4000000000000000000000000 Miles

"Whatdayacallit". Vera says that almost literally every time she speaks in this play. On a personal level, it reminds me a lot of my scatter-brained mother who has real trouble with common nouns. "Can you get me the thing for the thing?" is a very typical phrase from her. Things like these are classic signs of air-headedness or endearing senility. In the case of 4,000 Miles, however, the use of the motif "Whatdayacallit" is used as more than just a way of further characterizing Vera. This motif further emphasizes the theme of miscommunication throughout the play. Nobody seems to understand each other in this play. Everyone is always putting their foot in their mouth and saying the wrong thing. Beck and Leo don't understand what one wants from the other, so they break up. Vera LITERALLY doesn't understand most of what if said to her because she is hard of hearing. Additionally, Vera has issues with her dentures so she is difficult to understand as well. Leo doesn't really communicate with anyone about the death of his best friend Michah at all though out the play even though that is like one of the main, central issues of this play. AND THEN, when he finally opens up about what happened, Vera's hearing aid was off and she heard none of if. Everyone is constantly missing the connection. Sometimes, even, the computer of phone literally loses connection, making communication even more difficult. Not to mention the issues that go along with Leo's inability to face and communicate what on earth is going on with this incest thing between him and his asian sister. The miscommunication, however, while frustrating at times, make the play more effective for me. I am not sure of the message the playwright was trying to convey, but I really felt like this was a true "slice of life".

Judith

First of all, I don't know if this is a relevant this to say in a blog posting, but I did not like this play. I understand it is loosely based of biblical stories, and that it is very artistically and precisely done, but the entire thing felt very schizophrenic to me. The combination between the frequent changes in dialect, relationships, and motivations and just the mere fact that sexual desire and decapitation are the two most memorable aspects of the play is just not at all my style. That being said, even the weirdest of plays have major dramatic questions. I think the MDQ is "Does Judith have the mental strength to complete her quest?". In the beginning of the play, she is on a mission to kill general Holofernes, thus saving her people in these times of war. However, as she talks to him she develops feelings for him making us question if Judith has the ability to kill someone she is so fond of in such  brutal way. Well the answer if yes, she decapitates him and its horrific. Yet, she is still sexually attracted to him, even sans head. The murder seems to have deranged her, bringing out this brute-like barbarian inside of her. She comes out of the play a completely different person. I think in the end of the play she is severely disturbed, showing that she did not have the psychological strength to deal with the situation at hand. I think she is too emotional to be a killer, yet she did indeed kill Holofernes…very violently. The servant seemed to act as a real instigator for the deed at hand. I wonder how the play would have turned out without the presence of the servant. What if they had been alone the entire time?

Night, Mother: The most depressing play ever in one act

This prompt is difficult because I feel like there are so many questions to be asked in regards to this play, it is difficult to identify the "Major Dramatic Question". From a dramaturgical standpoint, however, I think that I could make a reasonable argument that the MDQ is "Will Mamma and Jessie be able to part ways?" This could be worded better, but in my reflecting, I felt like it wouldn't be right to center my MDQ around either Mamma or Jessie and exclude the other. Even they are the only two people in this play, I can't one hundred percent peg either of them as the protagonist. We grow to care about and root for both of as the play goes on. Of course, we do not want Jessie to get what she wants, which is death, so I suppose that is an argument against Jessie as the protagonist. Regardless, I digress. One of the main topics of discussion between Jessie and Mamma after we discover Jessie's plans to end her own life is that Jessie won't be here to take care of Mamma anymore and Jessie needs to make sure Mamma can get by without her. Jessie, even though she is determined to leave, she needs to make the separation as clean as possible. She feels a real responsibility to Mamma and feels like she can't leave her without making sure she will be okay. As Mamma reacts more and more poorly to the eminent death of her only daughter, we question, as readers, whether Jessie will really be able to go though with the suicide and leave her mother behind. Mamma seems defenseless on her own. Likewise Mamma can not accept that Jessie wants to die. She loves her, needs her, and feels responsible for her. She fights the reality of the situation as hard as she can, denying the truth and refusing to cooperate with Jessie's lists. However, this MDQ is answered in the last moments of the play where Jessie does, indeed, kill herself, parting ways with Mamma forever, and Mamma follows Jessie's instructions as ordered and calls the family, finally accepting what has happened and parting ways from her now deceits daughter, Jessie.