The Last Ever Blog - Blog Portfolio # 8 May 2012

Coverage


Hedda Gabler - An Unexplored Angle

3 Women 1 Goal - A Literary Device Comparison

Masking the Truth

Oleanna - Reel vs. Real

Theme in Oleanna - A Dangerous Mind

It's Just an allusion...

A Mischievous Imp, a Newspaper, and Me

Depth


Hedda Gabler - An Unexplored Angle

I came across this paper on Hedda Gabler and was extremely excited by its fresh view point and insight on a play that I thought we had already analyzed so well in class. It is interesting to hear new angles to every opinion and whether  you agree or disagree debate and discussion allows for lively interaction.

Research

Hand, Nigel; “Psychoanalysis and the Space of the paly.” Yale University, N.p, n.d. Web. 20 May 2012. <http://modernism.research.yale.edu.wi>.

Discussion


Production vs. Script Oleanna


It always nice to read a blog and then see further points of discussion and to be able to add to it. Blogging can often be a lonely process but discussion allows you to be heard and be part of the process with like minded people. And whether you agree or disagree is immaterial as what counts is what you bring to the table.

Interaction


Jorina's Mask's

Jorina's introduction on masks brought several comments of which I was happy to add my opinion to.

Xenoblogging – Comment Primo

Adrienne's Art in Heidi

I had not really explored how art impacted Heidi or the play itself, so it was interesting to read the in depth research on the paintings by Adrienne. I also felt compelled to be the first to comment on why Heidi stands up for female artists and yet often fails to stand up for herself.

Wildcard


A Mischievous Imp, a Newspaper, and Me

As I come to the end of my tenure at High School on the cusp of college life, I felt it poignant to include a memento of my memories in Delhi. I am about to embark on a new journey and my commute back and forth from the American Embassy School serves as a metaphor for the road I have already traveled. My memories at my school, teaching the Raju’s of this world at Teach India will remain with me forever.

Happy Birthday Ms. Morgan! :)

A Mischievous Imp, a Newspaper, and Me

Are we there yet? My little eight year old mind moaned ruing the earliness of the hour. I cuddled my snuggly Hello Kitty blanket, lovingly called my booboo (my first word apparently), still soft despite the frayed edges. It’s still 7:17am. Eyes closed, I rested my head against my car’s cold window on my journey to school, blissfully shunning the dusty pot holed roads and Delhi’s grey landscape. The chaos of merchants jostling with colorfully ornamented rickshaws, was mercifully drowned by the humming of my luxury car.

“Miss! Miss! Only 2 rupees.”

I sluggishly rubbed my eyes to see a scruffy little boy straight out of a Dickens novel, persistently knocking on my window. The three feet imp had a cheeky grin, and his overgrown mop fell lazily over his big brown eyes, that glinted with the wisdom of a boy beyond his tender years. His enthusiasm outshone his bedraggled state, as he eagerly waved a newspaper with a sales pitch that would have made any business graduate proud.

“No school today?” I quizzed him, handing over the loose change in my pocket.

“Nah,” he replied, tightly grasping the coins in his blistered hands that hinted at the life he had lead. “The streets are my school. I get by on my wits, only wish I could read the papers I sell.”

As the red light turned green I watched his fading figure waving emphatically at me. Here I was about to enter the gates of my privileged school, where I moaned about the mundane in my pampered existence. And here was this little entrepreneur, risking his life as he veered through the reckless traffic, through the pounding monsoons, bitter cold and relentless heat. And yet, instead of sympathy he garnered an instant likeability.

Raju became my friend and I looked forward to our daily anecdote exchanges. Worlds apart it was our similarities that drew us together; our unbridled passion for life, our shared love for the movie star ShahRukh, and our dreams.

Years passed and one day Raju never showed up, though I looked out for him daily. I never did find out what happened to him. Raju taught me to see my daily commute with new eyes, and each journey as my first. I noticed beauty and details in the mundane and learned to dance and laugh in the rain.

