Big Fish, more like medium fish, or maybe even small fish by Ebie Quinn

            I recommend Big Fish as performed by the SpeakEasy Stage Company to anyone who is a fan of mediocre musical theatre. And by that I mean, don’t go if you are expecting to be wowed or impressed immensely. Big Fish was originally a book written by Daniel Wllace, and then a Tim Burton movie. It also had an unsuccessful run on Broadway, which to me made perfect sense. The SpeakEasy theatre company performed this show at Roberts Studio Theatre in the Calderwood Pavilion. It is a smaller version of the Broadway show, with a reduced cast and smaller band.

            Big Fish is inherently a story about a father, and a son, and their tumultuous relationship. The two characters act as foils for each other throughout the show. The dad lives in a world of fantasy and tells many lavish exaggerated stories to everyone and more specifically to his son. The son is a self-proclaimed “realist”, who is very fact-focused and not very accepting go his dads stories. The musical switches back and forth from a young version of the son to an older version of the son. The story truly begins at the son’s wedding, where he has just learned of his fathers illness. He also just recently found out that his soon to be wife is pregnant. This turning point in the son’s life provides him an opportunity to better get to know and understand his dad, and he fears that the things he finds out won’t be positive. His dad was on the road most of his life and he always came back with many fantastic tales, involving witches, a mermaid and a very clever giant named Karl, all of whom the audience gets to see. The son’s goal is to chronicle the events that his father told and try to distinguish between fact and fiction. Most of the show consists of the stories.

            Many relationships are explored throughout the musical. The son and the father are constantly fighting and having revelations, and while for some people it seemed to be heart-wrenching, for me it felt cheesy and forced. While this actors didn’t lack talent, and the set didn’t lack creativity, the show overall lacked spark. Often after coming out of an amazing show, the audience members will feel a sort of “theatre high.” I’m sure this is something you have experienced. It is a feeling of happiness and it comes from a place of pure thought-provoking entertainment. I never experienced anything even close to that at this show. I was never blown away, if anything I felt indifferent. It seemed that this show was trying so hard to be original and different, but to me it seemed like a horrible cliche with random fantasy stories thrown in. But hey, that could just be me. The show was constantly striving for poignancy at every turn, but when you have lines like “I’ve been drowning since you left me”, right before a flood comes to the town, I’m going to have trouble taking you seriously. This constant attempt at creating “moments” was just not successful for me as an audience member.

            Overall, I think I might have struggled with the simplistic story itself more than anything. I want to take the time to give the actors credit, and also anyone who was involved with the sets. Many of the actors were phenomenally talented, and I think they did the best they could with the show they were given. The set was also cool and entertaining. I can only imagine the amount of work it would take to produce such complex set and costumes. I found the stage to be very visually interesting, and for me, these things were the highlight of the show.

            I don’t want to completely turn you off to the show. It wasn’t bad by any measure, it just wasn’t great. Not everyone shared my same opinion, and some people around me seemed to enjoy it just fine. You can judge for yourself, was this story amusing and poignant, or the epitome of mediocrity.

Typical Art Museum by Ebie Quinn

My experience with the Clark Museum was pretty so-so. It is located in Williamstown, Massachusetts. It became open to the public in 1955.  As a museum, it was fine, it had many fascinating and pretty pieces of art, but as a viewer I wasn’t as engaged as I wished to be. This might be as a result of visiting more modern museums, because in contrast this museum kind of fell flat. I’m not trying to dissuade you from seeing it, in fact quite the opposite. I think you should go see it for yourself, form your own opinion, prove me wrong! It has many great pieces of art and I’m sure there are many people who would appreciate it, and I certainly appreciated parts of it. Overall though, it felt kind of bland.

            The Clark Museum has a pretty extensive history which is a featured and discussed at length in the museum. I found the history to actually be quite interesting. The museum was founded by Sterling Clark. Clark went on an expedition to China in 1908, was introduced to the world of collecting art in Paris in 1910, and married Francine Clary in 1919. Sterling and Francine began collecting lots of American and European art, including prints and drawings, sculpture, decorative arts, and paintings. Most of the artwork they collected is French, and there is a lot of impressionist paintings.

