Friday, May 10, 2013
Final show and tell post: Bengal Tiger at the Baghdad Zoo
My show and tell play this round is Bengal Tiger at the Baghdad Zoo by, Rajiv Joseph. It was written in
the early 2000’s and was produced for the first time at Kirk Douglas Theatre in
Culvar, California in 2009. It quickly made its way onto many more stages
including Broadway’s Richard Rodgers Theatre, and was honored with the
outstanding New American Play award in 2008. I would consider this a play worth
reading, I was impressed with the abrupt plot changes, and the way Joseph was
able to incorporate the lines of the ghosts so congenially.
This play takes place in several different locations in
Baghdad in 2003. In the first scene, American soldiers Kev and Tom guard the
zoo, which is the home of the plays protagonist, the tiger. Tom took part in
murdering Uday Hussein and cares only to regain possession of the golden gun
and toilet he stole from him. Unfortunately, the tiger bites off Tom’s hand in
the very beginning making that a difficult task to complete. Kev kills the
tiger for eating Tom’s hand, and is actively haunted by him for the rest of the
play, turning Kev entirely lucid and eventually sending him to the loony bin.
Tom hires a translator named Musa who ends up connecting all the characters in
the play. Musa has a loyalty to Uday, even though he raped and abused his
little sister Nadia before his death. However, he is still employed by Tom and
haunted by the ghost of Uday and his cowardice choices. The interactions
between the living characters and the ghosts form the skeleton of this plot.
The twists and discoveries come from inescapable and ever-changing fates that
keep the characters in constant pursuit of one another, until there is nothing
left.
This play is written from the perspective of many characters
all branching from 1 of 3 worlds. There is the world of the tiger as an animal,
there is the world of the living characters as humans, and there is a world of
the dead characters that still linger and can affect the outcome of the given
plot. This is something you realize once you start reading because the script
flows quickly with no indication of who is talking to who or who can hear who,
from the author. There is so much Joseph wants his audience to recognize and
follow in such a short play, that its imperative for the reader to be able to
connect with and bounce back and forth with from different perspectives,
worlds, and lines of communication without getting lost. His choice to write
the lines straight though with no side notes was clearly done in order to help
us view the story the way he intended. Another choice that stood out to me was
how powerful the ghosts were in regards to their affect on the other
characters. Normally, one would assume the ghosts had no actual control because
they weren’t alive, therefore, I believe Joseph wrote their actions to have
consequences for a reason. The theme and message of this play has a lot to do
with mind control; with how easy it is to loose, yet how necessary it is to
have. Joseph uses the uncanny ability of the ghosts to control the characters
and significantly manipulate their futures to reveal how the fragility of ones
own mind. This choice reiterates the unifying principle of this piece and
leaves the audience overtly aware of the power of the mind.
Prompt 14: The Drowsy Chaperone
An analysis of The Drowsy Chaperone would read very
differently from an analysis of its meta-show Drowsy Chaperone. To assume the only difference is that one story
stands alone, and the other story is about a certain man repeating the original
story would be incorrect. The playwright(s) intentionally made the script more
difficult to follow by altering the already established elements of Drowsy Chaperone in order to unveil two
completely different stories.
The two elements that stood out
to me most in regards to a contrast between The
Drowsy Chaperone and its meta-show were the use of sequence and
progression. The playwright(s) could have easily had the man retell the story
in the same chronological order, but intentionally had the record skip back and
forth through time, and therefore changing the sequence in which Drowsy Chaperone was originally written.
Changing the sequence of what the audience knows and when they know it alters
the way in which they formulate their opinions on the play, and what message
they take from it. Another element that I noticed was only found in Drowsy Chaperone and not at all
mentioned in The Drowsy Chaperone was
that of progression. The motif regarding baking, pastry chefs, and sweet treats
was actively reiterated in the meta-show. As motifs are made to be discovered
and tend to tie together loose ends of their plays, I couldn’t help but notice
how drastically different it was for one play to have a clear line of
progression that is not at all a part of the other. I don’t think the two plays
are telling the same story at all, I think the playwright(s) intentionally
overload The Drowsy Chaperone by
overloading Drowsy Chaperone in order
to leave us with a surplus of unanswered questions and ambiguous yet
substantial connections.
