Next to Normal

An excellent example of a Horby element in the music of Next to Normal is the element of progression. There are three songs entitled "Hey" throughout the play. The first one is the beginning of Henry and Natalie's uncertain relationship. The second is Henry's attempting to rekindle their relationship, and the third is comprised of more uncertainty, but this time the unsureness is in their relationship's future.

Another element is choice. Nearly every song is in a different genre and key. This may sound chaotic in theory, but the play is about mental illness after all. Each situation is different, so each song's being different is most fitting as well as most effective.

Topdog/Underdog

The theatricals mirrors in Topdog/Underdog seemed unrelated at the beginning of the play, but by the end, it appears that both of them are united by control. The card game is a trick that is all in the hands of the dealer. Lincoln is the master of this illusion, so much so that he even makes Booth think that he learned Lincoln's moves. This relates to President Lincoln in real life. He ruled the country, so he had a lot of power in his hands. His power was then taken by Booth, when he was killed, both in the play and in reality.

Water By The Spoonful

Quiara Alegria Hudes creates different worlds in Water By The Spoonful. There is the real, physical world in which the characters live and the online world, where the characters frequently interact. In certain points in the play, we see these two worlds collide with one another.

The most remarkable example of these worlds coming together in my opinion is in scene seven. In this scene, we see Odessa, AKA "Haikumom" interacting with other characters in the real world for this first time. Online, she is a saint of sorts: all the addicts look to her as a solid rock on which to rely and for hope that the addiction can be overcome. In real life though, she curses quite often, contradicting the way she censors everyone else on the forum. We also learn that she abandoned her two daughters when they were ill, resulting in the death of one of them.

I feel that this scene reflects back to Yaz's lesson on dissonance. Odessa in reality is completely off key from the way she is on the internet. This scene completely throws the audience off from what they had been led to believe about "Haikumom" so far and changes the pace of the play.

'Tis Pity She's A Whore

'Tis also a pity I'm slacking on my blog. Since I didn't read the entry prompt, my artifact project was comprised of things forbidden on this post. I know they weren't forbidden for the project, but I still feel like I did a bad job. Whoopsies...

Anyway, to the real subject of this post: The quotes I've selected and their corresponding poster designs show the pain and darkness which lie underneath the entirety of the play.

My first quote selection would have to be from Putana in Act 3 Scene 3, "'Tis too late to repent now. Heaven help us." For a poster, I see a solid black background with a pair of bloody hands in praying position, the only thing illuminated. The lettering of the title would be white and the quote would be printed in red.

Another quote I like is also from Act 3: "I'm sick, and sick to th' heart." This was said by Soranzo in Scene 2. A neat poster for this would be a dirty, aged, and distressed Red Cross flag covering the entire background, and in the foreground, the sad hunched silhouettes of Giovanni, Soranzo, and Annabella in black at the bottom of the poster. Within the black along the bottom edge would be the quote in red, and the title would be above the cross in black.

My final quote choice is "The more I strive, I love; the more I love, the less I hope," Giovanni, Act 1 Scene 2. This poster would focus solely on Giovanni, his silhouette, purple, in the bottom left corner, on knees with his head in his hands. The background is black. An ivory spotlight beams down on him from the top right corner. The bottom right of the light beam is the quote, the title across the top.

House of Trials

Assuming the norms of Spanish Golden Age comedias from reading House of Trials alone, a convention I would first note would be the lack of inner monologues and dramatic irony. As one reads through, they will notice the enormous amount of asides given by the characters. They communicate with the audience almost as much as they do the other characters, which leads to another convention: lack of the fourth wall. The characters seem to know that they are in a play. In act one scene one, Celia complains: "That's great! A monologue in the middle of the night by candelight? God forbid!" Another even more straightforward moment comes from act three scene one. Castaño, while dressing in women's clothes, says, "Please remember, ladies, that this is a play. Don't think that I hatched this scheme myself. I don't want to fool any of you, especially not Your Excellency." Both of these elements are interesting choices, and I believe they make the play more comical.

