To be honest, I think I preferred the dramatic short plays. Even though they dealt with heavier subjects, they also had funny moments that carried more weight.
Of all of these, however, I particularly enjoyed The Philadelphia. I thought it was a very original and clever idea. The concept both explains in a hilarious way those tough days we all feel like we have sometimes where nothing we want works out, while poking fun at the city of Philadelphia, and creating funny characters all at the same time.
A tactic that many of the comedic writers used was dramatic, unrealistic, and almost unfitting statements in response to a silly situation. For example in The Philadelphia Marks asks, “Well what can I do? Should I just kill myself now and get it over with?” Al responds, “You try to kill yourself in a Philadelphia, you’re only gonna get hurt, babe.” Even though they’re dealing with such a normally serious topic, the drama becomes ridiculous and funny because of the bizarre and unrealistic situation.
One thing I noticed while reading all of these plays is that although the characters are interesting, it is usually because of the situation and not because of the actual depth of the characters. Although comedy definitely allows for flatter characters, I think Anything For You had more interesting character development than the usual comedic scene or short play.
In Anything For You, we know the play is comedic right off the bat with the random blathering Gail does in the beginning. Her talk about the rapper turns out to be completely unrelated with the rest of the point of the play so it is a hilarious touch to throw such a random rant in. Although someone in real life probably would not be so blunt about such a thing, the character Lynette’s bluntness works for her and is the reason the plot moves so quickly and smoothly. A difference I found with this play, as opposed to the other short comedic plays we read, is that it begins with comedy and ends a bit more seriously, with the confession of real feelings, etc.
Most of these comedic plays found their comedy through unique ideas or exploring something not often thought about in such a way (for example the inner monologues of a dog encountering a bear and their interaction in suburbia).
The Duet For Bear and Dog was hilarious mainly due to the fact that we were allowed to hear a conversation played out between the two of them. However, the addition of the teasing about certain things, etc. added a lot. For example, Bear teases Dog about having a name and this embarrasses Dog. I also enjoyed that Bear was slightly poetic when shot with the tranquilizer gun. Hilarious.
I didn’t, however, particularly like the play Aimée. Although the situation was strange, I didn’t find it particularly funny. It was a clever play on words but the turn around in both Madge and Larry at the end was just too sudden for my liking.
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
10- minute plays: Dramaaaa
I really enjoyed reading all of these short plays. They were each very different from one another regarding characters, setting, situation, etc., but the one thing that remained constant and effective throughout most of them was the revealing of pivotal information, or the main source of tension throughout the play, towards the end of the play. All four of these 10- minute plays started in the middle of things, revealing details as they went along, and almost all four of them used the element of surprise or revelation to sort of wrap up and give the play meaning and an adequate explanation at the end.
A Bowl of Soup and Midnight Rodeo used this tactic most clearly. We began each in the middle of things and learned the shocking information towards the end, explaining much of the rest of the dialogue and short play. Although I do think this tactic is effective in giving plays drama, meaning, and a satisfying ending, I don’t think it always works. For example, I felt a little blind sided in A Bowl of Soup by the ending. I don’t think it would have detracted from the story to let us in on it earlier. Also, although I thought it was a very interesting tactic to have only one character speak for the majority of the play, I’m not sure it added as much as it detracted. However, despite my reservations about this, I would love to see this play performed. Watching actual actors would probably resolve a lot of my issues with the play. All of the plays had strong characters though. I particularly loved the adorable, bumbling voice of Eddie. His affection for his brother and simple nature really came through. Great characterization with him.
The Roads that Lead Here also uses the element of surprise at the end but in a much different way, by having their father, or the Eminent as they call him, blow up each of their cars. This play has an absurdist quality to it; I probably actually would have classified it as a comedy. The characters, for their age especially, seemed so strange and out of touch with reality with their bubbly lack of cynicism and excited nature. It was quite enjoyable to read actually. It is nice to see that even in short plays stylized characters and situations can work.
The Man Who Couldn’t Dance was the only one where I felt the audience or readers had a general sense of what was going on right from the beginning. Although the plot was a little contrived and clichéd I would have been upset if it ended any other way. This is because the characters were interesting and well- developed and I wanted to see it played out. However, I wanted even a bit more. This play almost felt like a scene rather than a finished play. I wanted to know what happened later, either when they went downstairs or years down the road. It didn’t necessarily seem finished, but it was one of my favorites. I don’t quite know what to make of that.
