\ \hline
Beadle Bamford & Short & Short\\ \hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{figure}

Linguistic behavior is also dependent upon the relationship between the
characters. Mrs. Lovett talks
in almost motherly way to Tobias, while her tone toward Todd is more
conspiratorial. The same axiom applies for other figures.

Even the forms of the speeches reveal something of the disposition of a
character. For example, a strong tendency towards monological speech, can be
construed as an indication of egocentricity. And, as we have seen, Todd himself is
inclined to use monological speech indicating his introvert nature.

\section{Monological speech}
\subsection{Monologue and dialogue}
Monologue and dialogue are often conceived as two opposite phenomenons and
every dramatic utterance is assigned to one of these categories. In
{\ST} we shall see that this need not necessarily be the case. There are off course
situational and structural differences between these.

The situational criterion for monologue is that there is no addressee,
at least not on stage. This kind of monologue is non-existent in {\ST}
excluding the {\em Ballad}.

The structural criterion refers to the length and autonomy of a particular
speech.
When we use this criterion to label monologues, we can find several good
examples of this in {\ST}: {\em My Friends}, {\em Epiphany}, {\em The
Contest} etc. 

Then there is of course the distinction between soliloquy and monologue. I
believe the main difference between them is the fact that a soliloquy is
not meant to affect others, and a monologue is. The soliloquy will be
discussed in more depth later on.

As we can see, the distinction between monologue and dialogue is not always
clear. Many verbal utterances can be perceived as a mixture of the two. The {\em Epiphany}
provides us with such an example.

\subsection{Monologue versus monologicity: dialogue versus dialogicity}

Because of the unclarity of the distinction between monologue we can expect
to discover dialogical soliloquies and monological dialogues. I already
mentioned the {\em Epiphany} as a form of dialogical soliloquy: most of the
time there is no addressee; yet, at some time Todd addresses the audience
and Mrs. Lovett.
\newtheorem{defi}{Definition}[chapter]

The standard definition of a monological speech is:
\begin{defi}
A {\em monological speech} is speech which has an extended length and
internal coherence.
\end{defi}

I think this definition can be improved. First of all: what is
extended length? And what is internal coherence? I think many speeches,
normally labeled as monologue, fall outside this definition. Furthermore
the link with the situational criterion has yet to be explained. I prefer
Muka\v{r}ovsk\'y's definition. According to
Muka\v{r}ovsk\'y a dialogue always rests on the polarity or suspense
between 'several or at least two contextures' which 'interpenetrate
alternate in logic discourse':
\begin{quotation}
Because there is more than one participant in a dialogue, there is also a
manifold contexture: although each person's utterances alternate with those
of the other person, or persons, they comprise a certain unity of meaning.
Because the contextures which interpenetrate in this way in a dialogue are
different, often even contradictory, sharp semantic reversals occur on the
boundaries of individual replies. The more vivid the dialogue, the shorter
the individual replies, and the more distinct the collisions of the
contextures. Thus arises a special semantic effect for which stylistics
have even created a term: stichomythia\footnote{Muka\v{r}ovsk\'y {\em ibid}
p. 87-8}
\end{quotation}

We can see here that there is still an opposition between dialogue and
monologue but the definitions are so refined that it is possible that a
speech contains certain characteristics of both. If we table the characteristics:

\begin{figure}[ht]
\caption{Monological versus dialogical speech}
\begin{tabular}{||l|l||}\\ \hline\hline
{\sc Monologue} & {\sc Dialogue} \\ \hline
One speaker & Several speakers\\
One semantic direction & Semantic direction changes with the speaker\\
Long individual utterances & Brief individual utterances\\ \hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{figure}

We can now replace the opposition between monologue and dialogue with a
graded scale of values and speak of a greater or lesser degree of
'monologicity' or 'dialogicity'\footnote{Muka\v{r}ovsk\'y {\em ibid},
 p. 103, ff.}. 

For instance, at the end of {\em A Little Priest} when Todd and Mrs. Lovett
come to an agreement, we can say that because of the absence of the semantic changes of
direction, their initial dialogue has taken on
a monological quality.  This agreement is symbolized in the
music by the appearance of a
consonant instead of a dissonant at the end of their refrain.