Comments!

http://wellhithereyou.blogspot.com/2013/11/eurydice.html?showComment=1383760314143#c636878529426590733

http://jenniferdownes.blogspot.com/2013/11/terrance-mcnally-love-valour-compassion.html?showComment=1383760691847#c6736771774143592771

http://paulina2130.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-childrens-hour.html?showComment=1383760842280#c6918132864975629646

http://wellhithereyou.blogspot.com/2013/11/the-childrens-hour.html?showComment=1383761105299#c8598012586522435740

http://jenniferdownes.blogspot.com/2013/11/eugene-scribe-glass-of-water_6.html?showComment=1383776777767#c2719829131918586531

Show & Tell Posting #2 - The Clean House by Sarah Ruhl

The Clean House, written by Sarah Ruhl, is the play I chose to read and write about on my blog. It was written in 2004 and premiered at Yale Repertory Theatre. This play can be found in the November 2004 issue of American Theatre magazine.

Lane, a doctor, hires Matilde to be her live-in maid. Matilde spends much of her time thinking of the perfect joke. Virginia, Lane’s sister, visits Lane's home while she’s not there, and she and Matilde make an agreement to let Virginia secretly clean the house, since she actually likes to. One day, while they are folding laundry, they find a pair of underwear that are not Lane's, and grow worried that Charles, Lane's husband, might be having an affair. Right then, Lane comes home and reveals that Charles is indeed having an affair with an older woman who’s his patient, Ana. At the end of the first act, Charles and Ana arrive at Lane's house. The second act begins with the surgery and the story of how they fell in love. We are then back to the end of act one. Charles and Ana apologize to Lane. Ana shortly becomes very ill, and Charles makes an excursion to Alaska to find a tree with healing properties. Upon visiting Ana, Lane knows her cancer is back. Lane takes Ana into her home to care for her. Ana knows she will die soon but wants to die before Charles gets home. Matilde whispers the perfect joke to her, and Ana dies gently, laughing. Charles returns, grieving.

One interesting dramaturgical choice made by Ruhl was to have Matilde be Brazilian and Ana be Argentinean. When they first meet, they speak each others language to one another, with slight variations and accents. I believe Ruhl did this in order to create a connection between the two and therefore more of an initial conflict between Lane and Ana. Lane feels very inferior to Ana and now she does not even have the same bond with her maid as Ana does, although later in the play she forgives Ana and cares for her. 

Another interesting choice I found was in the set design. Both of the houses were integrated into one. I think this also had to do with the unity of the separation and the togetherness of the occurrences. Even while Ana and Charles are enjoying time out on the balcony, they are still a part of Lane's life, because she doesn't stop thinking about them and she can't get Charles out of her head. Her home is still his after all.

I found this play very interesting, and it turned out a lot better than I had expected. I would really like to see a stage production to see the magic played out.

Eurydice

The first quote that I would choose from Eurydice would be: "NO ONE KNOCKS AT THE DOOR OF THE DEAD!" This quote comes from the very tail end of the second movement, scene 20 loudly proclaimed by the stones. I chose it because it is an extremely loud, bold, and macabre statement that captures one's attention and peaks interest. It would be a sturdy base to a production; it creates great tension and a definite line between the overworld and the underworld. The knock that is referenced in this quote is Orpheus arriving in the underworld to find Eurydice, and the stones are clearly objecting him. I could see a pointed, strong production centered around Eurydice and Orpheus's struggling relationship and how fate seems to be doing all it can to keep them apart, focusing mainly on the latter. A possible set could contain many levels and types of barriers and generally rough surroundings.

The second quote I would select is: "It will be imprinted on my heart like wax." Said by Eurydice, it comes from movement 1 scene 1, as Orpheus is asking for her to remember a melody he wrote for her. It is basically a vow from Eurydice to Orpheus that she will never forget him and the things he does for her. This production would be focused more around the romance aspect of the play and really toy with the audiences emotions. The set would reflect how young and in love the two are: very colorful with modern aspects and soft textures, with dramatic lighting, especially of the hues of pink and purple, whenever they communicated or spoke of one another in a loving way.

