Comments on: Nice Enough to Pretend They Listen http://blog.steppenwolf.org/2007/10/05/nice-enough-to-pretend-they-listen/ Sun, 20 Jul 2008 11:18:05 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0 by: virginia lathan http://blog.steppenwolf.org/2007/10/05/nice-enough-to-pretend-they-listen/#comment-278 Sun, 28 Oct 2007 20:52:50 +0000 http://blog.steppenwolf.org/2007/10/05/nice-enough-to-pretend-they-listen/#comment-278 Hi, Just saw the play, today's matinee. One question the cast responded to was why John Merrick wasn't made up to look disfigured. The answer was that the playwrite suggested that he not be made up like that, possibly because it would get in the way of the audience gleaning some of the higher messages the play dealt with, like acceptance, what's normal, the need to conform, Merrick's keen insight into human nature--which transcended his disability. Even so, I still feel I would have enjoyed the play more if he had been made up to look disfigured because his disigurement is such an essential factor that goes into the examination of his life. I think it would have been more challenging for the audience to grapse some of the higher messages when viewing a disfigured Merrick. But the play seems to attract an intelligent audiene, so I think they would have been up to the challenge and would have appreciated it. From what I understand about staging (I'm a novice in this area, so I'm not sure I'm using "staging" correctly.) a play, the call as to how the characters are portrayed is more a director's call than the playwrite's. I understand the playwrite expressing his preference, but the final call is the director's. As a writer, I can relate to that personally from having artists design my book covers in a way different than what I would do. I don't always agree with them, but that's their domain, so it's their call. I just provide the written text. I'm thinking it's the same with playwrites and directors. Overall, I enjoyed the play and intrigued by some of the higher issues it dealt with. Some subtle humor was in it, and that was a nice touch. I'm glad the charaters were racially diverse yet race was not an overt issue dealt with. Keep up the good work. Hi,
Just saw the play, today’s matinee. One question the cast responded to was why John Merrick wasn’t made up to look disfigured. The answer was that the playwrite suggested that he not be made up like that, possibly because it would get in the way of the audience gleaning some of the higher messages the play dealt with, like acceptance, what’s normal, the need to conform, Merrick’s keen insight into human nature–which transcended his disability. Even so, I still feel I would have enjoyed the play more if he had been made up to look disfigured because his disigurement is such an essential factor that goes into the examination of his life. I think it would have been more challenging for the audience to grapse some of the higher messages when viewing a disfigured Merrick. But the play seems to attract an intelligent audiene, so I think they would have been up to the challenge and would have appreciated it. From what I understand about staging (I’m a novice in this area, so I’m not sure I’m using “staging” correctly.) a play, the call as to how the characters are portrayed is more a director’s call than the playwrite’s. I understand the playwrite expressing his preference, but the final call is the director’s. As a writer, I can relate to that personally from having artists design my book covers in a way different than what I would do. I don’t always agree with them, but that’s their domain, so it’s their call. I just provide the written text. I’m thinking it’s the same with playwrites and directors.

Overall, I enjoyed the play and intrigued by some of the higher issues it dealt with. Some subtle humor was in it, and that was a nice touch. I’m glad the charaters were racially diverse yet race was not an overt issue dealt with.

Keep up the good work.

]]>