MM+The+Long+Christmas+Ride+Home+critique

 Mackenzie Marr

 Dr. Richmond

 Appreciation of Dramatic Art

 6 February 2017

//  The Long Christmas Ride Home  // Critique

  The overall text of //  The Long Christmas Ride Home  // is rather moving, if somewhat busy. The story clearly centers around Stephen, and his story is poignant and sad, but some parts of it strike me as odd digressions. Stephen connects deeply with Japanese culture, and the connection between him not seeing Japan and not seeing a full life because his is cut short by AIDS is relevant and resonant. The use of quasi-Bunraku puppets to show the children in their youth is a passable extension of this, but the extended scenes about Japan in the Unitarian Universalist church was on the other side of the line into the realm of culturally appropriative. The effect of the father’s aggression on the children was an interesting theme, but the monologues the sisters do in the final scenes were long and awkwardly staged out of necessity based on how they were written. Watching one-sided fights showed off the actresses’ skills, but required their lines to be awkward and stilted, and it took me out of the moment. Overall, I think the show could have been more concise.

 There are some unusual ways religion is handled in this show. Thematically, religion is very important to the show, and overtly expresses conflict. There are some anti-Semitic notes that stood out, as well. The idea of religious conflict is introduced when Claire will not stop asking “but what do we believe?” in the Unitarian Universalist church, and underscored when Catholicism and Judaism are described as “two cultures at war.” The warring that occurs between characters throughout the play is not exclusively about religion, but the fact that the Father and Mother are from different religious backgrounds is frequently mentioned. When revealing that Father is cheating with a woman named Sheila, Mother says that, “Jewish men don’t cheat on their shiksa wives.” In the central scene in the show, where the Father and Grandfather fight, the grandfather uses a Jewish slur against the Father. I found the overall religious theme had an anti-Semitic implication, which made me uncomfortable. The combination of the use of the anti-Jewish slur and the fact that the father is the only Jewish character and is clearly portrayed as the villain added up to an unsettling portrayal. The symbolic connection between religion and conflict by itself I found rather interesting, but the way it is carried out comes across to me as somewhat offensive.

 Despite my qualms with the text of the show, the production was done very well. The design, especially the lighting and projection design were captivating. The projections that were used as backdrops were aesthetically pleasing, the effect they provided with the stained glass in the church especially stood out, since light was shining through the image. The backlit nature of the scenery also enhanced the effect that one was driving through snowy mountains; it was like the light was bouncing off the snow. The use of water and food dye during the final scene was novel and interesting, and the movement the projections provided in the final scene as the drops of dye mixed with the water enhanced the ethereal nature of the scene. The motif of purple as a symbol for lust, first the Father’s for Sheila and then representing that other characters were having sex, worked wonderfully. Since red was used for violence in several scenes, namely the climactic scene between the Father and the Grandfather, and this is a color that would usually be used for lust, the use of purple clearly emphasized the feelings of lust felt by various characters, and because it is close on the color wheel to red connected lust to aggression.

 The scenery in this show was simple and made much more efficient by the projections. The car seats served their purpose by making it clear to the audience what was happening while not getting in the way of or detracting from the action. The ability to change scenes quickly by changing the projected images helped the show to flow smoothly, and allowed for effects like the silhouette of the puppet in the window in Rebecca’s adult scene. At times, the projected images were not placed on the projector completely or were a bit crooked, and this was a downside to the projections, but overall, they worked very well.

 The sound design for this show was very appropriate. It reflected the desires of the playwright by playing under most of the action, and the sound was a consistently good compliment to the action of the show. The way the music underscored the fight scene added to the tension and drew the audience in, especially when combined with the red lighting. The contemporary versions of Christmas carols that played when the children had their adult scenes also stood out as complimenting the action well. The Asian influence of the music mixed well with the Western presentation.

 The props followed the bare, simplistic design of the sets—the gift boxes were simply conjoined outlines, though the gifts themselves were real. I was initially confused specifically by the scarf that was given to Rebecca. Since the puppet version of the prop was not knit, I did not understand at first that she was wearing the scarf that her grandparents had given to her that Christmas. It was not until Stephen put on the hat that I realized that all three children had kept their gifts. There are a few ways this confusion could be cleared up: the initial scarf could have been knit—or at least appear to be knit from a distance—or the scarf could have just transferred from the puppet right on to adult Rebecca when the transition from youth to adulthood occurred. The other gifts translated clearly to me, and did eventually clear up my confusion related to the scarf. The show did not call for many props, and this increased the focus on the puppets, since for the most part the actors only handled puppets.

 The costumes were appropriate and provided clarity to the show. The attire of the parents made it clear that the children did not grow up in the present day, and suggested that the bulk of the play takes place in the late 1950’s which makes sense based on when Vogel was young. The hat the Mother wore helped establish the time period, but the night I saw the play, it fell off her head, so it may have been a little cumbersome for the actor. The Father’s clothes were also appropriate for the time period, fit appropriately, and allowed for a free range of movement. The puppeteers and ensemble all wore black, which suited their varied roles. At the beginning of the show, the puppeteers wore black veils over their faces, but they removed these when the idea of the “floating world” was mentioned. I found this timing to be a bit strange, and while perhaps it was meant to foreshadow the monologue Stephen says about the floating world at the conclusion of the show, the removal of the veils at this time confused me. It would have made more sense to me if the puppeteers’ faces were covered until they switched into adulthood.

 The puppets themselves were interesting, but there were aspects of their design that confused me. Since Bunraku puppets are known for their highly detailed and movable facial features, like eyes and eyebrows, I was surprised that the puppets of the children did not have eyes, but instead simply had black circles that suggested eyes. The practicality of having only one puppeteer per puppet, however, could account for this disparity from the traditional style. The grandparents being portrayed as puppets was confusing, since the convention in the show was that adults are human actors and children are puppets, so this particular exception was odd. It also seemed like the puppets that were used in silhouette during the adulthood scenes in the second half of the show were in a completely different style than the puppets that portrayed both the children and the grandparents. The fact that these puppets are also used in a rather bawdy way in Claire’s, and especially Stephen’s, adult scenes was also unusual, not in the least because Sheila was always portrayed as the silhouette of a human, not a puppet. The lack of cohesiveness in what caused a character to be a puppet was off-putting overall.

 The student actors in this production stood out in several parts of the performance. Stephen’s character as it was developed throughout the play by Brian Chenard was very compelling and his performance, especially in the final scene, was captivating as he spoke to the audience from beyond the grave. Taylor Bahin’s performance as Rebecca was especially striking in her adult scene with her extended monologue, and her ability to hold both sides of her argument with her boyfriend was impressive. The performance of the Minister, portrayed by Jake Berne, was appropriately exaggerated in his enthusiasm.

 While the text of the play and general concept of the puppetry were off-putting at times, the production of // The Long Christmas Ride Home  // as presented by UGA was handled very well from a technical standpoint. Despite the unsettling culturally appropriative nature of the not-quite-bunraku puppets and the distinctly anti-Semitic undertones, the acting, sound design, and projections done by students and faculty of the university were rather impressive.

<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%; margin: 0px;">

<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%; margin: 0px;">