Waiting as Domination in Harold Pinter’s The Dumb Waiter
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.53103/cjlls.v6i5.301Keywords:
The Dumb Waiter, Pierre Bourdieu, Waiting, Temporal Power, Theatre of the AbsurdAbstract
This study explores the role of waiting in Harold Pinter’s The Dumb Waiter (1960) and its effect on creating obedience in the characters trapped inside a bureaucratic system. The research aims to uncover the ideological function of enforced duration as a technique of domination, extending existing readings of the play beyond language and institutional discipline toward a properly sociological account of time. The paper focuses on the play’s genre, language, silence and central prop as forms of temporal domination with the help of close textual analysis that draws from Pierre Bourdieu’s (2000) theory of waiting, Javier Auyero’s (2012) work on bureaucratic delay and Harold Schweizer’s (2008) work on duration. The analysis shows that the obedience of Ben and Gus is not due to discourse or surveillance alone, but is the result of an administered waiting that undermines the capacity to question authority; the play’s unresolved ending is not open to interpretation, but confirms the effect. This work contributes to Pinter scholarship by proving The Dumb Waiter’s (1960) dramatic exploration of power is a dramatisation of unequal distribution of time, and provides an approach applicable to a wider understanding of absurdist drama and institutional control.
References
Auyero, J. (2012). Patients of the State: The Politics of Waiting in Argentina. Duke University Press.
Beckett, S. (1954). Waiting for Godot. Faber and Faber.
Billington, M. (2007). Harold Pinter. Faber and Faber.
Bloom, H. (Ed.). (1987). Harold Pinter: Modern Critical Views. Chelsea House Publishers.
Bourdieu, P. (2000). Pascalian Meditations (R. Nice, Trans.). Stanford University Press.
Brewer, M. F. (Ed.). (2009). Harold Pinter’s The Dumb Waiter. Rodopi.
Buck, R. A. (2005). Pinter’s The Dumb Waiter. The Explicator, 63(3), 178-181.
Burkman, K. H. (1971). The Dramatic World of Harold Pinter: Its Basis in Ritual. Ohio State University Press.
Camus, A. (1991). The Myth of Sisyphus (J. O’Brien, Trans.). Vintage International. (Original work published 1942)
Esslin, M. (2001). The Theatre of the Absurd (3rd ed.). Penguin Books.
Foucault, M. (1995). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison (A. Sheridan, Trans.). Vintage Books. (Original work published 1975)
Knowles, R. (1995). Understanding Harold Pinter. University of South Carolina Press.
Merritt, S. H. (1990). Pinter in Play: Critical Strategies and the Plays of Harold Pinter. Duke University Press.
Peacock, D. K. (1997). Harold Pinter and the New British Theatre. Greenwood Press.
Pinter, H. (1960). The Dumb Waiter [PDF]. That Theatre Company. Retrieved from http://that-theatre.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/the-dumb-waiter-script.pdf
Quigley, A. E. (1975). The Pinter Problem. Princeton University Press.
Raby, P. (Ed.). (2001). The Cambridge Companion to Harold Pinter. Cambridge University Press.
Regal, M. S. (1995). Harold Pinter: A Question of Timing. Macmillan.
Schweizer, H. (2008). On Waiting. Routledge.
Silverstein, M. (1993). Harold Pinter and the Language of Cultural Power. Bucknell University Press.
Sofer, A. (2003). The Stage Life of Props. University of Michigan Press.
Storey, J. (2017). Theories of Consumption. Routledge.
Taylor-Batty, M. (2014). The Theatre of Harold Pinter. Bloomsbury Methuen Drama.
Van Laan, T. (1981). The Dumb Waiter: Pinter’s Play with the Audience. Modern Drama, 24(4), 494-502.
Wardle, I. (1958). Comedy of Menace. Encore, (5), 28-33.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Muhd Mustafizur Rahman, Mostak Hossain

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All articles published by CJLLS are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. This license permits third parties to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon the original work provided that the original work and source is appropriately cited.