Writing Exercises

I thought the exercises were really interesting and also challenging. Like Montana said, I think it started out confusing because we didn't really know what to do or what we should be thinking about, even though there was no real "right" way to do it. I didn't really know what to expect in the beginning and I really liked how my play on the first day evolved. Even though we just started writing it in class and continued a little more for homework, I realized there were so many different directions I could go in and I loved thinking about which story I wanted to tell. I don't know if I should continue developing it or not, but it was interesting to see how the nouns I used to describe myself led to what the set of the play consisted of, and how the two people who entered the stage ended up relating to each other. What starting out to be a broken up boyfriend and girlfriend ended up being a man and his therapist with a twist about where he is and why he's there. It was really weird how that was what my play turned into but I really liked how it came to that.

For two of the three days we had to write about what we were thinking or feeling at that moment. Even though this might seem simple, it was actually interesting to discover how I actually had to think about what I was thinking and think about what I was feeling at that moment. On the third day when we were watching the snow outside and we had to describe what we saw, heard, felt, and noticed, I realized I never really think about the sounds that I hear or the things that I see, I usually just hear and see them. With this exercise I actually took note of what was going on and how I was feeling and I found that really interesting.

I also loved the imaginative journey Ms. Connell took us on. I could only imagine how different each person's story became and I never did anything like it before. I found it hard to think of each object on the spot - what we were going back home to get, what the animal had in its teeth, what we had to take out of our backpack - even though maybe it should have come naturally.

Each exercise made me think of things I don't normally think about, for example naming nouns to describe ourselves, or even listing different kinds of trees (even though I think the point was to get our brains working and our pencils moving). These exercises made me look at different things about myself that I never really noticed before. One of the most challenging parts of the exercises was when we had to match the fairytale with the story we told. For some reason I found this to be so difficult, and I don't know if it was because I couldn't think of any fairytales to begin with, or if it was just difficult to find the similarities between my story and the fairytale. I was also not used to writing plays about witches and Thai iced tea and creating scenes from these random combinations was definitely an interesting challenge and something I'm not used to. The scene that we developed on the first day was more of what I'm used to, whereas it was hard for me to connect to these three scenes that were so different from what I usually write. I don't really know why that is, but I didn't feel as attached to the work as I did other times.

I thought it was really interesting how different stories, images, moments, feelings, and nouns that we listed all came together to make really interesting plays we would never think of otherwise. Writing down everything in silence and thinking of everything on the spot was both challenging and inspiring and really enabled me to discover unique stories.

Critique on View from the Bridge

Today I saw now one of my new favorite plays, View from the Bridge, which I would easily give a 9/10. The play is set in early 20th century Brooklyn where immigrants are really beginning to move into the US. The play centers around the beautiful Scarlett Johansson and the fantastic Liev Schreiber. The play is about how Liev, the uncle, is unable to let go of his niece, Scarlett, into the world because he has raised her as his own daughter. The actors throughout were amazing and player their roles expertly. The most intriguing part of the though play though was the actual set. The play involves several different setting so, the producers, in order to tackle this challenge without much problems made a spinning set that contained 4 different backs that would be used accordingly. The play focuses on the challenege Liev's character has with accepting a new world full of illegal immigrants from Europe etc. He represents the old fashinoned father is given absolute rule over his family and has decision over everything. Overall, this play was superb and I would recommend it to everyone.

Exercises in Class

The exercises in class have been confusing. The first class was weird because no one really knew what we were "supposed to be doing". What we really didn't know was that there isn't anything that is "supposed" to happen. The second time we did the exercise was the most interesting for me. The work that I got out of it was really inspirational for me and I really want to continue developing what I wrote that night. Having to put in the person who has inspired me the most in the life into my play sprouted all these other scenes that I really want to add in. The first day we did the exercise, I had this picture in my head about what I wanted the scene to revolve around and what I wanted the characters in each monologue to be talking about. The scene is between a mother and a son and I wanted them to discuss the father's abandonment of the son, completely. The scene ended up being about their struggle to be more "Jewish" in their neighborhood. I thought that was really cool. By simply writing for 5 minutes at a time without really thinking about it, I got something really interesting out of my work that I never would have though would have happened. I don't know if I want to develop that story anymore, but it is certainly an option. The last exercise day was the most interesting for me because I always love those exercises where someone just describes where you are going and your own imagination makes everything up. The items that I ended up picking actually had a theme between them, which I thought would never ever happen. I have gotten my most substantial and fascinating work from these exercises and I really want to continue doing them.

Time Stands Still

I saw a show with my mom this past Friday, and I had a yen to tell you guys about it, so here goes...

The play, "Time Stands Still," was written by Donald Margulies in 2009. The fact that the play was written so recently, and the information that you (Jenny) shared with us about your input into the production of your newest play, made me wonder how much say Margulies had in this production. Although I had an overall positive reaction to the show, there were definitely some weird choices, and I would've liked to hear what the playwright had to say about them. However, these choices were mostly acting-related, and I'd rather talk about the writing craft and techniques here, because I definitely paid more attention to that (the curse of this class!).

First of all, there seemed to be a lot of small talk written into the script. Now, I personally appreciate that and enjoy watching it (as long as it's done well...which it was). However, I couldn't help thinking about the conversation we had in class about condensing natural conversation, because a play is only one or two hours long and simply cannot include every little tangent and trivial conversation that people have in real life. I found...I think...that most of the small talk in the show was relevant because it helped add a sense of character and also gave the audience a clear idea of the relationship between the different characters. But, I also feel that these parts of the play were only interesting to watch and would be very dry to read on paper. I could be wrong, but I found myself wishing I had a script to follow along with, or to refer to after, so I could see how I would react to it in my own head, without the dynamic performances in front of me.

The second thing that really struck me about the show might have been (as I said) due to "weird" acting choices or choices made by the writer--I couldn't tell. This play had a cast of four, and as I watched, I found myself connected to three of them very strongly. I could identify with them, or at least believe that they were real and that their problems mattered. However, the fourth character, played by Alicia Silverstone, seemed very hollow...almost like a caricature. She was definitely written to be the most shallow of all of them (although, by the end, she contributed a great deal to the overall message of the show)--one character was a photographer, one character was a journalist (both traveled to war zones to document such atrocities), one was a photo editor of a magazine...and then Silverstone's character was an "event planner." This was meant to add an element of humor to the show. And it definitely did...but maybe a little too much. This was my problem with her acting/the character (it still remains to be seen which one of those was the root of the problem). Almost every single line that the party planner character said got a laugh from the audience. However, not every single thing she said seemed to have a "funny" message behind it! Either Silverstone played the character way to ditzy, or Margulies wrote the lines so that this character could bring little to no depth to the play. Either way, this choice bothered me--it doesn't seem realistic to have three serious, intense characters and one light, fluffy, vapid character.

