But the critical response to the presentnversion is based on previous experiencenwith the work. I am forced tonadmit I have not seen The Caretakernon the stage before. But that was a kindnof advantage. The full effect of a Pinternplay—and particularly this onen—relies on the freshness. For the audience,nignorance is primarily responsiblenfor the menace and the ambiguitynthat typify Pinter’s work. In fact, Pinter’snprincipal contribution to thendrama is not his celebrated pausen(which inevitably fails to refresh), butnhis refusal to provide exposition as thentheater had known it for 2,500 yearsn— in short, his sadistic treatment ofnthe audience. The menace for whichnhe is famous stems primarily from hisnkeeping the audience in the dark.nBefore Pinter, when the curtainnwent up, the playwright immediatelynwent about his business of establishingnthe context and supplying the background.nPinter recognized the greatnvalue of the audience’s implicit trust.nHe realized what was always theren—the audience’s sheer lack of understandingnwhat it wasn’t told, its totalndependence on the playwright—andnby deliberately failing to fill in thengaps, he turned that situation to hisnadvantage. His effechveness as a dramatistnlies in his ability to hold ournattention in an absolute vacuum ofnexposition. Unfortunately, the tricknonly works the first time, and much ofnPinter is like a second-rate mysteryn—worthless once you know how itncomes out. The taut and harrowingnedge to the suspense is expended thenfirst time around. (Ironically, Betrayal,nwhich some consider Pinter’s mostnstunning achievement, is merely anninversion of this method as he divulgesnan abundance of exposition but releasesnit backwards.)nUnwittingly or not, The Caretakernitself becomes a perfect microcosm ofnthe effect Pinter has on us. It beginsnwhen Aston invites Davies, an agingnvagabond he just met, home withnhim. Like Pinter, Aston is a laconic,nvague figure, but he has guaranteednhimself the upper hand. Like Davies,nwe become the unsuspecting guest henhas welcomed into his parlor for thenpurpose of knocking us around a bit,nthough we never clearly understandnwhy. Of course, the circumstance be-n”With the debate raging over “Star Wars,”nit is a relief that a distinguished scientistnhas now explained the subject in a booknthat is brief, lucid and comprehensible.”n-The Wall Street JournalnHow To Make NudearnWeapons ObsoletenBy ROBEmr JASTROWnFounder of NASAs Institute for Space Studies andnFirst Cliairman of tine NASA Lunar Exploration Committeen”Robert Jastrow may have written the mostnimportant book of the twentieth century.”n—Jeffrey Hart, Human Eventsn”A dvances ih modern science give usna non-nuclear defense against missiles,”nsays Robert Jastrow in How to MakenNuclear Weapons Obsolete. “No developmentncould be more favorable to thencause of ending the nuclear arms race.nIf both the U.S. and U.S.S.R. have an effectivendefense against missiles, bothnnations must then recognize the futility ofna continued competition in buildingnweapons of mass destruction.”nRenowned for his ability to make thenmost complex scientific matters understandablento a lay audience, Dr Jastrownexplains what Star Wars is, how it works,nand how it can protect the world from thennuclear menace.nH B H AT YOUR BOOKSTORE, OR USE THIS COUPON H B HnMODERN SCIENCE LIBRARYnRO. Box 1168, White River Junction, VT 05001nPlease send me copies of How to Make Nuclear Weapons Obsolete atn$15.95 per copy. Enclosed is my check for $ or please charge mynn MasterCard D VisanNonSignature-nNamenAddress-nCity-n-State-nVermont residents please add 4% sales tax.nnn-Exp. date-n-Zip-nCOM ZnMAY 1986/45n