4.48 Psychosis

Sarah Kane - English playwright, died at the age of 28. Wrote 5 plays, one short film, Skin, which focused on an abusive relationship between a black woman and a racist skinhead. Her most well-known play (at least within this department), Blasted, depicts multiple scenes of disturbing acts that span from anal rape to cannibalism and other forms of brutality. She committed suicide by overdose then hanging in King's College Hospital in London.

4.48 Psychosis was written within 3 months of Sarah Kane's suicide. It premiered posthumously at the Royal Court Theater in 2000. It was her last play and was her shortest. The writing is unclear as to the amount of actors needed to voice the play. The title derives from 4:48 AM, the time when Sarah Kane woke up the most during her years of depression.



1. The original cast consisted of one male and two female actors. How would your casting go? How many actors would you want in order to honor the text in your mind?

2. Do you believe that Sarah Kane's choice in writing more about thoughts than actions makes as powerful a statement as a play (Let's use Tracy Lett's Killer Joe) with lots of specific action and not so much inner exposition?

3. Is 4.48 Psychosis Sarah Kane's memiores?

4. If you suffer/have suffered/know someone who suffers from clinical depression, does this script accurately depict some of the feelings that one experiences when dealing with depression?

5. Would you EVER want to see this play done?

6. Looking at Sarah Kane's use of page spacing, and also examining Shakespeare's use of fragmented iambic pentameter to stress certain lines or have question-answers on specific topics, do you think she meant anything by her use of fragmented lines?

7. Did you think this was a boring, exceedingly trite call for help?

8. If you're answer to the above is no - Did you feel uncomfortable reading this play as if it were someones true thoughts or a journal of sorts?

9. Do you think 4.48 Psychosis correctly follows the doctrine of In-Yer-Face in terms of representing the new norm for theatre?

The Purple Flower

•  

The Harlem Renaissance (c. 1918–1935) was a blossoming of African American creative arts associated with the larger New Negro movement, a multifaceted phenomenon that helped set the directions African American writers and artists would pursue throughout the twentieth century. The social foundations of the movement included the Great Migration of African Americans from rural to urban spaces and from South to North, dramatically rising levels of literacy, and the development of national organizations dedicated to pressing African American civil rights (the NAACP), “uplifting” the race and opening up socioeconomic opportunities (the National Urban League), and developing race pride, including Pan-African sensibilities and programs (the United Negro Improvement Association and the Pan-African conferences).

Until the end of the Civil War, the majority of African Americans had been enslaved and lived in the South. Immediately after the end of slavery, the emancipated African Americans began to strive for civic participation, political equality and economic and cultural self-determination. By the late 1870s, conservative whites managed to regain power in the South. From 1890 to 1908 they proceeded to pass legislation that disenfranchised most Negros and many poor whites, trapping them without representation. They established white supremacist regimes of Jim Crow segregation in the South and one-party block voting behind southern Democrats. The conservative whites denied African Americans their exercise of civil and political rights. The region's reliance on an agricultural economy continued to limit opportunities for most people. Negros were exploited as share croppers and laborers. As life in the South became increasingly difficult, African Americans began to migrate North in great number.

Most of the African-American literary movement arose from a generation that had lived through the gains and losses of Reconstruction after the American Civil War. Sometimes their parents or grandparents had been slaves. Their ancestors had sometimes benefited by paternal investment in social capital, including better-than-average education. Many in the Harlem Renaissance were part of the Great Migration out of the South into the Negro neighborhoods of the North and Midwest. African Americans sought a better standard of living and relief from the institutionalized racism in the South. Others were people of African descent from racially stratified communities in the Caribbean who came to the United States hoping for a better life. Uniting most of them was their convergence in Harlem, New York City.

Facts About the play and  playwright

• Marita Bonner was born in Boston,MA                                                                                 
• In 1918, she graduated from Brookline High School and enrolled in Radcliffe College  where  she majored in  English and Comparative Literature.
• While living in Washington, Marita met William Almy Occomy. Bonner and Occomy got married and moved to Chicago where Bonner's writing career took off.
• The Purple Flower was first published in Crisis magazine in 1928
• It’s generally  considered her masterpiece
• The play was never performed in her life time
• She died in 1971

• Bonner contributed a variety of things to the Harlem Renaissance. Her writings addressed the struggles of people that lived outside of Harlem

1. 1.       The White Devils live on the side of the hill “Somewhere”, the Us’s live in the Valley of the hill between somewhere and nowhere.  What does the valley represent and why are the Us’s so determined    to make it “Somewhere” where the purple flower grows? What does “Somewhere” represent and what does the Flower   represent?

