DTVIETNAM

Essay Question 1 Devyn Trottier 25 October 2010

Although //The Life and Times of Tulsa Lovechild// and //The Vietnamization of New Jersey// are similar in concept, they differ in premise, characterization, message, and tone.

The conceptual similarity of the two plays is readily apparent. Christopher Durang, author of //Vietnamization//, and Greg Owens, author of //Tulsa//, both deal with the Vietnam War by using comedy to convey a deeper moral. Durang’s broken family sees its ties severed by Davey’s mentally unbalanced state, but everything happens comically. The background to the story is serious: As a former Vietnam soldier, Davey has grown to feel extremely guilty about the involvement of the United States in that country. His guilt and his inability to thwart that guilt ultimately lead to the demise of his family. However, Durang approaches the subject with tongue in cheek; as long as Et is eating cereal out of his pants and Ozzie breaking cups in fits of hysteria, the play cannot be taken seriously.

A further conceptual similarity is that both plays allow the audience to approach the subject by taking on the perspectives of people who were directly affected by the war. Although the plays do not portray the war, audiences nonetheless witness postwar effects from the eyes of those most severely impacted. The lead character in //Tulsa// was not directly involved in Vietnam, but her real father died fighting, causing a chain of events detrimental to Tulsa. //Vietnamization// likewise follows Davey, a soldier with firsthand experience of Vietnam, and a broken man who has acquired a self-destructive guilt complex as a result of his experience.

Finally, both plays present war with extreme negativity. As should be apparent from the plot references above, neither author finds good in the war. Even //Tulsa//’s lighthearted mood preaches hope despite the war, not because of it. The influence of Vietnam is depicted as an obstacle that characters in both plays must try to overcome.

Despite these superficial similarities, there are a great deal of differences between the plays. The first and most obvious difference is premise. The premise of //Vietnamization// is that the Vietnam War ultimately harms the family unit beyond repair. On the other hand, the premise of //Tulsa// is that people affected by the war can retain and even grow their kinship in spite of their difficulties. For example, the audience is led to believe that //Vietnamization//’s Davey shared a connection with his parents before he went off to war, but that connection was broken completely in the aftermath. However, in //Tulsa//, the titular character never loses the familial bond with her mother (who appears throughout the play as a benevolent figment of Tulsa’s imagination), or even with Stockton, whom Tulsa seems to care about despite their rough relationship. Further, Tulsa, along with Clyde, Bob, and the twins, finds love and friendship despite war-influenced events.

The second major difference between the plays involves characterization. //Tulsa//, despite all its farcical comedy, strives to present more representational characters to the audience than does //Vietnamization//. Tulsa is a vulnerable character, afflicted by the very realistic troubles of insecurity, sorrow, and confusion. The play itself is exaggerated, but the moral of the story is anchored to the realistic struggles of its characters. //Vietnamization//, however, depicts everyone as absurd and unpredictable. Uncle Larry has a dictator complex, Ozzie is outrageously clueless, and Davey is so far divorced from sanity that he ends up setting himself on fire. In this case, the commentary of the play is hidden; no realistic elements of the play directly convey a message to the audience.

The third major difference is in the message itself. //Tulsa// has a bittersweet ending: Tulsa is still struggling with her demons, but hope is in sight, as she has overcome some of her insecurity and found a potential love interest in Ed. However, //Vietnamizaion// offers no such hope. The play ends with Davey dead from his suicidal burning and his family bankrupt. The message of //Tulsa// is more upbeat: yes, the war is a negative, and it hurts families, but characters can find redemption and even start new families if they try. On the other hand, //Vietnamization// preaches that the Vietnam War irrevocably damages families, with no hope in sight.

The fourth major difference involves tone. Neither play is meant to be taken at face value, but //Tulsa//’s second act is quite serious, and the moral didacticism is blatant. Most every major plotline in //Tulsa// has a readily apparent message or moral, and the audience doesn’t have to work hard to see it. (For example, the story involving Bob and the twins preaches self-sacrifice—Bob pays for the twins’ surgery.) //__Vietnamization__// is an entirely different type of comedy. It’s a parody of the play //Sticks and Bones//, which is itself a parody //Ozzie and Harriet//’s outlook on family life. As a result, //Vietnamization// seems to devote much of its energy just to being a parody, and not so much to telling moral messages. Sure, it still has an agenda and a message, but they are more hidden and ambiguous than they are in //Tulsa//. Why does Davey don Buddhist robes and set himself on fire? The answer is not immediately clear.

So, although //The Vietnamization of New Jersey// and //The Life and Times of Tulsa Lovechild// are fundamentally similar plays, they have substantial differences in construction. However, both plays have important messages about the impact of the Vietnam War on the American family, so an audience of either should be attentive to the author’s intended meaning, as each is conveyed in a unique and dissimilar style.