Love! Valour! Compassion!

     First off, I would like to say I really disliked this play. It was so hard to follow who was saying what and to whom. The cutaways to the audience during the action on stage was extremely confusing. I feel that I may have enjoyed it if I watched it, but as for reading it, that's a big NUH UH. 
     Had the historian read Love! Valour! Compassion! after reading The Glass of Water and The Children's Hour, he probably would have been pretty confused. The play didn't really follow any pattern at all. The ending was not even definite. It was more just like a glimpse into these eight men's tangled lives. I think one of the biggest differences between this play and the two we read prior to it is the fact that the fourth wall is broken repeatedly. Rather than creating a world that only the characters live in,  McNally opens it up to the audience's world as well. I believe he does this in order to show that one can relate to the characters in some way or another and also to show that this is real life for some people.
     As far as inferences about the culture of our time go, the historian would see a major change in the acceptability of homosexuality. In the play, a same-sex couple is celebrating their wedding anniversary. This never would have happened in the times of The Glass of Water and The Children's Hour. Also, capital-T Truth lies within each man within God as well. At one point, a character has an aside about God's unconditional love, a truth that all or at least most of the men seem to acknowledge. They each have their own individual beliefs and idea, and these are just as true in this world.
     I have tried to make as much sense as possible, though my thoughts about this play are still really jumbled. I hope this post is understandable; I tried my best.
      

The Children's Hour

     The main way The Children's Hour strays from the form of the traditional well-made play is the way that the play comes to an end. Rather than the play coming to a nice, happy, everyone-wins conclusion, we get a suicide, resulting in the loss of a friend for Karen, and in addition to that the loss of Karen's lover, and on top of all of that, the little brat who started all this mess is still being protected by her grandmother! This is absolutely not the type of ending one would see in a well-made play. I believe this choice was made in order to show that chaos of this sort really cannot have a happy ending or easy solution. These's people had their entire lives and futures ruined, and that's just something that is irreparable. 
     I do think that the play could be performed today. The main course of the story does not revolve around Karen and Martha being struggling lovers but really centers on the discord caused by a terribly spoiled child. The only time we actually see a bit of truth in the lie is before Martha kills herself. She admits to Karen that she actually does love her in the way accused; that she has always been different but could never quite put her finger on what it was. All the rest of the play is focused most on the ruination of their lives because of a lie, not their same-sex relationship.

The Glass of Water

A well-made play follows a strict set of rules and arrangement guidelines. "The Glass of Water" written by Eugene Scribe adheres to these rules and guidelines to a T -- with the exception of two instances making up the "fat" of the play. These parts do not add to and are not necessary to the plot but are simply just there for reasons the translator only knows.

It was very difficult for me to find these bits that seem unnecessary to the script. The only thing my evidently weak spidey senses slightly picked up was at the very beginning of chapter three. Bolingbroke enters the Queen's boudoir to see Abigail. Rather than getting right down to business, he rambles on for a few moments about the Tory ministry but never gets in to any details with this. It has nothing to contribute to the plot. Right after he makes this brief mention, the play goes on, and Bolingbroke tries to figure out why he was summoned to the Queen's chambers. This is not necessary for the reason that no real information was gained from this little fork off the main road. Abigail does not even go along with Bolingbroke, agree and add to his conclusion that "it won't be long now" but shuts him down with the opposite: "On the contrary... it's a great deal further off than you think." 

I am very interested to find out the two parts that Dr. Fletcher found and whether or not mine is one of them. Looking forward to talking about this in class!