As I said, there was a clear message behind the show, one that the party planner outright said to the audience: focusing only on the serious, the upsetting, the harrowing, may not always be the best way to lead one's life. The way in which Margulies communicated this idea was very effective, and by the end of the show, I definitely felt a tie to these characters and their stories (or at least, 3/4 of them). Although there were frustrations along the way, I'll take Margulies' message to heart and say that for the most part, I really enjoyed this play.

A Play On War

I saw "A Play On War" this weekend. It was one of the weirdest things I've ever seen, but once I figured out what was going on I enjoyed it. I've been thinking a lot more lately about the script's intention vs. that of the director/actors, and this play really made me wonder about that (probably because I knew some background of the writing process). Like Hugo, I kind of wish I knew the original play "Mother Courage", because it took me about fifteen minutes to understand what was happening at all. The costumes, set, and acting were so bizarre (intentionally), that I think it inhibited the audience from getting a grip on the play; I wish it had started out a little calmer, just so the audience could get a basic understanding of the setting, and then gone all-out. There were a lot of great lines and characters: I particularly liked the prostitute and Mother. The director was clearly going for an extreme presentation, and sometimes it worked and other times it didn't, particularly in the actors' deliverance of their lines. I often found that the charicature-ish acting didn't hit the right note: a lot of the time it felt like the actors were confused about the direction, and ended up just going for laughs (which I don't think was the intention of the director in telling them to present their lines that way).
I really liked the witty banter (like in the bargaining scene), the repetition of the sound of music (especially when it was played on the TV, which was very haunting), the fight scene, the flirtation (between "the one with the cashbox" and both the prostitute and "the one who doesn't speak" who I'm hoping wasn't his biological sister), when the soldiers had synchronized lines, and many other things. A lot of the play was just really clever, whether it was the dialogue or the way things were portrayed, like when the soldier dropped shoes off the balcony to signify a massacre.
My favorite part was definitely when "the one who doesn't speak" narrated some reenactments of previous scenes: it was a good way of showing how she was always the observer, and had a strong voice that just wouldn't come out.

Late, sorry!

I would like to see a functioning farm on stage. With soil, crops, and livestock.

I would like to see...

a scene change that happens in an instant. Maybe not an instant, but in the time that it takes for a movie to switch scenes.

Sorry this is late, but I would like to see either a birth scene OR a real live baby in a play.

Now I'm not talking anything illegal here...

But I guess I'd like to see an actor take some sort of mind-altering pill or something that actually makes them change their type of composure rather than just acting like it. Or maybe a Nyquil and watch them fall asleep. Or laughing gas from the dentist and have that actor's actual laugh be heard. So basically what I mean is a drug but not an illegal one.

I want to see...

...a woman give birth to a character with lines on stage.

Straight Up Vampire

Okay, this is late.
Thursday February 11 I went to go see Straight Up Vampire at Joe's Pub. I had actually already seen this production and only attended because it was too good to miss and I wanted to support my favorite playwright, Nick Jones. It's about vampires in colonial PA and it's a love story and it's set to the music of Paula Abdul. The premise is that one crazy sister found her other crazy sister's play and insists on putting it on as a staged-reading. The story of the play is that Paula Abdul Blackwood is in love with an young political-idealist vampire named Jack and they plan to run away together but before that is possible her father marries her off to the horrible wheelwright's son (who has no other name than "the wheelwright's son") this is all occuring at the same time as a vote in Philly that is run by MC Skatt Kat (and to understand this you really have to be familiar with Paula Abdul's music videos, which is kinda sad) opposing Ben Franklin in a bill about vampire rights. It ends with Jack losing his political ideals and attacking the congregation killing MC Skatt Kat and Ben Franklin becomes a werewolf and Jack takes Paula Abdul Blackwood to be his bride. Overall it was a ridiculous but fantastic performance with little to now meaning (slogans include "no taxation without representation and blood" and "i only believe in one thing revenge......and love...........wait, that's two things")

I want to see

The actors have to build the set, but while their building it some of the story has to be projected onto the material they use

What I want to see on stage

I love and hate audience interaction. It’s really fascinating when shows use audience members in the story, but it’s really embarrassing when I’m one of the people chosen. Anyways, normally shows only have the audience play a small part in the story. What I would like to see on stage is an audience member or a few audience members become the main character(s) in the show.

What I want to see...

I would like to see a few animals (a monkey has to be included) perform on the stage. The animals have to be characters in the play and the monkey has to have a pretty big role.

What I'd love to see in a play

People roasting marshmallows over a fire. I love me some roasted marshmallows. And the fire...FIRE...

Vicky: What I want to see in a play

I want to see little red riding hood turn into a werewolf two times her size on stage.

something i want to see....

(THIS IS SOPHIE ON JOHN'S ACCOUNT)
knife juggling

If I were to see this, my life would be complete

Ice skating bears wearing fez hats

THing I haven't seen

One thing that I haven't seen in a play and would like to see is two midgets fighting.

A Play on War

This weekend, I went to see A Play on War at the Connelly Theater. The play, directed by Rubén Polendo and written by our very own Jenny Connell, is a reinterpretation of Bertold Brecht's Mother Courage and Her Children. Unfortunately, I was not familiar with the source material, but that did not prevent me from greatly enjoying this show.

A Play on War is the story of a woman and her three children living in war time. They own and operate a cart from which they sell supplies to the soldiers, and have come to rely on the continuous conflict of Us and Them. But when prophecy shows them a future in which all three children are destroyed by war, Mother Courage comes to reconsider her own place, and the morality (or lack thereof) in war profiteering.

This production was very strong. The script was a sharp, witty, innuendo-filled look at universal human behavior, carried by a handful of memorable, likable characters. The set was dynamically lit and starkly arranged, with a few strangely shaped bikes here and there. The cast was much more engaging and entertaining than that of the other show I saw at the Connelly. Every actor was animated, and amusing. Delivery was great on the whole, apart from a few flubbed lines. The outfits looked somewhat similar to how I would picture a Clockwork Orange burlesque. There was also a musical element, with a backing band of two, and a few numbers, though they were not the show's strongest point. All in all though, I would recommend this play. It was thought-provoking, it felt new, and it made me laugh.

Advice for Writing Plays

I've noticed a few things about our rough drafts in class that I would like to reflect upon...

1. I think that many of us (including myself) need to make our short dialogue more colloquial English. When I have read the plays we've written to myself, the English sounds fine, but once I say it out loud I realize that it doesn't sound like something any normal person would say. If we made our dialogue smoother, our plays would automatically because more believable.

2. I also think that we need to weave in parts of our plots more subtly. More often than not, when I read other peoples' and my plays, the characters summarize things that have occurred before the time frame of the play very obviously. Sometimes, I think that we as playwrights reveal too much information. We could allude to things that have occurred without actually saying them. Our audiences aren't stupid, they will figure it out if it's clear enough.

3. We all need to do a better job of creating plot lines that are between being cliched and unbelievable; we don't want to be on either extreme. Plays can still be unique without having plots that are extremely abnormal.

