DANIEL MACIVOR 2 PLAYS: NEVER SWIM ALONE & THIS IS A PLAY -- Daniel MacIvor

Playwrights Canada Press -- tpb
Toronto -- ©1993 -- 101pp
ISBN: 0-88754-524-6

Two one act plays.

Never Swim Alone (2M, 1F)
This Is A Play (1M, 2F)

#####

These two plays were both of an "experimental" nature. Somewhat of a cross between Tom Stoppard and Jean-Claude van Itallie, perhaps. I enjoyed both of them, though Never Swim Alone was a little more confusing and with less clear purpose.




This Is A Play was actually quite funny and I would seriously consider doing it if I had the right performers. The main point of it is that three actors are performing a play and while we do hear some of their dialog, we mostly hear their thoughts. What makes it quite funny is that they don't think much of each other or the play itself.



Worth a read if you're interested in theatre.

THE BEST SHORT PLAYS 1982 -- Ramon Delgado, editor

Chilton Book Company -- hc
Radnor, PA -- ©1982 -- 257pp
ISBN: 0-8019-7144-6

Part of the best short plays series. Included in this volume:

Introduction

Thymus Vulgaris -- Lanford Wilson (2F, 1M)

Ball Boys -- David Edgar (3M)

Chocolate Cake -- Mary Gallagher (2F)

The Dance and the Railroad -- David Henry Hwang (2M)

Vivien -- Percy Granger (2M, 1F)

Napoleon's Dinner -- Samuel Shem (3M)

Reflections In A Window -- Beverly Byers Pevitts (9F, 1M)

Today A Little Extra -- Michael Kassin (2M, 1F)

Minnesota Moon -- John Olive (2M)

In Fireworks Lie Secret Codes -- John Guare (3M, 2F -- possibly adaptable)

Twirler -- Jane Martin (1F)

Cumulative Index 1968-82

#####

I will admit that I read these plays now, differently as to when I read them while in school. Now I look at them as possible plays for the local high school students to perform for competition. In that respect, most of these failed to pique my interest.

Minnesota Moon is still a pretty good play (I saw it while in college), but for me, a play with two men and no women won't go very far. I'm lucky to get one male of decent ability, but usually get five or six females who are worthy actors.

Of most interest to me was In Fireworks Lie Secret Codes, which seemed to be adaptable as to which characters were women and which men. However, the story was a bit bland. It might bear further reading.

Today A Little Extra was probably the most touching play, but it's Jewish characters and low-rent neighborhood-setting is all going to be lost on my midwestern, Scandanavian-descendant high school kids.

This series is always worth looking at for anyone interested in the theatre.

A DELICATE BALANCE -- Edward Albee

Atheneum -- hc
New York -- ©1966 -- 190pp
Library of Congress catalog card number: 66-28773
Three Act Play.
Pulitzer Prize Winner.

A study of suburban couples facing the crisis of their daily lives.

#####

This play seems rather typical of the period for which it was written. A bit boring by today's standards and I think that even a remounting would have to be seen as a period piece rather than a current look at human behavior.

I wouldn't mind seeing a brilliant, current production, by I can see where I might easily be bored by a less than stellar performance. A good director will keep the humor out front and the drama, biting at the edges.

PROOF - David Auburn

Faber and Faber -- tpb
New York -- ©2001 -- 83pp
ISBN: 0-571-19997-6
Two Act Play.
Winner of the Pulitzer Prize

After the death of her mathematical genius father, Catherine, who gave up her own study of mathematics to tend to him, claims that she is the author of a mathematical proof found in the attic among his unpublished, mostly incoherent notebooks by Hal, one of his former students. But what "proof" does Catherine have that she, and not her father, is the author? Her older sister, home to attend the funeral, doubts her claim and, in fact, doubts Catherine's own sanity. Hal, who has professional ambitions of his own, isn't exactly disinterested and may not be trustworthy; his sleeping with Catherine has also complicated the issue. The elusiveness of genius in general and the difficulty of a mathematical proof in particular here become metaphors for the uncertainties of love, trust, and personal integrity. [from Amazon.com]

#####

I suppose that I shouldn't be surprised, but I enjoyed this play more than I thought I would. I expected it to be a bit dry, but it was actually quite lively and the relationships were well-defined (though I did feel that there was a certain leap to affection that was a bit rushed).

A minimal cast and a well-crafted tale brought this story to life. I would like to have seen it done. I will admit to wondering, even upon finishing, whether or not the young woman actually wrote the proof or not. Why don't we trust that it was her? Is it because she's a woman? Young? Why?

I enjoyed reading this from the viewpoint of a script reader. Does it have all the ingredients for a play to move from the slush pile to being a contender for a prize? Definitely. I most certainly would have moved this on. (And no, I don't say that just because it did win the Pulitzer.)

A play worth reading/seeing.