NEW IB ENGLISH LITERATURE COURSE BD SOMANI INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL MUMBAI. EMAIL andrew.callahan@bdsint.org
(Please note this site uses Google cookies in compliance with EU Law. By using this site you accept that cookies are used here.)
The deceptively simple plot of David Mamet’s Oleanna is what makes this play so captivating. Most of the happenings of the play occur between the lines privy to the audiences opinions as well as the social context. I had previously read the play and had formed a rather concrete alliance with John’s character. Therefore I spent yesterdays reading looking for evidence to substantiate my opinion. Interestingly enough I found that every line that I could potentially use to support the professor would also be used to justify Carols case. The play is dependant on the readers voice more than it is on the narrative. Most Authors and playwrights whose works I have read use their writing to express an opinion. Mamet’s diplomacy in his writing is what interested me most. It is is this diplomacy that shifts the attention from the storyline to ideas. There is always ambiguity in human interaction. Who decides who’s narrative is to be accepted as fact? As human beings aren't all our narratives distorted by our individualism and beliefs.
Mamet constructs Oleanna as a play that explores the transition of power. The initially frail character of Carol acts as a foil to John’s authoritative, and often at times demeaning, professor. Mamet unravels the intricacies of this student-teacher relationship through a three-act composition. In the first, John uses Carol’s lack of understanding to gain the upper hand. However by the time of the second, it is evident that the tables have turned. Carol goes so far as to address the hypocrisy of John criticising the educational system from his ‘elitist seat’. The final act of the play positions Carol as a formidable opponent who, even after being knocked down to the floor by John, emerges as the true victor in the narrative. In these three acts, Mamet demonstrates to his audience that power is a temporary commodity, which is lost just as easily as it is won. What is noteworthy is that the real ‘action’ of the play takes place outside of the office where it is set. By keeping this ‘action’, the sexual harassment case, on the outskirts of his narrative, Mamet ensures that Oleanna is at its heart a character-driven play. These are two nuanced individuals, and it is up to the reader to decipher their varying shades.
David Mamet’s ‘Oleanna' explores the nuances of the human condition. As two complex individuals, John’s and Carol’s characters are subjected to the perception of the audience: both characters are the protagonist and the antagonist of the play; each of their actions can be interpreted as both right and wrong.
Mamet constructs the play as a dialogue, which initially appears innocuous, but soon morphs into a hostile exchange. As the play proceeds, the dialogue between the two characters exposes their frequent miscommunications as well as their struggle for power.
Through the play, Mamet prompts the audience to consider how the mechanisms and forms of power can differ. In Act I, John seeks power through the use of language, where he attempts to appear dominating by employing jargon and politically correct terminology. In Act 3, however, the form of power that John chooses to employ is physical restraint. Carol too, derives power from multiple sources, such as her charges of sexual harassment against John and the support of her “group”. The evolving balance of power between the two characters forms the essence of the play and drives the plot forward.
Mamet’s confrontational play, Oleanna, captivates its reader and audience from the exposition with a dramatic plot in which a college student, Carol, charges her male professor, John, with lewd and sexual behavior. The simple two-character play provides a stimulating backdrop for Mamet’s exploration of a struggle for power and analyses the ambiguity of what is deemed politically correct. The constant struggle for power between Carol and John is outlined by their use of language. In the first Act of the play, Carol failed to understand her professor because of his use of elevated language. Her use of language, on the other hand, was arbitrary and confusing: she often found it challenging to fully articulate herself. As the play reaches an end, the two characters find themselves in reversed positions: John, who, as a professor, was in a position of power, now finds himself powerless since he last lost his job. Carol, however, is now supported by a group of students, and is at a position of high power. Not only is this rise to power reflected in Carol’s dynamic character, but also reflected in her command over language; towards the end of the play, Carol pragmatically and confidently constructs and conveys her thoughts, as she expresses her anger and challenges her professor.
David Mamet’s “Oleanna” is a play of paradoxes. There exist two characters, Carol and John, and their binary personalities are rendered exceedingly polarized through the development of the plot. Mamet delves into the inconsistencies of narrative and the unreliability of language; the audiences’ interpretation of the play is vulnerable to perpetual oscillation.
