tHeigesClybourne


 * Thomas: Thank you for providing a page off your profile page so that I can read your review and make comments. Note a few issues in bold below.**

Thomas Heiges Theatre 2100H Dr. Richmond 10/7/2014 Clybourne Critique //Clybourne Park// presents the tale of an American neighborhood, its inhabitants and the eternal struggle between the established dominant cultural group and the consequent alienation of an incoming group. By paralleling the events of 1959 to modern times the playwright works to cause the audience to question their own knowledge of racism and the intricate part race relations caused and cause in Western society. Ultimately //Clybourne Park// attempts to examine the role of race in American society, man’s instinctual resistance to outside groups intruding geographically, and the burden of a previous generation’s actions on today’s culture; the director achieves this effect to some degree through the use of realistic costumes, a grounded **(???)** set, and interesting acting. The first act of //Clybourne Park// works as a parallel to Lorraine Hansberry’s immortal classic //A Raisin in the Sun//, detailing the events that prompted the house the Younger’s purchase to be sold for so low a price and the reaction of the community to the incoming group. The two plays share the character of Karl Linder, a man deadest on preventing the Youngers from moving in to his neighborhood. Whilst in //Raisin// he presents a united front as a representative of the homeowner’s association attempting to buy the Younger’s dream away from them, in //Clybourne// we see both more of Karl’s personal character and evidence that the white community is not quite so united on the issue. Karl’s jovial nature and care for his disabled wife stand in stark juxtaposition to the inherent racism of his fight to stop the sale of the house causing the audience to question where it is racism stems from and to realize that the trait is one born of indoctrination through generations and stems from Man’s primal dislike of the “other” of the alien who stands outside his own social group. While they justly condemn racism, the playwrights in both plays concern themselves with the source of this behavior and its ability to arise even in groups that were previously oppressed, exemplified by the new community’s resistance to the white couple moving in in 2009. Interestingly Bev, even though she desperately tries to cling to the community that rejects the Younger’s on racial grounds, alone of all the character’s seems untroubled by the race of the new owners; Norris readily demonstrates the reason behind this character trait, alone of all the characters she spends prolonged periods of time with a member of a different race and learns to view them as an individual rather than a stereotype. The ultimate message perhaps being that only through living together can we as a people overcome our natural inclinations to divide ourselves racially and realize that there exists little difference between us; in the end such divisions are pure artifice and all men are simply that, men. **(Good!)** Norris also investigates the relation between the individual and the family, the family’s relation to the greater community and the community’s relation to the larger world, through the grief of Bev and Russ following their son’s suicide and their subsequent retreat from their former society. Firstly, due to the community’s ostracism of their son, he becomes withdrawn not only from the community but also from his family, ultimately culminating in his suicide; this ostracism presents a certain somber kind of irony in that the actions he took that caused the immediate neighborhood to shun him were undertaken in part in service to the greater society of the United States as pointed out by Russ when he describes his son’s actions. This disjoining of the society continues with Russ’s retreat from his neighborhood duties in the rotary club and his unwillingness to share the company of his neighbors. This dismemberment of the traditional suburban society at first appears to negatively impact Bev and Russ but that same disjoining allows Russ who might otherwise bend to his neighbors wishes and prevent the sale of the house to the Youngers to declare he doesn’t care about the race of the new tenants as he some time ago tired of his relationship with the society. Perhaps the playwright wished to show than only when Russ himself becomes alienated from the community can he understand the plight of those who struggle with said alienation constantly. The second act of the play jumps ahead 50 years to the Clybourne Park of the year 2009, by which time it had become a predominately African American community and begins to undergo the process of redevelopment. **(gentrification?)** The use of the same actors in different roles, in addition to the familial relationships amongst the characters from the two eras reinforces the idea that the prejudices and injustices of one era carry over to the next to breed more animosity and hate amongst people. The new inhabitants of the neighborhood resist the incursion of the new family in a way eerily similar to how their own ancestors were resisted; through the subsequent breakdown of the dialogue between the two groups, the façade of political correctness deteriorates to show racial prejudices belonging to all groups, and whilst Kevin and Lindsey try to maintain cool heads, their spouses degenerate into the use of hurtful stereotypes with little basis in fact. This outburst can be seen as a consequence of the prior social injustice that had been leveled at the African American community and the subsequent pressure on the current generations of both races. **(The previous critique of the play and its meaning is good and insightful. The following remarks are far less persuasive. In other words, when writing your critique of Hedda Gabler, you need to put more emphasis on the production and its interpretation of the play and less on the play and its meaning, from your point of view.)** The director uses a variety of technical aspects to bring the playwright’s vision to life upon the stages. Through the use of realistic period costumes he heavily grounds the audience in the world of the play and presents the characters as unique individuals clearly defined by their wardrobe; for example, the priest’s collar, Bev’s and Jasmine’s Aprons, and Russ’s decision to wear pajamas till late in the day impart valuable character information about the players such as their occupation and emotional states. Furthermore the use of set works to heavily link the 3 acts of the play, by grounding the action in the same location and showing its deterioration the director calls attention to the parallels between the two prospective families of tenants. The props also serve a significant symbolic role in the film **(???)**, with the dish that Bev constantly tries to give away representing the family’s retreat from the society of their neighbors and the document read in act two representing the tangled and complicated reality of race relations in present day America. The most important prop however remains the chest of the deceased son, buried in the backyard; the disinterest of the characters in act two in the chest mirrors the neighborhood abandoning him before act one and driving him to suicide. The acting also served to convey the playwright’s message through powerful performance and the decision to have all the actor’s double between acts. Russ’s portrayal in act one acts as a source of mounting tension and drives the first act to its explosive conclusion; he begins as a reserved and strange individual and the mounting stress of the neighbor’s arrival slowly peels away his emotions to reveal the source of his pain, his son’s tragedy. Likewise Bev’s nuanced performance provides the emotional anchor of the first act by being the only resident of Clybourne park to speak out in favor of integration and by working to bring her husband out from his haze of regret and misery. However in the second act, the use of the same mode of speaking by Bev’s actress appears jarring as the remainder of the cast change their manner of speaking in a much more pronounced manner when the action moves to the 21st century. The acting on the whole worked with the Director’s interpretation of the piece and served to investigate the realities of racism and its presence in otherwise reasonable people. **(What you've written about the acting is good. You might have expanded this paragraph considerably to provide insight into what you thought about the show.)** This production of //Clybourne Park// demonstrates a powerful understanding of the source material and evokes a powerful emotional response in the audience as they consider their own position and place in regards to race relations. While the acting and direction may not be of Broadway caliber it’s perfectly serviceable and the production ultimately conveys the playwright’s vision in a poignant and unique way.