I am very glad to have chosen Theater as my IB Group 6 class. I can already notice looking back on our filmed performances from the last three months that I have become more willing to put myself out there on stage without feeling awkward, though I can continue to work on that going forward. Learning all of the different methods to put yourself into the character from our Stanislavski unit has definitely helped me with that, as it allows me to ignore my own hangups and simply act as the character would.
The Brecht unit, though it went in a very different direction from the Stanislavski one, taught me a lesson that is equally as important: the ability of theater to change the world. Realizing that the art you are performing could seriously impact people who could then go out and affect the world certainly puts more pressure on the performers, but it also gives theater an air of distinguished importance, and has motivated me to push myself and take my acting more seriously. While Brecht stressed making characters unsympathetic and keeping the audience from becoming fully immesered in the world of the play so that they would be more likely to pay attention to and later act on the social messages being taught, I feel that having sympathetic characters can help with sending the message in another way; when bad things happen to characters you like because of the unjust system, it makes the viewer emotionally invested in fighting against that system for the sake of the characters. Humans are generally more likely to respond to a crisis if they are shown its direct impact on a human life, after all.
Outside of specific units, having to plan out scenes, adapted or original, with my classmates has increased my appreciation for both directing and cooperation. When you are in charge of setting up the scene, you have to have very significant detail planned out for the actors to make the most out of. You are the one with the most direct control over what message the performance is trying to send, and how the audience should feel. In particular, the scene we adapted from The Caucasian Chalk Circle by Brecht showed both the advantages and disadvantages of props. Having props can not only make a scene more realistic, but also, as they did in our performance, add extra subtle layers to the scene with how the actors interact with them. The downside of props is that you have to keep track of them, making sure that people bring them out when they’re supposed to and that they use the rights ones and, perhaps most importantly, that the props never get in the way of the acting. I will be considering all of these points going into future scenes we do for this class with props.
Lastly, as the main video editor for our class, I’ve been slowly learning about both how to best balance audio so that both the actors and any background music can be heard at the apportioned volumes (plus what kind of music is most fitting for the scene), as well as how important camera positioning is. I hope to continue improving on these skills and the others mentioned above going into the rest of this year and beyond.
Sunday, November 19, 2017
Monday, November 13, 2017
How to Do a Brecht Play Right: Review of Cheshire Academy’s “The Caucasian Chalk Circle”
I was cautiously optimistic going into Cheshire Academy’s production of Bertolt Brecht’s “The Caucasian Chalk Circle” directed by Marc Aronson. On one hand, I am well acquainted with many of the people who were involved in the production and already knew of their talents. On the other hand, Brecht’s style of play doesn’t lend itself well to a high school performance; wordy with an emphasis on social themes. While I was unable to attend Mr. Aronson’s last Brecht production, “Life of Galileo”, the snippets I heard about it afterwards were not positive, with the major complaint being that it was boring.
Fortunately, of the many words I could use to describe this performance of “The Caucasian Chalk Circle”, ‘boring’ is not one of them. This is mainly due to the actors, all of whom seemed perfectly cast. This play has only a few developed characters but a revolving door of ensemble members, yet the actors were able to make each role stand on its own. David Mathison in particular succeeded in this with his wide range of voices and mannerisms, going from a paranoid cloaked figure speaking in fragmented sentences to a squeaky voiced nobleman to a regal lawyer back to back. Peter Deng was the most emotive member of the cast, especially evident in the first scene where he was always reacting to the others’ actions rather than just sitting there.
In terms of single roles, Sam Weed was the natural choice to play the motherly Grusha, and I feel that she managed to play up Grusha’s practical nature in the earlier scenes rather than simply portraying her as a naïve, good-hearted girl; she even got a lovely little singing moment when crossing the bridge. However, the performance that surprised me the most was Amalia Gutierrez as the non-singing Singer. Not only did she have moments of sass, like at the very end of the opening scene, and genuine emotion when reciting the inner thoughts of the characters, but she felt much more present in the scenes than you would expect from a Narrator. She would sometimes stand right up next to the actors, occasionally directly interacting with them as with the Governor when he was being led off to his execution, and other times she would be hanging back on the edges of the stage watching the action unfold before her.