As hard as I know it will be, I’m looking forward to writing our complete plays. We can finally have that gratification and closure we’ve been seeking. Whenever I plan out a long play it’s always hard to decide which scene to write because I’m so excited about a lot of them. I know it’s difficult to develop well- rounded, full, and believable characters in such a small amount of space, but it obviously can be done!
A Bowl of Soup and Midnight Rodeo used this tactic most clearly. We began each in the middle of things and learned the shocking information towards the end, explaining much of the rest of the dialogue and short play. Although I do think this tactic is effective in giving plays drama, meaning, and a satisfying ending, I don’t think it always works. For example, I felt a little blind sided in A Bowl of Soup by the ending. I don’t think it would have detracted from the story to let us in on it earlier. Also, although I thought it was a very interesting tactic to have only one character speak for the majority of the play, I’m not sure it added as much as it detracted. However, despite my reservations about this, I would love to see this play performed. Watching actual actors would probably resolve a lot of my issues with the play. All of the plays had strong characters though. I particularly loved the adorable, bumbling voice of Eddie. His affection for his brother and simple nature really came through. Great characterization with him.
The Roads that Lead Here also uses the element of surprise at the end but in a much different way, by having their father, or the Eminent as they call him, blow up each of their cars. This play has an absurdist quality to it; I probably actually would have classified it as a comedy. The characters, for their age especially, seemed so strange and out of touch with reality with their bubbly lack of cynicism and excited nature. It was quite enjoyable to read actually. It is nice to see that even in short plays stylized characters and situations can work.
The Man Who Couldn’t Dance was the only one where I felt the audience or readers had a general sense of what was going on right from the beginning. Although the plot was a little contrived and clichéd I would have been upset if it ended any other way. This is because the characters were interesting and well- developed and I wanted to see it played out. However, I wanted even a bit more. This play almost felt like a scene rather than a finished play. I wanted to know what happened later, either when they went downstairs or years down the road. It didn’t necessarily seem finished, but it was one of my favorites. I don’t quite know what to make of that.
As hard as I know it will be, I’m looking forward to writing our complete plays. We can finally have that gratification and closure we’ve been seeking. Whenever I plan out a long play it’s always hard to decide which scene to write because I’m so excited about a lot of them. I know it’s difficult to develop well- rounded, full, and believable characters in such a small amount of space, but it obviously can be done!
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Fences!
When I initially started reading Fences, I was not so enthused. In fact, I thought the characters and situations were incredibly clichéd. BUT, as I read on it grew on me, particularly with the introduction of Gabriel.
The characters were generally very stereotypical, (not to say that they weren’t interesting or were underdeveloped, I definitely cared and wanted to see where the play went) but Troy and Cory’s relationship (the simple father who can’t and won’t understand his son’s dreams) rubbed me the wrong way. Rose however, despite being walked all over in many respects, was a strong character. She gambled, for one, which was an interesting addition and definitely not stereotypical. As the play went on the characters got less and less stereotypical and much more complex.
Wilson does an exceptional job of revealing back- story. He doesn’t have Troy just tell it like it is. His biases towards Cory’s baseball playing and his history with Bono are revealed slowly and subtly through conversations that lead naturally to such reveals. Wilson also does this with the plot. For example, we find out that Troy went to Cory’s baseball coach and told him he couldn’t play anymore as Rose finds out, letting the audience feel the same shock and dismay that Rose would feel at that time.
Wilson also did a good job of introducing the tensions between the characters right off the bat. Immediately, despite Troy’s constant profession of love to his wife, the audience can see that he doesn’t really listen to her. He sometimes even completely ignores her. Wilson has Bono introduce the “other woman” early on, but we get easily distracted by his over the top expressions of devotion to Rose that it moves to the back of our minds until it is reintroduced later. This is a subtle and effective tactic.
Bono idolizes Troy initially so much because of what a good person he was, particularly related to his relationship with his Rose. As Troy becomes more and more the man he didn’t want to be, he loses all that he has kept dear (Bono, Rose).
