Tis' Pity She's a Whore

For my Tis Pity She's a Whore poster I'd definitely have the imagery centered on this idea of conflict and fighting. I would want to have figures of two different people in stance as though they're about to fight each other. Not fleshed out characters, just silhouettes. There are so many characters within this play that end up fighting, it'd be more symbolic versus an actual scene from the play. I would want one of the silhouettes and side of the poster to be white, while the other one is black. The strong contrast would serve the purpose of visualizing this clashing of sides, and the conflict that is evident throughout the play. The writing would be in different shades of red since red is so closely associated with feelings of passion and anger. Opposites that are common throughout Tis' Pity. Of course it'd also bring up the image of blood which comes up many times.

There are many quotes that could apply to this poster, but these are the three that i think would work the best. Firstly Giovanni in Act 1; Scene 2 when he says, "...'tis my destiny That you must either love, or I must die." It accurately portrays the mood I'm trying to go for in the poster, showing both the passion and the conflict. The second quote I'd use is from Soranzo. It is Act V; Scene 6 when he says, "I shall burst with fury; Bring the strumpet forth!" He's getting extremely angry and cries out for the "strumpet" (whore) almost as though it is a battle cry. Finally I'd use a line from the Cardinal's final speech, when he says, "Never yet incest and murder have so strangely met." This speech ties up the whole play, referring to the passion and the death one last time before curtain. I think these quotes with my poster design concept would bring in a full house for Tis' Pity She's a Whore. 

My Comments, round three!

-comment on Caroline's Little Happy Secrets response

-comment on Morgan's Water By the Spoonful post

-comment on Chelsea's Mud post

-comment on Morgan's Wine in the Wilderness post

-comment on Brandon's House of Trials post

-comment on Brandon's Topdog/Underdog post

Third Show and Tell Posting-Making the Call by Jane Martin

The play I chose for my third and final show-and-tell posting is Making the Call by Jane Martin. It was written in 1997, and has been produced at Alma College in a One Act Play Festival as well as Pensacola State College. It doesn’t seem to me as though it is produced that often, but when it is it’s most often with other one acts of a similar nature. I found this Jane Martin play on the LSU library website at the URL;

http://solomon.nadr.alexanderstreet.com.libezp.lib.lsu.edu/cgi-bin/asp/philo/getobject.pl?c.802:1.nadr

Elizabeth is having a lovely evening, watching TV and eating when a knock at the door surprises her. When she asks who it is, the reply that comes back is a man claiming to be a member of the secret service. Being a cautious woman, Elizabeth calls her friend to ask her advice. She decides to open the door, but has her handgun at the ready in case something would happen. It doesn’t take long for her to realize that she made the correct decision, because the secret service agent is there to ask if she’ll have sex with the president! He saw her at an event earlier, and was very taken by her. The secret service man, Agent Parker, then offers an alternative plan, that she rejects the president and gets it on camera, so that him and her can instead make money and become famous. The play ends with Elizabeth again calling her friend for advice so the audience doesn’t know the outcome of the story.

The first dramaturgical choice I found extremely entertaining was the fact that Martin made the gentleman caller the president. In that same situation, it would have been funny no matter who it was…whether it was a movie star, a well-known politician, or a musician of some sort. Although it’s a short play, making the president the gentleman caller raises the stakes a whole lot. It’s interesting to watch Elizabeth trying to decide whether it’s a better option to hook up with the president, or sell him out. The play raises a hysterical controversy that gets you to think, “What would I do in this situation?” It’s interesting from an audience perspective as well, because I think our gut reaction is, “Oh, that would never happen.” But also knowing how much power the president can have, and that he does have secret service working at his side, it’s actually feasible that if a president wanted to behave in this manner he probably would succeed.