The constant presence of the Singer reminds the audience that, in both the full context of the play itself and our reality, the story being told is just that - a story. This is one of many ways in which the show followed Brechtian principles. The sets were no more complicated than they need to be, and there were practically no attempts to hide the stage crew when they came to move things around. For moments where there were supposed to be a large number of characters on stage, they simply played recordings of teachers reading the lines. Having these disembodied voices of people whom the audience are likely to recognize ends up subtracting from the illusion rather than adding to it, which seems to have been intentional. The opening of the play set this precedent by having a folksy song play while the actors come in stage, and then forcing both them and the audience to wait, silently and patiently, until the song ended.
Having read the entire play in advance for class, I took note of what changes were made. Due to the size of the cast, some scenes which used to feature four or five random characters were slightly reworked to have the number of characters reduced to two or three, such as when Grusha is initially watching baby Michael at the palace while the others convince her to leave, and the scene with the merchants at the bridge where three characters were condensed to two. Other bits were cut entirely, such as when Grusha tries to stay at the inn, when young Michael is allying with the older children, and the selection of Azdack’s past cases as judge. These cuts were understandable due to the limited cast size, and seeing as the play in this form ended up being two hours long anyway, I can only imagine how long it would have been if they had done everything. Even with these cuts, the story’s major themes, such as justice (Azdack’s corrupt sense of justice, the idea that items go to those who can make the most good out of it).
The last thing I’d like to note is the placement of the intermission. Rather than being halfway through the play, it occurs later on, right before Azdack’s backstory. By doing this, the play becomes re-framed as two different stories: first, the story of the maid Grusha becoming the mother of the noble child; and second, the story of the illegitimate judge who, through granting Grusha custody over Michael, delivers the moral of the play, that goods should go to those who can make the most out of them. Not only are both these stories made compelling by the excellent performances, but making Azdack essentially a secondary protagonist places an even greater emphasis on the social message, making this performance of “The Caucasian Chalk Circle” a perfect blend of the Brecht and more contemptorary styles of acting. I would drop everything to see this show again if I had the chance.
Fortunately, of the many words I could use to describe this performance of “The Caucasian Chalk Circle”, ‘boring’ is not one of them. This is mainly due to the actors, all of whom seemed perfectly cast. This play has only a few developed characters but a revolving door of ensemble members, yet the actors were able to make each role stand on its own. David Mathison in particular succeeded in this with his wide range of voices and mannerisms, going from a paranoid cloaked figure speaking in fragmented sentences to a squeaky voiced nobleman to a regal lawyer back to back. Peter Deng was the most emotive member of the cast, especially evident in the first scene where he was always reacting to the others’ actions rather than just sitting there.
In terms of single roles, Sam Weed was the natural choice to play the motherly Grusha, and I feel that she managed to play up Grusha’s practical nature in the earlier scenes rather than simply portraying her as a naïve, good-hearted girl; she even got a lovely little singing moment when crossing the bridge. However, the performance that surprised me the most was Amalia Gutierrez as the non-singing Singer. Not only did she have moments of sass, like at the very end of the opening scene, and genuine emotion when reciting the inner thoughts of the characters, but she felt much more present in the scenes than you would expect from a Narrator. She would sometimes stand right up next to the actors, occasionally directly interacting with them as with the Governor when he was being led off to his execution, and other times she would be hanging back on the edges of the stage watching the action unfold before her.
The constant presence of the Singer reminds the audience that, in both the full context of the play itself and our reality, the story being told is just that - a story. This is one of many ways in which the show followed Brechtian principles. The sets were no more complicated than they need to be, and there were practically no attempts to hide the stage crew when they came to move things around. For moments where there were supposed to be a large number of characters on stage, they simply played recordings of teachers reading the lines. Having these disembodied voices of people whom the audience are likely to recognize ends up subtracting from the illusion rather than adding to it, which seems to have been intentional. The opening of the play set this precedent by having a folksy song play while the actors come in stage, and then forcing both them and the audience to wait, silently and patiently, until the song ended.