On the cusp of adulthood with the optimism of youth, I believe Raju and I will fulfill our dreams. We will both make it in this mixed up crazy world. Life is like a potholed journey; I have begun to smooth them out by mentoring the Rajus of the world. There are no dress rehearsals, this is opening night and I am going to give it my all, knowing it is my journey and not the destination that counts.

Am I there yet? Not yet, but I am on my way. My journey has just begun…I hope to see you there.

Hedda Gabler - An Unexplored Angle

After so much reading and analysis of Hedda Gabler by Ibsen it was interesting to come across this paper which while still upholding and reiterating the basic accepted ideology on this play, still managed to offer some fresh approach and insight into this complex tale.

Hedda Gabler, Psychoanalysis And The Space Of (The ) Play by Nigel Hand explores Freudian, Kleinian and Winnicott’s key concepts with the view that Ibsen is a precursor of Freud and object-relations tradition in psychoanalysis.

It is interesting to sit back from the play and try and understand the mind of this deeply disturbed young woman, Ibsen’s female protagonist Hedda Gabler,  who ordinarily had everything to live for. The burning question arises; what when on in her mind to take her own life and that of her child. Was she psychotic or simply worn out by the pressures she faced?

The paper describes Ibsen as an anti-Romantic and that no text can be a single defining and exclusive context and that none of this would be possible without Freud. While this is debatable the paper states that Ibsen’s symbolism points to Ibsen’s early experiences which left his protagonists emotionally crippled and that Ibsen is an archeologist of the psyche. In fact the paper argues that the birth and development of psychoanalysis are foreshadowed and that Ibsen writes and thinks as a Freudian in Hedda Gabler (HG), as well as Klein and Winnicott as classified by Ibsen’s heroines preoccupation with the “beautiful”.

Hedda, is the quintessential tragic heroine who seems to actually revel in her self made gloom and doom. She is comfortable in her misery which she holds onto to like a comfort blanket. But what is her tragic flaw? Is this a tale of revenge or as the paper suggests is she a existential liberal tragedy Queen ? Is her death about release and freedom or the end of her grief ?  It is known Hedda is an alienated individual in conventional society who finds herself suffocating in her claustrophobic middle class atmosphere having abandoned her aristrocratic roots. I have talked in earlier blogs about the symbolism about the guns and her father’s portrait as reminders of her past and yet again I question why her mother is never mentioned. Of course all females may be abhorred by Hedda as a reminder of her bondage in a male domain. While all readings and interpretations clearly indicate Hedda is pregnant this paper only suggests there are hints and clearly points out that Tesman naively assumes Hedda and he have much in common while Hedda inwardly refutes this. The reader the paper also suggests will find it difficult to think of the two as a parental couple. I am not so sure that Tesman does think he has much in common with this aristocrat or that the play has a deep preoccupation with constituting the parental couple. I also was surprised to hear that the paper thinks Hedda knowingly pretended that Aunt Julies’s hat was the maid to simply humiliate her. Surely a high society woman would mistakenly think a middle class hat must be the maids as it does not fit into the norm of her high society ideals. Is Hedda being portrayed as the villain, both cold and manipulative by critics unfairly ? Is she being condemned without a trial? Are we as a society too quick to label and judge a woman who had just woken up and not found her bearings to find visitors or indeed does subsequent conversations with the conniving Brack reveal Hedda’s sinister side?

The play through relationship of Hedda and Thea shows perhaps a much less complex nature of simply jealousy over an old lover now belonging to Thea. This certainly brings us back to the theme of revenge as Hedda plots to destroy both Thea, Lovborg and their metaphorical child the manuscript that they created together. Hedda shoots herself when she realizes her husband and Thea are trying to piece the burned manuscript together from her notes as if this is the final straw. It is interesting theory though that while most critics argue that the play in an over romantic view that the central theme revolves around the protagonists revolt against middle class society, this paper says that this is only partially true. It goes on to state that “ The protagonist of the play is for all of us a deeply troubling dramatic creation-outside of Shakespeare and the Greeks, none more so perhaps. Northam attempts to escape from the challenging perplexity which Hedda Gabler arouses in our minds by producing a highly romanticized appraisal of her character and her actions. When he attributes to Ibsen’s heroine ‘a residually creative sense of human potentiality’ . Northam undoubtedly points to something which is at the heart of the play, but his belief that she also displays ‘serene self-confidence ‘is simply astonishing, for what is Hedda Gabler if not a deeply troubled soul? “.

