Dial M for Murderousness

More jumbled up thoughts on the Pillowman -

I think the ending is a little too wrapped-up-perfect in relation to the tone set by all the other stories. The fact that Ariel doesn't burn the stories and they live on is such a weaker ending than any other story creating the effect that McDonagh's story is actually the worst story of all. I don't like these parts where "Katurian" steps out of himself to talk about being fashionably downbeat, and ending things more in the "spirit of things." I understand what he's trying to say, but I think he is wrong...I think its against the Spirit of the play- perhaps a little copoutish.


Whoa, whoa, whoa Dr. Lennon, or should I call you Jason Bourne, lets not get carried away.

I'm not sure there is any commentary about society and how we treat prisoners and the rights of criminals or suspects. I don't think you can draw a legitimate connection between Michal's torture/murders and the current media, etc. I believe most of the totalitatian background is more simply a narrative device that allows us to believe Katurian might be just a really good innocent writer and that's why he's there, that allows us not to question the torture techniques of detectives, and makes for a more dramatic ending of instant execution. Its a story - you don't want people asking too many questions, playing detective to the accuracy/believablility of your story right. I think McDonagh makes this point during Turloski's story of the deaf boy when Katurian asks how the old man knew he was deaf and Turloski says he could see the hearing aid. He also makes this point in that Michal commits the murders to find out how believable the stories are.

Then of course there is the whole storyteller/oral tradition thing tied into this. I was not familiar with the story of the pied piper, but it has some obvious connections. As I mentioned before I think a lot of the stories are kind of reworks of traditional tales - with new twists, etc. Does it matter who tells each of the stories? What about the questions, interaction while the story is being told?

Did the Little Jesus story read like a bad bar joke to anyone else?

The Orange book, the muder very Halloween appropriate...nice.

Credibility....ah yes...again. Basically we can't believe anything anyone has said in any of these stories. We can't believe any of this ever happened, everything is a story, everything is a lie? Did Katurian frame his brother and really commit it all himself? Did the police make all this up and are just mentally torturing them both. Is Michal really dead? Is the whole play the Pillowman's stroy for young Michal on the eve of his torture? Basically we are left to believe whatever we want - similar to The Lady or the Tiger that I mentioned in a previous post. It kind of reminds me of the movie Memento a little. I love it and am frustrated by it at once.

How does Ariel, his sympathy in not burning the stories and his own stories (giving sweets to children, his dad hopping in bed with him) work with the rest of the story?
A few last things...

Jeff Goldblum as Tupolski? Horrible, horrible casting job...



This play really makes you think of your favorite stories and it made me recall two stories which I love and remember, but have no idea of their title or author - I have been pondering for days so just thought I'd toss it out there - let me kow if you recognize either and please tell me the author or title so I can look em up

1) A story that is only one or two paragraphs in length that basically describes a General of some Latin American? dictatorship who sits down to dinner with a journalist and describes the current war happening by tossing a paper bag of severed human ears across the table.

2) A Steinbeckesque backdrop of a Dustbowl family during the depression. A wife with starving children. The wife's father is the owner of a Nitroglycerin truck driving entity. The wife's husband is unemployed and cannot find work anyhwere, his family is starving. Basically the Father is presented with the choice of watching his daughter and grandkids starve or giving his son-in-law a job driving a truck full of Notroglycerin, which he knows will end in the son-in-law's death. Complicating things are the son-in-law's pride and his own decision of death vs. pride.

Anyone?.....Anyone?............................Bueller?

BS

Pillow Talk

Was anyone else visited by the Pillowman an hour before last weeks' exam?



Definitely an interesting, twisted, sick, awesome play. Seems like is more of a novel or a collection of short stories, but I guess I can see it being kind of unique on a stage. The stories themselves are great. You know a story is good when none of the characters have a name, the plot is simple, it begins with One Upon a time, and its still a powerful story. It reminds me a lot of O. Henry stories like Gift of the Magi. The blind man tripping over the grave in The Little Jesus and Turloski's story of the deaf boy on the train tracks especially. Frank Stockton's short story The Lady or the Tiger came to mind when reading the story about the guy hanging in the Gibbett. The stories are pretty formulaic and in many ways not that original in terms of the concepts. I think I've heard similar versions of the Little Green Pig story in many formats - the best perhaps being The Sneetches by Dr. Suess.

I have a lot of random thoughts about this play, and am at a loss of how to organize them so here ya go:

Both Michal (p.52) and Katurian (p. 103) claim they are the Pillowman. Who really is? Either of them? Is there any other significance to the title of the play? There is even a discussion of what makes a good title at one point.

Is Katurian a little too close to Kevorkian for anyone else?

I love the humor in this play - between brothers, between the detectives, there are these great, hilarious lines that come at just the right time - not easy to crack jokes in the midst of murdering children, but McDonagh does it very, very well. Sometimes though, Michal's humor is so witty and insightful that it made me sceptical of his supposedly diminished mental capacities - I'm not sure if I completely buy what the author is giving us - there seem to be some inconsistencies in his mental abilities.

Is there any significance to having a deaf boy and a mute girl in the stories? Other than it being part of a formula of fatally flawed characters?

