confused. I found myself staring at the computer screen, wondering how I could manage to whip up some wonderful observations with so little time... and then feeling a little bit of hopelessness. Missing so much class has been hard. Can I offer a suggestion? Don't allow yourself to be convinced that going on vacation in the middle of the school year is a good idea. Because it's not. Not ever.
Anyway. Moving past that, and onto the assignment.
I re-watched the movie after reading through all of your blog posts, this time aware that I needed to take notes on what I watched. Here are the points I came up with:
1) In Medias re: The script of the play begins with a narration/monologue from Vivian to the audience. This breaking of the fourth wall immediately creates a sense of openness throughout the play; the audience can feel like they aren't just watching the action - they're actually in the thought process of the main character. In the film adaptation, however, the beginning is in Medias re. Vivian finds out she has cancer right off the bat; this creates a "launching off," almost as if it were a roller coaster that shoots the ride off instead of slowly creeping up to crest of the track.
2) Body language is a key factor in the performance of drama, however this is something that cannot be "read" unless an actual stage direction is written down alongside the lines. In the script, Jason's character has lines that evoke a sense of rigid emotionlessness, but in the actual performance, the actor must insert his own interpretation of the lines. I felt like in the film, Jason seemed even more disinterested in the emotional side of Vivian's treatment; this was noticeable in how fast he spoke, throwing around the clipboard when he got impatient, and his general body language. In the script, we can't tell how fast he speaks or HOW he says certain lines. I did notice in the very end, after the code has been restated and the responders are leaving, Jason actually is showing emotion (tears forming in his eyes), something that isn't directly mentioned in the script.
3) Make-up is an effect that really added to the theatrics of the play, especially when it came to Vivian's treatments. You could actually see the effects of the chemotherapy showing on her face... heavy bags under her eyes, mouth sores, and there were even beads of sweat forming on her scalp at some points.
4) Camera-work was also a major part of the movie; zooming in on Vivian during the attacks of pain highlight the emotion vividly. This isn't an element that is available if you simply read the script... where the camera focuses is where the person watching focuses, too. If you were watching the performance on stage, your eyes would have to seek out the action for themselves. Cameras show you what you're supposed to be looking at and nothing else.
5) Vivian's flashbacks take place in different locations and show her during different stages of her life. This is something that isn't available in the drama itself, as Vivian plays her parts all together (never shown as a little girl, a student, or as a professor during her lectures) but is periodically inserted into her memories as "current Vivian" wearing her hospital gown and having no hair. This, I felt like, had a jarring impact on the audience; seeing Vivian go from "normal" to a cancer patient was an immediate juxtaposition that highlighted the idea that this can happen to anyone: children, teachers, students... cancer doesn't discriminate.
6) Side-by-side monologues don't occur in the film, possibly because the director simply chose not to do so, or also because it would be rather difficult to work the camera on two people speaking at once. Reading the script is easy to distinguish between the two speakers; film might be harder to do so.
7) The music that played in the film added to the emotion; the almost squealing violin and also the gradual crescendo of the piano adds to the action of the scenes. Music wasn't written into the script, but as a film, music is an integral part of "setting the mood."
8) Throughout the play and the film, there was a constant comparison to the study of poetry and the study of medicine. Both fields often substitute elaborate language for simple words. Both fields require extensive study and looking at things through different lenses (for example, when the different clinical fellows are talking about her symptoms and they miss the "obvious" hair loss). Jason also talks about how beneficial the poetry class was in his own field of study; he seemed pleasantly surprised that the class added to his medical knowledge instead of just being a class that looked good on his transcript.
9) One of the major motifs in Wit is the idea that if you are too focused on taking things apart, whether those things be poems or cancer cells, you lose a major part of life. Vivian realizes this, and it seems towards the end (after the code team leaves after Jason called the code on mistake) that Jason is beginning to understand this, too. He only saw Vivian as "research," not as a human being capable of feelings, while Vivian herself had been taught to overlook the humanity behind the poem and take it apart, word by word and comma by comma.
10) Two foils in the play are Susie and Professor Ashford, who show that humanity is still present in both the medical field and the field of poetry. Susie is constantly showing how to care for the patient and not just treat them like a piece of research; she talks to Vivian while she's "out of it," even though Jason says that it's not necessary. She also rubs lotion on Vivian's hands even though Vivian isn't awake. Professor Ashford is also a foil in that she shows how it's possible to teach someone how to analyze poetry but still be engaged in the world around them (telling Vivian in the flashback not to go back to the library but to go out and be with others, visiting Vivian while she's in town, comforting her and reading to her).
I think the observations I could try writing about are #10 or #2. There are so many instances where Susie and Jason are juxtaposed, so that might be interesting to find all the examples throughout the play and reread it focusing on that main idea. There would be quite a few examples to discuss at varying levels of depth. Also, for the second observation, I feel like there could be a relation between the body language giving a lot of the underlying message in the film and the "reading between the lines" that often has to happen in reading poetry (how Professor Ashford puts so much emphasis on one little piece of punctuation). What the actor chooses to do with the lines given and what the reader chooses to do with the words in the poem could be an interesting concept.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI like the idea of reading between the lines, most. I'd be most interested in reading a paper about that. I also like using the idea of Susie and Jason juxtaposed against each other.
ReplyDeleteWe had a day where we talked about the different formal elements of analyzing both drama and film. Did you miss that day? You talked a little bit about some of those more formal things, like camera angles or transitions, though I think it would be good to use a little more of that.
I agree with you--I think #10 and #2 would go well with each other. I also talked about the idea of body language betraying one's humanity, and I think the idea is an interesting one. It's easy to objectively view a character when you can't see them, but much harder when you can watch their face.
ReplyDelete