Eurydice

I was not familiar with Sarah Ruhl's play "Eurydice" before this class but I really, really enjoyed reading it. I really like the way Ruhl transposed this classic story into a more modern day, yet still fantastical, setting. I'm not one for classic Greek or Roman history, mythology, etc. so perhaps the setting Ruhl used (commentary on costumes, scenary, etc.) was a big part of the reason I liked this play despite its roots in classic Greek mythology.

I really liked the way Ruhl opened the play in the first movement. By showing the audience/reader how Orpheus and Eurydice interact, the audience/reader becomes acquainted with this couples dynamics, ways of relating to each other, etc. This makes their relationship less abstract and thus makes their loss of one another, and Eurydice's fear and inability to recognize Orpheus later, even sadder.

I really like the parallels drawn between Man and Child characters...their creepy, relentless come-ons and attempts to persuade Eurydice that staying with them is best. Is the Child supposed to be the Man growing younger? I don't know I just felt like the parallels in the underworld and the world of the alive (this mystical, fantastical Earth???) added a lot to the play and the character of Eurydice. Another thing I noticed about the interactions between the Man and Eurydice in the first movement is that, because they just met each other, they are both (to some extent) ignorant. Thus the explaining they do for each other is also done for the audience/reader.

The stones were another way to communicate information to the audience. Not well educated in Greek theater, I'm only assuming that the stones were fulfilling the role of the Greek Chorus (which, when telling the story of a Greek myth, is of course neccessary). Thus their exposition does not feel awkward or out of place since their existance (besides the plot involving the underworld and other fantastical aspects) heightens/reminds/highlights the imaginary, unrealistic atmosphere and setting of this play. Thus it is not jsut plot the stones reveal, but they also add to the general atmosphere of the play. Besides, they are hilarious. Perhaps some dark comedic relief to this heavy, sad story line? I think the role of the greek chorus could be a very strong and interesting tool to use when writing our own plays.

I thought it was interesting to read in the interview with Ruhl, that she had some background/interest in poetry. She said that she does not write poetry much anymore but I found some traces of it in this script. Scene one in the second movement, where Eurydice talks about Orpheaus, is one example of this. I particularly liked the syncopated interactions between Orpheaus and Eurydice when Orpheaus is trying to take her back from the underworld. I thought this style adds a lot, especially since music and remembering letters/language and writing letters and books plays a large role in this play...under the broader idea of means of communication (and their failure and successes).

I'm not sure how I felt about the grandmother character. When I first read the stage directions for her I wondered about how to communicate her identity to the audience. Yes, the father does explain to Eurydice (and thus the audience) later who she is but I still just saw her as a wandering, isolated character. Maybe thats the point, but even after reading Ruhl's explanation of the nearly silent grandmother, I was still unconvinced that her role added that much to the play.