All in all, I'm seeing a trend in my advice. I seem to be gearing towards doing anything that makes a play most believable. I think that good plays are believable plays. If we can all get to a point where we can really convince our audience members, I think we've done a good job.

Caroline, Or Change

I just got back from the musical Caroline, or Change at The Gallery Players theater. The theater was small, and it was definitely running on a low budget, but the musical didn't call for anything too elaborate. The musical, set in Louisiana in 1963, was different from our normal playwriting guidelines. One disadvantage to musicals in general is that there are automatically more redundancies throughout, because repetition is necessary in the music. Also, the plot in Caroline, or Change is pretty slow-moving, so the redundant music made the play feel even slower. The climax of the play occurs when the maid, Caroline, and her boss's son, Noah, get into a fight over $20... Then they make up. I think that Tony Kushner, the playwright, could have done more with the plot.

However, Kushner did a fantastic job with something that we practiced in class: he made his characters' wants clear. Every single character in the play had apparent, deep desires. Caroline, the main character, was poor and wanted a more stable living with a job that was more exciting. However, more importantly, she wanted to be happy and be able to be nicer to others. Rose, her boss, wanted loved and acceptance from her step son and her husband. Even though the plot was stagnant, the audience was definitely engaged for the majority of the play because of characters' passions. Not to mention, both the acting and the singing were fantastic.

The play was set in the 60's, an extremely political time. Although the play touched upon President Kennedy getting shot, and various hate crimes, it never showed any of them, and the civil activism that occurred in the '60's never really came to life. I think that Kushner could have made the musical more exciting by incorporating scenes where characters in the play witness or take part in political issues. For instance, at the end of the play Caroline's daughter, Emmie, admits to the audience in a monologue that she was in a protest that was on the news. It might have been more effective to see her in action at the protest, it could have been almost like a secret between her and the audience.

Overall, even though I have some issues with how the play was written, I enjoyed it. The plot was certainly unique, and it was interesting to see a take on such a vibrant political time. I would recommend this musical for people who a. want a local production to see, and b. have an interest in the southern white person - black person dynamic in the 1960's.

You're Welcome

About an hour ago, i saw You're Welcome, a series of five "bad plays," and for a variety of reasons, it was an extremely enjoyable production. The first of these is of course that we've also been learning about proper play structure in class and through the reverse psychology exercise of writing our own purposefully bad plays to learn from our mistakes, similarly to how You're Welcome ultimately played out as a strategy guide for inexperienced playwrights and directors. Another is that the second play was not in fact a play, but a single extended stage direction that narrated a suspenseful monster truck race. Yet another was that there was an aged, balding hipster laughing very loudly sitting in the row in front of me, sometimes slapping the leg of his awkward, more silent friend. Thanks to information I gained from casually eavesdropping on this friend, I was able to deduce that his name was Stephen (not certain if spelled with an ph or a v).

There were three main actors, along with several stage hands, and several of the plays were repeatedly interrupted by the director walking on stage for whatever reason, and the plays frequently touched upon what seemed like a kind of theme, a warning that on-stage hubris, in the form of expensive props or over the top direction styles, is ultimately quite detrimental to the play's integrity. I guess that's a fancy way of saying that I felt there was a certain sub-contextual message in the plays. At any rate, everything that was meant to parody something was taken to professional, well-planned extents that our bad plays could never reach, and it was hilarious to see such plays being preformed in actuality.

Language Strategies

Hi Guys,

Here's a list of LANGUAGE STRATEGIES you might employ this weekend, in your scenes.  FEEL FREE TO ADD MORE!

Heightening, exaggeration, using monosyllabic words to show rapidity, really obvious names, interruption, lambic pentameter, ubiquitous languages - magical words, modern references, OCD v. current slang, rhetorical questions, stuttering, pun, one word sentences, contractions, pauses, monologues, asides, interviews, music, malapropisms, incomplete sentences, accents, alternative/consequential dialogs, vernacular, information that can only be read not performed, volume, dialect, profanity, corruption, conjections/subordinated periods, allegories/poetic text, directness, run on sentences, fragments, intellectual language,foreign languages, repetition, no dialogue, narration, wordiness, absence of punctuation, hesitation, hyperbole, euphemisms, hyphens, ellipses, misspelling, question marks, fonts, page breaks, pauses, animal voices, wit, tempo, alliteration, violence, synecdoche, vulgarity, phonetic spellings, personifications, quotes, text language, mixing languages, beat, colloquialisms, italics, stychomythia, embellishment, silence.

The Wonders of "Hair"

Hair is the complete opposite of what Aristotle would have wanted out of a play: it has almost no plot. The musical is about many things--love, sex, drugs, war, peace, happiness--but there is n central story line that an audience can follow. This doesn't mean that "Let The Sunshine In" doesn't always bring me to tears, it does. The writing of this musical is very much centered in the music and this production was very tailored to the beauty of the music. Everyone, and I mean everyone, in that cast can sing really damn well. There was not one moment where I winced because someone was flat, or a moment where I couldn't have closed my eyes and had a fantastic time just listening to the music. The performances were also very good. Each character had their own identity--and it must be hard staying in character while sandwiching a random girl in the audience or trying to get an audience member to stand up when she really doesn't want to.
I love love love the music in Hair. The lyrics are very clever and have that little spark in them that make you want to listen to what each character is singing. Some of the songs are a little ridiculous like "Sodomy" or "Air". But then there are the beautiful songs like "Easy to be Hard" and the classic "Let The Sunshine In" that get me every time. These songs really speak to the community and almost what we are experiencing right now in our nation. These hippies living in lower Manhattan have a voice in this musical and I love that.
The first time I ever saw Hair, which was not on Broadway, I had a hard time enjoying it because there was no plot. But now seeing it for the second time with so much more audience participation, I see that not having a plot doesn't really matter in this sense. Now, that doesn't mean that anyone can just write random songs and put them together and have it be that moving. I don't think Cats has the same emotional "trip", if you will, that Hair has. The writing brings out an understanding and belief in who these people are, rather than an understanding of what happens next. There is no huge catharsis in Hair nor is there a specific point of climax in the plot (although there might be climaxes in other places...). The score always brings me to tears though. And frankly, after watching people simple enjoy things about each other all day today, it makes me want to be a hippie, or at least be in this musical one day. It must be so much fun, so much hard work, and so fulfilling. Unfortunately it looks like Hair might close soon because they aren't selling out, at all. So if you haven't seen it yet, run TKTS now! Well, only if you aren't afraid of hippies or anything.

Our Town

I realized I never posted about seeing Our Town at the Barrow Street Theatre last Sunday. Well... I saw it with Sophie... and it was one of the best things I have seen in a really long time. Because the set was so bare and the theater was so intimate, I really got to pay attention to Thornton Wilder's script, which had a very interesting structure. The play, which took place in the small town of Grover's Corners, New Hampshire, was broken up into three acts. The first is about basic life and growing up, the second is about getting married, and the last is about death.