            I was assigned to look at a room filled with all glassware. The glassware didn’t particularly appeal to me, I looked it over but to me it seemed to belong in a kitchen not a museum. There were two paintings tucked away on the sides of the rooms and I did enjoy those. The painting I liked the best was called “The Suitor”. It depicted a women in a beautiful flowing white dress standing at her door. The room she is in is very fancy and nice. It has a decorated table with beautiful white flowers sitting on top of it. Behind the flowers and table, there is a long mirror and the reflections rather blurry, but there are many colors, the most prominent being yellow. The wall is decorated with some sort of design and overall the room feels very classy and expensive. The door the women is looking at is cracked open and it is very blurry but you can see a man on his knees, kissing the women's hand. The whole picture is blurred and it gives off a sort of dreamy feeling. The man is the most blurred, and at first glance, he is not even visible. There is no description of the painting, just the title, “The Suitor”. The artist is Gaston de Latouche, and the painting is oil on panel. I really like this picture because it feels so simple and dream-like. It captured my attention for a while, and was just generally fun to look at.

            So, yes, overall the museum was pretty run of the mill for me, but there were certainly many wonderful pieces of art to view and appreciate. Give it a chance, especially if you are into art or museums in general.

Experience Reading (without actually having to read) By Ebie Quinn

            The MASS MoCA is my favorite museum experience to date. It is completely modern and features absolutely no historic pictures. MASS MoCA’s history spans for over two hundred years. It has been around through economic, industrial, and architectural development that has been a part of industrialism in New England. It is approximately 13 acres and it is made up of 19th century factory buildings. MASS MoCA is located in North Adams, Massachusetts.

            MASS MoCA is unique and interactive, there is no potential for boredom. Each exhibit is in a different medium and fills up the space differently. Some exhibits include Bibliothecaphilia, Plastic Fantastic, Paper Chorus, It’s only Human, and The Octagon Room. Each exhibit attempts to convey different ideas about humans, society, and nature. Many exhibits contain 3d works of art. I found the exhibits to be fantastic, although I had difficulty following the flow of the museum. It might have just been the way I walked through, but there didn’t appear to be an obvious traceable pattern. But as I said, that could have just been me. Despite the lack of fluidity overall, there was a lot of fluidity in each exhibit. The messages were usually pretty clear, and when they weren’t, the labels helped to explain things.

            I really appreciated a piece in Bibliothecaphilia in particular. The goal of bibliothecaphilia was to explore whether or not the physical and philosophical spaces of libraries remain relevant. It asked questions l

ike, what qualities define a library, and can libraries exist online, or be made up of things other than books? I liked a 3d “scene” or installation created by Jena Priebe. It explored the relationship between the reader, the place they are reading in, and the book itself.  It consisted of a blue arm chair, a foot rest, a lamp, a rug and a book. The blue chair with the foot rest is set up on top of the rug and next to the brightly colored lamp. It looks like an average room. On the foot rest a book sits lying open. Out of it, the pages erupt everywhere, unfurling in all directions. There are long strings of pages that seen to defy the laws of physics, curling up in the air and back down. The entire scene is encapsulated by the pages. Her work blurs the boundary between the physical book i.e. the pages, and the reader’s mental experience of the text. When reading, the contents of the story literally take over your mind, becoming larger than life. This piece portrayed books as an escape from reality, the stories overflowing out of the books filled with ideas. This exhibit spoke to my personal love of reading, and was a testament to my experience as a reader. I’m sure it resonated with many other people’s experiences as well.

            I found that this museum was very visually interesting and thought provoking and I highly recommend it to people of all ages. Even children can appreciate the colors and textures and some of the less complex ideas that Mass MoCa has to offer. If given the chance, defiantly make sure to check it out.

