August: Osage County -- A Soap Opera?

[nomdeplume]

Posted: 12/6/07 at 12:34am

I found this a strange show. It has some very fine things about it and some things I have trouble with that interfered with my enjoyment.

First up, the best things. The cast and the acting are very fine. The pacing is also on target. The three plus hour play goes right by quickly, no drags, and holds your attention. There are some good one-liners, though many are sick--like the "you never know when you may need a kidney" one (a groaner). And some absurd happenings like the outburst of the three "where's the beef?" squeals.

[SPOILERS]

When I saw the family tree in the program and it got to cousins I immediately thought, ok, so there's going to be incest in this plot. And there it was, though I preferred the way the comic and satirical musical "Bat Boy" handled it. It just seemed such an obvious setup here.

The play for me was creaky with exposition. As when Johnna gives the little spiel about the umbilical cord in the turtle pouch. It just sounded like something the playwright learned and was just dying to put somewhere in the play to teach it to the audience rather than being integral to play. Then there was the conversation between sisters where one chirps up "oh, I wasn't here then" as an excuse to hear the story told again. And there were a lot of little philosophical one-liners sprouting here and there which were interesting of themselves and often unusual ways of looking at things, but seemed to be stuffed in rather than being discovered by the characters during the events in the play itself.

By the time I had sat through alcoholism, drug addiction, suicide, child molestation, self-help "I'm happy", adulteries, sibling rivalry, parent-child abuse, child-parent abuse and who knows what else all supposedly being conveyed with realism despite the humor, I'd lost respect for the structure of the play itself and found its message convoluted. I had fatigued of its plot if not its actors. And I feel it was the nature of the writing, overwritten. It was a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing, I give it that. And like a soap opera and the daytime TV talk shows in subject matter content.

And I sat back after and thought, I enjoyed Cymbeline much more than this even though Cymbeline dragged in its pacing. The visuals in Cymbeline were stunning, set, lights and costumes and overall design and the play was bouyed by Shakepeare's lofty, and at times, tender language and humanist philosophy.

Since the mother is doing her drug addict thing immediately one thinks of A Long Day's Journey Into Night. However, the Osage County mother is not even trying to hide it, but brazen with it, it is much different Journey and Letts is no O'Neill. Journey was infused with love as well as various failings and vices in the family members. That love carried O'Neill forward to write, for it is obvious he loved his mother and she him. (His mother went on to conquer her addiction later in real life, by the way, drying out at a convent with the help of nuns.)

Love does not underlie Osage County, and I can't feel a unity about the play. Hence it hits me as soap opera.

This general subject matter handled in satire as by Durang in Betty's Summer Vacation or Busch in Die, Mommie, Die (a fine play, go see it) gives the whole mise en scene an aplomb that elevates the art out of soap opera and also the humor becomes delightful. And both Vacation and Die are infused with the love of absurdity in life and the creation of absurdity in the play.

Do you find Osage County similar to a soap opera (with more jokes) or how would you differentiate it?

© 2007 nomdeplume by pseudonym, all rights reserved
Updated On: 12/6/07 at 12:34 AM

[nomdeplume]

Posted: 12/14/07 at 9:55pm

What do you know. Peter Marks of the Washington Post agrees. And he also preferred The Seafarer's story and acting. I'd like to meet this guy, it would be a fun conversation.

I certainly agree with his:

"You keep waiting for "August" to stir the stewpot with something other than a bracing joke or shocking twist. But the characters never act out of impulses we regard as inherently affecting or tragically inevitable. They simply act out.
...
And given how easy it is to dismiss Violet [the mother] as ridiculously evil, the drama's conclusion proves to be an unpersuasive attempt to recast her as worthy of empathy.

Anna D. Shapiro's energetic direction and Todd Rosenthal's architecturally impressive design for the house both play into the idea that we are in the presence of important work. I am in total sympathy with my colleagues in the desire to find and crown the next great American play. Regrettably, the ersatz characters of "August" point in the direction of something that earns laughs but nothing more significant."
'August: Osage County': A Soapy Drama With No Guiding Light Updated On: 12/14/07 at 09:55 PM

[Tkt2Ride]

Posted: 12/14/07 at 10:35pm

This was my fear too about this show. I'm still picking The Seafarer right now. It's almost scary Osage is getting so much attention. I am sure though that the acting is very good. It's just the story that makes me want to run faster in the other direction.