Was the play centered more on the fate of the unborn child and is Hedda not the destroyer but the carrier of life. Are the symbolism of the burning of the manuscript deeper than killing the child but “ I am burning “ could denote in ambiguity that Hedda hates herself more. The paper states that by distortion of viewpoints we miss the real theme of the play, that the book –child theme shapes the play. The play suggests a triangular angle that has not been given attention to, “ triangular relationship “ (HG p.300). As quoted in the paper, “ The book-child theme is embedded in the more overt drama of sexual liaisons and rivalries[..] the play generates so many different subject positions we come to feel that it is being staged in some figurative space in which the potentialities of human nature are being very profoundly explored”. The paper goes into depth to show sexual jealousies and describes the book-child motif as the figure in the carpet, as the play is about adult sexual relationships which provides the setting for the modulations of the theme.

In section 2 of the paper creativity, envy and destructiveness is analyzed in depth. Hedda it states despises what she is drawn to which is a human nature trait. Hedda is drawn to Tesman’s good nature and his motherly concern but in an interesting twist the hat incident is interpreted as envy of what Tesman has with his Aunts caring and not just social disparity in their stations. This envy Hedda harbors borders on the psychopathic and is dangerous. It also explores Hedda’s objects such as the phallic symbols of the pistols as a substitute for a mother’s breasts. Further, the paper links her interest in Mrs Falk’s house beyond just materialism and a reason to marry Tesman but an association of a dead woman, absence and loss and happiness gone forever.

Section deals with fate or destiny and Hedda’s preoccupation with style such as the aesthetics of suicide. In fact “ the figure of the book child is a wonderfully imagined device for exploring the theme of the use of an object.[…] both literal and metaphoric[..] Hedda Gabler is unable to fashion a life is that in her personal world objects do not survive.” Ironically Tesman has the power to initiate her suicide ( her humiliation with Brack and Lovborg suicide aside ) by Tesman and Thea who she envies uniting to piece together the object she has destroyed. In her death and of her unborn child Hedda succeeds in leaving nothing else to envy.” If nothing is left to be reduced to nothing, something may begin to be. ‘A terrible beauty is born’ and a destiny is fatefully fulfilled”

The paper bought great insights depth and new ideas to the tried and tested formula. And while much is opinion based it leaves tremendous room for debate and discussion.

Hand, Nigel; “Psychoanalysis and the Space of the paly.” Yale University, N.p, n.d. Web. 20 May 2012. <http://modernism.research.yale.edu.wi>.

3 Women 1 Goal - A Literary Device Comparison

The plays Heidi Chronicles,( HC), by Wendy Wasserstein, A Street Car Named Desire, (SCND), By Tennessee Williams and Hedda Gabler, (HG), by Henrik Ibsen  though set in different eras all  revolve around the trials and tribulations of their female protagonists, Blanche DuBois, Hedda Gabler, and Heidi Holland respectively. The central theme of the play essays these essentially independent women trying to find their way and discovering their individual identity within the confines of a society where the male dominates. Fantasy over reality, feminism, and power struggles are all key themes played out in different scenarios.

  While Hedda,  and Blanche draw upon metaphoric masks to often hide their free will and independence from a judging society and give the illusion of fitting in due to their Victorian and Southern American restrictions, (please see my earlier blog on masks ), this is contrasted by Heidi who is much less apologetic on her ambition and free will as she is a  coming of age baby boomer in a modern world with albeit present but lesser restrictions. This contrast is highlighted by outcome where Hedda, unable to come to terms with her life, tired of the illusion commits suicide as death means freedom and release.  On the other hand  Blanche  fears death ,whose delusional escapism world  leads her tragically to the asylum  when reality wins. On the other hand, Heidi  comes to peace with her lot and starts a new chapter where single at forty, adopts a child with forward thinking hope despite the grievances of her past.

