Fast Times at Brigham Young University

I decided to consume a little appetizer play before the main course of A Midsummer Night's Dream and actually found myself enjoying it more than Shakespeare.  It was a little one act comedy called Moby Dude, OR: The Three-Minute Whale by David Ives.  This weekend I spent a solid 8 hours reading and writing papers, so I was nice to have a little comic relief.  Since the play is only one act the action plays out pretty fast.  In the exposition the only character with lines, a seventeen year-old with Jeff Spicoli diction, must give a verbal book report to his teacher, Mrs. Podgorski, on Moby-Dick.  Conflict is immediately established as the he defends himself against Mrs. Podgorski's accusations that he did not read the novel.  The action rises as he alternates between surfer dude lingo and high brow literary commentary using phases like peerless alegorical saga and metaphysical ambiguity to describe the book.  Is there more depth to this narrator than meets the eye?  Do we judge others too quickly based on their appearance or delivery or words?  This protagonist, slang and homophobic inferences aside, sums up the plot and symbolism of Moby-Dick quite well.  His teacher appears to think so too.  His summary climaxes in triumphant fanfare and our Spicoli awaits Mrs. Podgorski's response. The play's denouement is brought about with him agreeing to go out to coffee with his teacher!  So is he just a Moby Dude?  Is this just some high school fantasy or is he really a whale?  Is he a verbose Hercules of literature who merely chooses to express himself as he pleases?  If anyone has ever seen Fast Times they will recognize the scene from which the photo above was taken and know what I think.  It's nice to dream, but the conclusion just seems too far-fetched to be real.

Coming around to drama

Maybe my pun is a cheap knock off of Dr. Burton's, but so what?  It will all makes sense.  Theater and I have an on again, of again relationship that has never quite reconciled.  It all started when I was 9 and I got rejected in an audition for Peter Pan... too melodramatic?  Nevertheless, I was excited to see Urinetown, everyone I had talked to about it said it was great.  I had also never been to a theater in a round.  In this sort of arrangement the crowd encircles the stage as opposed to the proscenium stage that I am used to.  I first want to discuss the cons of this form of seating.  There were a few times when characters would make a dramatic gesture or humorous face that I could not see because the actor was not facing my direction.  This also made it difficult to hear the actors at some points as their voices projected away from me.  On the other hand, this setting allowed the audience to be more involved in the play.  Those in the very front row got up-close and personal with the actors.  The play itself was witty, self-aware (the narrators frequently point out flaws and holes in the story), and not lacking moral substance.  The music was great and the story was entertainingly original.  There were a few refences to Les Mis too!  Urinetown combines elements from many genres: satire, comedic music with tragic scenes, and elements of high and low comedy.  Although there were numerous points when the actors fumbled with their lines, I came away very pleased with what I saw.