The second dramaturgical choice that I found noteworthy was Martin’s decision to leave the ending ambiguous. Agent Parker proposes the alternative option, but then Elizabeth doesn’t know what to do. In fact she cannot decide on her own so she calls her friend saying, “…Margaret, this is just a theoretical question…” This leaves the audience thoughtful, wondering if she’ll sleep with the president or if she’ll sell him. Better yet, because of the recurring theme of her calling Margaret, it makes you curious as to just how long the conversation is going to continue, with her stopping to call Margaret and ask for advice every five minutes. The ambiguity at the end works well with the comic nature of the play. 

Next to Normal

Next to Normal is a complex and interesting production. Kitt's musical score does an excellent job of emphasizing the plot that has been laid out by Yorkey. Two of Hornby's elements that stood out to me during this show are ambiguity and progression. Ambiguity because of the way the show is open ended, so it leaves room for the audience to think about where the story goes next. Progression, because of Gabe's constant repetition of "I'm alive." This recurring theme caught my eye, because he always pops up at the worse times, and is such a strong influence on Diana.

At the end of Next to Normal Dan finally addresses his son. Gabe says, "...you've always known who I am." and then Dan says, "Gabe. Gabriel." talking to him specifically for the first time. Knowing that Diana was schizophrenic and also saw him, it leaves the audience wondering, is Dan now schizophrenic? Is he going to go through the same troubles as his wife? Is this traumatic event his trigger? Or will he be able to see him and still remember the truth. This ambiguity really engaged me, and even though it's at the end of the play, it drew me in and made me really care about the characters. 

The other Hornby element that stood out to me was progression, in the form of Gabe's "I'm alive" song.  He says, "I'm alive. I'm alive. I am so alive, and I feed on the fear that's behind your eyes."It's clear his character feeds off of the weakness of others, specifically Diana. He always shows up at the most inopportune moments, and the way Yorkey has written the script makes the audience resent him because of it. For me personally, because of this progression of him always popping up and being a burden on Diana's soul I grew to dislike his character. Even though he wasn't alive, I hated the fact that his spirit was essentially ruining people's lives. I think these feelings came from Yorkey's progression of   Gabe being "alive" even though he's truly dead. 

Topdog/Underdog

Topdog/Underdog by Suzan-Lori Parks exhibits two main theatrical mirrors. One of these is the assassination of Abraham Lincoln performance. The other is the game of the Three Card Monte, which some say would say is a mirror of our lives. I think the reason Parks included both of these is because they are both situations where one specific person has the control, although there has to be other people involved to create each situation. In both the card game and the assassination there is one victim. Other people are involved, but there is only one person who loses.

Both of these are games, in which one person has all of the control. Even though others involved feel like they do, they don't. In the case of the assassination game, everyone who comes to the arcade feels empowered because they are the ones holding the gun. However, at the end of the day the fake Lincoln only dies if Lincoln makes him. He's in charge of how the "Lincoln" dies. Even though the passerby feel like it's up to them, it isn't. As far as the 3-Card Monte is concerned, the mark comes into the game hoping to beat the dealer and win money. He or she thinks that they have a chance to win but the truth is that they don't. The game is fixed, and it's really completely up to the dealer whether the mark wins or loses.

Both of these mirrors reflect aspects of real life. Sometimes people are put in situation where they have to "play the game" in order to succeed. At jobs, you have to appease your boss or at school you have to appease your professor, but at the end of the day you are still living your own life. I think that is how Lincoln and Booth are in Topdog/Underdog. They play the game because they have to, but at the end of the day they are both still trying to live their lives.

Water by the Spoonful

        The moment I've chosen to discuss is in scene six, when Fountainhead has just returned to the chat room for a second time, and the others on the chat room are giving him tough love. Haikumom, Orangutan and Chutes&Ladders go on a tangent about how slogans can be a useful tool to help stay positive. While this chat is going on between the online personas, Elliot's reality shows up on stage. He's at a boxing gym, punching a bag. However, while he boxes the ghost haunts him repeating the phrase, "Momken men-fadluck ted-dini gawaz saffari?"