1. 2.       In the Setting of the play a thin board  named “ the skin of civilization” divides the stage in half horizontally so that the white devils are in the back ground and that the Us’s are in the foreground. The white devils mimic the us’s   and dance about playfully. And if an “us “breaks through the skin of civilization they become disfigured and twisted into a pile? What does the Skin of civilization represent and why do us’s become deformed when they break through it. Also why do the white Devils mimic the us’s?

1. 3.       Do you believe that the name of the characters such as Finest Blood, Sweet, Cornerstone, Etc. reflect characteristics of certain individuals in all societies or are the names exclusive to “People with a history of being oppressed? What characteristics does the name give to the person bearing it?

1. 4.      The play gives the impression that no matter how long and hard you work, unless you take a stance and make a bold move, you will never make it to where you want to be if there are people that don’t want you there. Do you find this to have any truth at all?

1. 5.       The Servant of God is starting to create a new man out of Gold, dust, Books, and lastly blood. Why does this new man need all of those things to defeat the white devils and why does a new man need to be created?  Couldn’t the Us’s take the things they wanted to use for the new man and defeat the white devils themselves?

1. 6.       The young Us’s Rely on action to make it to somewhere while the Old us’s rely on faith. Is this an issue that we still see today in society? The young impatient who see faith as nothing more than confidence versus the old and patient who have confidence that there faith will guide them.

1. 7.       In general do you think some groups of Americans are disenfranchised because of prejudice disguised as moral issues  are is that just the rhetoric  of liberal media?

Our Town

Thornton Wilder was born on April 17, 1897 in Madison Wisconson. “Our Town” premiered in McCarter Theater in Princeton, New Jersey on January 22, 1938. It’s New York City debut happened in Henry Miller’s Theatre on February 4, 1938. Later, it moved to the Morosco Theatre. In 1938, Wilder was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for Drama for “Our Town.” The Soviet Union prevented “Our Town” from showing in Berlin in 1946 because it was “too depressing and could inspire a German suicide wave.” Besides the awards he received for “Our Town,” Wilder was awarded two more Pulitzer prizes and a National Book Award.

1. 1. We talked about this a little bit in class on Wednesday, but what do you think the significance of the invisible props are? Do you think it detracts from the performance or adds to it?

2. 2. Why do you think Wilder chooses to keep the play in stasis for Acts 1 and 2? Do you think it helps to add to the story line of the play in Act 3?

3. 3. On page 83, Emily says “Oh, earth, you’re too wonderful for anybody to realize you. Do any human beings ever realize life while they liv it? –every, every minute?” Do you think that humans really do see the beauty in life or that they take it for granted?

4. 4. Why do you think Wilder chose to title the acts the way he did? Why do you think he split the play up this way? (Daily Life, Love and Marriage, and Death and Eternity)

5. 5. Why do you think Wilder had the Stage Manager play all of the small characters as well as the stage manager?

6. 6. What were your thoughts on how the play jumped around in time? Why do you think Wilder chose to tell the story this way?

7. 7. I had never read “Our Town”. Honestly, I had no idea what was going to happen in Act 3 and was TOTALLY caught off guard. I really want to know what everyone else thought would happen in Act 3.

"Our Town" Day One

Jennie's posting on Friday. This is to tide you over until then.

Neil LaBute's "The Shape of Things"

Neil LaBute is a contemporary American playwright hailed by John Lahr of The New Yorker as one of the most important artists working in the theatre. He has written for both the stage - The Shape of Things; Fat Pig; Reasons to Be Pretty; Wrecks; Bash - and the silver screen - In the Company of Men; Your Friends and Neighbors.

The Shape of Things debuted at the Almeida theatre in 2001, starring Paul Rudd, Rachel Weisz, Gretchen Mol and Frederick Weller. It was done in a black box style theatre, with realistic staging. LSU produced The Shape of Things in the fall of 2002 in the Shaver Theater, directed by Barry Kyle.