Prompt 13: Three Viewings
A relatively apparent connection between the 3 stories that
make up Three Viewings, by Jeffrey
Hatcher, is the common thread of sorrow seen within each character as they all
deal with the loss of their loved ones. After reading all three monologues, we
learn these protagonists know the same pain, and we discover the tragedies they
once faced that justify their current actions and perspectives. I feel as
though these characters are so similar in their individual circumstances, that
there must be a more intimate likeness between the characters involved. A commonality
so momentous, it holds the ability to connect the 3 on a level deeper than
simply “people in mourning”. Emil, MAC, and Virginia didn’t just loose the
person or persons that mattered most to them, they lost them abruptly, without
any warning, and with no form of closure. Emil’s love was killed in a car
accident, MAC accidentally killed her own family, and Virginia’s husband passed
on before they expected, and before he could settle his financial affairs. The
way in which these characters were separated from those they loved most is a
small detail. Yet, it more thoroughly and deeply explains the coincidence of
their similarities, and proves a stronger connection than what we may assume at
first glance.
The first time I read Three
Viewings, I didn’t at all understand what any of these people had to do
with one another, yet I noticed the funeral theme and the fact that each
character suffers from a great loss. I have now read this play 4 times, and
have discovered many physical motifs and connections that explain why these monologues
compliment each other. Which has brought me to an underlying theme found in the
dramatic action of each character that I feel is the reason they are so deeply
affected and suppressed by the fate that has fallen upon them. Emil, MAC, and
Virginia have an untamable desire to control what is going on around them. The
reason they were each left without the ones they love stemmed from their
inability to let things happen and urgency to make things happen. For instance,
Emil has to freakishly control when he should approach Tessie rather than just
telling her his feelings and giving her the power, an act that may have saved
her life if he had. These three monologues are together because the need to
control got these characters where they are, and the inability to accept things
further is what kept them there. Their similar actions produce similar
consequences.
Prompt 12: On the Verge
I want my poster to capitalize on the high levels of irony,
ambiguity, and complexity that make up the skeleton of On The Verge by Eric Overmeyer. Therefore, I’ve decided to use the
idea of a randomly placed, untraceable, collage of clutter similar to an “I
Spy” or “Where’s Waldo” puzzle. Images that depict the many different
environments, times, situations, and objects treasured through the notable
experiences of these women will be arbitrarily placed together to paint the
background of my poster. There will be a surplus of colors, themes, and
memorabilia on display. Surely, I will highlight a clock, an umbrella, and a
road to symbolize a journey, but will give no more insight to how or where that
journey unfolds. I am particularly fond of Mr. Coffee’s character, and what he
brings to the already surreal plot. I noticed that Mr. Coffee had a stronger
relationship with Fanny than he did Mary and Alex and think that choice was
made to encourage each person to be content in their own journey at their own
pace; a theme I noticed throughout. Finally, to represent the God-like presence
of Mr. Coffee, and the bold fantastical style in which the play was written, I
plan on filtering the finished picture with a dreamlike fog. A subtle detail
that hints toward surrealism and immortal content, giving the untrained eye
little to no concrete information about the play, but merely suggesting an
important feature to the world of On The
Verge. The tag line that will sit boldly in the center of the poster, on
top of the disorderly collage that basically serves as a picturesque analysis
of the play, is “The Mysterious Interior”. A fragment that can adopt countless
endings, 3 words with the potential of a thousand, a loaded phrase that means
so much and nothing at all.
Prompt 11: Fires in the Mirror
Fires in the Mirror by,
Anna Deavere Smith is a collection of monologues told from many different
characters in various locations, all of which on a particular side of the
controversy we discover throughout. Smith speaks of a historical incident from
the real world, therefore, risking loosing an unbiased audience to take her
story for what it is. Smith gives us 13 monologues before ever mentioning what
happened at Crown Heights, and she did so with intention. The characters revealed
to us before the controversy came to light had their own stories and their own
perspectives of what was to come. Smith gave her audience a chance to get to
know these characters personally before addressing their stance of which most
readers would soon disagree with. These monologues serve as a more intimate
introduction of the characters in their world before any mentioning of the
riots that affected ours. This way, we are able to see each character with a
clean slate and an unbiased opinion on whose they are according to what we
currently know.
These monologues justify the other side of the argument that
is so hard to comprehend once you’ve formulated an opinion of wrong and right.
Smith’s choice to connect us to characters on both sides of the equation allows
us to understand the reasons behind some of their opinions and relate some of
their actions back to certain things we learned about them before the riots
came into play. Ultimately, the playwright did what she did for a reason. It is
not our place to simply cut out what doesn’t immediately settle with us, rather
it is with great pleasure that we dig up motifs, themes, and underlying
messages in order to understand and appreciate what we’ve been given.
Thursday, April 25, 2013
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)