East of Eden: The Great Unknown

I got hooked by Steinbeck's East of Eden a few years back, and my obsession brought me to see both the movie and the television series. After being dissapointed by the award winning movie, I was told by a neighbor that in the early 80's there was a mini-series that I should look into. After searching for a while to find it online, I resorted to buying it on VHS via ebay. This was a bit over a year ago, but i just re-watched it and was as impressed by it as the first time around.

The story-line is a modern day retelling of the story of Cain and Abel, as well as the search of Adam Trask (played by Timothy Bottoms) to find the meaning behind the hebrew word "timshal." Although the latter point is not established in depth by the series, avid readers would appreciate that it was the last word of the show. The heart of the book was definitely shown (which was my complaint against the movie, it barely touched the depth of the book).

For any movie buffs, one of the main actresses, Karen Allen who played Abra, was also the female lead in the first Indiana Jones movie. The other well known name, Jane Seymour, played the evil mother Cathy.

When I bring this series up in conversation nobody has heard of it. Have any of my readers indulged in this series? I would highly recommend it, and if you can't find it online, I'll lend it to you!

She's the Man: Would Shakespeare be Proud?

Thanks to a good friend, I sat down to enjoy this amazingly funny movie. Andy Fikman's "She's the Man" was the ultimate entertainment. Amanda Bynes plays Viola, a soccar player forced to dress as her brother to be able to play. Through awkward-guy moments, romance, and laughter, Viola wins the game, the man, and many friends. This movie was inspired by Shakespeare's 12th Night.

For those of us who love Shakespeare, there would be a debate: Is this insulting, or would Shakespeare be proud to be associated with this movie?

Keep in mind that this movie was inspired by him, and this in itself would have made him glad, but as an actor, Shakespeare would have appreciated the humor and the entertainment value.

As a poet, he would have seen it as a shallow script, not much thought put between the lines despite the obvious humor of it.

Whatever he would have thought about it, I enjoyed laughing with a friend.

Girls' Night Out: Eat Pray Love

I would be lying if I said that I was expecting any depth to the movie Eat Pray Love, I thought it would be a typical chick flick and went just to spend more time with my sister. Having never read the book, I had no idea what to expect (admittedly I own the book and did plan on reading it). Since Julia Roberts is one of my favorite actresses, I went without a fight, even though generally I avoid chick flicks. Eat Pray Love is not what I consider a chick flick (I'm not sure where I picked that idea up), especially when one considers the visual effects, the plot, and the depth of confusion woven into the movie.

Eat Pray Love was visually magical. Since the story had Liz Gilbert (played by Roberts) travel from Italy to India to Bali in four month increments, the montage was not only a beautiful tour, but a way to tell Gilbert's story without having the audience sit through a six-hour long movie. The music only added to the color and journey, allowing us a real glance of her story.

Her story, what is her story? Much of the background was left unexplained, and some of it was alluded to by tastefully done flashbacks, but much of it was left to the imagination. (Is it like that in the book?) The plot synapses on imdb.com says "While trying to get pregnant, a happily married woman realizes her life needs to go in a different direction, and after a painful divorce, she takes off on a round-the-world journey." I was not under the impression that they were trying to have a baby. There was a conversation between Liz Gilbert and Delia Shiraz (played by Viola Davis) about when the latter realized she wanted a baby. Despite the ambiguity of why she wanted to leave, her decision to divorce her husband did not make her happy. Her traveling the world did not make her happy, nor did food, prayer, or men. Her happiness came from inside, it came from her meditations in which she was to smile with her whole body. This is a story of finding happiness and balance, and of course, love.

After the movie, I decided that although I enjoyed the movie, I do not necessarily agree with Gilbert's method of finding happiness. Theoretically there are two ways to become happy, changing one's surroundings, or changing one's insides. Eat Pray Love seems to suggest that the only way to find happiness is to run away from your life, and try to 'find' yourself in other cultures. I have always believed that this is the immature way of finding happiness. There is a strength in keeping one's support group and continuing life, and acknowledging the wonderful gifts that one has. To go on vacation to be able to see that is not a bad thing, but leaving everyone important to you, giving up on family, friends, and work for a year, is not anything I would be able to do, as it seems cowardly.

Am I wrong?

Pinter, a Practical Joke?