Splatter Paint Makes a Splash by Ebie Quinn

            The contemporary art in the Fogg museum first appears to be simplistic but once you delve into the descriptions and consider the artist’s thought process, the art becomes the most thought provoking in the whole museum. The Fogg Museum is the oldest of Harvard University's art museums. It was opened to the public first in1896. The Fogg joins the Busch-Reisinger Museum and the Arthur M. Sackler Museum as part of the Harvard Art Museums. Currently it features a contemporary art exhibit. I felt myself being immediately drawn to the whole exhibit. The old historic pictures were getting boring, and these pieces of art seemed new and meaningful. I took a first walk through admiring the art. I didn’t begin reading the descriptions until the end, but once I did I was pleasantly surprised. By reading about the artists intentions, the pieces of art I was witnessing gained a whole different dynamic. The pictures seemed random but in fact that were speaking about many aspects of society. Immediately I wanted to walk back through again and read each description in an attempt to take the art to the next level.

            The painting that stood out to me the second time, was one I hadn’t necessarily been impressed with the first time through. It was long and thin and took up most of the wall. It was full of many colors going every which way, circling around each other. To me, at first, it looked like the splatter paint picture a child might make. Still, there was defiantly something intriguing about this picture, so I read the description. The artist was named Jackson Pollock and the piece was called  One: Number 2, 1950. I learned that the painting was created through the “poured” technique. This technique involves laying a large canvas out on the floor, and then from above dripping, pouring, and flinging paint at the canvas. The looping, tangled lines, alternatively forceful and delicate, represented his highly physical creative process and served as a record of his engagement. To me this showed the patience and effort it took to produce this work that looked so simple. He had to maintain a balance between chaos and control and he did this quite effectively. The picture also shows Pollock’s interest in the different properties of paints. The paint has many different weights and viscosity’s, it bubbled and cracked and sunk into the canvas in many different ways. Pollock explored the paint and the image of the paint in a very controlled way, while also managing to convey spontaneity, which is a feat that I certainly appreciate.

            The piece and many others were minimalistic and generally visually interesting. The descriptions heighten the experience and leave you thinking about different aspects of modern society. I highly recommend this to anyone with a little free time, for you will surely enjoy examining this modern art.

 

The Glass Menagerie by Ebie Quinn

The Glass Menagerie by Ebie Quinn

The Glass Menagerie, as performed by Trinity Rep, was insane in all senses of the word. It was insanely weird, insanely random, and mostly insanely entertaining. The insanity began as soon as the audience entered the theater.

The set itself was very non-traditional. It consisted of a platform with a few random objects, a bed and a piano and a few other things set up around the stage. From the audience’s point of view, you could easily see the lighting/sound box which was directly next to the stage. You could also see all the lights and the bare bones of the theatre. The set and costume changes themselves were also questionable. The show makes no effort to hide the crew members. They walk on stage and do whatever needed to be done, seemingly as if they are part of the performance. This is also different from many shows I’ve seen, and if anything, it only adds to the chaos.

The play itself was about a mother and her son and daughter. The play is told from the perspective of the son, who explains at the beginning that this story is his memories, and they will probably be cloudy, confusing, and exaggerated. The son and daughter are adults in their early twenties, but they appear to still be living with their mother. The son works at a shoe factory, providing for his family and the daughter is emotionally and physically fragile. She lives at home collecting glass trinkets after dropping out of high school and business collage. The husband isn’t in the picture and the mother is hell-bent on finding a “gentlemen caller” for her daughter. It is clear from the beginning that this isn’t going to be a traditional production. The son and mother are loud and pretty crazy. They are constantly standing on things and yelling. To give you an idea of the randomness of the show I’ll provide a few details. Believe it or not, these details taken out of context make about as much sense as they do in the context of the show. There are random paper flowers scattered around the stage for no reason. At one point there is a blown up giraffe floating around. The actors pretend the piano is a fire escape, and subsequently stand on top of it. With no warning the scene quickly transitions into a weird musical number. These are only the details that stood out to me, there is so much more disorder in the show. It is done purposeful because it is supposed to be stream of consciousness/memory. It is up to the audience members to accept the version of reality the actors present. In this production, the world works in crazy ways, and you have to just go along with it.       

