The entire time reading this play, I was trying to figure out what the poster for it would look like. Designs are something I really enjoy (though, I must admit, I'm not very good at).
The tag line for this play was the easiest part for me. Throughout the entire play, the women are figuring out things from the future and hearing of things that they will enjoy later in the play and want to stay around. For the tag line, I chose a line that Alex says in scene five. "Everyone is a native of somewhere." The reason I'm choosing this line is because, despite each of the women talking about the time that they came from, each one finds home in the future, whether it be the 1950s for Fanny and Alex, or later on for Mary. It also applies to each of the characters they meet along the way. Everyone comes from somewhere.
As for the posters, I'm looking at them in terms of each woman, then one all together. I imagine one with one of Fanny's letters and a quill in ink next to it on one side, and a tub of Cool Whip with a spoon in it on the other. The letter could say something along the lines of "Dear Grover, I'm getting married again. I met a charming man in 1955. I wonder if you'd enjoy that age. The date of our wedding is (Insert date for play showings here in large print), Love Fanny" or something of that nature.
Alex's would be the rickety bridge with mountains in the background, then at the end of the bridge is the George Troll sitting on his motorcycle holding a 1950s style microphone out to her.
Mary's would be her walking away into a red sunset down a paved road wearing pants with her skirt lying in the road behind her, with her travelers pack and explorer's hat on her head.
The one with all three of them would be the three of them sitting around a fire, still in their 1889 clothes, with an umbrella leaning against one log chair, and an eggbeater against another, with a tent behind them and packs leaning against it. Yes, it seems typical, but from the other posters I saw, much of them are only silhouettes of the three ladies with a map in the background, holding the umbrellas and eggbeaters. This is slightly different enough to not be typical.
Saturday, May 4, 2013
Thursday, May 2, 2013
Three Viewings Response
This play was definitely interesting to me. Trying to figure out how each of the three monologues related to each other without speaking the names of the people who were saying them was cool for me.
One of the people that I noticed was involved in each of the monologues, though not in a major way, was Margaret-Mary Walsh. By the funerals she attended, I'm making the assumption that she is an older woman who's much involved with the community that all these funerals are held in. And yes, I do think they're all in the same community one hour outside of Pittsburgh as Mac says, since many of the same people are mentioned. The people mentioned don't seem to be the kind that would travel very far from home to go to a funeral or such.
Another thing that seems apparent in each of the monologues is that every character has lost their significant other. Though Emil was never married to Tessie, he still loved her. Mac lost her husband and children in an attempt to kill herself. Virginia lost her husband to heart disease. Only the funeral in Mac's monologue had nothing to do with losing her loved one, and Emil's only involved Tessie's funeral near the end.
Something else similar in the monologues is that each of the characters meet someone for a meal in a restaurant. However, it's never the same one. It's like receiving any sort of news is easier when you're chowing down on a burger. I feel like that's involved because it's familiar for every person. Everyone goes out to get a bite to eat occasionally, and it's a moment of comfort in a play that's centered around death and funerals.
One of the people that I noticed was involved in each of the monologues, though not in a major way, was Margaret-Mary Walsh. By the funerals she attended, I'm making the assumption that she is an older woman who's much involved with the community that all these funerals are held in. And yes, I do think they're all in the same community one hour outside of Pittsburgh as Mac says, since many of the same people are mentioned. The people mentioned don't seem to be the kind that would travel very far from home to go to a funeral or such.
Another thing that seems apparent in each of the monologues is that every character has lost their significant other. Though Emil was never married to Tessie, he still loved her. Mac lost her husband and children in an attempt to kill herself. Virginia lost her husband to heart disease. Only the funeral in Mac's monologue had nothing to do with losing her loved one, and Emil's only involved Tessie's funeral near the end.
Something else similar in the monologues is that each of the characters meet someone for a meal in a restaurant. However, it's never the same one. It's like receiving any sort of news is easier when you're chowing down on a burger. I feel like that's involved because it's familiar for every person. Everyone goes out to get a bite to eat occasionally, and it's a moment of comfort in a play that's centered around death and funerals.
Fires In The Mirror Response
Being a series of monologues that are seemingly unrelated, Fires In The Mirror is easy to get lost in and find the focal point of the play. However, without the beginning monologues, much of the impact of the play could be lost.
Before the "Lousy Language" monologue, we see pictures of racism and prejudice from both the black community and the Lubavich community. Angela Davis told of the way racism began in the race for colonization of European countries. Leonard Jeffries showed how racism was still very apparent in his life because of the way Roots was manipulated to be less of an impact for the black community than it really was. Letty Cottin Pogrebin told of the way that her mother's cousin, Isaac, survived the Holocaust because he didn't "look Jewish."