 Both HG and SCND are set in short time frames with references to the past that has shaped them and their present fragile emotional states whereas the over twenty year time line of HC sets the theme of the changing role of women. Heidi is educated and intelligent trying to make it in a society dominated by men. This is shown in the chosen title which reveals the post world war 2 coming of age of women. Heidi from her naiveté as a school girl with political radicalism in the 1960’s,  militant feminism in the 1970’s to her betrayal and disillusion in the 1980’s where she evolves to a Columbia University  professor. Wassertein almost blames the women’s movement where women are seen as trivial and men as serious as Heidi finds her bearings in a changing world. In contrast Blanche and Hedda are more obvious victims.  The title where Hedda holds onto her maiden name symbolizes her independence as does the awe she exudes to the other characters while in SCND the title symbolizes her journey as an allegoric trajectory of her life to achieve her desires but in a ironic foreshadow of her suicide she takes another streetcar named cemeteries to Eysian fields ( Greek allusion  both which allude to the death of her soul. )

In setting;  SCND is confined to a tiny apartment with the street visible showing the metaphor of Blanche being unable to leave her real world problems as she resides as an intruder in a hostile confined environment. Similarly HG is set in a few rooms in a home which ironically she pretended she wanted as the perfect wife but in reality is not her sanctuary but her incarceration as she spends her time rearranging the furniture in her frustration. In contrast HC, moves through varies settings as the story and Heidi progresses in maturity.

The past is a defining theme as shown in the guns in HG which not mere toys but represent a happier care free symbol of her former life and ironically allow her to escape in death. The guns also represent her masculinity in a phallic symbol. The portrait of her father and the piano link her to her past and are shifted as they no longer belong in her new life. The curtains act as a motif to shut out the world and live out the darkness of her heart and in her play acting close the final act and grand finale of her suicide. Flowers that she rearranges also acts as a motif for Hedda’s death and future while the reference to a Mexican woman selling flowers for the dead  and Blanche’s  reaction of horror in scene 9  of SCND foreshadows Blanche’s figurative death.  Similarly, in SCND Blanche hides the loss of her youth and beauty from Mitch  in dim light as she shuns the present and lives in her former glory until forced by Mitch to stand under the light. This symbolizes her regressive nature to hold on to better times where she lived in high society with a husband she loved, before her loved ones died and her stately home is taken away. The motif of light such as the covering of the lamp with a lantern show the metaphor that light is her innocence and youth and dark her maturity and disillusion. In contrast Heidi lives far more for the present and future though she too haunted by ghosts of the past and tries to escape her mistakes by taking a job in Minnesota until persuaded otherwise by Peter as he looks at her past as symbolized by boxes of records and books. Light and dark do not appear as metaphors in HC.

Music plays prominence as a symbol in all three plays. In HG in the piano representing the music of happier times while in HC the music chronicles her life and the era and mirrors her feelings like “Respect “ playing in the background during the feminist meeting in the church. In SCND only Blanche can hear the Varsouviana polka which haunts her guilt at her husband’s suicide and her singing of “Paper Moon” drowns out Stanley’s vocal ranting of her unsavory character and adds to her delusion that her lies are believable.

All three plays show the protagonists dependence on men as a theme,  like a damsel in distress and the characterization of the men as foils add to this. Blanche desperately wants to marry Mitch for security and deludes herself on a rich savior of Shep Huntleigh to rescue her. Hedda has lost her lover Lovborg and is forced to rely on Tesman as a husband and caretaker  after her father General Gabler’s demise. Though Heidi is the most self reliant of the trio she still relies on the crumbs given out to her by Scoop, waiting for his calls and being defined by him only to be betrayed, and leans on the gay Peter for as an emotional crutch. Peter even remarks on the allusion of Peter and Heidi in the Swiss novel as the little girl lost, but the contrast is that ultimately Heidi rescues herself where Blanche and Hedda fail. All novels show the theme of women as sexual beings to be used by men like the womanizing Scoop. In HC women are described as meat and in SCND Stanley throws a piece of meat in scene 1 and in the end rapes Blanche. Hedda too is used sexually by the men in her life such as Lovborg, Tesman and the Judge who wants an extramarital affair with her. However, while Blanche and Hedda exploit their femininity and sexuality for manipulative purposes, Heidi is much less feminine in her approach relying on her personality than body.