There were instances where I was unable to form a coherent decision as to which character I sympathized with. Although Carol’s careful observations seemed to jigsaw in with the tenets of sexual misconduct, John’s impassioned nature regarding his disdain for the “warehouse of higher education” drew me into his personal stream of consciousness and made me pity his vulnerability in the face of law.
On reading the play, I found that I was equally divided in my bias of both characters, however while watching it, I realized that my biases were derived from the director’s perception of the victim; in this production, Carol.
The telephone is a construct that particularly interested me. Mamet’s creation of an everyday device that possesses the power to leave resonating fissures in the midst of grave exchanges is apt in sustaining dramatic tension. “Oleanna” made me realize that our perceptions of right and wrong are limitless, just as Carol attempted to impose a black and white doctrine onto a gray cohesive whole. In essence, Mamet’s text taught me that in reality, everything is prone to subjectivity, as John aptly states, “We can only interpret the behavior of others through the screen we create. “
Mamet’s play Oleanna stops the audience from ever reaching a definitive answer. The character the audience sympathises with- either John or Carol- doesn’t depend on the narrative but instead depends on the opinion of each individual reading the play. I found myself constantly changing my opinion through the play but eventually siding with John despite there being enough evidence to support Carol. This play doesn't only demand to be analysed by actions of characters but it provokes arguments, each supported by concrete evidence.
The telephone, I believe, was almost incorporated as a third character in the play. It always restricted the development of arguments between the student and professor. It also seemed like an obstacle that delayed the audience from receiving new evidence. The balance of power is constantly challenged in the play, which contributed to the development of Carol’s character. In the first act, John was dominated Carol through language. However, by the end of the play, Carol is able to gain command over language, giving her the confidence to challenge her professor. The development of her character contributes to the development of the text.
Mamet's powerful two character drama explores the destructiveness of miscommunication and excessive political correctness. An aspect which compelled me was how Mamet's play stimulates discussions and even argument within the minds of the readers. Mamet explores a transition in power, similar to one we had studied in our english classes on "Death and the Maiden". Initially Roberto was in a position of power over Paulina, just as Carol appeared weak around John. Just as Paulina overcame her fears and Roberto, Carol was the character portrayed as the victor over John. Although, both the examples differ, they are linked by a similar theme; the ceaseless shift in power.
The play Oleanna, by David Mamet is constructed in such a way that the audience is forced to keep thinking. Never once is it made definite which character is right, and who is in the wrong. Feminists will side with Carol, saying that John’s behavior was unacceptable, and the case that she filed was justified. Others may consider her reactions to be highly outrageous, and hold her actions as unreasonable. Although I found myself supporting either character at different points in the play, I eventually realized that my sympathies lie with John.
I also found the power constructs in the play to be highly interesting, as they too shift with every scene. Initially, John is the more authoritative character, as he holds a position of power. By the second act though, the power seems to shift to Carol, as she is the one who has filed a case against him, and in a way has a major say in John’s future. In the last scene, when John uses violence against Carol, the power lies with him again. This constant shift is a major driving force, that propels the play forward.
I think the brilliance of Mamet lies in the fact that he has constructed a play with solely two characters, set in one room, that has proven to be extremely thought provoking. Either side can be justified through heavy analysis and argument, which is a result of his unbiased and even handed work.
David Mamet’s Oleanna deals with two characters, John and Carol who find themselves spiraling into a state of frustration because of their distinctly bipolar personalities. It also deals with the transfer of power, rather than transition from John to Carol under the construct that Mamet has created. Oleanna begins with Mamet polarizing John and Carol’s positions as well as personalities in Act 1. Act 1 brings forward Carol’s frustration and John’s “elitism” or his immodest high regard for his theories and ideas. I felt that Act 1 rendered the conflict in the play as I found myself frequently referring back to the events presented in it. It established the foundation of biases that would later be created among readers towards Carol or John. As a reader, I felt that Act 2 and Act 3 were Mamet’s attempts to construct disbelief in the audience, as he shows Carol returning to John’s office after filing a complaint against him, which is unusual in the real world. However he adheres to the theme of reversal of power through this as Carol transitions to become a voice whereas John loses his authority as a professor. I found the play constantly interrupted by the omnipresence of a third character- the telephone. It broke conversation between John and Carol in all three acts and evoked dramatic tension between them.
