Pablo Picasso, father of Cubism and pioneer of Neo-Expressionism, immortal in his fame, once said: “Everything you can imagine is real.” To the layman, the notion of Picasso may seem like an enigmatic escape; transcendence of reality is not easy to conceptualize. But for playwright Luigi Pirandello, these words represent an absolute truth. In his play Six Characters in Search of an Author, Pirandello tests this relationship between fiction and reality using the “Verismo” writing style. There is a fine line drawn between the six characters, who recognize themselves as such, purely creations of the writer, and the "actors", who are not meant to be characters at all but rather a representation of reality, of real people easily confused with these. sitting in the audience. And while it is true that everyone depicted in the play is inherently a Pirandello character, these characters are separated into two distinct groups: those who represent characters and those who represent real people. In attempting to differentiate these two groups, Pirandello gives masks to the characters, so that their singularity of emotion and their individual goals are visible throughout the play. It also depicts the actors and those associated with them as very tangible representations of real people; Due to the nature of the writing of "Verismo", the audience is meant to become genuinely confused by the presence of "real people" on stage, a space traditionally reserved for the progression of fictional events. However, as the play progresses, it becomes increasingly apparent that, despite attempts to separate the two groups, all of the people depicted in the play fall within Pirandello's definition of a character: a character with a "reality immutable” (Pirandello, 61). As the tragedy unfolds, the boundaries between characters and actors, between fiction and reality, blur. Although it appears that Pirandello took great care to separate depictions of what is real from those of what is not, the separate depictions of actors and characters and the subsequent mixing of roles reveal an underlying commentary. textual on the false nature of the action. all those depicted in the play, whether fictional or real, and the implications of this notion of falsity in relation to human nature. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an Original Essay At the beginning of the work, a foundation is laid to allow the audience to see the distinctive qualities of the characters throughout the play; this work has often been interpreted as an attempt by Pirandello to reveal the essential characteristics of the character. However, I feel like it defines the character so thoroughly in order to question the core characteristics of the person themselves. The contrast in the primary depictions of the characters and actors creates a juxtaposition of fiction and reality that is challenged later in the work. From the first time the characters appear on stage, they are depicted as physically and internally separate from real people. As the Father Character says, they are “more alive than those who breathe and wear clothes!” Less real, perhaps; but more real! (12). Although these characters are "alive", they are not in the same sense as the real person; unlike real people, Characters have no freedom of choice and are therefore condemned to repetitionperpetual of a single reality. This limitation is represented in the characters' conversations with the actors and in the use of masks and character descriptions in the text. The actors, however, are depicted as a representation of reality; nothing about their basic descriptions or actions could lead the audience to believe that they are anything other than accurate depictions of Pirandello's era. The clothes, the decor, the informal dialogues and the apparent spontaneity of their actions give the whole impression of an everyday reality. However, an undeniable stereotypical quality becomes more and more apparent as the work progresses. From the first scene, the director is the very example of serious theatrical management: authoritarian, frustrated and demanding. The depiction of the Leading Lady is even more extreme, a manifestation of haughtiness, vanity and self-importance. This contradiction between reality and impracticality is remarkable; although this does not change the fact that the actors are representative of real people, the inconsistency that is established quickly becomes an important theme throughout the play. Although the characters and actors are initially portrayed as contrasting representations of fiction and reality, their roles begin to differ. are mixed throughout history, the goal and objective become confused between the two categories, and the notion of free will is called into question. First, there is the fundamental problem of established roles; the fact that the characters and actors are all essentially Pirandello characters, and that all the characters (characters and actors) are played by real actors, creates a contradiction with the singularity of the objective established earlier in the play. Additionally, the characters begin to take on "real" qualities as the actors become increasingly one-faced, a trait initially reserved for fictional characters. This confusion of roles, of fiction and reality, ultimately reveals the false nature of all the characters and actors represented in Pirandello's work. When the Characters first enter the room, they not only have individual goals, but also a collective goal; they must find an author. Here begins the mixing of roles. The director is the first to be called upon to exchange his stereotypical role of authority for a more creative role, that of author. The next group called to exchange roles is the Characters; the writer-director, always demanding, orders them to go on stage and rehearse their story, and the Characters thus become their own actors. During this time, the actors study the characters so that they can reprise their roles and become characters on stage. However, when roles are returned to their original state, no one is content to play the role they were originally intended for, and only the actors remain constant in their singularity of purpose. The characters refuse to accept the actors' interpretation of their story; as the daughter-in-law exclaims: “I want to play my drama. Mine!” (53). The director also abandons his role to approach the scene as an actor and demonstrate the proper reenactment of the story. Only the actors remain completely constant in their stereotype and in their singular objective of acting. Through this transcendence of roles, it not only becomes evident that the boundary between fiction and reality is perhaps not as clear as it originally seemed, but also that the actors are more like characters than the characters themselves. As the characters become more..