        At the beginning of the production I was taken aback and thoroughly thrown off. What I was expecting I don’t know, but it certainly wasn’t this off-kilter show filled with crazy set changes, nonsensical soliloquies, and random objects. I had trouble following the show at first. I thought that the actors were trying to convey a larger message and theme to the audience, but I couldn’t quite get at what it was. The symbolism of seemingly random lines, objects and musical numbers was lost on me and I felt frustrated. I even had trouble following the story itself because it was interrupted with so many erratic lines and scenes. Despite these oddities, once I began to get used to the style of the show I found the story, and the way in which they told it, to be compelling. By intermission I was engrossed in the storyline and my own curiosity as to what they would say or do next. That being said, the confusing things were ultimately distracting and outweighed the story line and the actors performances. I thought that the dream-like memory state attempted to explore an interesting concept, how a story is affected by someone’s personal memories. It could have been quite successful, but I think the director took this idea to far and it ended up being detrimental to the shoes overall quality.

        The craziness of this show was somewhat balanced by stunning actors. The production was bold and risky, and without the help of brilliant committed actors, it would have failed miserably. The Glass Menagerie featured four actors each with a different important role. Their roles were all filled with high emotion, and the actors had the audience laughing one second, and the next focusing in on a serious scene. It was a skilled performance and it impressed me immensely. They were the highlight of the show and I felt that their skills could have been utilized even better if the set wasn’t so distracting.

        I recommend this to anyone with an open mind. It is not ideal for young children, not because the content was inappropriate, but because it would go over their head. It is one of the stranger plays I have ever witnessed. If you choose to watch this I advise you to allow yourself to open up to the craziness and consider new ideas. But, if you are looking for a more traditional piece of theatre, this production is not for you.

The Attraction of Ambiguity by Ebie Quinn

            The Gardner Museum achieves it’s greatness by being both perplexing and thought provoking. In 1903, Isabella Stewart Gardner, turned her house and large art collection into a museum for the public to enjoy. She required that all of her pieces remain in the exact same place, allowing no modernizations to be made. Personally, I do not have extensive historic or religious knowledge, and in looking at a painting I couldn’t tell you the story behind it. I don’t even have the means to fabricate a fake one. That being said, the museum was just as entertaining for me as it might be for a historian or an art expert. The entertainment for me stems from a different place then it might stem for someone else, and that is the beauty of this museum. The sheer amount of material allows for many different opinions and joys.

In particular, I connected with a book shelf being featured in a hallway. The piece was understated, which spoke to me. There were many paintings and tapestries filled with grandeur to appreciate, but the bookshelf could easily be overlooked. More than anything, this bookshelf confused me. It was a beautiful brown, and it seemed to be varnished. Inside there were many different books with titles like, “Renaissance in Italy,” and “The Louvre.” Each book had a price tag hanging off of it. The bottom of the bookshelf was engraved with two scenes. The first appeared to be a King standing by himself, and the second was the same king, but now with a girl weeping at his feet. The scenes were detailed and each had an intricate background. I was immediately drawn to the piece, not only because I connected emotionally, but because it was so bewildering to me. It was so different from all of the other pieces of art. It wasn’t depicting arbitrary monarchs that I might know but probably wouldn’t, it wasn’t flashy, and it certainly wasn’t boring. I found myself captivated by this bookshelf. Gardner was known for her intentionality and I began pondering what her intent was with this. Why were there price tags on the books? Were they ever really being sold, or were they just a part of the piece? These questions probably have factual answers, but I didn’t discover any of them.

This experience with the bookshelf was reflective of the rest of the museum for me. Yes, there were answers, and stories, and reasoning that someone visiting could appreciate. But for me, each piece of art was ambiguous, allowing me to connect in whichever way I felt regardless of the intention. I relished in my own confusion. Whether you are a historian who takes pride in their knowledge of facts, or like me, a teenager who appreciates not knowing everything all the time, you will enjoy a visit to the Isabella Gardner Museum.