There is a lot more I want to say, but I am off to a meeting in the Bronx, I will try to get the rest up before class...

BS

The Blackwatchers

Upon finishing Black Watch I feel the same as many classmates. I might just be reading three war pieces in a row or a two journalist vs. soldier pieces back to back, but I can't say I'm super excited to see this play. The accent of course will be a big payoff, as I definitely have not been doing it any sort of justice in my own head. I'm curious to the length of the play because it basically seems like about 45 minutes of really short scenes kind of randomly slapped together.

Give me a Beat


There seems to be a lot of diving around and things exploding constantly which could be really funny or really pathetic in a live performance - we'll see. The scene where they change the uniform while giving a history of the regimen could be pretty cool visually, especially after seeing pictures on Matt's blog.

Beat it, Beat it


Can I ask why he makes such a point of the American Revolutionary War? I mean they lost right? But he seems to belabor the point as a particular sense of pride. Other confusing points included the scene with Lord Elgin. Where did this guy come from? I read it as some kind of weird ghost/apparition appearing from the past - kind of like a Christmas Carol? I might have completely missed the boat on that one.

Beat Box



Beat - yeah so what kind of beat is this? A drum? - cause that might get pretty annoying. There is also a lot of music and singing? or are those just poems? It seems very ambitious in terms of piecing lots of strange elements together. And the story is basically just about three guys getting blown up by a suicide bomber and their buddies talking to a reporter about it in a pub?

One of the more interesting parts of the play was the argument over opinions on the Americans in the war. The brief discussion of peacekeeper vs. protector vs. invader was also insightful. I can see how the play makes these and some other valid points/arguments about the war in Iraq and war in general, and probably does it in a more intelligent and eloquent way than Jarhead or Shooting War, but after having them beat into our conscience for the last three weeks it seems slightly less than profound.

I leave you with two questions -

Does it make any sense to put bright red fuzzy balls on top of a camouflage uniform?

Is anyone else picturing Max Fischer's production of Platoon in the movie Rushmore?


BS

The Return of Johnny Walker

As someone who has never read a graphic novel and was never really into comics growing up, I was initially most aware of all the formatting uniqueness of Shooting War. Which bubble do I read first? What about the text boxes? Are there really no page numbers? O how no page numbers will foil all of Dr. Lennon's creative group assignments ahahahaha. I was maybe expecting more of a consistent format/illustration, but I did really like that each page was completely unique in terms of size of illustrations, how the text was presented, what type of illustration was used, real photographs (is that cheating - should it be called a photo novel?), tv representation, magazines mock-ups, etc. I think Lappe and Goldman did a great job of using all resources and keeping things fresh from page to page. Mostly because of this I have to disagree with those of you are saying this was not a quick read. I am not a fast reader by any means - and I flew through this in a couple hours. It was interesting, funny, and definitely relevant to most of our lives. Who hasn't seen their favorite bodega or dive bar swallowed up by American Apparell, Lucky Jeans, or Urban Outfitters? Who doesn't hink that the political and military portrayals are at the very least a possibility? I think Lappe and Goldman are especially talented in their mocking of the news media - their tv, magazine, newspaper visions were hilarious and right on the money - I have no doubt we WILL see some of those headlines in the near future. But let's be honest, will Staten Island ever be cool? Ok I'm glad we all agree there.


There were many parts in the book that I thought were very cliche. I think many will say - "that's intentional you thick-headed infidel! It's a satire, they're making of the genre as well as mainstream America." I guess this is true to an extent, but I think this very good graphic novel is a few original scenes away from being great. Scenes like bar scene with Crowley, slipping Dan Rather the memory cards, humvees getting blocked by rubble, etc. It didn't seem as much satyrical as it was an overly convenient and familiar way to move the plot along, introduce characters, or solve a problem. Was Crowley's character really any different in your mind than the millions of movie seargents we're used to? I partially feel this way because other aspects of the novel were so creative - suitcase nukes, Communist Iraqi's comparing the U.S. to Russia. I guess it was hard for me to separate at times what was satire and what was poor character or plot development.

More interesting moments/good times in Shooting War -
I love a jacked up badass Dan Rather texting warnings and spouting cheesy lines.

I definitely thought Jimmy was having sex with Sameera at first, not the New York Mag reporter, that was well done. I was waiting for that moment the whole novel in disgust and was happy that it did not happen. An example of the afforementioned originality missing from other perhps satyrical elements of the novel.

As others mentioned - the newscrawls on the bottom of GlobalNews were hilarious! Along with the Post, New York Mag, etc.

What if Jimmy Burns really did work for the Sword of Mohammed the whole time? I think this makes sense, and kind of like it - as if Jimmy Burns were a successful John Walker.

How do you feel about the last two pages explaining the authors/illustrators intentions?

I was impressed that the whole thing was digitally drawn.

Why did the American soldiers have the bluelight eyes? A skull, a cross, darth vader? It seemed a little out of place as a dialogue on christian influence, etc. Did this really contribute anything? What was intended by it?

Are we supposed to think Jimmy Burns has held true to his corporate hatred ideals in the end? Has he changed? I'm not sure. What is the effect of the anti-corporate stuff in the novel, does simply placing a kfc, mcdonalds, and starbucks at army bases really say anything?

BS