Questions:

1. What does Evelyn whisper to Adam?

2. Was what Evelyn did to Adam art?

3. Does Adam actually sleep with Jenny?

4. What is Jenny's role in the play as a whole?

"The America Play" Blog, featuring "Essays"

Suzan-Lori Parks, born May 10, 1963, is an African American playwright and screenwriter. Her works have been produced by Actors Theatre of Louisville, American Repertory Theatre, Arena Stage, The Public Theatre and Yale Repertory, among many others. She wrote her first feature-length screenplay for Spike Lee and his company, 40 Acres and a Mule. She won the 1990 Obie Award for Best New American Play and the 2002 Pulitzer Prize for Drama for her play, Topdog/Underdog. The America Play (the opening scene of which inspired Topdog/Underdog) is a two-act play which premiered at the Yale Repertory Theater in January 1994. Some consider it difficult to understand because, as with most of Suzan-Lori Parks' writings, it is anything but straightforward.

The America Play, featuring Essays Discussion Questions

1. First off, Imma need you to read Parks' essays before you read The America Play, so that you'll be able to understand it better. Besides helping readers to understand her writings better, there were many points that Parks brought to light about theatre, Rep & Rev, action in the line, ". . . Black People Onstage," etc. What were some points that "spoke" to you?

2. What's the significance of the John Locke quote in the beginning?

3. I remember the first time I heard Neal reading from this piece. I pictured it being located in the desert or this old, western town, and the Foundling Father's set-up was located in this worn-out boudoir (Word from "The Electronic Nigger") or saloon. Although Parks doesn't give us a specific location (or a "realistic" location), where did you picture all the action taking place?

4. What do the "big holes" and graves represent, and I'm not just talking about "The Great Hole of History?"

5. What's the underlining message, in your opinion, of the following "Reps & Revs?"

"A slight deafness in this ear . . . there are no side effects . . . only a little ringing in the ears" and "Emergency, oh Emergency, please put the Great Man in the ground."

6. "I think I'll wear the yellow beard. Variety. Works like uh tonic. Some inaccuracies are good for business. Take the stovepipe hat! Never really worn indoors but people dont like their Lincoln hatless." When reading The America Play, do you find yourself questioning certain facts from history and wondering if they've been created from the imagination of someone?

7. I feel like the Foundling Father was trying to say that the Great Man should be following the lead of the Lesser Known (I guess because of his origins), and, even though they both have the same stature and looks ("taking into account of course his natural God-given limitations"), the Lesser Known believes that the Great(er) Man is as his name says. The Lesser Known tries to follow in the Great Man's footsteps instead of creating his own. What are these lines saying to you?

"And the Great Mans deeds had transpired during the life of the Great Man somewhere in past-land that is somewhere "back there" and all this while the Lesser Known digging his holes bearing the burden of his resemblance all the while trying somehow to equal the Great Man in stature, word and deed going forward with his lesser life trying somehow to follow in the Great Mans footsteps footsteps that were of course behind him. The Lesser Known trying somehow to catch up to the Great Man all this while and maybe running too fast in the wrong direction. Which is to say that maybe the Great Man had to catch him. Hhhh. Ridiculous."

Fences

Fences was written in 1985 by August Wilson. Wilson mostly wrote about the condition of African Americans in the 20th century. In fact he wrote a ten plays know as the "Pittsburg Cycle". Nine of the ten plays were set in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. each play was about the African American condition in a different decade of the 20th century. Two of these plays, Fences and The Piano Lesson, each received a Pulitzer Prize. August Wilson also wrote six additional plays.

Fences was written about the 1950's. It was written to show that even though America is supposed to be a country where everyone has an equal chance "all men" are not "created equal". The play tells the story of one man, Troy Maxon, who grapples with this truth and the subsequent decisions he makes.

Discussion Questions:

1. Does Troy keep Cory in order to keep Cory from making the same mistakes he did, or is he just jealous of Cory's potential?

2. Why does Troy allow Lyons to play music when he dos not allow Cory to play football?

3. What do you think happened to Trow when he "wrestled with Death for three days and three nights" (14)?

4. What does Gabriel mean when he says "better get ready for judgement" (29)?

5. Why doesn't Rose leave Troy after she knows that Troy had a baby with another woman?

6. What does Troy really mean to the family? Is he really a cornerstone of the family? If so, what will happen to the family now that Troy is dead?

