I saw The Trojan Women last night. The director's note (and much of the promotion) focused on its role as an anti-war play, which of course was true, both script-wise and stage-wise, but not how I read it. I read it very much as a commentary on what it means to be a woman. Particularly, how much it sucks to be a woman. In a different world, granted
(
Read more... )
Comments 5
I was very struck by the amount of the script that was people ranting about their situation, versus actual action taken place. Or rather, what struck me about it was thinking about the idea that drama was supposed to be about catharsis for the audience, i.e., purging their emotions via vicarious experience of intense emotions of the characters. (I'm mangling that, I'm sure.) I'm used to think of plot/action and character being tightly coupled and drama springing out of the cycle of goal/conflict -- and there certainly were scenes like that in Trojan Women -- but there was also a lot of poetry and/or essay, which was emotionally moving but did not move the narrative along.
Reply
Reply
I am so glad you liked it. I was so proud of the work they did.
Reply
Yeah, the fact that they were objecting to being slaves, but were happy to be masters, kept nagging at my egalitarian soul throughout... I kept being reminded of the wave of modern-day homophobes whose "thinking evolves" when they realize they have queer relatives.
Reply
Anyway, Wellstar, I'm quite glad to see you posting again on LJ, because I think this is precisely the kind of post (thoughtful, nuanced, &c) that often doesn't work as well for Facebook conversation.
Reply
Leave a comment