        Hudes picks an interesting moment here for the two worlds to intersect, however the text makes perfect sense of this moment. In the script, the online characters are talking about slogans to help them fight off their addictions and in this same moment we see Elliot literally fighting off his demons by boxing. As the crack addicts go through their slogans, Elliot is saying to himself, "Your leg feels great. Your leg feels like a million bucks. No pain. No pain." He's repeating his own slogans. This moment is also especially significant, because we find out later that Elliot is still struggling with painkillers. So although these characters are existing in separate worlds, they're both using slogans to fight off addiction and defeat their demons.

         I think the UP "to defeat the demon" would work well for this play, because each individual is dealing with his or her past. This intersectional choice reflects this in terms of several characters in the play. They are take whatever measures they deem necessary to survive, whether it be sarcastic banter in a chat room, or punching a boxing bag. We know that the crack addicts are always struggling with the cravings of their addiction, but this moment provides unique symbolism for Elliot's addiction by physicalizing it with his leg injury. Instead of saying outrightly that he's fighting it Hudes says in the stage directions, "Elliot punches harder. His leg is starting to bother him." which sticks to the UP "to defeat the demon" and shows the struggle in a different way.

House of Trials

There are various unique characteristics in House of Trials showing it is a comedia. One thing that really stood out to me was the fact that there are so many asides. There isn't any sense of inner monologue, because the characters simply say their thoughts out loud. A specific example of this would be when Celia literally talks about the monologue being given in the moonlight. This directly leads into another convention, which is the fact that in using the asides, the character dictates the inner workings of their minds to the audience by breaking the fourth wall. This convention really serves the purpose of drawing readers/audience members into the plot because they are receiving a direct line of communication.

Show and Tell Posting-WIne in the Wilderness by Alice Childress

The show I chose for my show and tell posting is Wine in the Wilderness by Alice Childress. This play was initially written and produced in 1969 by WGBH-TV in Boston as part of a series called “On Being Black.” It’s also been produced at ACT in Seattle, as well as Common Ground Theatre (2008) a theatre that is actually in my hometown of Durham, NC. Another major theatre to produce this show was the Creative Arts Foundation in Chicago. I found this script in the LSU library database at http://solomon.nadr.alexanderstreet.com.libezp.lib.lsu.edu/cgi-bin/asp/philo/getobject.pl?c.27:2.nadr.

Wine in the Wilderness was written during the race riots in Harlem. Bill Jameson is a painter working to complete a triptych of African-American women. So far he has completed the young girl depicting innocence, and the ideal African-American woman that he has titled “Wine in the Wilderness.” He explains this to his old friend, Oldtimer, an elder who likes his alcohol. Bill’s friends Sonny-Man and his wife Cynthia bring him a woman named Tommy to use for his third painting. This woman is supposed to represent the lost woman, a back country African-American woman who is, “…ignorant, unfeminine, coarse, rude ...vulgar...a poor, dumb chick...” While the men disappear to go get Tommy Chinese food, she has a dialogue with Cynthia about men and settling down.  Cynthia tries to discourage Tommy from hitting on Bill, because she knows the actual reason why he wants to paint her. After everyone leaves, Tommy and Bill get into a dialogue, him trying to convince her to be painted, and her resisting. When she hears him talking on the phone about “Wine in the Wilderness” she’s filled with a sense of contentment, takes off her wig, and reveals herself as strong beautiful woman, which throws Bill off guard. They end up spending the night together, but the next morning Oldtimer comes in and tells her the truth about the triptych. As a result, Bill has a revelation about African-American women, and sees that the beauty lies in the ones that have lived and struggled…the people the surround him. He’s inspired to create a new triptych, based on Oldtimer, Sonny-Man and Cynthia, with Tomorrow Marie as the true beauty.

