Fires in the Mirror

The first few monologues of Fires in the Mirror should definitely still be kept in the play because although they are not directly correlated to the Crown Heights riots, they still help the audience or reader to understand something about one of the opponents’ culture. It’s as if the audience gets a peek into the world of the Jewish or the Blacks prior to hearing each side of the story. This is also useful because it pulls together the similarities of the two. It reminds the audience that although they have distinct differences, they are both still human and have things in common. Also, these opening monologues each connect to each other from one topic to the next except the race changes. For example, Al Sharpton, a black man, speaks on how and why he started wearing his hair the way that he does. In the next monologue, Rivkah Siegal, a Lubavitcher woman, speaks on the importance of her hair and wigs to her. Both stories showed how each person equates something that means something to them to their hair. 

Another reason I feel the monologues should stay where they are because they ease the audience into the situation. Certain topics are hard to talk about, and can quickly spark controversy. By Smith cleverly delving into this issue by showing how both sides have things in common, it makes it less easy to quickly choose sides as far as right and wrong goes. Regardless, I’m sure people are more inclined to lean toward what they know, which is their own. However, I think the idea of first showing common ground makes the audience think a little more before being so quick to judge. The first few monologues should definitely stay.

Show and Tell Post #2

The play that I would like to share today is called Fences.  Fences was written by August Wilson in 1983. The setting is a “house set back off a small alley in a big-city neighborhood” and takes place in the 1950s. It was first produced at the Eugene O’Neil Theater Center in 1983. Fences hit Broadway in 1987 at the 46th Street Theatre. This production featured James Earl Jones and Mary Alice, among others. It has won may awards such as a few Tonys and the Drama Desk Award. It has since been produced again featuring Denzel Washington. You can find this play in Barnes and Noble’s Bookstore, online, or in your public library.

Fences shines a light on African American life in the 50s by revealing the struggles and secrets within the family. Troy Maxson is the father of the household, and the most aggressive, assertive character. He can be perceived as hot-headed and fearless. Rose Maxson is Troy’s soft-spoken wife of 18 years. She is 10 years younger than Troy and devotes herself to him because she sees an inner light in him. She is also so loyal to Troy because she fears what her life would be without him. She can be perceived as a pushover, but I, personally, think she has an inner strength. Troy was formerly a baseball player and experienced racism first hand, so he is overprotective of his son Cory. Troy is currently a garbageman struggling to stay faithful to his wife, and keep the household together financially. He also has this strong idea about cheating Death, and not being afraid of it. This is where the “fences” part of Fences comes in. Troy wants to complete building a fence around his yard to keep Death out. Rose wants the fences built to keep and protect what’s inside her house inside, and what’s on the outside, outside. Regardless, Troy ends up impregnating another younger female outside of the household, and leaves Rose to pick up the pieces. 

One dramaturgical choice that Wilson made was to not make Troy necessarily the bad guy. He shows Troy with the strength you would expect a black male to have in the fifties. By this, I mean Troy is showcased as a strong man that provides for his family, speaks his mind, and dominates the household. We, the audience, are introduced to Troy in a comfortable setting where he’s making jokes with a friend, and shows his softer, “good” side. It shows that he does have dimensions.  I think the choice to not make him a stand out villain was interesting because I definitely saw him as a bad guy after he admits to cheating on Rose. No matter how he tries to justify his actions, I see him as a bit of a villain and a bully.  Another dramaturgical choice that Wilson makes is to make Rose equally as strong, but in another way. She’s not mean and intimidating like Troy, but a sweetheart. Throughout the play, Rose is shown as a sweet, soft-spoken woman who puts her family’s needs before her own. When Troy confesses his infidelity to Rose, she finally reaches her breaking point. She becomes outspoken and says everything on her mind. At that point, she tells Troy that he lost a wife. I think this shows Rose’s strength because she was strong enough to deal with all of Troy’s baggage for 18 years, and strong enough to let him go. Also, Rose ends up taking care of Troy’s baby for him since the mother died giving birth. This exemplifies her strength because she’s so caring that she’ll mother someone else’s child just so it doesn’t have to grow up motherless.

D'Amour, Detroit

There are a few examples of ambiguity in “D’Amour, Detroit”. The mystery of why Sharon dreams about Ben, and not her own man is one example of ambiguity. Mary is clearly disturbed by it, but remains quiet. Another example of ambiguity is the mystery of where Mary gets her seemingly expensive and foreign foods for the dinner parties. Ben even questions Mary about the caviar when she mentions having it. 

I’m not so sure that dramatic irony occurs in this play. The entire time that the play was going, I learned new things as the characters learned new things. For example, I didn’t know that Ben wasn’t actually working on his website in his spare time. Apparently, neither did the rest of the characters. 

There are a few stand-out reality checks that occur in this play. For instance, Ben announces that after seven weeks of pretending to work on his website, he has nothing to show for it. He even confesses that he does not want to start his business anymore. Mary is shell-shocked while Kenny and Sharon see it as a positive thing. ANother instance where a reality check occurs is when Sharon confesses to Mary of her slip up of drug usage. Mary is surprised because she thought Sharon was doing so well with her recovery.