** sorry, I see now how that might be confusing..**

Updated On: 12/14/07 at 10:35 PM

[uncageg]

Posted: 12/14/07 at 10:44pm

What I thought was so good about Osage is that Letts wrote each character so it embodied someone you knew in your family or in someone elses. Some characters reminded me of more than one person I have known throught my life. And he pulled it all together and made one dysfunctional family. But they represented just about every family out there in one way or another. I admit, I was not blown away right after I saw it. I had to let it sink in. And then I saw The Homecoming 2 days later!!! But I had to do the same thing with "Doubt". The thing that really hit me with Osage was the housekeepers role in all of it.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 12/14/07 at 10:44pm

Osage is a soap opera, albeit a very well-written and significantly more entertaining than general TV fare one. I thought the first act dragged, a bit too much exposition. I don't think the show, as a whole, was bogged down by too many plot points. Letts' wanted to show the destruction of an American family (his own), and how one thing, like a father's suicide, can lead to such a rapid downfall.

That it's based (at least partially) on a true story is what makes it special. That there's at least one character who you "recognize" as being part of your own family - whether it's the pill-popping mother, the wise-cracking aunt, and so forth - made it even more frightening.

So Tckt, you're boycotting The Seafarer, not having seen it, because you don't like the story?

It's an enthralling piece of work - top notch acting - and an entrancing story.

I'd still give Osage the edge. It's just brilliant...in my eyes, anyway.

[uncageg]

Posted: 12/14/07 at 10:52pm

The first act did drag a bit, but I just knew we were being set up for the next two acts. The ending to the 1st act gave me a bit of a chill. And after seeing the whole thing, I can see where the very ending to the 1st act came from.

[nomdeplume]

Posted: 12/14/07 at 10:57pm

"So Tckt, you're boycotting The Seafarer, not having seen it, because you don't like the story?"

I believe he/she is "picking" not boycotting The Seafarer, and choosing to see it over Osage.

At the end of Osage I just felt like I had seen nothing but a spew of nasty behavior and venomous talk. I didn't find any redeeming underlay, of a PLAY, in the work. It didn't go anywhere and I felt the play's characters actually lacked character and originality. For me the dimensional "feel" of the characters wasn't there. Updated On: 12/14/07 at 10:57 PM

[uncageg]

Posted: 12/14/07 at 11:04pm

I think the play goes everywhere. That's what I liked about it. It went everywhere but was contained to this one family. This may sound cliche or something, but it was one of those shows that when I walked out into the night after the show, I was in love again with Broadway. The same kind of feeling I had with DOUBT, History Boys and Caroline or Change. it was just an exhilirating feeling. Not that I was ever out of love with Broadway, but it was just that special feeling I get after a really special evening at the theatre.

Updated On: 12/14/07 at 11:04 PM

[Tkt2Ride]

Posted: 12/14/07 at 11:10pm

No Yankeefan, I am picking, ( like in choosing ) "The Seafarer" because I think it will have enough of a draw from the sets and performances to keep me intrigued.

Its "Osage" that reminds me too much of what I see everyday and really don't like much. I like to go to the Theatre to be taken away somewhere new or delve more into History from days gone by. I like some Modern stuff but shy away from anything that is too full of every thing wrong with the World. I do enjoy some Political intrigue if it is done well also. If I wanted to see family squabbles, I usually prefer Shakesphere's approach the best.

I just rather not leave the show feeling completely miserable if I have a choice. For certain classics I'll endure. I just like my misery with a bit of scenery. Some flashy costumes. Anything that comes even close to "All In The Family" I try to my best to excuse myself from whenever possible.

It seems like they put too much into "Osage". I still want to see "A Catered Affair" though because I know I will like the acting, the sets and the music will all be nice to hear. I prefer the intimate setting in a story because I think I get more of an understanding of what the writer is trying to get across.