However, the play is definitely not as simple as its main ideas make it seem. The entire play is narrated by the "stage manager," making it feel extremely informal and personal. He guides the audience through the small town, telling them everything they'd need to know in order to survive there. Although the characters lead pretty simple lives, they all show extremely real, human wants. One of the wives yearns to go to Paris; another one of the characters, George, is set on being a farmer. The audience automatically feels compassion for these people and their wants.

But the plot, as well as the questions raised throughout the play, thicken in the third act. One of the main characters, Emily, dies. The audience sees her in the afterlife, accompanied by others from Grover's Corners who have passed. after making a visit back to real life, she realizes how depressing it is to see people not appreciating life while they're living it. In this particular production, Emily's mother cooks bacon on stage, and the entire audience can even smell it. That was a pretty amazing way to add to Wilder's message, even though it was simple, and sort of cliched, the idea of "smelling the bacon." Emily willingly chooses to go back to her grave because she can't bare to be around all of the ignorance that living people exude. Wilder shows the audience that all of those who have died willingly choose to stay dead, in their graves, because the foolishness of humanity is so depressing.

The bones of Wilder's script are great. He wrote something extremely powerful; it doesn't just have to be a play, it is literature on its own. Although the actors in the production I saw were great, the script on it's own is so amazing that I think most productions of Our Town automatically can have some appeal. Wilder balanced simplicity with something very thought-provoking. In the production I saw people definitely seemed very moved. I would without a doubt recommend this play.

Advice from plays concerning rough drafts.

1) From my experience, the plays that I have seen have all, from the very start, given their characters a distinct personality that is easily labeled by the audience. So, my first piece of advice would be to immediatly give the characters in your rough draft a distinct personality so that when people actually read your rough draft play they can comment on whether or not they got a sense of who/what that specific actor sounded or felt like.

2) A good note about rough drafts of plays is that I find the more broad the concept the better feedback one can get. The reason I say this, is because when I notice a part of a play that I did not quite enjoy, it usually is a specific section of the entire play. So, if a play is broad then people can give the writer better feedbeek concerning the entire play/tone/feel instead of hating one single part that, if needed to be chagned, could result in the rest of the play becoming bad.

3) Lastly, I find that giving a detail that, isn't disticntly stated within in the play, really helps to drive the comments the writer gets into a direction that will allow the writer to make the play even better. The reason being, that the audience is left geussing as to what that mysterious detail ends up becoming or actually was. They then proceed to give the writer ideas as to what it could possible be, and, if some of the ideas are actually good then the writer, for his final draft, has an idea that makes his play even more interessting.

True West

On Sunday I saw Sam Shepard's True West, A play that has been running since 1980 all over the country. It's about the relationship between two brothers--Austin, a successful Hollywood screenwriter who lives up North and his deadbeat brother Lee who has a heavy Southern accent and has been traveling around the desert and thieving random houses. They see each other for the first time in five years when Austin has to housesit for his mother down south while she's away in Alaska.

Lee interrupts a meeting Austin is having with a producer about a screenplay he's been working on, and Lee pitches a silly idea for a "true" Western movie that the producer falls in love with. He undeservingly takes his brother's title and they slowly transform into each others' lives while Lee works on "his film" and Austin drinks and steals toasters from all of the neighbors' houses because he bet his brother that he could.

I payed close attention to the script, and I could imagine the lines on paper well...I wasn't sure how much I was enjoying the play in the beginning because it seemed sort of redundant. Lee bothers/embarrasses Austin, Austin rolls eyes. And at the end of the first scene, Austin says, "Why don't you get some sleep?" and Lee stares out into the audience and says "I don't sleep." The lights go out. I thought, Oh, great.

Some things I did really like about the first act, though, was the stage direction. The boys had very specific personalities, and Lee kept doing random things while speaking, such as doing a headstand in the middle of the stage and kicking his legs like he was riding a bike, or after Austin says something confusing he pours his beer on his own head and shakes his hair around and makes a weird noise. I thought those little things were important because while they essentially had no deep meaning, it added greatly to the boys' realistic personalities and situations.

I really liked the second act, though. Austin breaks out of his uptight mold and the boys let loose. They fire witty lines at each other and the acting was phenomenal. It was fast paced and I found myself laughing out loud, being completely stunned and feeling angry all in a matter of five minutes.

In the note from the director Jen Forcino, she mentions that every ten lines or so there is a (pause) in the script. She asked that as an audience we take note of every pause, because they are filled with heartbreak, betrayal, broken promises and loss that both brothers feel but cannot share. I did take note of the pauses, and I thought that they meant as much as the words because in the end, the play was not about the plot. It was about the relationship between these two brothers who seemed so different but "when they're sloshed" (quote from the play) their true colors come out and they seem like almost slightly different facets of the same personality.

The fact that the play was really about their relationship is the reason for the sort of open-ended ending. Their somewhat quirky/senile mother comes home and Austin says that he wants to travel in the desert with his brother. His brother freaks out because he's always wanted Austin's ivy-league lifestyle and they end up brawling. Austin strangles his brother with a telephone chord--Lee lives, and the end left us with an image of Austin and Lee standing in the middle of the stage with clenched fists, scowling at each other and breathing heavily.

When I left the theater, one of the men in the audience turned to me and said, "I didn't get the ending. Did you? No wonder it was eighteen dollars."

Personally, though, I loved the ending. It was as if the play ended with one of those (pause)s and we didn't really have to know what "happens next." I didn't care if Austin went back up North to his wife or kids or if his screenplay was successful, because what I appreciated most was the raw brotherly dialogue and realistic relationship and emotions exchanged between these estranged brothers.

I guess the only thing that the play could improve on would be the first act (which was about 40 minutes). It was purely sequential and I think that perhaps a snippet of the end could have been planted into the beginning to keep the audience guessing what's going on. The other smaller things that bothered me were Lee's strong accent and the trip there and back because 42nd street is INSANE.

Overall, I thought they play was definitely worth seeing and as I said before, I was incredibly impressed with the acting--especially towards the very intense last couple of scenes.

Fanny

Over the weekend I saw Fanny. It was an Encores production, so the actors had only nine days to rehearse and were allowed to carry scripts on the stage. However, the acting and singing was so strong that I didn’t even notice the actors were carrying scripts until the end of Act ii!

The story is about a young woman who is being pressured to marry by mother, peers, and her crush’s father. The boy she is in love with, Marius (played by the amazing, wonderful, talented James Snyder whom I was a huge fan of two years ago), likes Fanny, but is more interested in sailing and seeing the world. An older man, Panisse (played by Fred Applegate), is also interested in Fanny, but she believes he is far too old for her. When Marius leaves Fanny--but not after he has impregnated her--Fanny marries the old Panisse and the two raise Fanny’s son together.