The first dramaturgical choice I found interesting was that Childress began the play with a riot literally going on around them. She could have chosen to have it going on during the same time period without literally starting with a riot. Instead, the first thing the audience hears is sounds of rioting, and offstage voices yelling, “Off the street! Into your homes! Clear the street!” I found this noteworthy because I think it automatically sets the stakes of the play higher. These characters are literally fighting for their lives, that’s how important these themes of racial tension are. Additionally, it shows Bill’s commitment to his art and how much peace he really must find from it, considering that there are bullets being fired and he’s having a phone conversation about who will model for his paintings. The choice to set the scene during the riot immediately establishes high stakes while also giving the reader insight to what the main themes of the play are going to be.

A second dramaturgical choice that stood out to me was Childress’s decision to fully flesh out the space. The message could’ve come across with the characters and the paintings in a room or studio, but Childress goes into depth about the space and minute details, such as the print of the cloth that Tommy drapes around herself later in the plot. The space is currently in the middle of being redecorated, in the stage directions Childress describes it as, “…broken out walls and is half finished with a redecorating job…” and I think this reflects that fact that their culture is also currently in a state of disarray. Fighting to gain equality, but only part of the way there….just like the space that Bill is living in. Despite the fact that it’s halfway torn apart, it still retains strong aspects of culture with the paintings, sculptures and wall hangings that adorn the area. I think it’s really awesome the way this reflects the political themes of the production. 

Eurydice

The first quote I've chosen to suggest a take on Eurydice is: 

"NO ONE KNOCKS AT THE DOOR OF THE DEAD!"

This quote is said by all of the stones at the end of the second movement when Orpheus has made his way to the underworld. I chose it because all throughout the play, the characters are playing with fate; bending and twisting it instead of just letting things happen the way they happen. The stones want to stick to the conventional ways, and after Eurydice and her father have been singing and reading and doing these unheard of things, someone knocking at the door is the final straw. I like the idea that Orpheus and Eurydice aren't content to let fate own them, but instead they plan their own fate. They don't give in to what the stones what, because they will try everything to be together. A production based on this quote would have a definite bold contrast between the overworld and the underworld, and the people that are within each. It's designs would be bold, really highlighting the fact that Eurydice, her father, and Orpheus are BREAKING conventions, while the people of the underworld want them to just let fate take over. Perhaps everything in the underworld is a certain color, but then the fathers string, the shakespeare book, etc (items from the overworld) could have a different hue. This poster would definitely have strong lines, and would most likely show a huge difference between the underworld and the overworld. Like a stones versus characters with humanity type of thing. The main thing I'd picture is just vivd vivid contrast. 

The second quote I think a production of Eurydice could be based off of is:

"Love is a big, funny word."

The little stone says this is movement three, scene three. It's right after Eurydice and Orpheus have gone, and the father says, "Do you understand the love a father has for his daughter?" I chose this because I think love is one of the predominant themes in this play. Much of the action is sparked by love, whether it is the love of family or the love of a marriage. Love has many complex meanings, and each person sees love in a different way. The father sees love in his daughter. Eurydice finds love in books and in Orpheus, while he finds love in Eurydice and in music. I think it'd be interesting to really base a production of this play off of the idea that people will do anything for love. Since it's not a conventional love story, I think it'd create a unique challenge to have the designers and the directors really highlight the moments and the actions that are born out of love for another person. The imagery on this poster would definitely have Eurydice, Orpheus and the Father in the foreground, showing that love is the most prominent thing. But I think maybe the background would be the underworld or the stones....a contrast between love and the struggle it can face. 

My Comments, round two!

-comment on Morgan's The Children's Hour post

-comment on Chelsea's Four Thousand Miles post

-comment on Brandon's Show and Tell post

-comment on Morgan's Love! Valour! Compassion! post

-comment on Morgan's Eurydice post

Glass of Water

Okay, so it seemed to me as though Glass of Water adhered perfectly to the "well-made play" standard. All of the pieces of the puzzle made sense together, and there weren't very many moments that didn't match up with what was currently going on in the plot. However, if I was to say one that didn't add up, there is an odd encounter between Bolingbroke and the Duchess towards the end of the play.