7. What does the metaphor of the fence mean? How does it apply to the lives of each character?

Hamlet

Most of us know the basics of good ole William Shakespeare but I'll jot down a few:
Born in Stratford-upon-Avon and although the exact date of his birth isn't known, we tend to celebrate it on April 23. He married Anne Hathaway on November 27, 1582 and had several children. William Shakespeare is credited with creating many of the words we use today and transformed the world with his plays. Hamlet was written sometime in between 1599 and 1601. One Shakespeare's more famous works, Hamlet was criticized for different reasons depending on which century your point of view was born from. Late 17th century critics said it lacked decorum and unity while 18th century peoples applauded Hamlet as a hero. The earliest date of a performance of Hamlet is June of 1594, according to Philip Henslowe.

1. A recurring theme in Hamlet is inner sickness covered by a tough exterior. I realize this seems like a simple topic with an obvious answer but do you believe Hamlet's feigned insanity was (as it is named) false or was this a first glimpse of him finally having a mental meltdown? Was it a mix of both perhaps? Elaborate.

2. When Hamlet speaks to the players, Shakespeare feathers in some general rules on how to “act.” “Suit the action to the word, the word to the action. . . 'twere the mirror up to nature.” Essentially, don't speak on stage just to say a line. . . you must listen and react to every word, action, etc. Do you think this an appropriate approach to “acting” or do you believe there is a better way to understand the performance side of theater. If you agree with Shakespeare, please list a few reasons why. (personal examples, things you've read, etc)

3. Immensely popular in it's own time, Hamlet was viewed by all who enjoyed it and loathed it. Shakespeare drops some extremely funny shit in this play and I can understand why people who didn't like the show were offended. Take for example, the moment where everyone goes to see the play. Hamlet attempts to snuggle up next to Ophelia creating one of the funniest and raunchiest moments in the show.

Hamlet: Lady, shall I lie in your lap?

Ophelia: No, my Lord.

Hamlet: I mean, my head upon your lap?

Ophelia: Ay, my lord.

Hamlet: Do you think I meant COUNTry matters?

Ophelia: I think nothing my lord

Hamlet: That's a fair thought to lie between maids' legs.

See? Shakespeare was a riot! Any who, I'd really love for you guys to recall some other examples in the play where the bard slipped in some double meanings. Then, explain why these subtle phrases or quotes would have been considered offensive back in the day.

4. Out of the many times I've read this play, Polonius has always been my least favorite character albeit one moment. Polonius bestows up his son a few life lessons before Laertes departs. “This above all: to thine ownself be true, and it must follow, as the night the day, thou canst not then be false to any man.” Beautifully worded, this quote highlights one of the founding ideals of the play. If a quote stood out to you that could serve as another example of highlighting a major theme in the play, please share.

5. I'll be the first to admit that when I read Hamlet for the first time, I thought Ophelia was a crazy, hormonal woman that needed to take some pills. Even after I read Hamlet the third time and the fourth time, I couldn't get passed my initial perception of her character. I'll make light of this so it won't be super awkward, but last semester. . . I sort of went bat shit crazy(feel free to chuckle amongst yourselves). So many changes were happening all around me and it was too much. I tell you this to make a point, I promise. After going back through this play, I can in every way relate to Ophelia. She has had so much happen to her in such a short amount of time, it's no wonder she starts singing a song and throwing flowers around! In short, if there is a character in this play that you didn't connect with or didn't understand, or thought was completely bat shit crazy, I urge you to try again. Try to relate to that character with an open mind and, if need be, incorporate some personal experiences to help you. Now discuss. :)

6. I'm pretty sure that anyone who has ever read Hamlet in an English class addressed the issue of red hott mother/son lovin. . . and so shall we. Do you think their relationship was inappropriate or normal by seventeenth century standards? By our standards?

7. Overall, what messages can we interpret from William Shakespeare's Hamlet? There is no right or wrong answer to this one but really delve into what this play does (feelings it evokes, questions it raises, etc). If it helps, keep in mind how influential this work has been for the last few centuries. Why has it been so? What is so moving about this play compared to other writers of the 1600s (ish)? These questions should help you analyze Hamlet further. . . you don't have to formally answer all of them. :)

Extra Ticket

If anyone needs (or wants) a ticket to King Lear, The Metal Children, or Our Lady of 121st Street, I work in the box office and I have an extra ticket to those shows. I scheduled my extra King Lear ticket for tomorrow night's show, but I can move it to another day if you need me to. So just comment below, or e-mail me at holly.dicharry@gmail.com and it's yours.