The plot was sweet, but almost too sweet. Other then Marius sailing away (but then of course coming back), there was no real conflict. Panisse was a sweet man who really cared for Fanny, rather than a greedy villain who treated his young wife poorly. It would have been interesting if Panisse didn’t want to give Fanny up or if had other intentions in marrying her. Still, I enjoyed the story, even with its over-cheerful ending.

The dialogue was extremely old-fashioned at times, and it was obvious the actors felt awkward saying some of their lines. However, most of the audience was an older crowd, so I’m sure they had no problem with this. Allison and I, however, smirked a few times when one of the characters would call another, “you, billy goat!”

As I mentioned before, the actors were amazing. I can’t imagine learning lines, songs, and staging all in nine days! I also liked the music in Fanny. I’m honestly kind of sick of all these “rock musicals” with songs that I could easily hear on the radio. When I see a musical, I want to hear a different style of music. With Fanny, I heard older South Pacific-esque songs, which is exactly what I was hoping for.

After the show, Allison forced me to stay for the forty-five minute long talkback. Let me tell you, after sitting in the same seat for two and a half hours and seeing the same the people on stage, I kind of wanted to get out of the theater right at the curtain call. However, I did enjoy the talkback. It was interesting to hear what the director and music director had to say regarding the production, and I thought it was a real treat to see the original Fanny, Florence Henderson (aka. Mrs. Brady from the Brady Bunch) talk about what it was like starring in Fanny at age nineteen.

I’m glad I attended Fanny. Originally, I only went to see James Snyder perform. However, his performance was only the cherry on top of a delightful and charming show.

Fanny

This weekend I saw the Encores! production of the 1954 musical Fanny. With the average age of audience members being around 75, I didn't really know what to expect, and I felt pretty out of place. The musical is set in Marseilles and is about an eighteen year old (Fanny) who falls in love with a man (Marius). She gets pregnant right when he decides to leave for the sea, and he doesn't know she's carrying his baby. She doesn't know what to do and ends up marrying an older widower (Panisse) so that her child could have a father. I don't want to give too much away, but Marius ends up coming back and that's when we're unsure of what is going to happen. While the musical doesn't involve much conflict or tension, it is still a nice play. There were no characters I absolutely hated and at the same time there were few I truly cared about, possibly adding to the reason why I wasn't really feeling anything during the play. I thought the acting and singing were amazing, along with the orchestra. What was very interesting was that the show was presented in concert form, so while it was a fully staged production, with costumes and everything, it was performed with the script in hand. Each actor held a binder throughout the whole show, sometimes hardly visible and other times clearly shown.

I couldn't decide if knowing and seeing the actors with their scripts the entire night took away from the experience or if it enhanced it. Maybe because they had the script with them it was hard for me to imagine that what was taking place on stage was actually happening, and I couldn't forget that they were actors putting on a play. Because of the binders, it was a constant reminder that each person was playing a certain role. At the same time, even knowing they had the script in hand didn't affect their acting. The acting was great, script or no script, and I never would have known they didn't fully know their lines if they didn't have the binder to look to every so often.

What is so unbelievable is that the actors learned the entire show in nine days, and were only going to perform it for four. I can not believe the amount of work that must have gone into the show, not only learning all of the lines and direction (and the good amount of choreography), but also the little changes that were made to their performances every day. I never could have guessed the play was rehearsed in nine days; everyone performed flawlessly.

I thought the music was nice, but not particularly memorable. What I found to be interesting (and what I learned in the talk back after the performance) was how the songs were written. There is a lot of repetitiveness in the lyrics, and as the music director said, it is not because the composer/lyricist ran out of things to say, but instead it was to showcase what the characters were feeling. The script, while some parts were obviously old-fashion and didn't seem realistic (but that could definitely be because it was written in 1954...) for the most part was enjoyable, and I thought there were many nice jokes. The jokes weren't necessarily laugh out loud funny (usually they weren't) but I did smile a lot because of them, and it was definitely a nice touch.

I wouldn't say the show wowed me and I don't think I can really pinpoint why. The story was interesting, and we were interested in finding out what would happen between Fanny and Marius and how Fanny and Panisse's relationship would also turn out, but because I knew most of the storyline before seeing the show, it wasn't very exciting. I guess I knew what to expect for a lot of it. I don't think the play pulled me in enough. I couldn't really relate to the characters or what was happening to them, and I wasn't completely drawn into what was going on.

I found myself somewhat bored and wondering how much longer until intermission a few times, but there were still many great components to the show. I keep going back and forth deciding whether I liked the show or not. I guess all in all it was a good production of a play I am ambivalent about.

"Present Laughter"

Present Laughter is a play by Noel Coward, written somewhat biographically. It is about a famous British movie star in the 30's whom everyone adores, and he adores himself of course. It is full of charming characters and a very light plot that presents great laughter. I enjoyed it so much! Not only were the performances some of the best I have seen in a long time (not a weak link in the chain), the writing was incredibly funny and smart. The fast paced language makes it easy for clever jokes put in on almost every single line--plus every character is completely hilarious. They range from a star struck writer to a wife to the aging housekeeper. Everyone in the "lifestyle" of the rich and famous who might encounter this rich, handsome, flawless (on the outside), pompous, dashing man. I though the director (Nicholas Martin) and the actors (Victor Garbor stared) truly brought the play to life. Even though the first Act was a little bit long and hard to get through, the acting made it interesting for me. There was always another character coming onstage. Furthermore, I found out something about the plays title at the talk back after the show. Someone asked what the meaning of the title was since it is not exactly explained in the play, and no one says it in the dialogue. However the title is from a line of Shakespeare which I now forget and was oringinally called Sweet Sorrow which is also from Shakspeare: "Parting is such sweet sorrow." So I thought it was a great great performance and it was cool to go backstage after the show! (I know one of the cast memebers because my mom taught her). I definitely recommend it! It is on Broadway, so not exactly the cheapest of things...but Noel Coward is a playwrite to know.

On Saturday I Saw...

"Our Town." Another phenomenal show. I've had really good luck this semester with that so far!

So here's the deal: I read this play in middle school, probably around seventh grade, and I fell in love with it. I think it was maybe the first play that I ever read on my own and definitely the first play that had an impact on me (via reading rather than watching). I've never been able to see a production of it (though I've always wanted BC to put it on) and so when I heard that it was playing off-Broadway I was so excited to see it.

Many people have already written about this production on the blog, so bear with me; I'm going to at least attempt to say something that hasn't been said.