\section{Monological tendencies in dialogue}

From Muka\v{r}ovsk\'y's definition it is possible to define an ideal form
of 'dialogical dialogue':
\begin{defi}
A {\em dialogical dialogue} is an undisrupted form of two-way communication
between two or more figures who represent polar opposites and whose
relations are marked by a high level of tension.
\end{defi}

It could be argued that the dialogue between Tobias and Todd in {\em
Pirreli's Miracle Elixir} is a form of such a dialogue, since it contains
all criteria.

The fact that many so-called dialogues possess monological tendencies can
be explained by the following facts:
\begin{itemize}
\item disrupted communication because:
\subitem the channel between the two partners is disrupted;
\subsubitem they are physically or psychologically unwilling to
communicate; and
\subsubitem they employ diverging codes, thus causing incomprehension or grave misunderstandings.
\subsubitem there is a difference in referential contexts.
\item When complete consensus occurs there can be no semantic change of direction.
{\em A Little Priest}, an example of this, has already been cited.
\item When the two partners of the dialogue take no notice of each other,
a combination of monologues may occur. {\em By The Sea} is a good example
of this. Todd doesn't really listen to Mrs. Lovett, he only answers her in
short phrases, probably just to stop her nagging him.
\item The predominance of one figure also encourages the development of
monological tendencies.
\end{itemize}
\section{Dialogical tendencies in soliloquies}
The presence of dialogical tendencies in soliloquies is always based on the
fact that the identity of the speaker and listener which defines the
soliloquy is dissolved into a contrast between different semantic contexts. 
This contrast can take on different forms:

\begin{enumerate}
\item Prayer: this form isn't used in {\ST}. The only evidence of this is the Judge's song. I discussed this song in a previous section,
and I stated that it starts as a prayer (cf. p.~\pageref{charjud}).
\item Interior dialogue: there are two examples of this in {\ST}: the {\em
Epiphany} and the {\em Judge's Song}. In both cases the speaker is divided into two
different conflicting subjects.
\item Speech {\em ad spectatores}: this only works in the external
communication. It is directed at a fictitious audience. In the {\em
Epiphany}, there is good example of this:
\begin{quotation}
{\sc Todd:} You, sir?\\
Who, sir?\\
How about a shave?\\
\end{quotation}
\end{enumerate}

\section{Soliloquy}

That a soliloquy is possible on stage is based on an unspoken agreement
between playwright and audience, which allows the dramatic figure to think aloud
and talk to itself. In the normal world thinking aloud is normally
restricted to short exclamations. Soliloquy stylizes a pathological extreme
into a form of normal communicative behavior.

The convention of soliloquy cannot be justified by any mimetic
relationship to reality, or the whole gallery of dramatic heroes would have
to be presented as a collection of pathologically disturbed individuals.
Rather 
by the functions it is able to fulfill, which are about the same as that
of the mediating communication system in narrative texts. Soliloquy can
therefore be regarded as a convention employed to compensate for
the absence of mediating communication systems in drama. Often used as a vehicle for transmitting information on previous or future
events in concentrated form, soliloquy is also used for revealing the figure's
consciousness (and awareness).

Three different function are attributed to soliloquy:
\begin{enumerate}
\item As a bridge between two separate scenes 
preventing a break in the action on, perhaps an empty, stage. An example of this is
the third {\em Ballad of Sweeney Todd}:
\begin{quotation}
Sweeney pondered and Sweeney planned\\
Like a perfect machine 'e planned\\
Barbing the hook, baiting the trap\\
Setting it out for the Beadle to snap\\
Slyly courted 'im, Sweeney did\\
Set a sort of scene 'e did\\
Laying the trail, showing the traces,\\
Letting it lead to higher places\ldots\\
Sweeney\ldots
\end{quotation}
This soliloquy forms a bridge between the contest and the moment Todd has
installed himself in the barbershop; a transition which needs a change of
sets.
\item as an entrance or exit; it can look forward
to or summarise future events; The differing renderings of the {\em Ballad}
except for the first one, could be said to have this function with the
difference that they are not expressed by a single person, but by members
of the choir.
\item in all positions it can be used to slow down the action and create an
element of reflection and psychological distance. This form is not used
frequently in {\ST}; perhaps
in {\em There's No Place Like London} we can observe a short moment of this
kind of soliloquy:
\begin{quotation}
There's a hole in the world like a great black pit,\\
And it's filled with people who are filled with shit\ldots\\
\end{quotation}
Soliloquy is not action because it does not change the dramatic
configuration.
\end{enumerate}

