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.