I do though wish the cast and crew well. It doesn't seem to be doing poorly. I am just not following the crowd on this yet.

[nomdeplume]

Posted: 12/14/07 at 11:16pm

Yeah, I was expecting Osage to be a major work of theatre and very much hoping for it, but was left feeling like I'd just seen a bunch of cheesy TV with a ridiculous amount of nasty behavior tossed on for show and sitcom punchlines. And I felt like I was robbed of the evening of theatre I had hoped for and expected.

[KJisgroovy]

Posted: 12/15/07 at 1:39am

"Letts is no O'Neill"

I don't understand the need for this. It's not just in your post, but it has popped frequently in one or two reviews and many board posts... sometimes also including Williams and Albee. I am not directing these comments at you personally, please don't take offense (if that is even possible), I think most of your comments in this post are well articulated(though I disagree-more on that later). I think there is such an air of condescension in comparing Letts to O'Neill and Williams... it is like the poster/reviewer is saying that not only O'Neill is better than Letts but the poster/reviewer is better than all of the people who have compared the two. Have you read early O'Neill? 'Cause early O'Neill is no O'Neill. I don't understand how people can declare something "great art" or "not great art" after leaving the theater... isn't great art something you have to get some distance from? Isn't history litered with plays that were "great theater" in their day... but are long since forgotten... or revived as oddiities?

"with a ridiculous amount of nasty behavior tossed on for show and sitcom punchlines."

This too, I don't understand. Perhaps it is because one person's experience is SO different from someone else's... but those people on that stage... I know them... they lived in breathed in a way... that... I have not really ever experienced... This "nasty behavior" is the behavior of my family... of scared people, terrified of vulnerability even in the face of people who love them... it is not fiction for me... it rings true... certainly... the play is overfilled with scandal... but for me... that made it MORE enjoyable... it was too much in a way a musical is... it was over the top... and clearly on purpose... for me it was an opera... no soap.

"At the end of Osage I just felt like I had seen nothing but a spew of nasty behavior and venomous talk."

I think... um... if this is all you got... we clearly have opposing perspectives that shall never never meet... and I respect that!

[KJisgroovy]

Posted: 12/15/07 at 1:44am

"...but shy away from anything that is too full of every thing wrong with the World."

Then challenging art, or even challenging entertainment... is not for you. Why bother? For me, I expect "art" to do more than remind me life is "nice," beause often it's not.

"Anything that comes even close to "All In The Family" I try to my best to excuse myself from whenever possible."

What? Have I missed the parade of plays that model themselves on "All In the Family"? I don't think I've ever seen anything that reminded me of "All in the Family." Certainly not August: Osage County.

[nomdeplume]

Posted: 12/15/07 at 1:56am

Sure, KJ, I can address the O'Neill comment. It is coming about because the playwright has created a parallel situation to the famous scene and story of the mother entering the room and her being a drug addict (in Letts' play she's a pill/drug addict). When there is already such a famous scene in such a famous play, it invites comparison, but it also sets the play up for comparison against the masterpiece of O'Neill.

Updated On: 12/15/07 at 01:56 AM

[KJisgroovy]

Posted: 12/15/07 at 2:20am

So, O'Neill has got the copyright? Was MY grandmother copying Mary Tyrone... or...? That comes off more aggressive than I intend it to... so... you know... no offense.

Um, I get the comparison... it is understandable and appropriate as far as the situation of the two plays are concerned... I was more interested in the need to dismiss Letts as "no O'Neill"... I get comparing the two... I just don't understand how someone can dismiss Letts so quickly... I understand comparison... not the need to rank playwrights... particularly without any time to digest.

kmc

[nomdeplume]

Posted: 12/15/07 at 2:24am

John Heilpern in the NY Observer thought about the same.

Interesting because some of the major reviewers came out so strongly for the play, and my reaction was just "what are they thinking?" and to me it was a "the emperor has no clothes" situation, but now some of the reviews are also saying that.