Because soliloquy is such an artificial means of communication, solutions for this
artificiality had to be found. French classical drama tended to eliminate
all narrative soliloquies and replaced them by dialogue between confidants. This
method is also used in {\ST}: {\em There's No Place Like London} and {\em
Poor thing}. Lessing went even further by excluding all purely narrative
soliloquies to construct soliloquies that reveal the figure's awareness
more naturally either by imitating the style of spontaneous speech or by
establishing interior dialogue. Realist and naturalist writers rejected the
soliloquy altogether. This does not mean that the soliloquy entirely was
rejected. August Strindberg wrote in his preface to {\em Miss
Julie}(1888):
\begin{quotation}
Our realists have excommunicated the monologue as improbable, but if I can
lay a proper basis for it, I can also make it seem probable, and then I can
use it to good advantage. It is probable, for instance, that a speaker may
walk back and forth in his room practicing his speech aloud; it is probable
that an actor may read through his part aloud, that a servant girl may talk
to her cat, that a mother may prattle to her child, that an old spinster
may chatter to her parrot, that a person may talk in his
sleep.\footnote{Strindberg, A. {\em Miss Julie} in {\em Best Eight Plays},
112}
\end{quotation}

I must also state that there is sharp distinction the semiotic systems used
by `realist' soliloquies and the semiotic systems used by `conventional'
soliloquies. Conventional soliloquy forms part of the {\em secondary
code}-- the code which regulates the communication between author and
receiver in the external communication system. The `realist' soliloquy
works through the communicative conditions of the internal communication
system. This kind of soliloquy is often interpreted by the audience as the
inability or unwillingness to communicate dialogically. {\em By The
Sea} is a soliloquy in that sense, although who is speaking
the soliloquy: Todd or Mrs. Lovett, is debatable.

There is another difference between the `conventional' and the `realist'
soliloquies. A `conventional' or `conventionalized' soliloquy often follows
established rhetorical patterns. These are most common in classical plays. The
`realist' soliloquy is more like a spontaneous, associative flow of verbal
utterances. {\em The Worst Pies in London} is an example of this kind of
soliloquy (if it is a soliloquy at all). I believe it to be a soliloquy or at
least a song with many soliloquial aspects, because there is not a great change in the dramatic situation.

Conventionalized soliloquies often give the impression of a
dispassionate reality and premeditated closure of content and form.
Unnatural as they may be, they can be used to characterize a figure. In
{\ST} they are non-existent.

The realist soliloquies are made to convey the simultaneity and movement of
feeling, thought and speech. I have already discussed an example of this: the {\em
Epiphany}. An equivalent form of speech we find in B\"uchners play {\em
Woyzeck}:
\begin{quotation}
{\sc Woyzeck:} On and on! For ever! On, on, on!\\
Stop the music.--Shh. {\em (Throws himself down.)}
What's that?-- What's that you say? What you're\\
saying?\ldots Stab\ldots Stab the she-wolf is dead.\\
Shall I?
Must I? Is it there, too? In the wind even.\\
{\em (Stands up)} It's all round me. Everywhere.\\
Round, round, on and on and on\ldots\\
Stab her. Dead, dead--dead!! {\em (Runs out)}\footnote{B\"uchner, G.
''The Woods Beyond'' from {\em Woyzeck}}\\
\end{quotation}

As we refer to the distinctions between monologue and dialogue, therefore 
are either `conventionalist' or `realist'.

\subsection{Soliloquies of action and reflection}

The structural typology I provided above must be complemented by a functional
typology. Many attempts have been made: ``lyrical soliloquy'', the
``soliloquy of reflection'', the ``soliloquy of decision'', the ``soliloquy
of planning'' and the ``soliloquy of conflict''. The problem with these
attempts is that they lack a clear-cut distinction and the number of categories
can be expanded at will. I will describe Pfister's typology of
soliloquies. His system is constructed according to one criterion, the relationship between speech and action.

The main distinction is that between actional and non-actional soliloquies.
The actional soliloquy is in itself an act which alters the situation. The
speaker reflects on different possibilities for action and then selects
one.

Non-actional soliloquies do not change the dramatic situation and
contain elements of epic communication structures. The epic effect
increases in proportion to both the distance between the commentary and the
dramatic situation and, between the speaker and his active role within
the plot.

There are two kinds of non-actional soliloquies: the informative or expository and
the commentative, the audience must first be informed of particular events and
situations. The commentative soliloquy describes an event or situation with
which the audience is already familiar, and it is interpreted subjectively from
that figure's perspective.

