《等待加布里埃尔》:对布莱恩·沃特金斯的独幕剧《顿悟》的评论,将于2022年5月26日至7月24日在纽约林肯中心的米齐·e·纽豪斯剧院进行美国首演

IF 0.1 4区 文学 0 LITERATURE, BRITISH ISLES
R. Gerber
{"title":"《等待加布里埃尔》:对布莱恩·沃特金斯的独幕剧《顿悟》的评论,将于2022年5月26日至7月24日在纽约林肯中心的米齐·e·纽豪斯剧院进行美国首演","authors":"R. Gerber","doi":"10.1353/jjq.2022.0022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Samuel Beckett might have been pleased. But Joyce . . . well, not so much. Like Godot in Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot, Gabriel Conroy is a no-show in Brian Watkins’s one-act play Epiphany, a riff on Joyce’s short story “The Dead,” which had its American premiere at Lincoln Center in New York this past summer. The world premiere was presented by the Druid Theatre Company of Galway, Ireland, back in 2019. As long as Gabriel was not appearing, however, the producers might have spared American audiences this play, as well as the trip across the Atlantic. While Gabriel’s non-appearance is one of several clever and intriguing ideas in the play, it is not the only thing missing from this re-visioning of “The Dead.” There is no mention of Joyce’s story in the publicity or the playbill for Epiphany. And, while the acting is generally adequate, aside from the AWOL Gabriel and a tepid Freddy Malins, none of the characters in this play carry the names, recite the lines, nor retain other attributes of the figures we are all so familiar with in “The Dead.” Aunt Kate, for instance, is renamed just “Morkan,” and she is the central figure here. None of this matters since audiences are blissfully unaware of Epiphany’s connections with “The Dead” anyway; Joyce would probably have been happy with that. The dialogue that has been substituted in this play for his elegiac language can only, ironically, be described in one word: deadly. Most of the conversation in Epiphany consists of solipsistic philosophizing, sophomoric psychologizing, and handwringing blather, especially by Morkan. That all said, it is relevant to recall that “The Dead” has served as inspiration for multiple reputable versions, ranging from a movie to a musical, and even an opera and more. Each of these has had its strong points and points that were less strong. So a brief account of some of the more interesting aspects of Epiphany that are related to “The Dead”—not the story line itself, really, nor the dialogue—might best serve readers of this review. The almost-in-the-round Mitzi E. Newhouse Theater affords the entire audience an opportunity easily to view all the actors as they make their way in and out and around the stage. Many of the characters’ lines are spoken simultaneously, however, so, while they can always be seen, they cannot always be heard over one another. The set","PeriodicalId":42413,"journal":{"name":"JAMES JOYCE QUARTERLY","volume":"59 1","pages":"573 - 575"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"\\\"Waiting for Gabriel\\\": A Review of Epiphany, a One-Act play by Brian Watkins, the American Premiere at the Mitzi E. Newhouse Theater, Lincoln Center, New York, 26 May-24 July 2022\",\"authors\":\"R. Gerber\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/jjq.2022.0022\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Samuel Beckett might have been pleased. But Joyce . . . well, not so much. Like Godot in Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot, Gabriel Conroy is a no-show in Brian Watkins’s one-act play Epiphany, a riff on Joyce’s short story “The Dead,” which had its American premiere at Lincoln Center in New York this past summer. The world premiere was presented by the Druid Theatre Company of Galway, Ireland, back in 2019. As long as Gabriel was not appearing, however, the producers might have spared American audiences this play, as well as the trip across the Atlantic. While Gabriel’s non-appearance is one of several clever and intriguing ideas in the play, it is not the only thing missing from this re-visioning of “The Dead.” There is no mention of Joyce’s story in the publicity or the playbill for Epiphany. And, while the acting is generally adequate, aside from the AWOL Gabriel and a tepid Freddy Malins, none of the characters in this play carry the names, recite the lines, nor retain other attributes of the figures we are all so familiar with in “The Dead.” Aunt Kate, for instance, is renamed just “Morkan,” and she is the central figure here. None of this matters since audiences are blissfully unaware of Epiphany’s connections with “The Dead” anyway; Joyce would probably have been happy with that. The dialogue that has been substituted in this play for his elegiac language can only, ironically, be described in one word: deadly. Most of the conversation in Epiphany consists of solipsistic philosophizing, sophomoric psychologizing, and handwringing blather, especially by Morkan. That all said, it is relevant to recall that “The Dead” has served as inspiration for multiple reputable versions, ranging from a movie to a musical, and even an opera and more. Each of these has had its strong points and points that were less strong. So a brief account of some of the more interesting aspects of Epiphany that are related to “The Dead”—not the story line itself, really, nor the dialogue—might best serve readers of this review. The