I like theatre to elevate me to a new level of understanding and this play didn't. There are plenty of people who don't mind soap opera/TV stuff on the stage, but to me theatre offers an opportunity for something different and that difference is why I like theatre.
TV or Not TV? Tracy Letts’ Dark New Gothic Play Dissolves into a Soapy Potboiler

[KJisgroovy]

Posted: 12/15/07 at 2:41am

"I like theatre to elevate me to a new level of understanding and this play didn't. There are plenty of people who don't mind soap opera/TV stuff on the stage, but to me theatre offers an opportunity for something different and that difference is why I like theatre."

I guess this is what gets me riled. Most of the negative reviews have done this. What you've said here is not really a comment on the play, but instead... people who enjoyed the play. As if you were saying "Well, I suppose some people liked it, but only those people who don't expect much... wink wink." I think August: Osage County is a great potboiler... a down and dirty melodrama with a sly resonance. I think it is aware of it's potboiler/melodrama status... look around... contemporary life is full of melodrama... I'm not sure if that is just the way life is... or perhaps it has become so in the past few generations... and isn't that partially what this play is commenting on? Doesn't it touch on the shallow and melodramatic society we've become? Aren't you missing the point... just a little bit? But that is me sharing an opinion. And I'm cool with that... let's debate the merits of the play... let's not dismiss the play as unworthy because you don't like it... the playwright as second rate because he's "no O'Neill" ... and the people who like the people as small minded.

There are many negative things you can say about the play... I will probably disagree with you... but that doesn't make them any less valid... but some of this criticism (and I guess it isn't really you I am directing this to... but some previous posters and the New York Observer(though... some of it was spot on) and the Washington Post reviews...) has the sour odor of elitism that has driven people away from the theater.

I believe the urban youth of America call this Hating.

kmc

Updated On: 12/15/07 at 02:41 AM

[nomdeplume]

Posted: 12/15/07 at 3:06am

I want something from a play when I go to see it. I want to learn something, experience something, be surprised, enlightened.

And I want to experience from the play something that can only happen in a theatre, that makes full use of the medium of the theatre.

To me that is not elitist, it is getting my money's worth.

Melodrama and society I covered in my initial post by saying I thought Durang and Busch had handled similar subject matter much more effectively than Letts. Read Betty's Summer Vacation if you didn't catch it and go and see Die, Mommie, Die. The use of satire was a much sharper work in the crafting of a play, choosing an absurdist approach rather than trying to be serious with the tawdry melodrama. Durang and Busch didn't weigh their plays down trying to be serious, which would have made the plots hard to buy with an attempt at realism such as Letts tried to present as he threw in the kitchen sink of abnormal behavior.

I've heard a person remark that Shakespeare was elitist theatre, but Shakespeare wrote on many levels and for several classes in society, including bawdy and stuff for the rowdy people who sat in the cheap area known as the "pit" in the theatre. What does elitist mean in this regard? What is elitist to one is not elitist to another. For me "elitist" is the work of a pretentious playwright like Stoppard, I would use it for work that purports to have a lot to say but I don't think does.

[Tkt2Ride]

Posted: 12/15/07 at 6:01am

I guess I should just make it very simple for you. This may be your family and some of it is definitely mine. You may go to see a show like this because either you need this sort of message or it makes you feel like you're home.

I myself go to see a show because I would like to see something different. I am going out because I don't want to be around any of my relatives that I find annoying. My immediate family isn't too bad at all. My relatives and siblings, I don't miss the company.

So though these plays have a place on a stage, I myself will avoid them at all costs, unless they are set to Shakesphere and I like the sets. If you like them great but I do not pay to see this stuff on television and I am certainly not going to pay even more to see it on a stage. I can go visit my Uncle and see it for free!

That "All in the Family" joke has to do with anything that focus on out of control domestic strife. It seems that Osage is full of that. Should I just say based on what everyone has said about this family, I don't like them and hopefully all of my kids will be lucky enough to avoid them at all cost. It seems you have enough love for them all. Good for you! Me? I'm just going to save myself the misery of it all.

[uncageg]

Posted: 12/15/07 at 7:30am

The play is not for everyone. And to "put it plainly" from my perspective, I personally did not go to see it because I "need" this sort of "message" or it made me feel like I am home. I went to see good theatre. Period.