Having read the entire play in advance for class, I took note of what changes were made. Due to the size of the cast, some scenes which used to feature four or five random characters were slightly reworked to have the number of characters reduced to two or three, such as when Grusha is initially watching baby Michael at the palace while the others convince her to leave, and the scene with the merchants at the bridge where three characters were condensed to two. Other bits were cut entirely, such as when Grusha tries to stay at the inn, when young Michael is allying with the older children, and the selection of Azdack’s past cases as judge. These cuts were understandable due to the limited cast size, and seeing as the play in this form ended up being two hours long anyway, I can only imagine how long it would have been if they had done everything. Even with these cuts, the story’s major themes, such as justice (Azdack’s corrupt sense of justice, the idea that items go to those who can make the most good out of it).
The last thing I’d like to note is the placement of the intermission. Rather than being halfway through the play, it occurs later on, right before Azdack’s backstory. By doing this, the play becomes re-framed as two different stories: first, the story of the maid Grusha becoming the mother of the noble child; and second, the story of the illegitimate judge who, through granting Grusha custody over Michael, delivers the moral of the play, that goods should go to those who can make the most out of them. Not only are both these stories made compelling by the excellent performances, but making Azdack essentially a secondary protagonist places an even greater emphasis on the social message, making this performance of “The Caucasian Chalk Circle” a perfect blend of the Brecht and more contemptorary styles of acting. I would drop everything to see this show again if I had the chance.
Scene with Signs Reflection (Excerpt from Brecht’s “The Caucasian Chalk Circle”
Overall, our excerpt of a scene from “The Caucasian Chalk Circle” worked out even better than I had initially hoped. First of all, though it took us extra time to learn our lines and become comfortable performing the scene, the performances ended up being spot-on. Unfortunately there are moments in the video where, even after drastically raising the volume of the raw video footage and lowering the volume of the background music, it could be difficult to tell what we were saying. In the future, I think that we can all work on speaking louder and more clearly. However, speaking of the music, I personally feel that it added to the atmosphere and tension of the scene, especially the short song used at the end, without making its presence too obvious. Then again, it would likely have felt more Brechtian without the music, even if it ended up feeling slightly more awkward as a consequence.
The minimalistic set also worked in our favor, as it forces the audience to focus on the content of the scene rather than becoming fully immersed, the mind of effect that Brecht was going for in his plays. In retrospect, the idea of using a bottle for the baby did not work out as well as we had originally envisioned it. While it succeeded in being less sympathetic than an actual baby doll would have been, I can see how any random person watching the scene could take a while to realize what the bottle is meant to represent. If we had planned ahead more, we could have made its purpose more clear. Even the mini label added to the bottle clarifying its role is impossible to read in the video.
When we started work on this scene, the aspect we put the most thought into was the use of signs. We made most of them double sided both to save posterboard and to add an extra layer of meaning to each one. Watching the video, I see that I personally could have paid more attention to making my sign visible to the audience while performing, but Helen and Youngchen did well in this regard. Helen also pausing the scene to show off the last two signs as she picked them up was a good call in that it both gave the audience time to read them and further contributed to the staged feeling this play is meant to give off.
The signs all served different purposes: the opening sign sets the tone for the scene and the “Cottage” sign sets the location; the “Losing the Baby” sign states the threat the Corporal presents and what Grusha is primarily concerned about; the sign reading “What is the woman afraid of?” provides the audience with a question to think about, forcing them to lay attention as Brecht would want, and the “Truth or Lie?” sign does the same while also giving the audience a glimpse into Grusha’s thoughts; the sign Grusha hits the Corporal with is covered in phrases that serve as her motivation for her saving the baby; and the “Mother” sign represents Grusha’s accepting of Michael as her own while also answering a question presented by the first sign. Who are the good people? Mothers, for one.
The minimalistic set also worked in our favor, as it forces the audience to focus on the content of the scene rather than becoming fully immersed, the mind of effect that Brecht was going for in his plays. In retrospect, the idea of using a bottle for the baby did not work out as well as we had originally envisioned it. While it succeeded in being less sympathetic than an actual baby doll would have been, I can see how any random person watching the scene could take a while to realize what the bottle is meant to represent. If we had planned ahead more, we could have made its purpose more clear. Even the mini label added to the bottle clarifying its role is impossible to read in the video.