In extreme cases, the result might be a speech {\em ex persona} in which
the commentary goes beyond the figure's level of awareness and develops
into a commentary that can be detached from the speaker, to convey, in epic
form, the
intended reception-perspective. The final part of
the first ballad is an example of this, where Todd seemingly rises from the
grave. In such cases, the
soliloquy assumes the function of the mediating commentary in much the
same way as does the chorus in the classical drama.

{\em  Poor  Thing}  is  a  good example of this.  Actional, informative and
commentatative   soliloquies   are  ideal  abstractions.   

\section{Asides}
\subsection{The  monological aside:  convention versus motivation} 

An aside
resembles a soliloquy in that it does not have an addressee on
stage. It differs from the soliloquy in that the speaker is not alone on 
stage(nor  does he imagine he is alone). As a result, an aside bears even
less mimetic relationship to real life than a conventionalized soliloquy.
This  kind  of  aside is called a conventionalized monological aside. It
enables the author to:  
\begin{enumerate} 
\item present a figure's thoughts directly;  
\item give a frank commentary on a particular situation free of
any strategic consideration(often expressed by scheming figures); and,  
\item convey information on the background of a figure.
\end{enumerate}

If we look at {\ST} we see an example of this in a section of {\em There's
No Place Like London}:  
\begin{quotation} 
There's a whole in the world like
a great black pit,\\ 
And the vermin of the world inhabit it.\\
\end{quotation} 

When Todd sings this, he's not addressing anyone on stage.
It is more like an interior mumbling, reflected in the music, by
repeated notes, with little melodic change. Judging by Anthony's
reaction, Anthony, who at that moment is the only one on stage with Todd, hasn't even heard this mumbling.  

\subsection{The aside {\em ad spectatores}}
This kind of aside breaks through the internal communication system and
hence has a certain epic and mediatory function. It is often found in
comedy and is often used to inform the audience of the background of a
certain dramatic situation, and the speaker's plans and creates a level
of suspense. This ensures that the audience has an advantage
over the victims of the intrigue. 

There are no asides of this kind in {\ST}. It is included here for the sake of completeness.

\subsection{The dialogical aside}
This kind of aside is based on the convention that it is not heard by the
characters on stage. The acoustical implausibility can be reduced by the
spatial orientation of the speakers: Figures participating in the
dialogical aside at the front of the of stage well away from the other
figures. Dialogical asides are generally motivated by conspirational
dialogue or dialogue in an eavesdropping situation.

\section{Dialogical speech}
\subsection{Prescriptive versus descriptive poetics of dialogue}
Dialogue is mainly regarded as the basic form of drama. Soliloquies and
non-dialogical epic communication structures are generally regarded as mere
additives. This implies a conflict-orientated theory of drama, although it
needs to be said that this description of drama applies to only one part of
the historical corpus of dramatic texts. Modern drama doesn't have to be
conflict-orientated.

This conflict-orientated theory elevates the actional dialogue, which is
designed to change the situation, to the norm and condemns non-actional
dialogue, where matters are discussed, regardless of whether they have any
bearing to the action. The latter kind is often found in comedies. 



\subsection{Duologue and polylogue}

We now have to make a distinction between Duologue and polylogue. A
duologue is a verbal exchange between two dramatic figures. A polylogue is
a verbal exchange between three or more dramatic figures. This distinction
is not merely quantative but also qualitative. A polylogue for instance can
convey a triadic relationship between two figures. Or two figures arguing
with each other and between a mediator or commentator.

Polylogues are semantically more complex because of the many semantic
changes of direction. There are several examples of polylogue, and in the
case of a polylogue the music can help distinguish the different
participants in the polylogue. At the same time it can blur the semantic
structure by different figures singing different melodies and lyrics. As an
example of a polylogue I'll discuss {\em Kiss Me} from Act I in the next
chapter. 

\section{Frequency of interruption and speech length}

The frequency of interruption is roughly equivalent to the frequency of
semantic change in direction. In comedy, this tends to be higher than in
tragedy. The average frequency of interruption is an important stylistic
parameter and so is the variation within this frequency. A high frequency of
interruption exhibits a clear tendency to a close relationship between the
dialogue partners, as we will see in the analysis of {\em Kiss Me} in the
next chapter. That is: the higher the
frequency, the more marked is the dialogical and actional quality of the
verbal interchange. This his also the effect of increasing the tempo.