First of all, I just want to say that I really loved Sophie's interpretation of what the addition of props/scenery/traditional costumes meant for the overall message of the play. Because I had read that before I saw this, it kind of helped guide my own perception of the play, which I thought was cool. So thanks :)

Anyway, this script in and of itself is very unique, as far as I'm concerned. Although I agree with Hugo that the plot is sort of mundane and run-of-the-mill, I think that the way that Wilder handles the cycle of life and the rhythm of the everyday is really remarkable. I love the character of the Stage Manager. His perspective on everyday life is refreshing: even though he occasionally makes ordinary things "meaningful," he also lets many things stand on their own. The women are making breakfast. Howie is delivering milk. The choir is rehearsing at church. These are regular events and nothing more. This view, this character, is all Thornton Wilder's creation, and when I read the show I appreciated his matter-of-fact tone and lack of hidden motives. I like that Wilder lays everything out on the table: the geographical facts about the town, yes, but also the purpose of the play. Through the Stage Manager's words we discover that Wilder wants the show to last for thousands of years, to represent how the plain people lived. I was happy, too, to see the portrayal of the Stage Manager in this production. He carried the words well and was well-balanced: he seemed neither too nosy nor too uninvolved with his commentary.

I honestly liked almost everything about this production, and almost everything about the script as well. The last thing that I wanted to discuss about this production was the amount of downtime that some of the actors had while ON stage. The last scene of the play demanded that at least seven cast members sit silently and still on stage for at least twenty minutes. This isn't criticism or praise, just an observation. It was just something that really stuck out to me as impressive. I also think that the set-up of the theater (the audience was sort of integrated with the actors) was conducive to me paying attention to this downtime during the last scene. This final part of the play takes place in a graveyard, and with the actors sitting all around me, I felt as though I too had to sit as quietly and still as they were. I felt as if I, too, were a gravestone in the cemetery.

On Feedback

Guys,

I met with my play group last night.  We're about a dozen playwrights, good ones -- some big names in the world of new plays, some total unknowns.  We meet once every two weeks for TWO YEARS to give each other feedback.

I was reminded, last night, just how hard it can be to stick to giving fair feedback -- to not jump into the role of "fixer," to support your fellow playwrights in writing the play that THEY intend to write, not the play YOU'D write.

Sometimes, when a play isn't working, the "solution" seems so obvious.  But it's YOUR solution, not theirs.  Sometimes, it seems like a playwright is missing the forest for the trees, in terms of their questions.

Still, you're there to help them as best you can -- to avoid the "evaluative" comment, even when you want to say is "that character is boring" or "that scene can go."

It's a delicate balance.  We won't always get it right.  All we can do is practice.

jc

Okay,

in order to not waste trees or break printers


Scene One.
Mother and Alis stand in a pool of light on stage.
Mother has Alis by the shoulders and pushes her
forward more into the light. Alis is afraid, and tries
to push back but Mother just puts on a relentless
smile and addresses the blackness.

Mother

...And this is my daughter, Alis. Poor thing, she's terribly shy. Had a bit of trouble lately with a young gentleman she scared off and of course with the death of her brother, well, you understand, she's incredibly silly to be effected by such things.

Vicious laughter echoes from off stage

Mother (to Alis, who shutters)

Now, dear, you must be polite. Don't you want to make something out of yourself? You'll never get anywhere without your manners and it's nearly time for the games, you want to go to the games to get better, don't you?

Alis nods her head in fear. And the voices offstage
rise in volume slowly, until not much can be heard besides.

Mother

Good, then. Gentlemen, if you'd excuse us. We must prepare for the games.

Light out. Scene Two
Alis sits with Joe thumb-wrestling. The
thumb-wrestling steadily becomes more
and more violent, but maintaining a
playful quality. Until finally Alis falls over
on her side in defeat.

Alis

It's not fair, you always win.

Joe

That's because I'm better than you.

Alis

You could let me win some things. I always lose.

Joe

If I let you win some things, you'd never always lose and then you'd be wrong. And we can't have you be wrong anymore. Not after what happened with your Father. If you're wrong, I don't want you to be punished, but they will punish you.

Alis

Maybe they wouldn't notice I was wrong, maybe this time we could get away with it and then we could play more games.

Joe

If I lose, you might lose me.

Alis and Joe repeat every action of the
scene in retrograde, until slowly we see
Joe's exit and he walks backwards off stage.
Scene Three
Joe and Mother stand on opposite sides of
an empty stage, leaning forward facing each
other. Seeming to address someone over their
shoulders while maintaining eye contact.

Joe

Alis, will you kindly tell you that broken old wench that if she does not ask I will not be attending the games? And that she is not Queen, despite her demands on your manners?

Mother

Alis, please inform this boy of yours that the games are at six and if he is not properly attired and on time there will be hell to pay? Honestly, I cannot believe you let him treat you this way, he takes up all your time and you hardly come to the games anymore and please tell him--

Joe

All she does is boss you around. Do you even like the games? Alis, you have to stand up to her, she's not the Queen, and your life doesn't belong to her. How can you be so--

Mother

I mean, really, it's not like he owns your life and time, darlin'. You really ought to make more of an effort at the games and teaching him some manners, did he get that etiquette book I gave him?

Joe

Don't even get me started on her demand for manners, like she has any? Anyway, you need to spend less time with her--

Joe and Mother (in unison)

---And more time with me. Alis, are you even listening? (beat) You're mine.

Lights out. Scene Four
Alis paces the stage with a glass in her
hand, she presses it against her forehead
and fidgets, she addresses the mirror at the
end of the stage.

Alis

.........and it plays around and around in your head and you hear it so much not only from the ones you hate but also from the ones you love and it has to be true. It has to boil down to it. You must be bad, you must be. But you also must be clever, not smart but clever. Clever enough to trick them, and hurt them, even if you haven't really done anything you're aware of but they tell you that it's your fault, that you hurt them and they don't understand why. They don't understand why they loved you, they don't understand why you hurt them, even if you didn't really hurt them at all and instead they hurt you. They didn't just hurt you, they left you and it plays around and around and around. Like silly little circles that you doodle in french instead of paying attention, loosing your attention span, losing your mind around and around and around.

Mother

Alis!

Alis drops the glass, which shatters

Mother

Who are you talking to in there? Get out of there I need the mirror!

Alis

So do I.

Lights out. Scene Five
Alis on stage with her Father, who cannot
be seen in the light besides his profile. Alis
kneels on the floor, her head bowed, almost in
prayer.

Father

You just ran off, you ran off after he died. But we both know he didn't die, did he? We both know what really happened. But it didn't make a difference did it? You ran off to your Mother with her games and met that boy and now all you do is play. Didn't even think of us once, did you? Pushed us out of your head and ran off. Always playing your games, your stupid games, you don't deserve them. We both know what really happened, why don't you just own up? Why don't you just tell us right here right now? You killed him.

Father's arm reaches behind him and he
pulls a figure by the hair, which he throws
in front of Alis. The figure, her brother,
collapses and Alis shutters, beginning to fidget.

Alis

No.....

Father

Yes, you remember? You killed him and left without three words to fix it. Off to play your games when you KILLED him.

Father's motions are violent in nature.
Alis reaches down to hold her brother,
shaking her head, still not looking at her
Father.

Alis

I don't remember.....I couldn't....I...