When we started work on this scene, the aspect we put the most thought into was the use of signs. We made most of them double sided both to save posterboard and to add an extra layer of meaning to each one. Watching the video, I see that I personally could have paid more attention to making my sign visible to the audience while performing, but Helen and Youngchen did well in this regard. Helen also pausing the scene to show off the last two signs as she picked them up was a good call in that it both gave the audience time to read them and further contributed to the staged feeling this play is meant to give off.
The signs all served different purposes: the opening sign sets the tone for the scene and the “Cottage” sign sets the location; the “Losing the Baby” sign states the threat the Corporal presents and what Grusha is primarily concerned about; the sign reading “What is the woman afraid of?” provides the audience with a question to think about, forcing them to lay attention as Brecht would want, and the “Truth or Lie?” sign does the same while also giving the audience a glimpse into Grusha’s thoughts; the sign Grusha hits the Corporal with is covered in phrases that serve as her motivation for her saving the baby; and the “Mother” sign represents Grusha’s accepting of Michael as her own while also answering a question presented by the first sign. Who are the good people? Mothers, for one.
Friday, November 10, 2017
Masks in Contemporary Theater Quick Research
Big modern shows that feature masks:
- The Phantom of the Opera
- The Lion King on Broadway
- Cats on Broadway
Masks were rarely used in the 18th and 19th centuries, but was brought back in the 20th century due to some theater practitioners moving away from Naturalism
Inspirations from commedia dell’arte, oriental theater
“A Note on Masks” (1910) by Edward Gordan Craig repopularized use of masks in theater, inspiring people such as Brecht
Groups that famously used masks:
- San Francisco Mime Troupe (1959)
- Peter Schumann and his Bread and Puppet Theatre (New York early 1960s)
Sources:
Tuesday, October 31, 2017
Notes on “The Caucasian Chalk Circle”: Scene 6 - The Chalk Circle
Characters
Principals:
• The Singer as narrator (plus other musicians)
• Grusha, our protagonist
• Michael
• Judge Azdack
• Simon Chachava
• Natella Abashvilli and the Adjutant
• Shotta, the Corporal
Other:
• Former Governor’s cook
• Ironshirts
• Two lawyers
• Three farmers
• The rider
• Old unhappy couple
Plot synopsis:
In the final scene of the play, the trial is held to decide whether Grusha or Natella Abashvilli is Michael’s true mother. The Judge, Azdack, is nearly executed before the trial can even begin, but the rider delivers a message from the Grand Duke that makes Azdack official Judge in the region, likely as repayment for Azdack helping the Grand Duke to escape.
At the start of the trial, Simon and the former governor’s cook agree to help Grusha create a lie to explain how Michael is her child. However, Grusha ends up abandoning their plans when she becomes fed up with the unfairness of the situation. Natella’s side is paying off Azdack, and he throws extra charges at Grusha for menial offenses. She explodes in anger at him, and Azdack decides to take a momentary break to see who wishes to see him next; an old couple that wishes to get divorced.
The way Azdack decides to settle the matter is to have Michael stand in the middle of a Chalk Circle with Grusha on one side of him and Natella on the other. The idea proposed was that whichever woman managed to pull Michael out of the circle first would get to keep him. However, both times the test is payed out, Grusha refuses to pull on Michael, and so ends up letting go of him. Natella easily wins the challenge, but Azdack reveals that was not the point; rather, by showing a reluctance to hurt Michael, even temporarily, Grusha has proved herself to be more of a mother. As Natella and her lawyers leave, Azdack signs the divorce papers - but instead of doing it for the old couple., he does it for Grusha and her husband in the mountains, allowing her to marry Simon. The scene ends with Azdack holding a dance for everyone, and Grusha and Simon discussing plans to start a new life together with Michael as a real family.
Also, the Abashvilli’s estate is going to be torn down and turned into a garden.
