Jiwoo Han:
This production has many more dynamic aspects than the text and gave more understanding of the text. Especially, I very much enjoyed Hamm’s and Clov’s facial expressions while watching it. Sometimes, their facial expressions helped me better understand the intent of the director. I watched about the last 20 minutes and I found the clear-cut difference between the production and the text. Hamm asks Clov for his pain-killer and Clov says that there is no more pain-killer. In the text on page 791, their conversation seemed to me that it is an everyday conversation with the words which are empty of meaning. But, in the production, when Hamm asked for pain-killer and said “Ah! At last! Give it to me! Quick!”, Clov answered with an abrupt facial expression that “There’s no more pain-killer”. His facial expression was like I know what is coming in the end and it is high time to begin to change. In my opinion, this production provides a greater understanding of the story.
Susanna Domosi:
I agree with Jiwoo that the production brought much more light to the meaning of the story through the expression of the actors. Another element that I observed while watching the last 20-30 minutes of the production is how much the use of costumes can bring more insight to a work. While reading the script, Beckett does not exactly describe the attire of Hamm and Clov. Many clues throughout the script and the period during which Beckett wrote “Endgame” during communicate that the story takes place post apocalypse, or post atomic bomb attacks. The costumes of Clov and Hamm illustrate that they are living in the Cold War Era, the time period that followed World War II during which the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki took place. Clov is wearing a button down shirt and vest with a tie, also known as work attire. To contrast this outfit, Hamm is wearing a robe and a blanket. This brings meaning to the fact that Clov is in essence a worker and is present to serve Clov. Even though Clov does not officially work for Hamm which can be proven by Clov’s pondering on page 792 “There’s one thing I’ll never understand. Why I always obey you,” Their interactions based on the script and attire based on the production illustrate that Clove is in a sense, a laborer of Hamm’s.
Daphne Young:
I agree with both Jiwoo and Susanna, the production helped me to understand more in depth what was happening in Endgame. Facial expressions, like Jiwoo explained, helped to understand the mood and feelings of the characters. The costumes, like Susanna mentioned, helped me to further understand the dialogue references as it may give us an insight as to when the story took place.
Another thing I believe that the production provided, that helped to understand the story better, that the script didn’t was the tone of voice that the characters used when speaking. Although the script did sometimes mention when a dialogue was spoken sarcastically, in the production the tones that’s the actors had throughout the story helped me to understand when they were being sarcastic, angry, upset, and even happy.
5 responses so far ↓
p.cheung // Apr 28th 2017 at 1:35 am
Jiwoo and Daphne make great points about how the production of the play helps us understand the story much better. The facial expressions shown affect how we interpret the words that are said which gives the story that much more meaning. While reading the text, you’d have to guess what they’re expressions would be which could lead to false interpretations.
k.parkinson1 // Apr 28th 2017 at 7:52 am
I think you all made great points when pointing out the difference between the film and book. In regards to directing/production and the costumes/setting. It is interesting how much of difference in expression and emotions we get from both works. With the film, we can actually see the characters and how they look and get a better understanding of their feelings when they are talking. Like Jiwoo states about Hamm asking Clov for his pain-killers. In the film, we see that Clov is a little frustrated. Something that is not easily picked up on in the book.
j.guzman3 // Apr 28th 2017 at 10:34 am
Jorge G COMMENT:
———————————————————-
I too believe film helps to fill in the gaps and provided a deeper understanding of Endgame, for without I would have certainly missed out on the context of somethings. For example, Through the film I able to capture Beckett’s nihilistic themes where humans are pictured in a hopeless and repetitive daily routine but it was only hammered in when Clov looks directly at the camera and says, “Finished, it’s nearly finished, it must be nearly finished”. As you stated Jiwoo, because of his expression and air of gravity around the scene, I was able to truly capture Beckett’s message.
m.santos4 // Apr 28th 2017 at 11:15 am
I agree with Jiwoo when he says, “This production has many more dynamic aspects than the text and gave more understanding of the text.” Reading the text myself, I didn’t completely get the imagine Beckett wanted the reader to get until I saw the movie. I got a sense of the facial expressions (which I agree with Jiwoo, it helped me better understand his intent) and the costume design which helps understand why/how the characters are feeling. Throughout the scene I watched with started from the beginning to 45 mins in, the facial expressions of the character helped the acting that both Clov and Hamm were doing and the feelings they had towards each other, Nag and Nell.
sh125650 // Apr 28th 2017 at 11:37 am
I agree with they said the production has more dynamic aspects than the text. From the movie, we have the straight feeling of the expression from the characters. Hamm is the protagonist of the play, though his unlikable demeanor at times makes him the antagonist to his servant. Clov is the other protagonist of the play, the servant to Hamm despite his own infirmity. He was taken in by Hamm as a child.He performs various tasks for his master, such as wheeling him around and reporting on the landscape outside the windows.
You must log in to post a comment.