Get to the Point! by Rakel Abellan
Isn’t the
entire point of “Raisin in the sun” a black family buying a house in a white
neighborhood? The intermission is an hour and a half in and somehow they
haven’t even bought the house yet. This play by Lorraine Hansberry and directed
by Liesl Tommy is an awfully long production with not much story into it.
The story can be summarized shortly – The
grandmother of a poor black family gets the insurance money from the death of
her husband and the family fusses about what it should be spent on. The grandmother
decides to buy a new house in a white neighborhood but they try to bribe them
with money to not move in. Finally, the family rejects the offer and moves to
their new house.
This production
leaves the audience wondering what happened next to all the characters. Its
like they are telling you different separate individual stories from all of
them and all the sudden it all ends when they move out. It feels as if this was
only the first part of a play, but on the other hand three hours seem too much
for such a simple plot. Anyone could have missed an hour of this play and
gotten back in track easily since nothing ever really happened.
On the other
hand, “Clybourne Park” a play by Bruce Norris directed by M.Bevin O’Gara is the
complete opposite. This production had way more story to it and it took an
appropriate amount of time. Furthermore, the director made very good choices
with the good use of humor and tension when it was needed, careful to not mix
them together.
The only thing
these two plays have in common is that “Clybourne Park” appears to be the same
story but in the perspective of the white people selling the house and what
happens after they sell it to a black family. In other words, we could say that
it is the second part of “Raisin in the sun.” Overall, I believe whoever has
the chance should go see “Clybourne Park” rather than “Raisin in the sun”
unless they want to know both sides of the story, that in my opinion aren’t
needed.
No comments:
Post a Comment