I particularly liked the inclusion of song into the play and thought it was an interesting aspect. Rose’s song about fences is obviously very applicable to the play and foreboding with the lyrics “Jesus, be a fence around me every day. Jesus, I want you to protect me as I travel on my way.” Also telling that it takes Troy so long to actually build the fence and by the time he has he has already hurt her so its symbolic protection is worthless.
Troy’s song about Blue is forlorn and melancholy, also mirroring the story. Blue was “mighty true” and a “good old dog,” but Blue dies. It is as if the good man Troy had initially set out to be, in opposition to his father, died as his troubles caught up with him.
Rose ends up being the most reasonable and mature character in the family. I could definitely sense of lot of Wilson’s poetic roots, particularly in Rose’s last explanatory feminist speech in which she tells Cory that disrespecting his father isn’t going to make him a man.
I’m a little bit confused by the ending, but I like it? I like the auditory element that just moments before Cory and Raynell were singing Troy’s favorite song, then contrasted with Gabriel’s subsequent lack of music. Wilson writes it in that Gabriel in fact “howls,” like a dog, or in a wail of despair. It is eerie and ambiguous and that is always good :)
All in all, I suppose the things that worked for me were the incorporation of music and the revealing of tensions between characters right off the bat. I also appreciated the subtle inclusion of back- story. I'm looking forward to seeing it live!
The characters were generally very stereotypical, (not to say that they weren’t interesting or were underdeveloped, I definitely cared and wanted to see where the play went) but Troy and Cory’s relationship (the simple father who can’t and won’t understand his son’s dreams) rubbed me the wrong way. Rose however, despite being walked all over in many respects, was a strong character. She gambled, for one, which was an interesting addition and definitely not stereotypical. As the play went on the characters got less and less stereotypical and much more complex.
Wilson does an exceptional job of revealing back- story. He doesn’t have Troy just tell it like it is. His biases towards Cory’s baseball playing and his history with Bono are revealed slowly and subtly through conversations that lead naturally to such reveals. Wilson also does this with the plot. For example, we find out that Troy went to Cory’s baseball coach and told him he couldn’t play anymore as Rose finds out, letting the audience feel the same shock and dismay that Rose would feel at that time.
Wilson also did a good job of introducing the tensions between the characters right off the bat. Immediately, despite Troy’s constant profession of love to his wife, the audience can see that he doesn’t really listen to her. He sometimes even completely ignores her. Wilson has Bono introduce the “other woman” early on, but we get easily distracted by his over the top expressions of devotion to Rose that it moves to the back of our minds until it is reintroduced later. This is a subtle and effective tactic.
Bono idolizes Troy initially so much because of what a good person he was, particularly related to his relationship with his Rose. As Troy becomes more and more the man he didn’t want to be, he loses all that he has kept dear (Bono, Rose).
I particularly liked the inclusion of song into the play and thought it was an interesting aspect. Rose’s song about fences is obviously very applicable to the play and foreboding with the lyrics “Jesus, be a fence around me every day. Jesus, I want you to protect me as I travel on my way.” Also telling that it takes Troy so long to actually build the fence and by the time he has he has already hurt her so its symbolic protection is worthless.
Troy’s song about Blue is forlorn and melancholy, also mirroring the story. Blue was “mighty true” and a “good old dog,” but Blue dies. It is as if the good man Troy had initially set out to be, in opposition to his father, died as his troubles caught up with him.
Rose ends up being the most reasonable and mature character in the family. I could definitely sense of lot of Wilson’s poetic roots, particularly in Rose’s last explanatory feminist speech in which she tells Cory that disrespecting his father isn’t going to make him a man.
I’m a little bit confused by the ending, but I like it? I like the auditory element that just moments before Cory and Raynell were singing Troy’s favorite song, then contrasted with Gabriel’s subsequent lack of music. Wilson writes it in that Gabriel in fact “howls,” like a dog, or in a wail of despair. It is eerie and ambiguous and that is always good :)
All in all, I suppose the things that worked for me were the incorporation of music and the revealing of tensions between characters right off the bat. I also appreciated the subtle inclusion of back- story. I'm looking forward to seeing it live!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