Dialogues with longer speeches introduce monological elements with a high
level of self-reflection, a greater degree of abstraction from the dramatic
situation and a slower tempo. This difference becomes particularly clear
whenever the frequency of interruption shows considerable variation.

A good example of how the change in this frequency can help to depict the
relationship between two dramatic figures is {\em Pretty Women} from Act
II. The Judge and Todd are at first quite distant, because of the social 
class-distance but as they discover a ''fellow taste in women'' they grow closer,
and so, the frequency of interruption increases until they sing together.
Seen in this light, a duet is probably one of the most intimate forms in musical
theater.

\section{Temporal relations: succession versus simultaneity}

Dialogues normally take the form of a succession of utterances, but even in a succession
there are overlaps. Disrupting this principle to produce
simultaneity, provides a mirror image to the inverse process of
stretching the pattern by introducing pauses or silences
between the individual utterances. This can hardly be considered an
innovation of modern drama. Modern drama was the first to begin to
employ this device with any measure of innovative consistency. Pauses and silences
always reflect some kind of disrupted communication. In classical drama,
a period of silence is deployed to create suspense, to emphasize certain aspects or to allow
reaction-time
for the audience. Successful verbal communication is, therefore regarded as
the norm.

The pause is used very effectively in {\ST}, {\em
Epiphany}:
\begin{quotation}
You, sir? {\em (Pause)} Who, sir? {\em (Pause)} How about a shave?
\end{quotation}
Or the beggar woman:
\begin{quotation}
Alms, {\em (Pause)} Alms, {\em (Pause)} for a desperate woman
\end{quotation}
Or in {\em Wait}:
\begin{quotation}
\ldots Let it brew {\em (Pause)} Wait.
\end{quotation}

Many speeches in {\ST} have a tendency to be length and thereby creating suspense.
Inversely, when the speeches are short, as in {\em A Little Priest}, the effect is
comic.

\section{The relationship between dialogues}

The temporal relationship between dialogues is also succesive. Two
dialogues may be presented simultaneously as a dialogical aside, an example
of which is the full {\em Kiss me} sequence. The temporal overlapping of
two or more dialogues is a common feature in densely populated scenes in
which the polylogue is often divided into many separate conversations
simply by the way the figures are grouped on stage. This is a common
device in opera, of which there is an abundance of examples in the operatic
literature.

\subsection{The syntagmatics of dialogue}

In the analysis of dialogue at least three perspectives exist:
\begin{enumerate}
\item how the individual parts of the utterance interrelate
\item the relationship of the utterance to previous utterances.
\item the relationship of the utterance to previous utterances by other
figures.
\end{enumerate}

\subsubsection{How the individual parts relate}
An utterance can be coherent in it semantic orientation and the way it
refers to the dramatic situation. It can also contain changes of semantic
direction (as we have seen in the {\em Epiphany}), and changes in the
situational references. It is therefore inherently dialogical in character in so
far as its various segments can be assigned different levels of
awareness, different types of figure portrayal or different roles of the
speaker. Semantic changes in direction may exhibit the transparent
tectonics of logical argument, like a {\em refutatio} or a rhetorical
pattern of disposition.

\subsubsection{How an utterance relates to the previous utterances by the
same figure}

How an utterance relates to a previous utterance by
the same figure suggests more far-reaching questions of semantic
coherence and stylistic homogeneity of utterances by one
figure in both a single dialogue and the dramatic text as a whole. It
informs us of the verbal disposition of a certain figure. His perspective
is determined by the semantic equivalences of all his utterances. The
recurrence of certain stylistic features delineates the contours of the
figure's identity and distinguishes him from other characters. Examples of
this are quotes of previous utterances or idiosyncratic utterances.

