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.