Oedipus the King

Yesterday, tuesday, I had the privilege of seeing Oedipus Rex (an ancient Greek play) on DVD at the boarding house. The play was very well acted and has interesting movement. The movements made by the actors were very un-natural in the concept that the movements weren't regualr every day movements. The movements the actors made was like that of living statues: perfectly sculpted and perfectly moved with grace and dignity and eloquence.

The costumes were draped magnificently! I noticed the king, queen, laius, and the king's daughters, wore rich vibrant colors-which demonstrated their royalty. The chorus wore more earthy colors-representing their poor status. While the soothsayer, shepards, and messengers, wore either an off white or a vibrant white. Perhaps the white color of the robes was to bring out the characters and seperate them from the others, to deem their importance to the story.

The masks were interesting. They looked like groutesque folk characters, and resembled the 50's canadian show Stingray.

Don't ask me how I know that show.

Especially the king, Oedipus, looked very fishy (like a neptune-so said my teacher) similair to the king of that undersea world in Stingray where Aquamarina was being held captive in the first episode.

I wonder if there's a relation?

~Kelly

How have watching plays affected me?

Well the subject of this post is how has watching plays change me and my perceptions on theatre. I think that college theatre is entirely different from professional theatre, as can be seen when I went to cleveland playhouse performance: Beethoven as I knew him, the CASE mfa performance: All's Well that Ends Well at the cleveland playhouse, and CASE's undegrad production: The Hedi Chronicles at Eldred Theatre.

Undergraduate student actors perform with basic acting skills beyond the high school level. They don't fidget in their places and have mastered the art of movement. What needs to be fine tuned is the actions they perform and the belivability of the actions, and not making them look 'fake' or 'acted'. One trouble actors seem to have is 'acting' as an actor. You need to actually be that charater on stage. I think Scoop had it on the Hedi Chronicles, but Hedi herself was not a belivable character as protrayed by the actor. She needed to be more well develped and belivable and not just 'playing a role' and 'doing this here' and 'that there'.

Graduate student actors such as the MFA students in All's Well that End's Well, were accomplished actors. They were belivable and well rounded in ther acting skills and were ready to go onto the stage as full time professional actors. Although All's Well could've been directed better because of the way the british director inseted some iffy politics (we don't want to be reminded of avan gard while watching something for entertainment. Especially if it's not our fault, it's our government's. When the president is in then you can do something like that, the american people on the other hand, no.)

And the professional actor of the Beethoven As I Knew Him, was well rounded to the point where he could perform a one person show with ease and simplicity, with added humor and accent and advanced character development. He kept the audience entertained without worrying about his role, and he was marvelous at keeping his energy and stamina up when there was only one guy doing it.

So how has watching plays changed me? It has changed me because now I know what the differences are between different acting groups and actors. I also cannot wait to see twelfth night at the Great Lakes Theatre festival.

Speaking of which there was an article in the paper about Tom Hanks in the Great Lakes Theatre festival in it's infancy days. How amazing.

Heidi Chronicles

So on friday I saw the Hedi Chronicles at CASE's Eldred Theatre. For those of you who don't know, the Hedi Chronicles is written by a feminist who was often unsatisfied romantically because of the times she grew up in. The Hedi Chronicles follows the story of Hedi, a girl who was born in the 50's, was a teen in the 60's, in college in the 70's, and at work at a university in the 80's. The play first shows Hedi giving a lecture on women artists as a university college teacher of the 80's. Then the play transitions to the 60's where Hedi is at a dance and meets Peter. Peter is one of the main characters of the story, he is Hedi's good friend who turns out later in the story to be gay. Much to the dismay of Hedi, who thought that Peter loved her. The second character we meet is in Hedi's college days while she is working at an event. There we meet Scoop, a jew and a journalist. He and Hedi fall in love in an on and off relationship. Her friends call Scoop an asshole, mainly because he wants Hedi to choose either or. Either him or her career ambitions. After that scence happens, and Hedi chooses her career ambitions, the play chronicles the struggle between the two as they grow up longing for each other but neither one willing to compromise on their images of their future. Ultimately Hedi moves away from New York (the place where this is all happening) to become a college professor in Chicago.

The play discusses feminist issues of the time; What is a woman supposed to be? What is the definition of a woman? Who are women supposed to be as a whole? Are we supposed to be pretty and flirty, intelligent and nerdy, or a mix of both?

These questions still haunt generations of women today. Perhaps the most important question that women face today is: What is the definition of women? What is the image of a 21st century woman?

I think a 21st century woman is 1. strong in who she is (personality) 2. determined in who she wants to become (profession, job) 3. positive about her sex (doesn't have to show cleavage to win appreciation, etc.)

Once we have those three elements down then the rest will be a breeze.

We certainly have a long time until that happens.