Her brother jerks and Alis flings back
and fidgets more and more. Father is moving toward
her, kicking the body of her brother which is slowly
jerking to life, until it begins to crawl toward
her. And just before they reach her, the lights go out.
Scene Six
Mother and Alis in front of the mirror.

Alis

He's really gone.

Mother

He's been gone for a while now, darlin'. Good fucking riddance in my opinion. He was a waste of space and time, and far too possessive.

Alis

He took care of me......So, I'll see you at midnight or so?

Mother

You aren't coming to the games? You really ought to be getting out more.

Alis

No games. I don't have anything appropriate to wear anyway, ma'am.

Mother

It's fine. But, we're going soon, you can't be alone for too long. If you're alone for too long you might end up wrong. We can't have you being wrong, nor can we have you winning.

Alis

I killed him.

Mother

No, you didn't. That's it, you're coming to the games. Clearly you won't be sensible or well-mannered on your own, I'll need to keep an eye on you.

Alis

No, I killed him. Father said so.

Mother

Enough. I won't hear anymore of this nonsense. Get your etiquette book and read chapter 34, then we're going.

Alis pulls out a thick book and begins to
turn the pages, one hand turning the pages
the other hand fidgeting.

Mother

Stop that.

Mother pulls her hair and Alis
drops the book.Lights out.
Scene Seven
Alis and Joe, sitting with Mother
playing rock-paper-scissors and Mother
wins. Joe pouts and Alis watches, tries to
start the game again but Mother is too
pleased with herself and Joe is pouting.
She tries twice more, then gives up,
stands and exits.
Lights out.

Vicky's Very Bad Play

Read it here:
https://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AZEBEZuCe6G0ZGRwNXQ4czZfN2M2NDVmN2Q3&hl=en

Puppet Extravaganza!

Guys,

More new and interesting theater opportunities...or...the weird things Berkeley Carroll teachers do when they're not teaching you (this from Tanya Khardoc, a kindergarten teacher here).

• Hello All,
• 
  
• My puppet troupe, Evolve, will be performing our short piece, Becoming, this coming Friday and Saturday, February 5th and 6th at 8pm. We are part of en evening of short puppet pieces. We would love to see you there!
• 
  
• Tanya
• 
  
• 
  
• Two nights only of the greatest puppet mayhem around!
• 
  
• PUNCH puppet slam - NYC's most consistent puppet slam - teams up with Dixon Place's Puppet Blok to present this special re-invigorated PUNCH extravaganza. This two-night special presentation is bringing back PUNCH in a big way with Drama of Works, Evolve Company, Alissa Hunnicut and many more local favorites PLUS guests from CT and a special appearance by Paper Moon Puppet Theater from Indonesia.
• 
  
• DON'T MISS the first of many new awesome editions of PUNCH!!!
• 
  
• Puppet Blok gets PUNCHed!
• 
  
• February 5th & 6th
• 8pm - come early for a seat!
• only $10
• 
  
• Dixon Place: 161A Chrystie Street
• (between Rivington & Delancey)
• www.dixonplace.org
• www.dramaofworks.com/punch
• 
  
• PUNCH is a showcase for all things puppet. Here, artists try out their latest puppet-flavored fare. Everything from pieces in-progress, somber wares and flamboyant experiments. Come if you dare! Curated by Gretchen Van Lente, of Drama of Works.
• 
  
• Dixon Place's puppet presentations are funded in part by
• a Henson Foundation Presenters Grant.
• PUNCH is funded in part by funds from puppetslam.com

Our Town

The last piece of theater I saw was a production of Our Town at at the Barrow Street Theatre. I knew nothing at all about the play before seeing it, and I'd say it left quite an interesting, positive impression on me. Though I felt that the story itself was somewhat old hat, the production was unlike anything I had expected.

Our Town is a story about life and its strange trajectory, specifically within the small community of Grover's Corners, New Hampshire. The story was told by the "stage manager" who set the scenes, interacted directly with the audience, and introduced the three parts of the play plus all characters within it. The set was very stripped down, being just tables and chairs save for the final scene, which featured a more traditional house view.

The three parts of the play followed three stages in the life the townspeople, and more specifically a boy and girl who are fated to get married and live together until the girl dies after childbirth. The story, while somewhat cliché in its full circle portrayal of human life, was carried by very strong acting, close interaction with the audience, and some sharp dialogue. All in all, it seemed to me to be a case of style over substance. However, I felt that its stylistic merits were such that I would recommend it overall.

...From Rehearsal

Hi Guys,

I'm posting from rehearsal for "A Play on War," at 8th Avenue and 36th Street. There are currently eight adults in various states of dress and undress, with their lines memorized to varying degrees, trying to do bizarre choreography, learn eight songs, find their props, make sense of a complicated timeline, and figure out where they want to call to order take out.

It looks pretty ridiculous.

At this point, we've been through two weeks of rehearsal...and our first preview is ten days away. It's an inhumanly short rehearsal process, but even so, it's as much rehearsal time as just about any Equity (read: unionized) show gets these days.

Add to that: this baby's complicated. The show has, in fact, more "moving pieces" than any show I've ever done. Song, dance, fight choreography, several languages, bicycles, immobilizing costumes, and one of the most venerated "source scripts" of the 20th century -- in other words, the whole endeavor is one enormous, expensive opportunity to screw up.

Why am I not losing my mind?
Or, actually, losing it but only a little?

Short sentences.
When I don't know what to do, I ask myself:
"Am I taking the play to the story?"
"Does this order of events make sense?"
"Is what I'm hearing from actors PRESCRIPTIVE? Okay, I don't like that solution, but they're pointing me to a problem"
"Is that moment enough of an INVITATION to the audience?"
"What QUESTION does that moment raise? Is it the question I want my audience asking, or does it distract?"

I've made four changes to the script tonight. They all required me to think about things we've ALREADY discussed in class.

I encourage you to flex your muscles over the next couple of days, and see if you can start to apply some of the things we've discussed as you listen to your very bad plays in the mouths of your very generous classmates.

See you Thursday.

-jc

So I don't have to kill a forest...

Everyone can just read my play here so that I don't have to print 14 copies...

Bad Play—1st Draft
The characters are on a bus in the afternoon. Genna and Chris are seated next to each other, with Genna at the window seat and Chris in the aisle. The bus stops, and the bus driver gets out and stands in line for ice cream.

FEMALE PASSENGER

Hey, what are you doing? We’ve got to be somewhere!

GENNA

(Mumbles) Shit, are you kidding me? I’m going to be so late.

People shuffle and groan. One person shoves Chris while he moves past, squishing him against Genna.

CHRIS

Sorry, sorry.
Genna looks uncomfortable.
What are you going to be late to?

GENNA

Me? What?

CHRIS

Are you going to the dentist or something?

GENNA

Um… (looks away, clearly unnerved)

CHRIS

OK….
Chris gets elbowed by another passenger.
Ow! Shit.
Shifts and squishes Genna more.
Sorry.