The baby and  love and sexuality act  as a symbol in all three plays where it is positive in HC where the adoption represents a new beginning of pure love but in SCND Stella’s pregnancy reminds her of everything Blanche never had with her husband and the ticking biological clock as she desperately searches for a husband. More dramatically the pregnant Hedda hides and hates her pregnancy as it will simply further imprison her in a loveless marriage and her suicide ends this burden. Taking this further the manuscript is the metaphor for the ‘baby’ of Lovborg and Thea and her jealousy comes to a head as she burns it to destroy their happiness. The fire in fact foreshadows Hedda’s  death and contrasts her lack of passion and warmth towards others. Heidi and her group burn lingerie to rid themselves of sexual beings. The reference to vine leaves by Hedda  for Lovborg acts as the allusion of  Dioysus the Greek god of partying and fertility as she fantasizes about in the old alcoholic days where he would rebel from society taboos to be with her. In a situational irony she ends up encouraging Lovborg’s death despite her desire for him, with her gun having killed his ‘child’ the manuscript while rejecting domestic bliss with Tesman as symbolized with her careless attitude towards the slippers bought by his aunt. On the other in SCND the allusion to the Browning poem and the lighter represent Blanche’s lost love which has increased post her husband’s death. On the other hand despite Heidi’s love for Scoop she shies away from commitment despite her jealousy at his marriage and the recurring motif of art reveals her rebellion against traditional mating rituals as she fights for women representation in the art world.

The three plays are centrally the journey of three very different women tied by their desire to be free. The path to their self discovery, liberation and outcome may be varied but all three women show their solidarity in their convictions which they hold onto till the end.

Masking the Truth

 Prompt: Masks can be used literally or metaphorically in drama. Discuss to what extent, masks have been used and for what purpose in A Streetcar Named Desire and Hedda Gabler.

Intoduction

In the world of stage, masks are often used figuratively or literally to camouflage and disguise the true intent or personality of a character, allowing them to manipulate situations and people as a means to an end to great effect. In Tennessee Williams’ A Streetcar Named Desire, and Henrik Ibsens’s Hedda Gabler, the female protagonists Blanche DuBois and Hedda Gabler use metaphorical masks to hide from the real world that they cannot accept or face to create a delusional one. Ironically during this staged play acting façade, they convince not only those around them, but sadly themselves that their illusions are not just mirages. That is until their masks become irretrievably broken down leading to tragic or disastrous consequences. Blanche an ageing beauty on the brink of insanity and a closet alcoholic, having lost her wealth, youth, position in society and her first love finds herself clinging to her past and clutching at straws to desperately find a gullible husband to free her from her misery.  Blanche’s mask hides her vulnerability, fear, and ultimately her unsavory past until she is exposed  to be a conniving drunk whose mental instability sends her to the asylum. Hedda, coming from a wealthy background, masculine and independent in outlook feels trapped in an age where women are mere pretty props.  Similarly, Hedda’s mask  disguises her isolation from society as she cannot conform to their ideals and her unhappiness in a loveless marriage until unable to hold onto the charade she kills herself with the gun that symbolizes her freedom and past. Williams and Ibsen utilize varying literary devices to illustrate their protagonists’ masks.

Topic Sentence 1: The Mask of Darkness

In  A Streetcar Named Desire a dimly lit room is used as a metaphor of a fading beauty and serves to hide not only the age of Blanche but to mask her eyes and face so they cannot betray her feelings and emotions.