Show & Tell Posting #1 - Third and Oak: The Pool Hall by Marsha Norman

     Third and Oak: The Pool Hall is written by Marsha Norman. It was first published in 1985 by Dramatists Play Service. The first production of this play in one act took place in the Actor's Theatre of Louisville. A film was later produced for Turner Classic Movies by Gladys Nederlander, starring James Earl Jones and Mario Van Peebles. This play can be found as an electronic edition or in Collected Plays, published by Smith and Kraus.
    Third and Oak: The Pool Hall is a second part to Third and Oak: The Laundromat, but it also functions on its own. The play takes place in a "small and seedy" pool hall at three in the morning. The owner, Willie, is wanting to put the hall up for sale soon. A young husband and disk jockey, Shooter, who is also the son of the owner's best friend, comes into the hall for a visit. In the time to pass, much more serious conversation takes place, including talk of family, loyalty matters, secrets, happiness, and friendship. 
     One dramaturgical choice that I found significant is the integration of the game of pool into their conversation. From nearly the first moment Shooter walks into the hall, he tries to get a round of pool started. Time after time, Willie shuts it down before he can even begin. As an example, Shooter's first attempt involved opening his cue case. In the next line, Willie closes the cue case and tells Shooter to leave the hall. Shooter tries to get Willie to play a game with him, but he refuses. As the play progresses, Willie allows Shooter to take a few shots on his own. Eventually Willie proceeds to lines up the balls for him, gives him pointers, and, by the end of the play, he actually asks Shooter, "So are we gonna play or not?" The progression of the pool game parallels the manner of their conversation. Willie initially wants no part in it, then he begins to share information with Shooter, and eventually opens up fully and they enjoy the bond they share through Shooter's father.
     Another interesting choice Norman chose is the inclusion of the conversation regarding what Shooter likes to do. He says the only thing he enjoys is playing pool, although according to Willie, "pool just ain't his game." This conversation puts Shooter into a panic when he realizes there really isn't anything else he likes to do, the first vulnerability the reader has ever really seen from him in the course of the play. The vulnerability then leads into anger and defensiveness. The point when Shooter starts to show his true feelings seems to be a turning point within the play between Shooter and Willie. Following this, Willie starts to feel a bit more sympathy for Shooter, encourages him to set up a round of pool to play and gives him tips. Willie steps up to be more of a father figure than before, and "perhaps begins to feel a little of Shooter's pain."

My Comments

http://wellhithereyou.blogspot.com/2013/09/night-mother.html#comment-form

http://jenniferdownes.blogspot.com/2013/09/marsha-norman-night-mother.html#comment-form

http://paulina2130.blogspot.com/2013/09/overtones.html#comment-form

http://lo-graham-theatre.blogspot.com/2013/09/judith-by-howard-barker.html#comment-form

http://alyseiadarbyscriptanalysis.blogspot.com/2013/09/trifles.html#comment-form

http://alyseiadarbyscriptanalysis.blogspot.com/2013/09/there-were-moments-we-all-as-student.html#comment-form

4000 Miles by Amy Herzog

     A recurring pattern or motif in 4000 Miles is a sense of being disconnected. Here are a few examples involving Leo. He is detached from his parents. He goes on a months-long bike trip across the country and doesn't speak to anyone. He has a skewed view of real life: as someone said in class, he's so open-minded that he's closed-minded. Within this skewed view of life lies an equally skewed view of relationships. When he brings Amanda home from the club, they don't connect on any level, not even in the main purpose of a casual hookup. With Bec, he believes they have the most romantic, perfect relationship, but she sees nearly the polar opposite and asks to break up, and as for Ginny? They grew up together as siblings but still views her as just another girl. He refuses to believe that their kiss is what sent her into therapy. Complete denial and disconnect.
     The scene in which Leo smokes marijuana with his grandmother is one of the few that link connection and disconnection. They separate from the real world by getting high, but they talk about a lot of things that they wouldn't have talked about on their own. 
     An example outside of Leo and even the world of the play lie in the stage directions. Herzog gives a lot of free range for interpretation. A few example of these directions include:

• "Time: September of a recent year -- maybe 2007."
• "She reenters with coffee and a plate with a few breakfast pastries on it, maybe a couple hard boiled eggs." 
• "He is stopped by the sound of a sickening thud (and maybe something breaking?) in the direction of Ginny's apartment."

By taking this step back and disconnecting in a way, she allows the director to really delve in and show what is most powerful to him or her.