GENNA

(Mumbles) It’s ok.

CHRIS

It’s like four—(consults watch)—thirty-seven. Who’s in a rush at 4:37 in the afternoon?
Genna takes out her phone and fiddles with it.

CHRIS

Hey, is that the iPhone? I’ve got the Droid. (Imitates Droid voice) Droid. Droid. Droid—

GENNA

I don’t know you!

CHRIS

Uh, I guess not.

GENNA

So I’m a little uncomfortable right now. I don’t really want to talk to you because I don’t know you and I would like you to leave me alone please.

CHRIS

Oh, I’m sorry, really… Am I just being really annoying?

GENNA

No! (Visibly irritated) It’s just that, I don’t know, you’re a stranger and honestly it’s a little weird that you keep talking to me. I am a girl. You can’t do that.

CHRIS

I’m not, like, a rapist!
Nearby passengers give him weird looks.

GENNA

I didn’t say you were a rapist, I’m sorry…

CHRIS

What the fuck.
Driver can be seen leaving ice cream parlor and going to gardening store next door. Collective sighs and sounds of malcontent can be heard from the passengers. Genna stands up.

GENNA

Let’s get him fired!

CHRIS

How the hell are you going to get wherever you’re going if there’s no bus driver?

GENNA

(To Chris) Shut up. (To other passengers, who have all gone silent) This guy walked out on us!

PASSENGERS

Yeah! Right on!

GENNA

Are we going to stand for this?

PASSENGERS

No way! (Cheering)

GENNA

I will drive this bus! Screw my dentist appointment!
Genna plops down to retrieve her bag, then tries to get out of the seat. There is an awkward attempt by Genna to get out of her seat and into the aisle, past Chris. The passengers are all watching her eagerly as she slowly pushes her way past Chris and into the aisle. Just as she gets out of the booth, the bus driver reenters the bus, cup of ice cream in hand, and spade in the other.

MALE PASSENGER

Thank God he’s back!
The bus driver starts driving. Genna
is still standing, but no one is paying
attention to her anymore, and everyone has gone back to what they were doing: reading, listening to music, etc., like nothing happened.

GENNA

This is ridiculous!

CHRIS

Your mom's ridiculous.

GENNA

Hey! You’re just some creep who started talking to me on the bus. Who starts talking to random strangers on a bus? Random female strangers? How sketchy can you be?

CHRIS

I was just trying to be funny!

GENNA

Well you weren’t.

CHRIS

You’re right, potential rapists don’t have a sense of humor.

Things to See

Outre Island at Ars Nova ($15) every Thursday this month at 8

Found at Ars Nova ($20) Friday at 7:30 and 10:30

Too Little Too Late at Here($12) Friday at 7, Saturday at 2 and 7 and running into next week

You're Welcome at The Brick ($18) Thursday-Friday at 8

See this play!

I just got back from a performance of a show called "Safe Home" by Sean Cullen. It was amazing and you should all see it.

When I first arrived at the theater, I felt a little out of place because I was there with my mom and still wearing a backpack while the rest of the theater-goers were hipster twenty-somethings that all seemed to know each other. I kind of regretted choosing this show. Then we entered the theater, and a few minutes later, honestly, none of that mattered. We all laughed at the same parts, cried at the same parts, and came out moved (or at least, it seemed that way).

To summarize, "Safe Home" tells the story of a family--a mother, a father, and three sons--affected by the Korean War. The first son enlists, against the wishes of his parents, and ends up dying (I'm not giving anything away...you realize this within the first five or so minutes). The show then, instead of merely letting us observe how this family reacts to such a tragedy, mixes up the chronology of the play, and begins flipping forward and backward to give us a sense of who these people were before the war.

I found the acting in this play to be really phenomenal, and the set/costumes were interesting to look at and fitting for the time. For such a small theater, they really created a genuine environment, including traditional 50s music that played in between scenes.

But aside from all of this, all of these accolades about the acting and direction and design, I have to commend the writing! I was, first of all, really happy to realize that I would be able to specifically say something about this, and second of all, happy to realize that the writing consciously helped to make the play better in my mind. I thought that the manipulation of chronology was an amazing tool. Although getting into the rhythm of this was difficult at first, and I did find the order of events a little confusing throughout, by the end, it hardly mattered because of the overall effect that it had on the play. What flipping back and forth between pre-enlistment and post-enlistment did was allow us to feel more of a sense of what this death meant. Starting off the play with a death was definitely a risk, because although we as an audience realize its implications, we feel hardly any sympathy because we haven't established a relationship with the now-gone character yet. But then the fact that I was then able to see the entire sequence of events leading up to the son's choice to enlist made his death heartbreaking, even though, after seeing it in the beginning, I knew it was coming all along.

All in all, you should see this show! I'm not sure when its run ends (I think it's soon) but I had a really great time and came out of the theater very moved...and apathetic about the swarming, intimidating hipsters.

Detectives (also) (again)

Hannah and Vicky both didn't quite like Detectives as much as Victims, and although I'd have to agree, I think there were several things that this play did differently than the first one we saw, things which gave the overall story a series of interesting twists. It seems that the order in which one was intended to see the plays was never specified, as the scheduling on the back of the programs indicated that they were preformed on some days with Victims followed by Detectives, and the opposite on other days.

A number of scenes from Victims crossed over into this play, although literally from a different perspective, one wherein the audience was on the opposite side of the action. This made me remember what we talked about in class regarding the events and scenes of a play being like windows from which to view the broader story beyond the events themselves, and in Detectives the audience was shown things from the view of Andi Summers, a character who appeared infrequently in Victims. The program also indicates that the showing we saw actually had a "special alternate ending," which was quite a bit different from the ending of Victims, and really only served to confuse me more about the actual nature of the story.

On the topic of confusion, I realize now, reflecting on both plays, that I barely understand what actually occurred. It seemed like the director(s) and/or playwright(s) often wanted to have deliberately odd or confusing events, ones that might allow the audience to form their own beliefs about what had happened, but an abundance of such abstractions only made me wonder what pastries have to do with murder, demons, and fiery apocalypses.

Detectives

A Brief History Of Murder, which encompassed both "Detectives" and "Victims" was, I'm sure, somebody's baby of a two play series. Agreeing with Vicky, Detectives was disappointing. Instead of filling in many of the gaps of "Victims" the play only furthered the confusion of those events which we did not witness in "Victims". It also had managed to make the three Portal sister characters become totally irrelevant and gave them two stupid and crazy song and dance sequences which did nothing for anyone besides potential make a few people's ears bleed. The pastry aspect of the play seemed even more random as well as the construction of the relationship of our main character, Andy Summers, the detective and her husband, the photographer. There were far too many scenes that were only recording, (bad quality recording at that) and those only happened during the brief scene changes, which were, in general, just annoying. I think it'd be interesting to see what the Sneaky Snake Productions does next, but I have slightly lower expectations than before.