In Hedda Gabler, the drawing of the curtains by Hedda is a  metaphor not only for the staged act she is playing as an actress but to shut out the world riddled by societies restraints that she abhors, and acts as her cloak of misery and darkness.

Topic Sentence 2: The Mask of Femininity.

In A Streetcar Named Desire, uses her feminine wiles backed with stage like hair, make up and clothes, to pretend to be a high society lady, with airs and social graces to trap a husband using these masks as a cover for her actual immoral activity and feisty, independent self.

In Hedda Gabler, Hedda plays up her femininity and acts as the perfect wife and hostess, as she re-arranges her flowers and furniture which acts as a metaphor for her frustration and the change in her life she craves, all the while masking her entrapment as she hides her true self symbolized by guns locked in a drawer.

Topic Sentence 3: The Mask of Illusions.

In A Streetcar Named Desire, Blanche uses fabricated story telling to create an illusion and myth that she has a life filled with admirers and high society parties to mask her downtrodden actual lonely self.

In Hedda Gabler, Hedda uses conversation to illustrate story telling to create an illusion of a well settled homely character with a caring attitude to mask her disillusioned, depressed self.

Oleanna - Reel vs. Real

I recently saw the movie, Carnage, by Roman Polanski (a movie adaptation of the play ‘God of Carnage’ by Yasmin Reza). Like Oleanna movie, it dealt with complex human relationships and blame games of a situation and was set mostly in the confines of a living room with four characters. Interestingly both movies ended up with people playing football in the park perhaps to denote that life goes on beyond the musty cobwebs of emotional verbal entanglements. While Mamet is no Oscar winning Polanski I felt his direction was compelling and drew you in like a thriller, rather than the drama as intended by the original play. The movie though slow and pedantic, a little staged  at first ( not for the usual Friday night cinema goers), began to pick up pace  from normality to highly charged primitive insanity. The discerning movie buff needs to look underneath the complex layers to see the subtle nuances beyond the script as related to all human misunderstandings and miscommunication to make an impact.

 I was surprised to find out that the playwright was also the director and screenplay writer of the movie as most hand over that mantle to others. In that sense the movie must be a true representation of the writers vision and came across so except in the ending when John beats up Carol before picking up the chair and says “ Oh my God “. I wonder why Mamet decided to change this from the original play. Perhaps he succumbed to pressure that a movie needed more dramatic action and shock factor. However, while I think the extra three words shows John’s  remorse and self realization of what he has done out of character from his normal sense, I think just putting the chair down as the original has more effect. Further, her response to his final elipsed word “ well…”  which is  “  Yes that’s right” changes in context now from the play. In the play  there is ambiguity in her words but in the movie her rebuttal is an affirmation of his wrongdoing and makes Carol revengeful and self righteous and downright smug as she celebrates her victory which flaws the movie. In the original context it appears that no one wins and both are left disillusioned. In fact both play and movie still leave us with the question of who are the traditional protagonist and antagonist. Perhaps John is the hero and Carol his foil or maybe nemesis? Or is Carol the heroine and John the villain ?  There is room for interpretation and debate.What do you think ?

The movie has definite rhythm and pace in its dialogue delivery and both actors do a commendable job in bringing the characters to life. The movie succeeds in its auditory capacity as tone changes with shouted words revealing greater insight into mood than the script alone. The script is annoying to read with its broken elipsed sentences and in this cannot compete with the movie.

The script and dialogue show the transformation of the characters and their role reversal; Carol from meek, confused, immature student  to confident, self assured assertive woman and John from conceited, condescending  but still caring and affable stressed professor of high stature to harrowed, insecure and aggressive man. Words are used effectively to mirror this change from high end vocabulary from John that Carol does not understand such as “predicliction” showing his status of mature academic to basic and primal profanity of “ bitch” akin to hoodlum talk.  However, for a brief point there is an equilibrium that boils over to events going out of control. The movie enhanced this metamorphosis visually with the costume design. At first Carol is in a coat showing a student devoid of funds or style to a business like suit. Her clothes a form of power dressing shows she means business and will not tolerate nonsense from her former superior. On the other hand John dressed as the conservative, respectable academic turns into a disheveled drunk. Roles of student and professor are broken down, gender and status and age become irrelevant as they face each other as two sparring equals in the climax. What was interesting and not in the play was when John looked at his ripped bleeding shirt and seemed shocked at how he had got to this point, and how did it all go wrong. The pristine shirt may be a metaphor for his ruined life.