The deceptively simple plot of David Mamet’s Oleanna is what makes this play so captivating. Most of the happenings of the play occur between the lines privy to the audiences opinions as well as the social context. I had previously read the play and had formed a rather concrete alliance with John’s character. Therefore I spent yesterdays reading looking for evidence to substantiate my opinion. Interestingly enough I found that every line that I could potentially use to support the professor would also be used to justify Carols case. The play is dependant on the readers voice more than it is on the narrative. Most Authors and playwrights whose works I have read use their writing to express an opinion. Mamet’s diplomacy in his writing is what interested me most. It is is this diplomacy that shifts the attention from the storyline to ideas. There is always ambiguity in human interaction. Who decides who’s narrative is to be accepted as fact? As human beings aren't all our narratives distorted by our individualism and beliefs.
ReplyDeleteMamet constructs Oleanna as a play that explores the transition of power. The initially frail character of Carol acts as a foil to John’s authoritative, and often at times demeaning, professor. Mamet unravels the intricacies of this student-teacher relationship through a three-act composition. In the first, John uses Carol’s lack of understanding to gain the upper hand. However by the time of the second, it is evident that the tables have turned. Carol goes so far as to address the hypocrisy of John criticising the educational system from his ‘elitist seat’. The final act of the play positions Carol as a formidable opponent who, even after being knocked down to the floor by John, emerges as the true victor in the narrative. In these three acts, Mamet demonstrates to his audience that power is a temporary commodity, which is lost just as easily as it is won. What is noteworthy is that the real ‘action’ of the play takes place outside of the office where it is set. By keeping this ‘action’, the sexual harassment case, on the outskirts of his narrative, Mamet ensures that Oleanna is at its heart a character-driven play. These are two nuanced individuals, and it is up to the reader to decipher their varying shades.
ReplyDeleteDavid Mamet’s ‘Oleanna' explores the nuances of the human condition. As two complex individuals, John’s and Carol’s characters are subjected to the perception of the audience: both characters are the protagonist and the antagonist of the play; each of their actions can be interpreted as both right and wrong.
ReplyDeleteMamet constructs the play as a dialogue, which initially appears innocuous, but soon morphs into a hostile exchange. As the play proceeds, the dialogue between the two characters exposes their frequent miscommunications as well as their struggle for power.
Through the play, Mamet prompts the audience to consider how the mechanisms and forms of power can differ. In Act I, John seeks power through the use of language, where he attempts to appear dominating by employing jargon and politically correct terminology. In Act 3, however, the form of power that John chooses to employ is physical restraint. Carol too, derives power from multiple sources, such as her charges of sexual harassment against John and the support of her “group”. The evolving balance of power between the two characters forms the essence of the play and drives the plot forward.
Mamet’s confrontational play, Oleanna, captivates its reader and audience from the exposition with a dramatic plot in which a college student, Carol, charges her male professor, John, with lewd and sexual behavior. The simple two-character play provides a stimulating backdrop for Mamet’s exploration of a struggle for power and analyses the ambiguity of what is deemed politically correct. The constant struggle for power between Carol and John is outlined by their use of language. In the first Act of the play, Carol failed to understand her professor because of his use of elevated language. Her use of language, on the other hand, was arbitrary and confusing: she often found it challenging to fully articulate herself. As the play reaches an end, the two characters find themselves in reversed positions: John, who, as a professor, was in a position of power, now finds himself powerless since he last lost his job. Carol, however, is now supported by a group of students, and is at a position of high power. Not only is this rise to power reflected in Carol’s dynamic character, but also reflected in her command over language; towards the end of the play, Carol pragmatically and confidently constructs and conveys her thoughts, as she expresses her anger and challenges her professor.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDavid Mamet’s “Oleanna” is a play of paradoxes. There exist two characters, Carol and John, and their binary personalities are rendered exceedingly polarized through the development of the plot. Mamet delves into the inconsistencies of narrative and the unreliability of language; the audiences’ interpretation of the play is vulnerable to perpetual oscillation.
ReplyDeleteThere were instances where I was unable to form a coherent decision as to which character I sympathized with. Although Carol’s careful observations seemed to jigsaw in with the tenets of sexual misconduct, John’s impassioned nature regarding his disdain for the “warehouse of higher education” drew me into his personal stream of consciousness and made me pity his vulnerability in the face of law.
