great works ii – 2850 jta 12:25-2:05: love letters from the world

Your Responses on April 28^th: Comparing a scene from the text of Endgame with a production. As you all have remarked, the choices of the director and actors greatly influences our interpretation of the text. Remember, those are just choices, and would not necessarily be sanctioned by the author. Your own interpretations and expectations of how things should be done are also quite valid! We’ll talk more about this in class.

Remember, too, that just because your name is listed in the group (or just because you actually put the comments on the site) doesn’t mean you’ll get credit. You need to have posted twice.

Directing: tone of voice: yes the directorial choice shows these two very angry at/bitter with one another. Also, Clov’s comic movements are almost silly (Beckett’s interest in vaudeville to show Absurdism). Good observations, Jacqueline! Muneeb also points out the angry that emerges in the production. Daphne, as well, points out that the tone of voice is often quite different than one expects when reading the text.  Clov’s being directed to not look directly at Hamm’s face (Keauna) seems to show their isolation from one another. Rebecca points out Clov’s physicality in the production, and how that helps us to see him as someone with low self-esteem (good comment!) Songyun makes the interesting comment that while the production makes us feel Hamm’s control more poignantly, the more subtle references and philosophical themes may be somehow more subdued than in the text. Katerina feels the sadness indeed comes out more in the production.

Acting: Bintou makes the interesting comment that “When they were happy they weren’t happy enough, and when they were angry they weren’t angry enough.” Yes, at times the acting seems wooden, and this is part of Beckett’s plan, I think, to highlight the artificial nature of their (and our?) lives. Contrarily, Nicole (and Maria) points out that Clov seems to be more enthusiastic in her section of the text, than she would have expected (again, to highlight artificiality?). Jamie makes a very interesting comment about the acting choices at the end, saying that he doesn’t necessarily like being directed how to interpret the dialogue, and says that he doesn’t know if he is “comfortable with giving an actor or director the power to fill in these gaps of uncertainty.” ( Jorge G. and Farhan agree, saying they’re happy with more guidance, which is also valid) This is a very valid comment, and remember, you do have to agree with the director’s choices! Jiwoo, on the other hand, seems to like the fact that the actors are bringing the scene to life with their facial expressions (and yes, they are also asking us to interpret these characters in a specific way).

Costume Design/Set: Joseph points out how different our expectations can be from reading a text, but remember, the choices in costume and set are simply that, choices, so you are not “wrong” Joseph, you simply had a different vision for costumes/set. The director makes a very particular choice, when choosing these “dirty old clothes.” Maria points out, too, the starkness and emptiness of the set, and Onu seems to agree, but does see fluctuation in tone. Beckett seems to want to emphasize the apocalyptic nature of this world. Susanna brings out the very good observation that the dress indicates the “master-servant” relationship between Hamm and Clov. Michelle makes a good observation when she notes that costume and set design all contribute to the bleakness of the play, underlining the bleakness of what the world has become for these characters. Joaquin points out that actually seeing the trash cans changes his perspective on the text.

Filming: Jorge M. brings up the very interesting comment that filming allows the unique point of view of getting very close to the face, something that cannot happen in a theater production. Here, the director is using Hamm’s facial expressions to underline a way of looking at the character, and a way, possibly, that Beckett never intended?  Does filming humanize the actors in a way that is not consistent with Beckett’s ideas