 The most important element of the three, I’d say, would be the reality checks. I say this because the reality checks break whatever truth we initially believed, and replaces it with the actual truth. For example, Kenny and Sharon come across as more sane and together than Mary and Ben, at first. Then, it seems that these two couples interacting with each other brings the bad out of all characters. We are broken out of seeing Kenny and Sharon as clean, sane people. This also occurs for the characters. Mary and Ben were blinded by their new neighbors, and acted as erratic and irrational as them. In the end, they lost their house due to the foolishness fueled by Kenny and Sharon. Their perception and reality of the odd couple comes crashing down after they learn the truth from Frank.

Water By The Spoonful

One moment from a scene where I see realities interacting is in scene 12. In this scene, Odessa has overdosed and Elliot and Yaz are trying to revive her. While they await the ambulance, Odessa’s physical body is in Yaz’s arms, but Odessa’s “spirit” is standing in the room watching everything. She thinks she is at the airport waiting for her next flight. Simultaneously, Orangutan is at the train station, in Japan, sleeping. As a policeman shines a light on Orangutan, “a radiant white light pours in from above” in Odessa’s house. After the policeman turn off his flashlight and Orangutan rises, so does Odessa. I think Hudes has these realities interacting because it highlights something that Odessa says earlier on in the play. She states,”A sober day for you is a sober day for me(43).” I believe this could possibly be an example of what she was referring to. I do not think sobriety was only attributed to the disuse of drugs, but, also, for the strength to gain independence from anything holding them back. This may seem like a stretch, but when Orangutan declined the help of the policeman and stood on her own, so did Odessa. I feel, spiritually or telepathically, Odessa drew from Orangutan. Orangutan’s strength gave her strength. I think this showed a tremendous amount of independence from both characters, and that is why Hudes chose to have these moments cross paths. 

Buried Child

I don’t feel that The Buried Child is in black and white or clear cut, as far as what is being conveyed. In this play, nothing is what it seems. For example, the play starts off with two spouses that appear to be relatively, sane. However, we, the readers, become aware that there is a secret. In this instance, The Buried Child starts off just as a well-made play is supposed to, but there are mass amounts of irony as the story goes on. For instance, Vince came across as sane as his grandparents, at first, but drank himself into a crazed state. He later appeared as a psychotic family member searching for power and a reason to be remembered. I say this because he was heavily disheartened when he realized his family did not recognize him. So, it is plausible that he, now, wants to gain recognition from them by stooping to their crazy level. Another instance that played a part in this compilation of irony was when it appeared that Vince may had been the “buried child” that was spoken about in spurts of the play. However, things take a drastic turn when Tilden comes into the house literally carrying the decayed body of an infant.

Some possible elements that counter the conventions of illusionistic realism could be the fact that Shepard’s created illusions were, more so, unrealistic. I say unrealistic because the madness that was created within the world of the play as not normal, even in the world of the play. For instance, within the family, everything that goes on seems relatively normal. Dodge, his wife, his children, and his grandchild make everything appear usual. However, Shepard has Pastor Dewis in that one scene to draw attention to the fact that the behavior in which the family exhibits, is not actually normal. He shows this by expressing his discomfort when things become tenser as the seconds go by.

Noises Off

A motif found in Noises off could be income tax. Throughout the play within the play, Phillip and his wife are terrified about Inland Revenue taking some of their money for not being in Spain, as they said they were. Any hint of tax or income tax gives Phillip a bad taste in his mouth, and cause him to run for cover. For instance, there’s this scene where Phillip, Vicki, and Roger are running frantically around the house, afraid that one of the others are either a criminal or a member of Inland Revenue. Phillip screams,” Tax inspector’s everywhere!” This shows the concept of income tax repeating. Another example of this is the fact that Vicki’s sole purpose in being there revolved around taking files on tax evasion. Thus, it constitutes as a motif. The unifying principle could be  HAVING A CHAIN REACTION. I say this because all of the characters’ actions were either the cause or effect for another person’s actions. For instance, Flavia sees Philip downstairs, with his trousers down, and drops the biscuit tin in shock ad pain. Meanwhile, “Vicki flees before him and takes refuge in the linen cupboard” (53).  This is how the chain reaction is created. One person sees another, and instantly reacts. One of the level one moments in the script could be the beginning. Specifically, the scene where Roger and Vicki were just talking and walking around the house. It was a slow scene where not much action occurs.

The Glass of Water

I feel the protagonists are multiple people. In The Glass of Water , Bolingbroke, Abigail, and Masham are protagonists. I almost considered Queen Anne to also be a protagonist, but I don’t feel the script was sculpted to create sympathy for her circumstances. The script, however, supports Bolingbroke, Abigail, and Masham’s story. They are tied together. Bolingbroke manipulates other characters in the play to achieve his super goal, therefore, making Abigail and Masham’s dreams come true. Overall, the play is about playing the game to get what one wants. All of the three that I have mentioned, conflicts and triumphs are equally receiving stage time. However, I feel Bolingbroke and Abigail may get a little more stage time because they interact with the Queen and the Duchess more, who are also central characters but do not request one to root for them, judging from the script. I think that Scribe wants the reader to root for Abigail and Masham’s love. I say this because throughout the play, Queen Anne and Duchess are manipulated to turn against one another so that Bolingbroke can get what he wants, and Abigail and Masham’s love can become legal and feasible. I , often, questioned Bolingbroke’s true motives. It seems as though he was on his own side the entire time, but didn’t mind helping his friends in the preocess, if he could. He creates plans and plays mind games effectively to get what he wants. The play would not have turned out with the conclusion that it did without Bolingbroke’s efforts. Therefore, Bolingbroke definitely deserves to be considered a protagonist, also.