   

Judith by Howard Barker

    Judith by Howard Barker was quite the piece to analyze. Besides being thoroughly confused the first time through by the language, I found another major dramatic question besides whether or not Judith would kill Holofernes. The MDQ is, "Will Judith stand up for her country, Israel?" The resulting answer is yes. 

    The first step of answering this question is clearly when Holofernes' head was severed. Next, Judith was tempted by her slain victims body and nearly fell into her human lust. She was then "punished" for a while and couldn't move, but with the help of her servant, got her senses together and ended up standing up for her country in the end. 

    While it isn't much word-wise,  I feel this aptly expresses the MDQ. 

'Night, Mother by Marsha Norman

    While the MDQ question of "Will Jessie kill herself?" is acceptable, I feel that there is another one within the play. This question is, "Can Jessie convince her mother to accept that she is going to kill herself?" Much of the play consists of Jessie trying to show her mother how things are going to work while living alone, explaining to her what she has arranged and how to obtain what she needs. She asks a few final questions, and does her best to explain to Mama why she is going to off herself. Her mother pleas with her to stay, but in the end she still goes into her room, locks the door, and kills herself, answering the first MDQ. I believe this answers my proposed MDQ as well. Her mother screamed at her and tried her best to stop her, but after she heard the shot, she got on the phone and called Dawson, just as Jessie asked her to do. Her mother did not encourage her to kill herself (what mother in their right mind would), but she did take her last requests to heart, and I feel that this shows an acceptance of her death.

Trifles by Susan Glaspell

     Trifles is a one-act play written by Susan Glaspell in 1916. It is actually based on a real murder that Glaspell extensively investigated. The play takes place in a rural house, the home of the murder victim, John Wright, and his wife, Minnie Wright. The main characters include the county attorney (George Henderson), the sheriff (Henry Peters), Lewis Hale (a neighboring farmer, Mrs. Peters, and Mrs. Hale.
     I believe the idea of producing a minimalistic rather than a naturalistic version of this play would be extremely effective. I honestly think that with so many little props and doohickeys around the set, the audience and/or readers can be distracted. I know I was. By focusing mostly on the character's actions and emotions, I feel the play would be much more powerful. Especially so would be the part near the ending in which Mrs. Hale frantically tries to hide the box containing the killed canary. Rather than being distracted by the patterned quilt and her shuffling through all her clothes and her bag with this lovely little box, the audience could truly feel that anticipation of the approaching group and wondering why the bazooms this chick has been trying to defend this lousy woman. Guilt for not visiting her sooner? Maybe. But the fact remains, she's a sucky person because she killed her husband. I digress... If I were ever to direct this play, I would definitely assume the minimalistic approach. 

Overtones by Alice Gerstenberg

     Overtones by Alice Gerstenberg was quite the task to read. My brain found it tricky to switch back and forth between Harriet and Hattie and Margaret and Maggie on such short notice. This made it all the more intriguing, and I must say I was compelled to scrutinize it over again twice.

     I do believe that the "inner selves" see and hear each other. For example, Hetty says, "Yes, you are not. There are circles under your eyes." Maggie says, "I haven't eaten since breakfast, and I'm hungry." If there was any question as to if she was actually replying, in parentheses before Maggie's line, it reads, "To Hetty."

     Now, as you can see, the script clearly states that they speak to one another. But, there is no concrete indication that they SEE each other, though the "inner selves" see their "trained selves." This is shown in the first few lines of the play, where Hetty compliments Harriet on her appearance. 

     One of the things I found most interesting in this world created by Gerstenberg, is that one person exists physically as two beings. I can't imagine walking down the street and seeing two people, really only making up one person, while the inner personifications could communicate with one another, and their own human representations, but not with other human representations... *brainsplosion*. Only in the world of theatre does this work and make sense. (Which is part of the reason why I love plays!) The rule for this communication, in which inners can speak to each other but only their human, exists throughout the play. It's not spelled out specifically, so viewers would pick up on it in the same manner readers do: context. 

     Overall, I found this play utterly fascinating, and would love to see it performed.