Anyone seeing TOP GIRLS tonight? — Page 2

I was there tonight also.

At least they knew their lines.

I honestly have no idea what I just watched. I had never seen or heard of the play before, so I was not going into it with any pre-conceptions. I honestly had no idea what it was about going in. Well, after watching the show, I still don't have any idea what it's about.

I thought and thought about the play on the way home trying to make sense of it, and it just isn't coming together. I have no idea how the first scene ties in to the rest of the play, or why we needed these seemingly random "job interviews" in the second scene of act 2 (which was before the intermission, by the way). The characters in the dinner party scene are not well introduced, nor is the conceit of that dinner party adequately explained.

The cast does a fine job with what their given, and I have no complaints about any of them. The play just didn't make any sense to me.

Nor did it make much sense to this evening's audience, many of whom ran for the exits at the intermission. Several couldn't even make it that far and left during the first act, including one couple who dropped their listening devices on the floor as they left. The response to the curtain call was very, very quiet, and I was actually concerned that there wouldn't be enough applause to get through the two bows the cast takes.

Updated On: 4/16/08 at 12:08 AM

Wow.

Didn't see that coming...

I certainly hope, for the actors' sake, that this gets better...

It's an out there play by an out there dramatist.
But, Caryl Churchill is considered by many to be pretty stellar and Top Girls is in her top drawer... and one of her more accesible. It's a taste level kind of thing... also... I would imagine if you are prepared for the style of Churchill's writing.


kmc

---

It's an enigmatic play, as are many of Caryl Churchill's plays. Not for people who like things didactic. Dying to see this!

---

It's def. a taste thing. It's not absurdist, but it's not a normal linear type play like Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, or something like that. It's just a little out there, and it's not for everyone. I think it's a great play, and has a bold message to say, but I can see how some people could not understand it. It relies on the audience to think the whole way through, instead of just sitting back and being entertained for a few hours.

Do you recommend reading the play prior to seeing the show?

---

I would recommend at least reading a little background on the people I just mentioned (the character from Canterbury Tales is Patient Griselde from the Clerk's Tale).

Really, outside of the first scene, the show is not difficult to follow at all, but it's not really clear who they all are or what's going on at first. And like I said, a LOT of crosstalk. A good portion of the first act literally has two conversations going on at once onstage.

Any comments on Tomei, Plimptom, and Marvel?

---

Thanks for the heads up, Calvin. I'm going to Wikipedia all of those women.

I figured it was inevitable for TOP GIRLS to get vitrol-filled reactions on the boards (and from most audience members), like it seems to be.

Yes, some reading/background would certainly be helpful before heading to the theater, but a receptive sense of open-mindedness will work just fine too.

In a manner similar to "The Homecoming," there's a heightened level of appreciation once you have an understanding of what the play/playwright is trying to do, and are operating on its wavelength, rather than just expecting an easily digestible in-and-out, simple, linear "story" thing.

If you 'step up your game,' so to speak, you'll likely really be pulled in and fascinated by the play. However, most people won't, so expect to hear a lot of "one of the worst things I've ever seen!" and "what was THAT?!?"

Updated On: 4/19/08 at 10:26 AM

steve, here's a synopsis, as well as I can give it. Those who know the play better, please feel free to correct at will.

And obviously, MAJOR spoilers will follow.

The play really center around Marlene, who is, for lack of a better term, a real ball-buster who has recently been appointed a top executive at a London employment agency. Meanwhile, her sister Joyce is living a pretty ratty life with her 15-year-old daughter, Angie, having been left by her husband and having to work as a maid to stay afloat. Angie's kind of a hopeless case: not too bright, pretty much friendless except for a 9-year-old girl who lives nearby and prone to violent thoughts. (yes, adults play the children roles)

In the final scene, which actually happens when Angie is 9, it's revealed that Angie is actually Marlene's daughter, and she gave her up to Joyce in order to not get trapped in the same life as her mother and sister. Joyce resents her for this, especially because she miscarried her own child because she was run so ragged caring for Angie.

The first scene is more of a fantasy -- Marlene is celebrating her promotion at a restaurant with the figures I mentioned a few posts above. All basically have a common thread, that they either had to give up their femininity, children or both in order to get ahead.

There's also a number of vignettes in the employment agency of interviews with women looking for jobs that further this theme.

Basically, what kept running through my head throughout was Lady Macbeth's "unsex me" speech. I could give my own interpretations, but maybe in another thread, if anyone is interested in discussing.

My wife went Weds night (should have prefaced by saying she likes just about EVERYTHING !! (or, at least usually finds something very redeeming about everything she sees).

She said it was the worst thing that she has seen in years.

She understood what was going on, but found it to be extremely odd, and very boring.

I love Plimpton, and was really looking forward to this, but thinking of doing "Boeing-Boeing" instead on Weds.