Principals:
• The Singer as narrator (plus other musicians)
• Grusha, our protagonist
• Michael
• Judge Azdack
• Simon Chachava
• Natella Abashvilli and the Adjutant
• Shotta, the Corporal
Other:
• Former Governor’s cook
• Ironshirts
• Two lawyers
• Three farmers
• The rider
• Old unhappy couple
Plot synopsis:
In the final scene of the play, the trial is held to decide whether Grusha or Natella Abashvilli is Michael’s true mother. The Judge, Azdack, is nearly executed before the trial can even begin, but the rider delivers a message from the Grand Duke that makes Azdack official Judge in the region, likely as repayment for Azdack helping the Grand Duke to escape.
At the start of the trial, Simon and the former governor’s cook agree to help Grusha create a lie to explain how Michael is her child. However, Grusha ends up abandoning their plans when she becomes fed up with the unfairness of the situation. Natella’s side is paying off Azdack, and he throws extra charges at Grusha for menial offenses. She explodes in anger at him, and Azdack decides to take a momentary break to see who wishes to see him next; an old couple that wishes to get divorced.
The way Azdack decides to settle the matter is to have Michael stand in the middle of a Chalk Circle with Grusha on one side of him and Natella on the other. The idea proposed was that whichever woman managed to pull Michael out of the circle first would get to keep him. However, both times the test is payed out, Grusha refuses to pull on Michael, and so ends up letting go of him. Natella easily wins the challenge, but Azdack reveals that was not the point; rather, by showing a reluctance to hurt Michael, even temporarily, Grusha has proved herself to be more of a mother. As Natella and her lawyers leave, Azdack signs the divorce papers - but instead of doing it for the old couple., he does it for Grusha and her husband in the mountains, allowing her to marry Simon. The scene ends with Azdack holding a dance for everyone, and Grusha and Simon discussing plans to start a new life together with Michael as a real family.
Also, the Abashvilli’s estate is going to be torn down and turned into a garden.
Notes on “The Caucasian Chalk Circle”: Scene 5 - The Story of the Judge
Characters
Principals:
• The Singer as narrator (plus his musicians)
• Judge Azdack
• Natella Abashvilli and the Adjutant
People from Azdack’s story (pre-judge):
• Fugitive (Grand Duke)
• Policeman Shauva (who Azdack later makes Public Prosecutor)
• Three Ironshirts
• Fat Prince Arsen Kazbeki and his nephew Biergarten Kazbeki
People from Azdack’s court cases:
• The limping man and the invalid, who are both suing a doctor
• The blackmailer
• An old bearded innkeeper, his daughter-in-law Ludovica, and a stableman
• An old woman, some farmers, and the axe-wielding bandit Irkali
Plot synopsis:
This scene takes a break from Grusha’s story, instead telling the backstory of the Judge who will be presiding her trial. The Judge, Azdack, used to have a rivalry with Shauva, a policeman at the time, back when he was just a village clerk who occasionally got in trouble with the law. Azdack takes in a fugitive and, despite initially treating him in a derogatory manner, ends up protecting him from Shauva, more so because he doesn’t want to do anything for “that brute of a policeman”. The fugitive stays with Azdack for some time before Azdack realizes that he has been harboring the overthrown Grand Duke. Ashamed of having done so much for this murderer, Azdack goes to himself over to the courts, only to learn from three Ironshirts and Shauva that the Judge of that time has been hanged. Through a song taught to him by his grandfather from Poland, Azdack warns them about the dangers of these lawless times.
It is at this point that the fat Prince appears with his nephew. The fat Prince offers to put his nephew up for the position of new Judge, and though he says it is their choice, he is very confident that his nephew will get the job. Azdack suggests that the nephew undergo a test trial, with Azdack playing the role of the Grand Duke as defendant. Azdack manages to undo all of the nephew’s arguments while cracking up the Ironshirts and nearly driving the Prince crazy. In the end, the Ironshirts appoint Azdack as their new Judge.
The rest of the scene shows some of the cases Azdack dealt with as judge, with Shauva now working for him. The main purpose of this is to show that Azdack is a Robin Hood-like figure; rather than making the truly just decision, he always does what he can to help whichever side is worse off in the eyes of society. The only case that is relevant in and of itself is the appearance of the governor’s wife, Natella Abashvilli, at the end of the scene. Azdack promises to find the woman who stole her son Michael and behead her, but the Governor’s wife seems to distrust him.