\subsubsection{How an utterance relates to previous utterances by other
figures}
How does an utterance
relate to immediately preceding utterance by the dialogue partner?
To understand this relationship it is perhaps preferable to realize that there are
two extremes: complete unrelatedness and identity. In the next table some characteristics of both
will be given:

\begin{tabular}{l|l}\hline\hline\\
{\sc Identity} & {\sc Complete unrelatedness}\\ \hline
No change in semantic orientation & Total semantic incoherence \\
'Consensus dialogue' & 'Talking past each other' 
\& 'Disrupted communication' \\ \hline
\end{tabular}

The complete semantic break must be evaluated as a refusal to communicate
and as an expression of unwillingness to answer. For an example of this, I
refer to the first part of {\em Kiss Me}. Normally speaking however, the
relationship between one speech and the next lies somewhere between these
extremes of identity and complete unrelatedness. The second speech
generally picks up certain elements in the first, but places them in a
different context. The first speech always gives the speaker the opportunity
to choose between two alternatives. Negation and qualification are
particularly common features of conflict orientated classical drama. H.G.
Coenen's analysis\footnote{H.G. Coenen, {\em Elemente der Racineschen
Dialogtechnik} 1961} establishes a complete
repertoire of variants, tackling two main aspects:
\begin{enumerate}
\item the choice of the point of reference in the preceding speech or
utterance; and
\item the way this point of reference is treated in the second speech or
utterance.
\end{enumerate}
The point of reference is often the 'sign content', that is: the subject
matter or the idea, of the first. Another way of referring to it is the
{\em captation benevolenti{\ae}} for example which recognizes the emotional
state of the dialogue partner in a conciliatory way, only to reject his or
her wishes. An example of this {\em Wait} in Act I.

When the 'sign' is not the point of reference, the speaker is not
responding to the content, but to the fact that the subject has been raised
in the first place. The first speech is taken up by its actional role.
Again {\em Wait} is a good example of this.

Reference to the communication process plays no more than a subordinate role
in classical drama because it only occurs when dialogical communication is
disrupted.

The processing of the chosen point of reference by the second speaker can
be done by applying two strategies:
\begin{enumerate}
\item he can show that the opposite is true;
\item he can invalidate his dialogue's partner's arguments; this is a
weakened form of negation, because it does not propose an opposing view.
\end{enumerate}

Should the second speaker wish to show that the opposite be true, an entire series of rhetorical and dialectical arguments the speaker
may rely:
\begin{enumerate}
\item by invoking some other authority e.g {\em communis opinio} or the {\em
argumentem ad hominem}, the latter being referring to earlier opinions
expressed by the speaker; and,
\item {\em demonstratio ad oculos}, in which the speaker shows the
contradiction between the words spoken and what actually is happening; and,
\item reference to preconditions; and,
\item reference to future consequences; and,
\item {\em reductio ad absurdum}; and,
\item rejection of the {\em propositio}; and,
\end{enumerate}
The invalidation of the first speakers argument by the second may also be
done by the above principles. Coenen's typology assumes successful communication.

\section{The rhetoric of dialogue}

When one examines rhetorical speech and classical form of dialogical speech
in drama we find a great affinity. The question in this section is: how then
does rhetoric work in dialogical speech?
\subsection{{\em Logos}--{\em Ethos}--{\em Pathos}}

The main function of rhetorics is to persuade or convince. The
basic strategies applied to attain this goal are so general they can also be
applied to drama. The three basic strategies arise from the question of
whether the predominant point of reference is:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The speech object ({\em logos} or {\em pragma})
\item The speaker ({\em ethos})
\item The listener ({\em pathos})
\end{enumerate}
This triadic pattern partially overlaps with the referential, expressive
and appellative functions of Roman Jakobson's communication model, only its
content is more narrowly confined.
\subsubsection{{\em Logos}-strategy}
When a speaker applies the {\em logos}-strategy, his response will be partisan. This response can be narrative or descriptive,
e.g. narrative mediation of background action (exposition), or hidden
action, or argumentative (which is mainly used in drama).
\subsubsection{{\em Ethos}-strategy}
This strategy is based on efforts to establish the reliability and
credibility of the speaker who is then able to develop his own moral
integrity or factual authority into the main argument. An example of this in {\ST} is the contest
between Pirelli and Todd which will be discussed in the next chapter.
\subsubsection{{\em pathos}-strategy}
This strategy is designed to arouse strong emotions in the audience so as
to  convince of the speaker's position.  Also certain verbal techniques can be used:
\begin{enumerate}
\item an exaggerated style, full of metaphors. (See Pirelli's speeches in the {\em
Contest});
\item appelative structures such as the rhetorical question; and,
\item the apostrophe to the listener; and,
\item the impassioned exclamation; and,
\item non-verbal: the showing of emotive objects; and,
\item non-verbal: expansive and emotionally laden gestures; and,
\item And in modern drama there is a new pathos of understatement.
\end{enumerate}

