It's definitely a cute script, and fun to work with. As far as the
has an overall message and that that is the core of the text. I don't
acting styles would add interest. I don't think much Meyerhold or
to the scene either. Not unless by some technological wizardry we
have your voice emanating from the plastic body itself... Which we
> Frank,
> Awesome on the 5 W's. However, I've been taking the road that all the
> characters are entirely Brecht-ian, and not at all method. None of
> them seem to me to be more than skin-deep. They're supposed to incite
> the knee-jerk reaction, to present the audience with a series of
> stimuli and to make the audience react. Barker is the embodiment of
> social structure, "posh", of social normalcies, and good, capitalist
> thought. He is essentially the meaning behind "Politically Correct".
> Donna is everything a good housewife should be, but there's a twist
> with her. She also embodies female empowerment, especially before the
> woman's movement. She is the emotional side to the couple, she is his
> lesser but greater half. Frank is simply an object. I like the idea of
> Frank only being a manikin because it puts further into light the
> situation between social qualms and simple humanity. If Frank is not
> even human, it makes the audience look into themselves to determine
> what makes humanity, what makes any action "acceptable", and who
> decides?
> I love the idea of Frank. He is simply one big question. He answers
> simply, like a child, but the questions he asks are more than
> subtexted. "would you like a summer sausage?" becomes: how comfortable
> with yourself are you? are you intimidated by another man because he
> is able to look at himself and let others look at him? are you
> unhappy? what are your emotions? are you repulsed by the thought of a
> masculine body? are you thinking about how others perceive you? but
> most importantly, are you afraid of this body because it is human, and
> alive, and willing to be exposed and you are none of these?
> and that last question is not for Barker, it is for the audience. The
> audience never fully sees Frank, so they never really get the
> opportunity to judge themselves against Barker's or Donna's reactions.
> It makes me wonder what a person would do after seeing this play.
> BBB,
> -Sayrah
> On Apr 23, 3:31 pm, Frank <frankoftheno...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Sorry I was not in Class on Monday. I was assigned at the last minute
> > to help with a presentation on "Food Security." A very interesting
> > concept, though off topic, please look it up! http://www.fns.usda.gov/fsec/
> > I would like to continue with the scene as Barker.
> > I have a couple notes I wrote about Barker,
> > Who - Barker is the embodiment of societal conformity - a smarmy
> > proper preppy guy - from the city. he's never gotten muddy in his
> > life. All his friends are white, and he's never been to a non-white
> > person's house. His parents spoiled him, and took him to church where
> > he learned to conform even more, and fear the human body and germs.
> > What - Barker is put in a place where he must respond to a nude
> > person in his living room.
> > Where - he lives in a suburb, in a clean and tidy house, thanks to the
> > woman who he feels is in place to keep it tidy - her function is
> > limited in his mind
> > When - its in the 1980s, when the itchy sweaters were popular
> > Why - he wants to escape the possibility of growth - he doesn't want
> > to change and learn about himself. to do so would make him want to
> > escape the disgustingly predictable
> > all in all, its an ugly man in a situation he is uncomfortable in -
> > yet could stand the most to gain from the experience.
> > I was thinking the naked man could be a symbol of elusive happiness.
> > On Apr 16, 1:50 pm, Sayrah Langenberg-Miller <slangm...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > Click onhttp://groups.google.com/group/acting2/web/try-not-to-step-on-the-nak...
> > > - or copy & paste it into your browser's address bar if that doesn't
> > > work.