almost-in-the-round Mitzi E. Newhouse Theater affords the entire audience an opportunity easily to view all the actors as they make their way in and out and around the stage. Many of the characters’ lines are spoken simultaneously, however, so, while they can always be seen, they cannot always be heard over one another. The set\",\"PeriodicalId\":42413,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JAMES JOYCE QUARTERLY\",\"volume\":\"59 1\",\"pages\":\"573 - 575\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JAMES JOYCE QUARTERLY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/jjq.2022.0022\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LITERATURE, BRITISH ISLES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMES JOYCE QUARTERLY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jjq.2022.0022","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE, BRITISH ISLES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

塞缪尔·贝克特可能会很高兴。但是Joyce。嗯,没那么多。就像塞缪尔·贝克特(Samuel Beckett)的《等待戈多》(Waiting for Godot)中的戈多一样,加布里埃尔·康罗伊(Gabriel Conroy。2019年,爱尔兰戈尔韦的德鲁伊剧团举办了全球首映式。然而,只要加布里埃尔没有出现,制片人可能会放过美国观众这部剧,以及穿越大西洋的旅行。虽然加布里埃尔的不露面是剧中几个聪明而有趣的想法之一,但这并不是《死者》重新构思中唯一缺少的东西。《主显节》的宣传或海报中都没有提到乔伊斯的故事。而且,虽然表演总体上是足够的,除了擅离职守的加布里埃尔和不温不火的弗雷迪·马林斯,这部剧中的角色都没有名字,没有背诵台词,也没有保留我们在《死者》中熟悉的人物的其他特征。例如,凯特阿姨被改名为“莫坎”,她是这里的中心人物。这些都无关紧要,因为观众无论如何都幸福地没有意识到主显节与《死者》的联系;乔伊斯可能会对此感到高兴。具有讽刺意味的是,这出戏中被他的挽歌语言取代的对话只能用一个词来形容:致命。《主显节》中的大部分对话都包括唯我论哲学、二年级心理学和手忙脚乱的胡言乱语,尤其是莫尔坎的胡言乱话。话虽如此,但值得一提的是,《死者》为多个知名版本提供了灵感,从电影到音乐剧,甚至歌剧等等。每一个都有自己的长处和不足之处。因此,简要介绍一下主显节中与《死者》有关的一些更有趣的方面——实际上不是故事情节本身,也不是对话——可能最适合这篇评论的读者。几乎是圆形的Mitzi E.Newhouse剧院为全体观众提供了一个轻松观看所有演员进出舞台和在舞台周围表演的机会。然而,许多角色的台词都是同时说的,所以,虽然它们总是可以被看到,但它们不可能总是被听到。套装
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
"Waiting for Gabriel": A Review of Epiphany, a One-Act play by Brian Watkins, the American Premiere at the Mitzi E. Newhouse Theater, Lincoln Center, New York, 26 May-24 July 2022
Samuel Beckett might have been pleased. But Joyce . . . well, not so much. Like Godot in Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot, Gabriel Conroy is a no-show in Brian Watkins’s one-act play Epiphany, a riff on Joyce’s short story “The Dead,” which had its American premiere at Lincoln Center in New York this past summer. The world premiere was presented by the Druid Theatre Company of Galway, Ireland, back in 2019. As long as Gabriel was not appearing, however, the producers might have spared American audiences this play, as well as the trip across the Atlantic. While Gabriel’s non-appearance is one of several clever and intriguing ideas in the play, it is not the only thing missing from this re-visioning of “The Dead.” There is no mention of Joyce’s story in the publicity or the playbill for Epiphany. And, while the acting is generally adequate, aside from the AWOL Gabriel and a tepid Freddy Malins, none of the characters in this play carry the names, recite the lines, nor retain other attributes of the figures we are all so familiar with in “The Dead.” Aunt Kate, for instance, is renamed just “Morkan,” and she is the central figure here. None of this matters since audiences are blissfully unaware of Epiphany’s connections with “The Dead” anyway; Joyce would probably have been happy with that. The dialogue that has been substituted in this play for his elegiac language can only, ironically, be described in one word: deadly. Most of the conversation in Epiphany consists of solipsistic philosophizing, sophomoric psychologizing, and handwringing blather, especially by Morkan. That all said, it is relevant to recall that “The Dead” has served as inspiration for multiple reputable versions, ranging from a movie to a musical, and even an opera and more. Each of these has had its strong points and points that were less strong. So a brief account of some of the more interesting aspects of Epiphany that are related to “The Dead”—not the story line itself, really, nor the dialogue—might best serve readers of this review. The almost-in-the-round Mitzi E. Newhouse Theater affords the entire audience an opportunity easily to view all the actors as they make their way in and out and around the stage. Many of the characters’ lines are spoken simultaneously, however, so, while they can always be seen, they cannot always be heard over one another. The set
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
JAMES JOYCE QUARTERLY
JAMES JOYCE QUARTERLY LITERATURE, BRITISH ISLES-
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Founded in 1963 at the University of Tulsa by Thomas F. Staley, the James Joyce Quarterly has been the flagship journal of international Joyce studies ever since. In each issue, the JJQ brings together a wide array of critical and theoretical work focusing on the life, writing, and reception of James Joyce. We encourage submissions of all types, welcoming archival, historical, biographical, and critical research. Each issue of the JJQ provides a selection of peer-reviewed essays representing the very best in contemporary Joyce scholarship. In addition, the journal publishes notes, reviews, letters, a comprehensive checklist of recent Joyce-related publications, and the editor"s "Raising the Wind" comments.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信