I'm in the union box office tuesdays & thursdays from 10:30am until 5pm and on wednesdays from 2:30 until 5. And I can totes answer any box officey related questions you have, if you have any. :D

Hamlet, Day One.

Emily's post will be up by midnight tomorrow night - but since we had class today, I figured it would be a good idea to post something so that you could comment.

As kind of a prompt for these comments - and a prompt ideally that will be continued in Emily's discussion on Friday - I'd like to bring your attention to a passage from Peter Goldman's review of Stephen Greenblatt's book Hamlet in Purgatory.

In Hamlet in Purgatory, Greenblatt argues that the Ghost of Hamlet is not simply a plot device, a generic convention of the Elizabethan revenge tragedy, as sometimes assumed. Its power, both for the audience and for young Hamlet, goes far beyond its function as a plot catalyst. Rather the figure of the Ghost expresses (1) a widespread fear among the living of being forgotten after death and (2) bereavement for those already dead. The Ghost, in brief, inhabits the imaginative space left open by the English Reformation's banishment of Purgatory in 1563. The Ghost returns from Purgatory, and in effect brings Purgatory back with him, albeit in a fictionalized and thereby transformed shape. Shakespeare's Hamlet, as Greenblatt puts it, participates in "a cult of the dead" (203, 257), and we as readers and viewers continue this cult--one with important social functions that he explores at length. Only on this cultic basis can we account for Hamlet's powerful and continued fascination. The primary imperative of the Ghost is to "Remember," not to "Revenge," as commonly thought. In this sense, Greenblatt's interpretation shares common concerns with the readings of René Girard and Eric Gans, for both of whom also revenge is secondary to the refusal or delay of revenge. In Greenblatt's reading, the imperative for memory at the cost of revenge accounts for Hamlet's delay that has so puzzled critics over the centuries, as indeed Hamlet himself (in his soliloquies) is puzzled and frustrated by his lack of ready action. In this reading of the play, the problem is not delay but rather revenge itself: the Ghost does call out for revenge, and Hamlet eventually fulfills that requirement, if not, perhaps, in exactly the way envisioned by King Hamlet. The problem for Greenblatt's interpretation, as he puts it, is that "Sticking a sword into someone's body turns out to be a very tricky way of remembering the dead" (225). If the play is primarily an expression of the "desire to speak with the dead," and the fear, on the part of the living, of being forgotten after death, then how do we account for the elements of revenge at all? We cannot deny that the play, like all revenge tragedies, ends with a bloodbath. And at least part of the aesthetic experience of the play is the conventional anticipation of revenge. As Greenblatt observes, "Purgatory, along with theological language of communion (houseling), deathbed confession (appointment), and anointing (aneling), while compatible with a Christian (and, specifically, a Catholic) call for remembrance, is utterly incompatible with a Senecan call for vengeance" (237). Ghosts from Purgatory typically ask for prayers to hasten their way to Heaven. How, in other words, do we reconcile revenge and remembrance?

A few things to keep in mind about Shakespearean tragedy: although it is influenced by Greek tragedy, its more direct ancestor is found in ancient Rome, specifically in the works of Seneca.

Lucius Annaeus Seneca - a writer of the early Roman empire, contemporary and one-time tutor of Emperor Nero - is the author of 9 surviving plays. His plays, many of which deal with revenge, are the only extent examples of fabula crepidata (Roman adaptations of Greek tragedy). There is only one surviving example of a fabula praetexta (Tragedy set in Rome) - Octavia - and it was long attributed to Seneca, too: unfortunately, Seneca's appearance in the play as a character who is forced to commit suicide, an event that actually happened in Imperial Rome as depicted in the play, makes this authorship decidedly dubious.

Like the Greeks, Seneca had a chorus - although given the size of most Roman theatres, it is likely that the chorus was much smaller than those of Sophocles. The structure of the plays was largely the same, and, at least in the fabula crepidata largely stayed close to the Greek myths that inspired them; although Rome as an empire had Etruscan roots, its appropriation of Greek culture, religion, and literature is extremely important. Unlike in many of the surviving plays by Ancient Greeks, Senecan characters die on stage in extremely gruesome ways; frequently, the characters are used as mouthpieces for debates on Stoic philosophy. It's not unreasonable to say that Seneca is the most bad-ass ancient playwright - and his works are the Tragedies that were held up in the Renaissance (in both Italy and England) as the best of the ancient world, and the template upon which new tragedies should be built.