Principals:
• The Singer as narrator (plus his musicians)
• Judge Azdack
• Natella Abashvilli and the Adjutant
People from Azdack’s story (pre-judge):
• Fugitive (Grand Duke)
• Policeman Shauva (who Azdack later makes Public Prosecutor)
• Three Ironshirts
• Fat Prince Arsen Kazbeki and his nephew Biergarten Kazbeki
People from Azdack’s court cases:
• The limping man and the invalid, who are both suing a doctor
• The blackmailer
• An old bearded innkeeper, his daughter-in-law Ludovica, and a stableman
• An old woman, some farmers, and the axe-wielding bandit Irkali
Plot synopsis:
This scene takes a break from Grusha’s story, instead telling the backstory of the Judge who will be presiding her trial. The Judge, Azdack, used to have a rivalry with Shauva, a policeman at the time, back when he was just a village clerk who occasionally got in trouble with the law. Azdack takes in a fugitive and, despite initially treating him in a derogatory manner, ends up protecting him from Shauva, more so because he doesn’t want to do anything for “that brute of a policeman”. The fugitive stays with Azdack for some time before Azdack realizes that he has been harboring the overthrown Grand Duke. Ashamed of having done so much for this murderer, Azdack goes to himself over to the courts, only to learn from three Ironshirts and Shauva that the Judge of that time has been hanged. Through a song taught to him by his grandfather from Poland, Azdack warns them about the dangers of these lawless times.
It is at this point that the fat Prince appears with his nephew. The fat Prince offers to put his nephew up for the position of new Judge, and though he says it is their choice, he is very confident that his nephew will get the job. Azdack suggests that the nephew undergo a test trial, with Azdack playing the role of the Grand Duke as defendant. Azdack manages to undo all of the nephew’s arguments while cracking up the Ironshirts and nearly driving the Prince crazy. In the end, the Ironshirts appoint Azdack as their new Judge.
The rest of the scene shows some of the cases Azdack dealt with as judge, with Shauva now working for him. The main purpose of this is to show that Azdack is a Robin Hood-like figure; rather than making the truly just decision, he always does what he can to help whichever side is worse off in the eyes of society. The only case that is relevant in and of itself is the appearance of the governor’s wife, Natella Abashvilli, at the end of the scene. Azdack promises to find the woman who stole her son Michael and behead her, but the Governor’s wife seems to distrust him.
Notes on “The Caucasian Chalk Circle”: Scene 4 - In The Northern Mountains
Characters
Principals:
• The Singer as narrator (plus other musicians)
• Grusha, our protagonist
• Michael
• Simon Chachava
Grusha’s family:
• Her well-meaning brother Lavrenti
• His wife Ankio, who is very concerned with reputation
• Their stableman
• Mother-in-law and her “dying” son Yussup
People at the wedding:
• Monk who officiated the wedding
• Mourners/wedding guests/Grusha’s new neighbors
◦ two women
◦ a very old peasant
◦ drunk singing peasant
◦ another man
• Three musicians
Other:
• Children Michael plays with
◦ Tallest boy, the leader of the group
◦ Fat boy who plays the Prince
◦ Girl who plays the Governor’s wife
• Two Ironshirts
Plot synopsis:
This scene covers a period of several years, starting with when Grusha arrives with baby Michael at the farm belonging to her brother Lavrenti and his wife Aniko. She stays with them for several months, recovering from illness and weariness she contacted on her long journey. Lavrenti helps Grusha come up with a lie about where Michael came from and where her final destination is to prevent additional conflict with Ankio, whose supposedly pious nature and deep concern for her own reputation would cause her to immediately through Grusha out if she learned that Michael was not truly Grusha’s child. When Lavrenti fears that Ankio is nearing the end of her patience, he gets Grusha’s permission to set up a marriage between her and a man close to death who lives just over the mountain. The plan was that Grusha would have the land to herself once he died, and she would be free to re-marry with Simon if/when he returned from the war.