Bolingbroke says, "You honor me, madame...especially since you don't even know my best qualities." Then Duchess replies with, "But I have an excellent imagination. However, milford, let me claim the first privilege of a wife..." and then they kiss. This incident stands apart from the conflict that has gone on between them throughout the play. They've acted hostile towards each other the entire time, so this moment definitely seemed random to me. The Duchess has been in love with Masham the entire time, so it seems unlikely that she'd be over him so quickly.

Love! Valour! Compassion!

Love! Valour! Compassion! definitely differs structurally from the last few plays we read. It isn't in linear order, for one thing, and the story includes some direct narration to the audience. The men in this play have a complex history that gets fleshed out as the play progresses, so the story is much more fuzzy than other pieces we have read that are more straight forward. Honestly, I had difficulty getting through this play, because I kept having to go back and re-read passages, or rethink relationships to make sure I knew who was involved with who, who was hooking up with who, etc.

A historian could draw from this play that during this time period gay-rights and gay awareness was quite a relevant issue. I think that the playwright does an excellent job conveying the Truth of the matter, because although homosexuality is much more accepted at this time than it was in the past, there is still hate that must be fought against. Even though these men are at their oasis, she still touches on the fact that there are hateful people out there. They're watching footage of a gay demonstration in seattle and Perry says, "...He whacked that guy with his nightstick right against his head. Motherfucker!" This play is different than other plays we've read because it raises awareness of a societal issue....homophobia...that's still relevant today. I like how McNally makes every character in the play homosexual, because he's propagating the idea that love is love, no matter what gender you are.

The Children's Hour

There are several place where The Children's Hour departs from the traditional structure of a well-made play. Firstly, i was definitely expecting the obligatory scene to be a reveal in which Martha and Karen confess their love for each other, but that never happened. Secondly, the "just-in-time" resolution never showed up, because Martha succeeded in committing suicide. The play isn't really resolved until the very end, and but the style isn't in keeping with what is dictated by the "well made play" structure.

In regards to the question of whether this play should be produced today, I definitely think it should, however I think the situation in which it was performed would play a huge factor in whether the show was successful or not. I definitely think that this would give younger, even up to high schoolers, negative feelings and act as a bad behavioral example, if that makes sense. I would definitely support the awareness that'd be generated by performing this play, but I do think it'd be important to make sure it was given to a mature audience, and not someone that would handle it in an inappropriate way. I feel like Night, Mother exhibits shades of this as well. It's a very interesting plot, however because of the adult themes I don't think it would benefit audiences under a certain age.

Show and Tell Posting-Beauty by Jane Martin

The play I’ve chosen to comment on is called Beauty by Jane Martin; it was published in 2000. I was unable to find record of a production history for this play, so I’m assuming it hasn’t been produced before on a large scale. I found this play on the LSU library’s database, the exact link to it is…http://solomon.nadr.alexanderstreet.com.libezp.lib.lsu.edu/cgi-bin/asp/philo/getobject.pl?c.1206:2.nadr.

Beauty is a play written about two women, Carla and Bethany, who are unhappy with themselves. Bethany is an accountant who writes short stories, while Carla is a gorgeous model, struggling to make it in the modeling world. In this particular moment, Bethany has left work because she had a “beach urge” and on the beach, she finds a genie. The genie grants her three wishes, two of which she makes while on the beach. During the play, she is describing this occurrence to Carla. Carla is doubtful at first, and annoyed that Bethany is making her late for her Ralph Lauren modeling call, on her birthday nonetheless. When Bethany shows her the $25,000 that the genie gave her on the beach, she starts to believe it. She’s even further persuaded when Bethany swears “…on her mother’s grave…” that her uncle walked straight out of the intensive care unit. Carla and Bethany begin arguing when Bethany starts entertaining the idea of wishing for beauty on her third wish, because Bethany thinks it would make her life exponentially better, while Carla tells her she can’t have a normal functioning life because people are so distracted by her looks. The action of the play culminates in the genie switching Bethany and Carla into each other’s bodies, without Bethany actually making the wish.