Although the structure of Hamlet is virtually unrecognizable as a Senecan tragedy (there is no chorus, and as such no Tragic structure featuring parados, stichomythia, and repeated agons), the subject matter and details of the plot - the supernatural element of the ghostly visitation, the desire for revenge at all costs, and the bloodsoaked finale - are all staples of Senecan drama. You won't see much of a linear descent from Oedipus to Hamlet, true - but if this was a year long course and we could read 50 plays, I promise you that a few works by Seneca would fill in the gaps between the Greeks and the English Renaissance.

So yeah, guys; that's all I got. This is the structure upon which Shakespeare was building. Use the Greenblatt quote above as a jumping off point for discussion.

Ancient Performance

This is something I wanted to post just to give everyone an idea of how expansive performance in the ancient world actually could be; although our class is devoted to dramatic literature, "dramatic" performances in the ancient world occurred in a space that was, in some ways, far more fluid than that of the present day.

Ancient Tragic and Comic performances - particularly in Athens (and the rest of the Greek world) as well as Rome and its territories - combined acting, dance and song into something that may have resembled opera far more than it does theatre. Choruses were sung and danced, as were some of the monologues we read in Oedipus.

Aristotle, in The Poetics, argues that theatre's roots extend back to dithyrambic choral competitions that honor Dionysus (with Theatre proper being born when Thespis, the first actor, stepped out of the chorus and "became" or "imitated" a character about whom the chorus was singing) as well as the poetic tradition of Homeric recitation - The Iliad and The Odyssey were both performed works, passed down orally for centuries.

But these weren't the only performances going on in the ancient world: in the Greek region of Megara improvised stories were quite popular, and this practice of Megaran Mime is believed to be one of the precursors to both Atellan Farce (ancient improv comedy in Rome) and Commedia dell'Arte (Italian comedic improv).

Komos dances were also popular in Ancient Greece.

Another thing to note. By the time of Aristotle (4th Century BCE), the Greek theatre competitions held at the three largest festivals (The City Dionysia, The Rural Dionysia, and the Lenaia) began to award prizes for best actor and best "revival" of a classic play (from the 5th century BCE, i.e., Sophocles, Euripides and Aeschylus). The result of this is that the theatre of Aristotle's time often featured performances that differed from the surviving scripts: a Tragic actor might rewrite Sophocles' Oedipus such that there is no chorus, and the performance would consist of him giving all of Oedipus' best monologues.

What I'm saying is, there's a lot to ancient performance that we simply can't cover in one day; and that ancient performance covers a lot of ground.

We focus on the theatre, but dance, epic poetry, choral singing, marching, gladiatorial games and even processions and funerals can be considered within the spectrum of ancient performance - and considered worthy objects of study.

Below, I post a recreation of a Roman Triumph; it's from HBO's "ROME" and was researched by an ancient history scholar, with the events drawn from the descriptions found in Roman historians (such as Plutarch). This stuff, as much as the drama, gives us a sense of exactly how different and all-encompassing the study of the ancients could be.

OLEANNA by David Mamet

Oleanna is a two character play, about a professor, John, who struggles with a female student, Carol, who excuses him of sexual exploitation. The play's title, was taken from a folk song, which refers to a 19th century escapist vision of Utopia.

• The play premiered in May 1992 as Mamet's first production at the Back Bay Theater Company in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
• It also appeared off-Broadway in New York City's Orpheum Theatre.
• It premiered in London in 1993 at the Royal Court Theatre.
• A 2004 production in London at the Garrick Theatre featured Aaron Eckhart and Julia Stiles.
• Julia Stiles reprised the role of Carol in a 2009 production and on June 30, 2009 it transferred to Broadway's John Golden Theatre.
• Due to poor ticket sales, it closed December 6, 2009 with 65 performances and 12 reviews.

Discussion Questions:

1. Do you believe that the tests (ex. standardized test) are designed to discredit students?

2. Do you agree with John when he says that education is "prolonged and systematic hazing"?

3. Was Carol right to claim John as a sexist or was she overreacting?

4. Do you think Carol was putting on an act in Act I(about her not understanding the concepts) versus later on in the play where she spoke fluently about John's flaws as an educator?