Each of these monologues shows the basis of racism or prejudice for the communities involved. Once we reach "Lousy Language," Robert Sherman applies the things we've already seen to the riots in Crown Heights. It's not directly applied yet; that comes later in the play. But both communities are mentioned in one monologue for the first time in the play. Without the previous monologues, this one wouldn't have as much of an impact. The descriptions of word use wouldn't have that basis of proof from the previous monologues to back it up.
These beginning monologues show snapshots into the lives of all the communities in Crown Heights so that a decision can be made without bias as to whether the driver of the car meant to kill the little boy or not.
Before the "Lousy Language" monologue, we see pictures of racism and prejudice from both the black community and the Lubavich community. Angela Davis told of the way racism began in the race for colonization of European countries. Leonard Jeffries showed how racism was still very apparent in his life because of the way Roots was manipulated to be less of an impact for the black community than it really was. Letty Cottin Pogrebin told of the way that her mother's cousin, Isaac, survived the Holocaust because he didn't "look Jewish."
Each of these monologues shows the basis of racism or prejudice for the communities involved. Once we reach "Lousy Language," Robert Sherman applies the things we've already seen to the riots in Crown Heights. It's not directly applied yet; that comes later in the play. But both communities are mentioned in one monologue for the first time in the play. Without the previous monologues, this one wouldn't have as much of an impact. The descriptions of word use wouldn't have that basis of proof from the previous monologues to back it up.
These beginning monologues show snapshots into the lives of all the communities in Crown Heights so that a decision can be made without bias as to whether the driver of the car meant to kill the little boy or not.
Saturday, April 13, 2013
Water By The Spoonful Response
In Water By The Spoonful, there are two worlds. One of the physical variety, and one of the viral. In Scene eight, Elliot and Yaz discover the world that Odessa has created for herself to live in. A world where she isn't a crack addict, where she can write haikus and not worry about how bad she wants to relapse. Orangutan is there waiting for Haikumom, but she instead meets her relatives.
This moment is pivotal for the relationship between Elliot and Yaz. Yaz learns of his addiction to pain pills after having four surgeries on his leg from Iraq. She learns how he tried to deal with the addiction alone, and begins to feel bad for herself.
This moment is also important because it's shortly after Elliot has begun pushing the correct buttons to make Odessa relapse. Orangutan sees Haikumom online, but it's not actually Haikumom. She won't see Haikumom after this, not for a long time. It's that last moment of daily routine before everything begins to change in each of the worlds. Chutes&ladders learns more about Orangutan and they begin to become a real life friendship instead of only online. This scene is the pivotal moment of change for everything.
This moment is pivotal for the relationship between Elliot and Yaz. Yaz learns of his addiction to pain pills after having four surgeries on his leg from Iraq. She learns how he tried to deal with the addiction alone, and begins to feel bad for herself.
This moment is also important because it's shortly after Elliot has begun pushing the correct buttons to make Odessa relapse. Orangutan sees Haikumom online, but it's not actually Haikumom. She won't see Haikumom after this, not for a long time. It's that last moment of daily routine before everything begins to change in each of the worlds. Chutes&ladders learns more about Orangutan and they begin to become a real life friendship instead of only online. This scene is the pivotal moment of change for everything.
Detroit Response
Trying to figure out why this play could be called Detroit actually wasn't that hard of a stretch. When Frank talks about the neighborhood having its heyday nearly 30 years ago, it reminded me a lot of how the city of Detroit was at its high point in the 1950s. Since then, it has steadily declined (both the neighborhood and the city) so that things aren't as good as they once were.
In the city of Detroit, much of the economy was fueled by sports teams and vehicle factories. After the first interstate was built in the 1950s and '60s, much of the better off population moved to the suburbs of Detroit. This left the city itself to slowly decline and lose much of its luster.
The same thing happens to the neighborhood that Ben, Mary, Sharon and Kenny (Roger) live in. Frank tells Ben and Mary of what the neighborhood used to look like when he moved in. Kids went outside and played and built lemonade stands, everyone knew their neighbors and were friendly, and life just seemed like an episode of Leave it to Beaver. However, much like the city of Detroit, the neighborhood decline. Neighbors were less likely to acknowledge the people living in the house next to them. The thought of asking for a cup of sugar wasn't applicable in the more modern time. And people like Sharon and Kenny showed up in the area, causing what was already a delicate balance of self-sufficiency to burst into flames. Literally.