On reading the play, I found that I was equally divided in my bias of both characters, however while watching it, I realized that my biases were derived from the director’s perception of the victim; in this production, Carol.
The telephone is a construct that particularly interested me. Mamet’s creation of an everyday device that possesses the power to leave resonating fissures in the midst of grave exchanges is apt in sustaining dramatic tension. “Oleanna” made me realize that our perceptions of right and wrong are limitless, just as Carol attempted to impose a black and white doctrine onto a gray cohesive whole. In essence, Mamet’s text taught me that in reality, everything is prone to subjectivity, as John aptly states, “We can only interpret the behavior of others through the screen we create. “
Mamet’s play Oleanna stops the audience from ever reaching a definitive answer. The character the audience sympathises with- either John or Carol- doesn’t depend on the narrative but instead depends on the opinion of each individual reading the play. I found myself constantly changing my opinion through the play but eventually siding with John despite there being enough evidence to support Carol. This play doesn't only demand to be analysed by actions of characters but it provokes arguments, each supported by concrete evidence.
ReplyDeleteThe telephone, I believe, was almost incorporated as a third character in the play. It always restricted the development of arguments between the student and professor. It also seemed like an obstacle that delayed the audience from receiving new evidence.
The balance of power is constantly challenged in the play, which contributed to the development of Carol’s character. In the first act, John was dominated Carol through language. However, by the end of the play, Carol is able to gain command over language, giving her the confidence to challenge her professor. The development of her character contributes to the development of the text.
Mamet's powerful two character drama explores the destructiveness of miscommunication and excessive political correctness. An aspect which compelled me was how Mamet's play stimulates discussions and even argument within the minds of the readers.
ReplyDeleteMamet explores a transition in power, similar to one we had studied in our english classes on "Death and the Maiden". Initially Roberto was in a position of power over Paulina, just as Carol appeared weak around John. Just as Paulina overcame her fears and Roberto, Carol was the character portrayed as the victor over John. Although, both the examples differ, they are linked by a similar theme; the ceaseless shift in power.
The play Oleanna, by David Mamet is constructed in such a way that the audience is forced to keep thinking. Never once is it made definite which character is right, and who is in the wrong. Feminists will side with Carol, saying that John’s behavior was unacceptable, and the case that she filed was justified. Others may consider her reactions to be highly outrageous, and hold her actions as unreasonable. Although I found myself supporting either character at different points in the play, I eventually realized that my sympathies lie with John.
ReplyDeleteI also found the power constructs in the play to be highly interesting, as they too shift with every scene. Initially, John is the more authoritative character, as he holds a position of power. By the second act though, the power seems to shift to Carol, as she is the one who has filed a case against him, and in a way has a major say in John’s future. In the last scene, when John uses violence against Carol, the power lies with him again. This constant shift is a major driving force, that propels the play forward.
I think the brilliance of Mamet lies in the fact that he has constructed a play with solely two characters, set in one room, that has proven to be extremely thought provoking. Either side can be justified through heavy analysis and argument, which is a result of his unbiased and even handed work.
David Mamet’s Oleanna deals with two characters, John and Carol who find themselves spiraling into a state of frustration because of their distinctly bipolar personalities. It also deals with the transfer of power, rather than transition from John to Carol under the construct that Mamet has created.
ReplyDeleteOleanna begins with Mamet polarizing John and Carol’s positions as well as personalities in Act 1. Act 1 brings forward Carol’s frustration and John’s “elitism” or his immodest high regard for his theories and ideas. I felt that Act 1 rendered the conflict in the play as I found myself frequently referring back to the events presented in it. It established the foundation of biases that would later be created among readers towards Carol or John.
As a reader, I felt that Act 2 and Act 3 were Mamet’s attempts to construct disbelief in the audience, as he shows Carol returning to John’s office after filing a complaint against him, which is unusual in the real world. However he adheres to the theme of reversal of power through this as Carol transitions to become a voice whereas John loses his authority as a professor.
I found the play constantly interrupted by the omnipresence of a third character- the telephone. It broke conversation between John and Carol in all three acts and evoked dramatic tension between them.