Comments Post

http://crayonxasxsnail.blogspot.com/2013/09/judith-by-howard-barker.html?showComment=1380401171406#c3874738996140528436

http://crayonxasxsnail.blogspot.com/2013/09/4000-miles-by-amy-herzog.html#comment-form

http://paulina2130.blogspot.com/2013/09/overtones.html?showComment=1380401677142#c264108681505580502

http://alyseiadarbyscriptanalysis.blogspot.com/2013/09/night-mother.html?showComment=1380402333562#c7945540590976916951

http://lo-graham-theatre.blogspot.com/2013/09/overtones-analysis.html?showComment=1380402704165#c9044952114813070575

http://wellhithereyou.blogspot.com/2013/09/trifles.html?showComment=1380403015043#c1798797117928585436

Amy Herzog - "4000 Miles"

A motif I found in this play is avoidance. I believe this is especially interesting since this play is a slice-of-life style play, and I can see how in the world of the play it is much easier for the course of the characters lives to avoid issues rather than confront them. Leo is avoiding a lot of things when he arrives at Vera's house, and so is she. They are both avoiding his mother, which continues throughout the play when Leo's mother calls Vera and she avoids telling her that Leo is staying at her place. Leo is also avoiding several other women in his life (his girlfriend, his sister). His avoidance of his sister and his mother seem to be his refusing to deal with the repercussions of his actions and to move forward with his family, rather than separated from them. He also has avoided talking to his girlfriend, perhaps because he feels in some place that she is going to break up with him, but also in a way because he is avoiding the reality of a relationship, believing that he will be there waiting for him no matter what. In this way he is avoiding reality of his relation to everyone in his life, including himself.

Leo is also avoiding the reason that he is so distraught, Micah's death. I believe the scene where Micah's death is finally revealed is a fulcrum point to this play, where he is finally confronting at least some part of himself, of his emotions. It also changes how Vera and Leo relate to one another, they are finally not avoiding each other in any sense, they are open to listen to one another.

Howard Barker - "Judith"

For Judith, I believe that the most pertinent MDQ is "Does Judith want to sleep with Holofernes?" At first she seems certainly willing enough to sleep with Holofernes, but it is still unclear as to why she has come to him. As the play progresses, it is easy to think that perhaps Holofernes knew of her intention to kill him, considering his relaxed reaction to the women discussing their plan. However, I believe that he allowed her to remain with him because he felt a connection between them and thought that her attraction to him would overcome her. Indeed, it nearly does overcome her, after the "evil" (his head) has been removed.

I believe that Judith is genuinely attracted to Holofernes, and does want to sleep with him. She is unable to complete her assassination without being reminded of her duty to her nation. She was not expecting Holofernes to be the type of man he is when she came to murder him, and is clearly knocked off balance by her attraction to him. I believe that she is incapable of coming to terms with her attraction to him and her sense of duty, hence her idea to fornicate with his body after he is dead. When she is "punished" by her inability to move, she accepts this explanation for her immobility and asks to be prayed for, indicating that she feels guilty for her actions and for her lust for the evil man that she was sent to assassinate.

Marsha Norman - "'Night, Mother"

Though the merit of using “Will Jesse kill herself?” as the MDQ is evident, I do not believe it to be the most interesting question of this text. Jesse’s struggle is not whether or not to kill herself, nor does she ever waver from her task to Mama. Therefore, I do not think that the text necessarily supports that as the MDQ, though it is of course the question on the audience’s minds throughout the play. Dramaturgically speaking, I believe the MDQ supported fully by the text is “Will Mama understand?”