As far as film techniques I am pretty sure I noticed the shadow of the camera on the door which is a major goof up. That aside at times the camera moves into the face of John highlighting his confusion in an otherwise confident demeanor, but Carol remains an enigma and is difficult to decide if she is delusional and naive  or cruelly manipulative. Subtle camera movements move along the storyline and maintain momentum of the events and dialogue. However I felt the film was dimly lit by the lighting people and full of shadows perhaps to add to the claustrophobia of the restrictive settting, but the cinematographer mostly does not allow us to see the eyes of the character leading to ambiguity of motive and intentions and echo the dark theme. But then again this pattern of one setting of the play is broken by short periods out such as John in his hotel room which takes away Mamet’s original intent of feeling trapped. When he takes the final phone call and reacts to her comment not to call his wife “baby” reveal a very ominous and evil look on his face foreshadowing his reaction and intent.

The University office was as I imagined musty, old fashioned and masculine with woodwork and book shelves like a library revealing the elitest world of higher learning that was once just a male domain. Tearing down of the book shelves could be a metaphor for tearing down the establishment.

All in all the pros out weigh the cons and bring the written word alive with music adding to the mystique. And whether you root for the hapless yet haughty professor or the conniving and annoying Carol caught in her feministic tirade is irrelevant. What is important to note is how difficult it is even for two level headed, educated people to communicate.  Words the crux of education and academia fall by the way side and the most primal instincts take over where communication happens through violence. The movie and the play are both thought provoking, provocative and disturbing but are realistic as it is controversial. And finally we need to note the adage that there are three sides to every story: his, hers and the truth !

Theme in Oleanna - A Dangerous Mind

Oleanna, though simplistic in approach with only two visible characters is actually deceptively complex with several themes that are related to one another. It is difficult to point out one main theme but I feel political correctness / feminism/ gender power struggles, generation gap lack of communication  and society expectations as primarily used in the theme of higher education are central themes. Mamet uses several literary devices to illustrate his themes including allusions, motifs, setting, language and diction, tone and to some extent symbolism.

I have discussed allusions of the prologues and its meaning in my last blog , “Its just an Allusion “ so I won’t elaborate further here but the extract and folk song reflect conforming to societies expectations of which higher education is one aspect. Young people buy into the notion that they need to go to college to obtain status symbols to show they have succeeded such as a good job, house, car, family life that represents normality and respectability. Carol who has undergone hardships in her family background and financial hindrances has bought into the dream that college is her ticket to improve her status. However, failing and not understanding in class she feels she is stupid and is letting down society who will condemn her. Ironically John scoffs at the benefits of the brain washing of higher education and even publishes a book about it  and still with hypocrisy of entering the teaching profession wants a promotion to have the house he wants and give his children the benefits of the right school.

Mamet uses setting of the dusty academic office of the professor through out the play. I feel this room which though not described I imagine as small musty and windowless lined with book shelves is the oppression of the education system that kills free thinking and only wants students to regurgitate facts parrot fashion. Actually both John and Carol are victims of societies expectations and the room represents their incarceration of a jail that they cannot break free from.

Following on from this is the motif of Carol’s notes. She unable to answer John’s questions and despite his pleas to stop looking at her notes she is unable to do so. She clings to her notes like a crutch and will foreshadow her intent by writing down what he says so she is sure she can remember it correctly. She does not make her own decisions but follows the rule book and her note book is her Bible that she worships as the gospel truth. She is frustrated though that despite note taking and despite reading John’s book and despite attending class she is not absolved and does not understand. The motif could also be symbolic with religious connotations of the good girl who goes to church and yet God (the college or professor) does not reward her but instead gives her penance. She begs John not to punish her with a low grade as her faith is strong and she has abided by his rules. The written word as truth appears many times in this play whether it be John’s book, Carol’s notes, the legal notice, lack of tenure committee promotion in writing and her paper which is attacked as meaningless.