Tkt2Ride, you seem to have a strong opinion against the show and I am taking it that you have not seen it. While what you have read or heard about the show may be enough to let you know that it may not be a show that you may not want to see, until you see it, I wouldn't make a comparion to "All in the Family". All in the family was not "out of control domestic life". And there was always a message behind each episode. Both of these shows, "Family" and "Osage" are also comedies. So while I understand that you prefer certain types of shows, I don't think it is fair to compare a show to something else or imply that it is not something different until you actually see the show. I go to the theater for some of the same reasons you do but I also like to see things like Osage, DOUBT, and Caroline or Change. All of which address real life situations and are done beautifully. While in New York last week, I had not planned to see "The Homecoming". It was low on my list because there were other things I wanted to see first. But it was on my list because of the cast and I had never seen a Pinter play. it turned out that I was offered a comp seat to see in last Saturday afternoon and I went. And I am glad I did. I enjoy all of the big shows with big sets, dancing and special effects that take me to another place. I also enjoy a show that will spark conversation and debate after seeing it. But to each his own! Just my random thoughts.

Updated On: 12/15/07 at 07:30 AM

[Gypsy9]

Posted: 12/15/07 at 8:42am

I went to see AUGUST: OSAGE COUNTY with a friend for the matinee last Saturday. I agree with some of the thoughts of nondeplume, but not all of his thoughts. I found the acting ensemble to be excellent and the play to be very interesting, but also would characterize it as a potboiler- melodrama, and because of that I was somewhat disappointed. I went in with the NY Times review in my head, expecting a "junior" Eugene O'Neill afternoon. I did not find that to be so. There was very interesting dialogue, but no poetry to the lines, except for the father who leaves shortly after the play begins. I guess I was expecting more, given the glowing notices it received. Incidentally, my friend thought it wonderful throughout, with no reservations. But I am still waiting for it to sink in as a great play.

[nomdeplume]

Posted: 12/15/07 at 11:05am

All in the Family was much tamer than Osage.

[uncageg]

Posted: 12/15/07 at 11:26am

I was at the airport in Denver when the reviews started posting. My friend had the Times and Post waiting for me when I got there. He told me I may not want to read them as there were some slight spoilers. I waited until the day after to read them and I am glad I did.

All In the Family was a bit over the top but always with a message. Usually one that "taught" Archie a lesson. Osage bascically rolled almost every family member plus that we know together and put them within the story of the father's "disappearance".

[nomdeplume]

Posted: 12/15/07 at 11:38am

Pretty obvious that "August" was added to the title just to put it alphabetically at the top of any list published in media or theatre chart, as at TKTS.

That was another problem I had with the play. I never felt the supposed "heat" of the summertime in the play. Yes there were a couple lines that her back was sweating from the mother's sister and one of the daughters complained of the heat but I never felt it in the play itself as you can in Tennessee Williams' plays. People move around too fast for a real heat wave. I didn't feel the oppression and slowdown that goes with heat. It was more like it got tacked on just to put an "A" word in the title.

[uncageg]

Posted: 12/15/07 at 11:57am

August was the month. And it was obvious that it was hot. You could se the "sweat" on the costumes. The windows were covered to "keep the world out" but I assumed it was also for the heat. We used to keep the curtains drawn in the summer to keep the house cooler even after we got an air-conditioner. And even though we complained about the heat, we were outside playing and running around, etc. So that part didn't really cross my mind. And I feel that they showed how tempers can also rise in the heat.

Updated On: 12/15/07 at 11:57 AM

[KJisgroovy]

Posted: 12/15/07 at 12:05pm

"Pretty obvious that "August" was added to the title just to put it alphabetically at the top of any list published in media or theatre chart, as at TKTS."

Oh. I see. You think your opinion is a fact. I thought we were having a discussion and you seem to be declaring facts. I misunderstood.

"I myself will avoid them at all costs, unless they are set to Shakesphere and I like the sets."

Why go to the theater at all? Get a disney picture book. It's much cheaper and I promise it won't upset you.