Jesse’s goal throughout the play is not only to get Mama to understand that she absolutely is going to follow through with her plan, but also why she absolutely cannot do anything else for herself at this point. Though Mama tries her hardest to relate to Jesse and to get her to see another option, Jesse remains tired; already through with life. Jesse’s only purpose in telling her mother of her plan was to get her to understand, and to then proceed with the evening she had planned for herself before her self-service silencing. Mama cannot come to Jesse’s view, however, and continues to alternate between berating Jesse and begging her to stay. For Jesse, I believe the only question that remains for her is whether or not Mama will eventually find a way to understand the inevitability of her plan, though I do not think she is looking for Mama to understand why she is doing it. Though she does eventually come to a climactic moment of tension when she lists for Mama the factors in her discontent, I do not believe Jesse’s goal to be a self-explanation. Rather, I think that her purpose is to have Mama understand that there was nothing, and remains to be nothing she can do about it. The most interesting MDQ for Jesse (who I believe to be the protagonist) is “Will Mama understand that I (Jesse) am already gone, and that it isn’t her fault?”

Susan Glaspell - "Trifles"

I think that the proposed production choices for Trifles would be extremely interesting as far as going towards a more symbolic representation of the text. The very idea of specific stage detail could be argued to be a 'trifle' itself. Since none of the dialogue would be changed, it could be argued that there would be no distractions for the audience to detract from the extremely specific and plot-motivated wording, especially in the interactions of the two women. Much of the story is built on suspicion and tone of the actors, so I can absolutely see the merit in removing detail as a means of keeping the audience's attention firmly on the descriptions of the life the audience must build for the alleged murderess. I can especially appreciate the simplicity of this production in relation to the box containing the dead bird. To make the "pretty little box" a plain, black box would force the audience to consider the care she must have felt for the bird in order to feel the need to bury it in the first place, and to feel the need to shroud it and place it in a type of coffin.

However, speaking as someone who had already read this play and was already a fan of the script itself, I cannot say that I don't think these production choices would detract from the overall level of connection to the audience. Though the story is one of understandable relation throughout history, I believe that the era and specifically the regional location of this story is incredibly important in relating to how the women behave towards the men, especially since in that era and region the idea of the Sheriff being "the Law" was incredibly accurate and for the two ladies to knowingly obstruct their process was incredibly bold. The idea of Trifles, I believe, is that the little things matter. Without the setting and props to provide the audience with a true sense of this woman's life, and how dreary her home really was, and how beautiful the box really was that she was going to give up to the earth for the sake of reverence for her bird, I believe that many audience members would find it hard or even impossible to connect fully to the desperation that lead up to her act of violence. Though the text is rich with descriptions, to rely solely on the dialogue to construct the nightmarish world of a woman in solitude even when in the company of her husband, would be a disservice to this play as well as to the actors attempting to work in such an unforgiving environment. In order to fully grasp this play, I believe that the only ambiguity should come from the moral 'grey'.

Alice Gerstenberg -- "Overtones"

The structure of Overtones and the very idea of calling the 'educated' version of each woman their 'overtones' speaks largely to how women relate to each other even to this day. Nice-on-the-outside is still a well-honed skill in many women's repertoire. The first scene sets up the relationship of Harriet and Hattie as two sides of the same coin, or perhaps the wrapper and the sweet. However, as the play progresses Hattie and Maggie take on larger and more complex roles towards their 'overtones', and even break from previous patterns to speak directly to each other after the mention of Turkey. In that exchange, the 'undertones' understand and respond to one another, but do not respond to each other even when their veils are dropped and they are yelling at each other directly. I believe this choice by Alice Gerstenberg was not to confuse the audience, but rather to make the most sense to the intended audience for this play: women. 

Though all the social niceties are present throughout the play, women communicate amongst each other (based on my own experience) largely with what remains unspoken, with carefully chosen words, and especially with tone. Therefore, what makes the most sense to me is that the 'undertones' are able to communicate to each other through the women's unspoken signals when in the context of a relatively inconsequential bit of information, but cannot understand each others' deeper, ulterior motives. Margaret's tone, word choice, or even body language could have given away her lie about Turkey, which Hattie of course jumped on, and which Maggie would suspect she would; given the tense nature of their relationship and a person's natural self-doubt when trying to pass off a lie as truth. However, the 'undertones' remain deaf to the final expressions of each woman's true intentions towards each other because, sadly, even a woman's intuition has a limit.