in both their lives, suggests that all family, career, and
social institutions are fundamentally destructive to
the human beings engaged in them.
The result of the many acts of violence is a
painfully introspective, existentially detached series
of dialogues that mix into the more brutal, direct
exchanges. The specter of alienation first appears
subtly when George asks Nick if he “like[s] it here,”
meaning the university, and Nick replies that “it’s
fine” in reference to the room. The men also repeat-
edly confuse each others’ wives in conversation.
Nick: [S]he... gets sick quite easily
George:... Martha hasn’t been sick a day in
her life
Nick: No, no; my wife... my wife gets sick
quite easily. Your wife is Martha.
George: Oh, yes... I know. (Act 2)At the top of act 2, the repeat of this miscommuni-
cation becomes a preamble for a lengthy discussion
of each other’s personal pains in relation to their
wives, in which neither really listens to the other,
except to cause small hurts.
Later, the alienation factor increases. At the end
of act 2, Honey describes a fantasy about children
and feeling exposed while George unsuccessfully
tries to make her aware of her husband’s liaison
with his wife. At the top of act 3, Martha has an
entirely rhetorical conversation about her feeling
abandoned and constantly crying, while violently
searching for “the bastards” who are hiding from her,
which eventually degrades into her mimicking the
sound of the ice in her glass, with “clink.” The most
terrifying of these moments occurs immediately
before the boy’s death is made official. Martha rants
about her attempts to protect the child from every
“failure”; George counters by reciting the Libera
Me, a responsory portion of the Roman Catholic
funeral mass. Increasingly, Albee’s characters illus-
trate the alienation imposed upon human beings by
the destructive institutions of their worlds, prepar-
ing the audience for the needed “exorcism” of the
fictional child.
George prepares to destroy the child by return-
ing to his use of the Latin mass. When he tells
Martha that Crazy Billy delivered a telegram that
their boy has been killed in a car crash, she screams,
“YOU... CAN’T... DO... THAT.” He engages
the others in the exorcism, first by fooling Nick
into reinforcing the idea that the boy’s death is not
within George’s “power,” then by looking to Honey
to verify that he did indeed consume the telegram
(the only evidence) before her eyes. Martha contin-
ues to explore the stages of grief—first denial, then
anger, then bargaining (“you didn’t have to push it
over the EDGE,” then depression as she sinks into
a sudden awareness of her fatigue and lack of inter-
est in drinking, and finally reaches acceptance (“You
had to?” and “Just... us?”). The sacrifice and the
aftermath are complete as George and Martha face
the dawn of a new day alone.
Albee’s delicately constructed murder, revelation,
and mourning clearly attest to what the author sees
as the need for destructive human institutions to
be destroyed. But killing the lie on which George
and Martha’s marriage has been built does not leave
behind a nurturing marriage. Rather, it leaves behind
a world of uncertainty and terror. Within that terror,
however, is the hope for a better existence, one that
leaves behind destructive institutions like marriage,
with their violent, manipulative, and treasonous acts
of communication and interaction and the deep
psychic alienations experienced by their participants.
In the dawn at the end of Who’s Afraid of Virginia
Woolf? is the possibility, despite Albee’s inherently
cynical and sardonic view of the world, that human
beings may indeed be able to care for one another.
But only by obliterating the institutions that compel
them to control, alienate, and abuse each other will
that possibility ever be realized. That is a Virginia
Woolf of which to be afraid.
Ben FislerFamily in Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?
Lies, misunderstandings, and betrayals are the back-
bone of relationships in Who’s Afraid of Virginia
Woolf ?. So unrelenting and broad are the assaults
that neither Martha or George can be named the
aggressor in their cruel games. Simultaneously, Nick
and Honey reveal that while some couples might not
attack each other publicly, they are still victimized by
the fundamental destructiveness of relationships. All
couples are destroying each other with lies, manipu-Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? 135