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