Essay on Experiment with an Air Pump PDF

Preview

Summary

Upper level coursework paper on experiment with an air pump...

Description

Molly Hamdan ENGH 305:003 April 7th, 2015 The Thing with Feathers George Mason’s production of An Experiment with an Air pump truly brought the story to life and provided a visual understanding of the material that was previously missing. Through the use of staging, blocking, and casting choices the production was able to reveal and act as a remarkable supplement to the main focus of the play, which is ultimately people and the ways in which they understand and relate to one another when faced with issues of life and morality. The production was instantly visually and emotionally absorbing. Kathleen Barth, who plays Ellen displayed so much passion and fierce conviction towards her character’s scientific aspirations. Through her performance I was given an enhanced picture of who Ellen was. Watching Ellen observe the painting in the beginning of the play allowed me to see much more humanity than I previously saw in her. I was able to understand that she possess a great deal of emotion, though it is directed more towards her scientific studies than anything else. Not only Kathleen, but all of the actors did a tremendous job of bringing Stephenson’s characters to life, and providing readers of the play with an enriched understanding of the work. The play deals with such intense moral questions along with the ambiguity of life, and it was not until I saw it brought to life on stage that I was able fully understand the depths of it. For example, reading about Isobel and attempting to imagine the emotional duress she experiences in the play at the hands of Armstrong, while gripping, was nothing compared to watching Rebecca Wahl’s

embodiment of this character. Her acting choices within the role helped to reveal the raw intelligence that encapsulates Isobel, and enhanced the hidden fragility that later overtakes her. She was able to present Isobel in a way that clearly showed the contrast between her and the other female character in the 1799 portion of the play. While the actresses playing Susannah, Maria, and Harriet held themselves with a manner of confidence and poise, Wahl’s posture and movement remained slouched and unsure. Isobel never wishes to remain around the family and their houseguests for long periods of time, and Wahl’s stage presence clearly illustrated that. Though this production did not include double casting of the two sections, it definitely played with the idea of certain characters mirroring others. For instance, when reading the play it is clear that the characters Armstrong and Kate share similar ideas and traits. Watching the performance enhanced their similarities, as the actors playing Armstrong and Kate would at times mirror each other in terms of body language. Both actors made sure to take up as much space with their bodies as possible, even if they were not the main focus of the scene, as to assert their dominance. Both actor’s walked with an air of authority and importance, which highlighted their internal views of themselves. Mirroring occurred again with the actors playing Roget and Phil, whose written similarities came to life as both actor’s utilized large movement and actions to reveal similar types of excitement and passion. Both characters hold an enthusiastic view of the world and an intense desire to discover the world around them, and Sumblin and Zak’s performances really heightened that idea. As Roget, Sumblin utilized constant pacing to reveal his character’s enthusiastic nature. He also established an upbeat tone of voice for most of the play, except during heavier scenes to further illustrate his character motivations. Mirroring comes into play with the relationships of Fenwick and Susannah, and Ellen and Tom.

Susannah and Tom both struggle within their marriages, with Susannah feeling underappreciated and invisible, and Tom feeling emasculated and unheard. In the second act of the play when Fenwick and Susannah finally open up to one another about the faults in their marriage, Susannah is seated with Fenwick eventually kneeling in front of her. This blocking illustrated Fenwick’s attempt to reconcile with his wife, as before this scene his usual movements towards her included standing tall and keeping a great deal of space between them, asserting his refusal to compromise on matters. This blocking is mirrored almost exactly in the following scene with Tom and Ellen, except Tom is seated with Ellen kneeling before him to reflect their similar martial struggles. In Tom and Ellen’s final moment on stage, they are also dressed in essentially matching costumes, another visual showcase of their reconciliation. As previously mentioned, the blocking of the production acted as a type of symbolism for the play. An actor’s movement on stage has the ability to reveal true character motives, further along the plot, and essentially acts as character in itself. The actor portraying Armstrong is the most noteworthy in this case. Following the scene of Isobel’s attempted suicide turned murder, the entire cast is gathered on one side of the stage while Armstrong stands alone on the other side. This helps to reveal Armstrong’s complete lack of empathy and morality. He utterly destroys Isobel throughout the course of the play, and he is the embodiment of pure selfishness. By the end of the play each character proves themselves capable of seeing beyond their own egos and preoccupations, except for Armstrong. He never compromises his own needs for the people around him, instead he assumes the role of the parasite; he sucks the life out of Isobel, almost literally, and feels no remorse whatsoever. He approaches life in a very Machiavellian way and lives exclusively in a moral gray area. Lemos’s portrayal of Armstrong

directly represents this, as he carried himself with an air of authority, his movements toward Isobel abusive and predatory. The most gripping theatrical choice made in the production was in the final scene where the cast is gathered around Isobel’s casket exactly how we found them when the play began, except instead of the bird acting as a representation of the fleetingness of life, Isobel does. She represents the advancement of science at the cost of our own humanity, and this choice of staging produced a powerful end note for the production....