The first dramaturgical choice I found noteworthy in the script of Beauty is that Martin chose to have the genie switch the two females’ personalities, without Bethany actually wishing for him to do so. It’s an interesting choice because it makes the genie a more relevant character, showing that he’s overheard their conversation from within’ the lamp. It also creates the question, why did he do it instead of just waiting for Bethany to ask? I think this brings up the idea that it’s important to know what you want to get out of life, because situations can change in the blink of an eye. Martin shows that sometimes in life things are out of one’s control, and that one has to be able to adapt if life changes.

The second dramaturgical choice I’ve chosen to highlight is the way Martin ends the play with the line of dialogue, “Different problems.” Even though the play doesn’t necessarily resolve itself, this one line of dialogue sort of wraps the whole thing up giving us the message that Martin wants to convey. Expanding upon this line, she’s saying even though some peoples lives may seem better than others, at the end of the day every individual is dealing with their own issues. Whether your insecurities have to do with the way you look, your intelligence, or something completely different, everyone has his or her “different problems.” This message is something that everyone can relate to, so it’s a perfect way to punctuate the action of the play.

My Comments!

-comment on Caroline's 4000 Miles blog posting

-comment on Chelsea's Trifles blog posting

-comment on Morgan's Judith blog posting

-comment on Brandon's Overtones Blog Posting

comment on Morgan's Night, Mother blog posting

-comment on Brandon's 4000 Miles blog posting

4000 Miles

The motif that I noticed most prominently in 4000 Miles was the losing and finding things. This happened consistently throughout the play in the physical sense with objects, as well as with characters losing their words. An example of this would be when she thinks she lost her checkbook, but she ends up finding it...also she often forgets her hearing aid. There are other things lost in the play, Bec and Leo's relationship, and also Vera's neighbor Ginny. Leo and Vera are also at a loss for words many times. Vera continually makes statements such as, "...there are a lot of bad things about getting old, but the worst one is not being able to find my words." I think this motif pertains to the story in a huge way, because the play truly is about Leo losing and finding himself, through his journey. Just as Herzog has some items lost and some found, there are parts of Leo that he'll never get back, and there are parts of him that he discovers that will continue to grow. This motif is true to life in the sense that everyone is on a journey and is searching, and there's lot's to encounter along the way. Leo is definitely struggling right now to find himself and Herzog highlights this with the use of the motif.

Reflections on Judith

While at the beginning of Judith Judith appears to be a docile character, it isn’t long before the reader realizes Judith has an agenda. She cleverly manipulates herself close to Holofernes, so that she can achieve what she wants to him to achieve, and consequently, gain power. This being said, it seems to me as though the major dramatic question is, “At the end of the play, will Judith have power over both the Servant and Holofernes?” When Judith initially enters, she’s submissive. She doesn’t complete many thoughts, getting cut off by Holofernes various times. However as the play progresses, we see a shift in her. She knows her plan is working, and once she kills Holofernes she loses this false shyness and completely takes over, ravishing her position of power. It briefly looks as though the Servant will take over when she’s accusing Judith of hesitating, and considering doing it herself. This is an example of a moment within the play when it looks as though Judith could lose power. After she completes her mission, Judith takes complete rein over the entire situation. Besides not listening to what the servant says, she goes so far as to humiliate her servant as well. Her success isn’t enough, she has to continue to assert her dominance. The MDQ is definitely answered, because Judith does, in fact, gain complete power over the other two characters by the end of the play.