At the wedding, Grusha and Lavrenti do their best to hide the child until after the ceremony is complete. After an awkward moment with a drunken peasant, the guests begin gossiping about how the war is now over and the surviving soldiers are beginning to return home, which catches Grusha completely off guard. The dying man, Yussup, also hears some of the conversation, which leads him to get up and start bad-mouthing those around him as if he were perfectly healthy the whole time (he was probably faking illness to avoid being conscripted into fighting in the war). In the following days, Grusha and Yussup are shown to not get along at all, with Yussup calling her a cheater, treating her as less than a person, and referring to Michael as an unnatural bastard. He is aware at this point that Grusha has her heart set on a soldier, and tries to convince her that he’s never coming back.
Months pass, and Michael is now just old enough to play with other kids. They reenact the death of the Governor, with Michael attempting to play the executioner with a wooden sword. He falls over after swinging the sword and runs away in embarrassment, with the three kids chasing after him. Grusha has been casually watching them, but then she spots her old lover Simon Chachava the soldier. Their reunion starts off on a good note, but then Grusha has to tell him that she has been married. When Simon asks her about Michael, seeing his cap in the grass, she tells him that he isn’t her and Yussup’s son, but he is unable to believe her due to the sting of her betrayal. He turns to leave, bitterly, just as the other kids return to announce the arrival of two Ironshirts. The soldiers take custody of Michael but Grusha chases after them, proclaiming that he is her own child, and this leads to the trial in the following scenes.
Principals:
• The Singer as narrator (plus other musicians)
• Grusha, our protagonist
• Michael
• Simon Chachava
Grusha’s family:
• Her well-meaning brother Lavrenti
• His wife Ankio, who is very concerned with reputation
• Their stableman
• Mother-in-law and her “dying” son Yussup
People at the wedding:
• Monk who officiated the wedding
• Mourners/wedding guests/Grusha’s new neighbors
◦ two women
◦ a very old peasant
◦ drunk singing peasant
◦ another man
• Three musicians
Other:
• Children Michael plays with
◦ Tallest boy, the leader of the group
◦ Fat boy who plays the Prince
◦ Girl who plays the Governor’s wife
• Two Ironshirts
Plot synopsis:
This scene covers a period of several years, starting with when Grusha arrives with baby Michael at the farm belonging to her brother Lavrenti and his wife Aniko. She stays with them for several months, recovering from illness and weariness she contacted on her long journey. Lavrenti helps Grusha come up with a lie about where Michael came from and where her final destination is to prevent additional conflict with Ankio, whose supposedly pious nature and deep concern for her own reputation would cause her to immediately through Grusha out if she learned that Michael was not truly Grusha’s child. When Lavrenti fears that Ankio is nearing the end of her patience, he gets Grusha’s permission to set up a marriage between her and a man close to death who lives just over the mountain. The plan was that Grusha would have the land to herself once he died, and she would be free to re-marry with Simon if/when he returned from the war.
At the wedding, Grusha and Lavrenti do their best to hide the child until after the ceremony is complete. After an awkward moment with a drunken peasant, the guests begin gossiping about how the war is now over and the surviving soldiers are beginning to return home, which catches Grusha completely off guard. The dying man, Yussup, also hears some of the conversation, which leads him to get up and start bad-mouthing those around him as if he were perfectly healthy the whole time (he was probably faking illness to avoid being conscripted into fighting in the war). In the following days, Grusha and Yussup are shown to not get along at all, with Yussup calling her a cheater, treating her as less than a person, and referring to Michael as an unnatural bastard. He is aware at this point that Grusha has her heart set on a soldier, and tries to convince her that he’s never coming back.
Months pass, and Michael is now just old enough to play with other kids. They reenact the death of the Governor, with Michael attempting to play the executioner with a wooden sword. He falls over after swinging the sword and runs away in embarrassment, with the three kids chasing after him. Grusha has been casually watching them, but then she spots her old lover Simon Chachava the soldier. Their reunion starts off on a good note, but then Grusha has to tell him that she has been married. When Simon asks her about Michael, seeing his cap in the grass, she tells him that he isn’t her and Yussup’s son, but he is unable to believe her due to the sting of her betrayal. He turns to leave, bitterly, just as the other kids return to announce the arrival of two Ironshirts. The soldiers take custody of Michael but Grusha chases after them, proclaiming that he is her own child, and this leads to the trial in the following scenes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)