5. Was Carol writing the letter to the Tenure committee about John an act of revenge? What are her motives?

6. What does Carol want from John? What does she want him to understand about this incident? What is she trying to prove?

7. Why does Carol tell John not to call his wife "baby"?

In preparation for Pinter's "Betrayal"

Although Pinter's Betrayal is still about two months away from being read, I thought I would post this interesting analysis of how the "Pinter pause" can work in theatrical performance. Robert Clyman, in his 1991 essay "Harold Pinter's Betrayal: Sign-Making / Sign-Breaking" notes the following.

Pinter's pauses have achieved almost legendary fame. In a discussion of "semiotic economy," as reducing simultaneity of signs and thereby allowing a single one to "achieve its full significative potential without any disturbance," Chaudhuri has described these pauses as "zero signs" or the "absence of any signs." (23)

I disagree with this analysis. Pinter's pauses never semiotically stand alone but, rather, are annexed by the speeches immediately preceding and following them. The result is a new unit of meaning whose greater significative power, to use a hackneyed expression, is greater than the sum of its parts. When Emma says, "It's nice to think back. Isn't it?" and Jerry replies, "Absolutely" before pausing, the pause seems to be looking doubtfully back at "absolutely." (13)

Beyond that, the pause signifies a question about the honesty of their entire relationship and, even beyond that, undermines our belief in the usefulness of language as a signifier of internal states. When Emma then changes the subject, we are reminded that the pause belongs to both characters. In that sense, the pause is like a free-floating electron shared by two ions, each of which needs the additional charge to complete it as an atom.

How the pauses are played will determine how adeptly a given production subverts the reliability of language. Too calculating a pause before "absolutely" goes beyond introducing doubt and actively implies a repudiation of the thing just said. Such a choice insures a laugh, as bald duplicity generally does. The more interesting choice is one in which doubt is truly felt, with a genuine desire to remember in tension with an equally strong desire to forget.

Just to define a few terms in the above quote: "semiotics" is the study of signs and sign systems. Generally speaking, the field of semiotics breaks a given sign down into two constituent parts: its signifier, which is the material sign itself, and the thing that it signifies, which is what it tells you to do.

Consider a stop sign. Its signifier is a red octagon with the word "stop" written inside of it. The thing that sign signifies is to put your foot on the brake and stop your car. In semiotics, every single sign works in this way: there is a material thing that conveys meaning, and the meaning that thing conveys.

Oedipus Rex: Paragraph of Facts/Discussion Questions

Facts:

Oedipus Rex is the second play in a chronological series of three plays written by Sophocles: Antigone, Oedipus Rex, Oedipus at Colonus. For the most part, all three of these plays are considered tragic (Oedipus at Colonus is the exception, and is difficult to determine). Oedipus Rex is said to have been written circa 430 B.C. in Athens, Greece. The name "Oedipus" actually means "swollen foot" (significance explained further in discussion questions). Oedipus Rex was performed at several annual Greek festivals, during the season of Dionysus (early-Spring), with an approximate audience of 15,000 members. Majority (if not all) of these audience members knew the story of Oedipus by heart and were well aware of the ending of the play, yet they were still anxious to see it performed over and over again.

Questions:

1.) Do you believe that Jocasta was unaware that Oedipus was her son, or do you believe that she was aware who Oedipus was as soon as he arrived in Thebes?

2.) Consider this: the name "Oedipus" literally translates as "swollen foot," used to symbolize that Oedipus' feet were swollen because his ankles were bounded as a child. Do you believe this name was given to Oedipus as a coincidence or as a result of his true destiny?

3.) Do you consider Oedipus to be a protagonist or an antagonist in the play? Why/why not? Who do you consider to be the protagonist/antagonist?

4.) Do you see a significance in the "three cross roads" where Oedipus unknowingly murdered his father?

5.) Do you think the plague ended once Creon became king and Oedipus was exiled? (Consider the Chorus' speech at the end of the play says that all men are destined to be miserable).

6.) Do you think Jocasta committed suicide out of guilt (for sending her baby son to be killed because of a prophecy) or shame/embarrassment (out of knowing that she has slept with her son and birthed his children)?

7.) Why, in your opinion, does Tiresius (prophet) withhold the truth (that Oedipus is the murdered of Laius) when Oedipus first asks him? Do you think he is trying to save Oedipus from knowing the truth, or save the citizens of Thebes from knowing their beloved king is a murderer?