There is the theme also of power struggles in the form of student teacher relationship bordering on the generation gap and also male female power struggles related to feminism and sexual harassment.

The desk I think represents a great divide which shows that initially John is in the powerful position and Carol is the subordinate. John with his decision of Carol’s grade controls her future. However, the desk becomes irrelevant when in the third act Carol takes over control and has the power to destroy John’s perfect life or forgive him. In the final act in frustration he takes his throne (chair ), or seat of power and threatens to fling it at Carol symbolizing her audacity at her figuratively taking away his position or seat of power.

Language, tone and diction are used to signify the differences in their status. At first John is condescending in his tone and treats Carol like a little lost girl who he will save. Ultimately John becomes the little lost boy that Carol can save. Carol cannot understand his academic difficult words such as “predilection” ( ironically John does not fully understand  “term of art” and may resort to hard words to prove his superiority). Word play to show power is used effectively by Mamet through out the play. John claims not to be Carol’s father but goes on to try and exert authority in a personal manner more akin to a father giving a sermon to a daughter. And here lies John’s mistake he breaks the formality of student teacher relation and tries to become personal which is interpreted by Carol as sexual harassment. The interruptions of Carol by John reveal,  his reluctance to listen to her and comes to a head with her screaming that she is “SPEAKING “. The interruptions and the choppy half sentences show John’s lack of respect towards Carol and vice versa.

Ultimately there is a huge communication gap between Carol and John as a theme and neither try to understand each other despite their futile attempts and pleas from both sides of wanting to understand. The communication gap could be social differences, gender or generational. The telephone which is the only access to the outside world serves as a powerful motif to interrupt their dialogue in mid sentence. It shows that John has an outside life and is a real grown up with real grown up problems. John constantly putting Carol on hold even rudely not waiting to hear what she has never told anyone else belittles her leaving her feeling small and marginalized.  Carol’s problems are trivialized as psychological  growing pains that she will grow out of while his telephonic conversations highlight his very real non imagined problems. The group that Carol on the other hand talks about simply serves as an imagined authority figure that controls her thoughts in a parental way showing her immaturity and clinging to approval. I feel John should have not taken the calls or either re-scheduled his meeting with Carol as his half hearted juggling of his student and personal issues do little justice to either and simply show his weaknesses to a student that undermines his authority which will be taken advantage of cunningly by Carol. Interestingly though Carol and John are alike, trying to get approval and fit into societies’ norm, they both struggle with their insecurities. John in his calls has lost control of his future in his house buying plans and in his waiting for the tenure committee decision and Carol has lost control of her future at college which determines her future life’s success. They are both on the cusp of success but are afraid will not attain it. Ultimately John offers her help by granting an A and bending the rules which does not appease her and is misunderstood in intent and Carol in turn negotiates a deal related to her retraction of her complaint that leads to the final lack of communication in his violent outburst.

In final consideration with the theme of feminism Carol acts as a living caricature symbol of the Political Correct movement. She corrects him in the final act taking the mantle of power away from John. . Ultimately  male/ female stereotypes and power struggles come into play climaxing with Carol deriding John for calling his wife “ baby” which she sees not as a term of endearment or love but his authority over his wife. John in his naiveté has been oblivious that his actions could be interpreted as predatory and though the allegations (which Carol sees not as allegations but fact) are extreme and far removed as being actual rape the fact they are taken seriously as the burden of proof is on John  shows the great divide in communication and understanding  between men and women.

Whether you agree with John or Carol is opinion based but ultimately both appear as victims caught in their own misconceptions and insecurity and both ultimately abuse their power and control over each other leading to an ugly climax show down preceded by dangerous mind games.