Tonight was the premier viewing of No Man's Land by Harold Pinter at the Shakespeare Theatre of New Jersey. For those of you who have read or seen a play by Pinter and came out with a new view on life- I envy you. My goal of seeing plays is to see the world through another's eyes, and gain an appreciation. To leave with gladness in my heart, or mascara smudges beneath my eyes is a sign that my evening (along with the $10 ticket) was not wasted. Walking into the theatre gave me a false sense that my curiosity will be aroused, and that new ideas will flit into my mind. Beautiful scenery and lighting gave way to a most peculiar show.

No Man's Land has no plot, which apparently is a theme of Pinter's and the director, Bonnie J. Monte, explained that this displacement was the reason he won a Nobel Prize in Literature in 2005, since it had great influence on modern playwrights. Unfortunately, I enjoy the classic build of a story. There is just something about having a beginning and a middle that brings the play to life. When asked by my grandparents what it was about my answer was "four guys in a room, talking."

The text was rich, in the way modern poetry so often is. I felt stupid for not understanding why the audience was wracked with laughter, half of the words alluded me. Whether it be boredom or confusion, the play made little sense until afterwards when discussions arose. Was it a dream? Was it reality? Who was Spooner, was he an alter ego? Where were they? The questions went on and on, most of them being just as juvenile as the last few. When the director and actors came out for a q&a session after the play, Monte mentioned a story about Pinter's flippant answer to the question of what his play meant. His "the weasel under the cocktail cabinet" answer was analyzed as a true commentary about his play instead of a flippant answer (which he supposedly regretted afterwards).

This story got me thinking. Maybe he really is talented, but realizes that it doesn't matter. If he can write a string of complicated words to create a conversation, and make it strange enough with no concrete evidence of what is going on, then all theater and english majors in college will still manage to find subliminal meanings to ramblings and clarity in his confused works. Why they bother is beyond me, since in the play itself they claim that "it is not method but madness", so why bother trying?

The idea of a dream was bounced around, and if you have seen, or read this play let me know what you think. The version I saw featured many dreamlike settings, a five walled room, blackness beyond the window although all characters claimed it was daytime.

Before I wrap this up, I want to point out that the detailed scenic design was extraordinary, and really created a strange dimension of life onstage. The lighting, though unusual due to use of elipsoidles, was well done and very realistic. Each individual part of the play was beautiful. Each costume, lamp, actor, was immaculate and beautifully shown on stage, but together created a strange play that cannot be categorized.

To have my first play critique be about such a complicated script is both frustrating to me and a challenge, and I hope it does not dissuade you from attending the theatre in general. My advice on this play? See it, but only if you have the patience to mull it over afterwards until the play settles into the crevices of your mind.

Poetry

Don't stop reading.

From my vast experience, convincing anyone to read a poem is a drag. Honestly, if you send me a poem of your own to read, chances are I'll glance at the first line. Good poetry is hard to come by. I was recently told by a former 8th grade Literature teacher that she never taught poetry since she was given the option to avoid it.

My opinion: you're reading the wrong stuff. Poetry is nice and short, and can range from heavy to light topics. Unfortunately the majority of modern poetry is congested with words only found in the thesaurus about god only knows what.

For those of you not too scared to try something new and not too political or scandalous, try Joyful Noise: Poems for Two Voices by Paul Fleischman. I have read these duets with all ages, and have even discussed the poems with a group of 8th grade girls. Having done a bit of background, I found out that many religious schools use this as a springboard into different subjects. This surprised me since the book has no religious connotations (with exception to the title). It is a children's book, but has depth. It's no Shakespeare, but a good start.

Try it, and let me know what you think!

First Post

As I sat at the dinner table with my grandparents and sister, the spiderweb that is my brain connected the comments about blogs (why anyone would throw their entire life story for anyone to read) and my inability to remember what plays and movies I saw.

A friend of mine was given advice from a professor, that when applying for an editorial or technical writing position, the potential-employer would search their work on the internet. Having seen blogs of family and friends, I could not imagine what kind of blog I would be interested in writing. Generally, I enjoy writing fiction, and would prefer to publish my work, so blogging did not seem like a good option.

So why do I think that I would have any sort of following while spewing my opinion? There are plenty of reasons, but I prefer my readers know little about me, and make judgement of my critiquing ability solely based on my writing, instead of my experience.