Le Sens de la Marche (The Way to Go) – 1953 by Arthur Adamov (Analysis)

 

Le Sens de la Marche (The Way to Go) – 1953

by Arthur Adamov

(Analysis) 

Arthur Adamov’s Le Sens de la Marche presents a world governed less by logic than by pressure—an invisible but constant force that compels individuals to act without understanding why. The play explores the tension between movement and meaning, exposing how human beings often continue forward not out of conviction, but out of habit, fear, and submission to authority.

At the center of the play is the paradox suggested by its title: there is a “way to go,” yet no one truly knows what that way signifies. Movement, which ordinarily implies progress or purpose, becomes hollow. The characters are caught in a cycle of action that lacks direction, revealing a fundamental disconnection between human effort and meaningful outcome. This sense of purposeless motion reflects a broader existential condition in which individuals search for clarity but encounter only ambiguity.

Authority plays a crucial role in sustaining this condition. Figures of control impose rules that are often inconsistent or irrational, yet they are rarely challenged effectively. The characters’ obedience is not driven by belief in the system but by an ingrained fear of deviation. This dynamic highlights how power can persist even when it lacks coherence, as long as individuals internalize the need to comply. The authority in the play does not need to justify itself; its presence alone is sufficient to maintain order.

Communication within the play further reinforces this instability. Dialogue frequently circles back on itself, breaking down into repetition and uncertainty. Words fail to clarify the situation; instead, they deepen the confusion. This collapse of language suggests that meaning is not only absent in action but also inaccessible through expression. The inability to communicate effectively isolates the characters, even when they are physically together.

Another significant aspect of the play is its portrayal of identity. The characters are not fully developed as distinct individuals; rather, they appear interchangeable, defined more by their roles within the system than by personal traits. This lack of individuality underscores the dehumanizing effect of the environment. As they conform to imposed patterns, they lose the capacity to assert themselves as unique beings. Their existence becomes mechanical, mirroring the repetitive and controlled nature of their actions.

The atmosphere of the play gradually shifts from questioning to resignation. Early moments of doubt or resistance fade as the characters become increasingly absorbed into the system they initially struggle to understand. This progression suggests that prolonged exposure to confusion and control can lead to acceptance, even when the conditions remain fundamentally irrational. The absence of a decisive climax or resolution reinforces this idea, as the characters remain trapped within the same framework at the end.

In its dramatic method, the play aligns with the principles of the Theatre of the Absurd, where traditional narrative structures are replaced by fragmentation and circularity. However, Adamov’s work is not merely an abstract experiment; it reflects deeper concerns about human existence in a modern world shaped by impersonal systems and uncertain values. The play captures a sense of dislocation, where individuals are compelled to act without understanding, to move without arriving, and to obey without believing.

Ultimately, Le Sens de la Marche offers a stark vision of human life as a continuous, unresolved journey. It portrays a reality in which direction exists in form but not in substance, leaving individuals suspended between motion and meaning, unable to reconcile the two.