The name Detroit is given to this play because, like the deterioration of the city of Detroit, the characters' lives and neighborhood deteriorate until there's nothing left. Ben and Mary are having to live in a hotel. Frank comes to take his house back. And we don't even know what happened to Kenny and Sharon. It's all constantly falling apart.
In the city of Detroit, much of the economy was fueled by sports teams and vehicle factories. After the first interstate was built in the 1950s and '60s, much of the better off population moved to the suburbs of Detroit. This left the city itself to slowly decline and lose much of its luster.
The same thing happens to the neighborhood that Ben, Mary, Sharon and Kenny (Roger) live in. Frank tells Ben and Mary of what the neighborhood used to look like when he moved in. Kids went outside and played and built lemonade stands, everyone knew their neighbors and were friendly, and life just seemed like an episode of Leave it to Beaver. However, much like the city of Detroit, the neighborhood decline. Neighbors were less likely to acknowledge the people living in the house next to them. The thought of asking for a cup of sugar wasn't applicable in the more modern time. And people like Sharon and Kenny showed up in the area, causing what was already a delicate balance of self-sufficiency to burst into flames. Literally.
The name Detroit is given to this play because, like the deterioration of the city of Detroit, the characters' lives and neighborhood deteriorate until there's nothing left. Ben and Mary are having to live in a hotel. Frank comes to take his house back. And we don't even know what happened to Kenny and Sharon. It's all constantly falling apart.
Monday, April 8, 2013
Buried Child Response
With The Glass of Water and Noises Off!, it's very easy to tell that they are Well-Made Plays. Buried Child, however, throws readers for a loop. There's three acts--check--, there are things the audience sees that other characters don't know about--check--, but there isn't a distinct scene that encompasses the play and shows how it all relates together. Instead, as the entire play comes together, it becomes more and more confusing until the end when Tilden comes in holding the child, and it seems like everything has just blown up in pure confusion.
But everything that happens, though disturbing, could seem normal in some Norman Rockwell-meets-Rocky Horry world. The thing that catches our attention and shows us that the plot of this play is not so normal is Vince's girlfriend, Shelly. She acts as the audience on stage. When Vince and Shelly first arrive at the house, she says Vince should just leave because the man that is supposed to be his grandfather doesn't even recognize him. Later, when Vince comes back into the house drunk to oblivion as she's holding his uncle's wooden leg, she's basically done with life and just leaves.
Shelly seems to be the thing that stands out as different from this play. She gives us the perspective that we, as the audience, generally have. Such as "Why the hell is Tilden asking me/her to peel these carrots that apparently came out of a garden that doesn't exist?" And instead of what we would originally believe to be straight out of a Norman Rockwell painting, that vision, along with Shelly's is shattered as it becomes an image of infidelity, murder, and secrecy that is just plain creepy.
Is what we see what we get? I'm not quite sure. Is there a garden in the backyard or is it an empty pasture or a freaking torture chamber that we don't know about? It's all really frustrating, but it seems as though this play heavily relies on the ambiguity of it everything. The pretend garden, whether Ansel was a murdered basketball player or not, whether the farm was "flowing with milk and honey" as Dodge says. It's all left unsaid.
So I would say, no, this isn't a Well-Made Play. Everything is not as it seems because, well, we don't see a lot of it. And Norman Rockwell paintings will now haunt my dreams.
But everything that happens, though disturbing, could seem normal in some Norman Rockwell-meets-Rocky Horry world. The thing that catches our attention and shows us that the plot of this play is not so normal is Vince's girlfriend, Shelly. She acts as the audience on stage. When Vince and Shelly first arrive at the house, she says Vince should just leave because the man that is supposed to be his grandfather doesn't even recognize him. Later, when Vince comes back into the house drunk to oblivion as she's holding his uncle's wooden leg, she's basically done with life and just leaves.
Shelly seems to be the thing that stands out as different from this play. She gives us the perspective that we, as the audience, generally have. Such as "Why the hell is Tilden asking me/her to peel these carrots that apparently came out of a garden that doesn't exist?" And instead of what we would originally believe to be straight out of a Norman Rockwell painting, that vision, along with Shelly's is shattered as it becomes an image of infidelity, murder, and secrecy that is just plain creepy.
Is what we see what we get? I'm not quite sure. Is there a garden in the backyard or is it an empty pasture or a freaking torture chamber that we don't know about? It's all really frustrating, but it seems as though this play heavily relies on the ambiguity of it everything. The pretend garden, whether Ansel was a murdered basketball player or not, whether the farm was "flowing with milk and honey" as Dodge says. It's all left unsaid.
So I would say, no, this isn't a Well-Made Play. Everything is not as it seems because, well, we don't see a lot of it. And Norman Rockwell paintings will now haunt my dreams.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)