• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses Graduate School 1979 Modern American Prizewinning Plays (1965-1975): Structural Analysis and Criticism. J. Michael Phillips Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses Recommended Citation Phillips, J. Michael, "Modern American Prizewinning Plays (1965-1975): Structural Analysis and Criticism." (1979). LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses. 3458. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses/3458 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INFORMATION TO USERS This was produced from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is “Missing Page(s)”. If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure you of complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark it is an indication that the film inspector noticed either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, or duplicate copy. Unless we meant to delete copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed, you will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photo­ graphed the photographer has followed a definite method in “sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand comer of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again—beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. For any illustrations that cannot be reproduced satisfactorily by xerography, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and tipped into your xerographic copy. Requests can be made to our Dissertations Customer Services Department. 5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases we have filmed the best available copy. University MfcrcSilms International 300 N. ZEEB ROAD, ANN ARBOR. Ml 48106 1B BEDFORD ROW, LONDON WC1R 4EJ. ENGLAND 8013139 PHILLIPS, J. MICHAEL MODERN AMERICAN PRIZEWINNING PLAYS (1965-1975) : STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND CRITICISM The Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical Col. PH.D. 1979 University Microfilms International300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106 18 Bedford Row, London WC1R 4EJ, England Modern American Prizewinning Plays (1965-1975) Structural Analysis and Criticism A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Department of Speech by J. Michael Phillips M.S., North Texas State University, 1972 B. S., Lamar University, 1970 December 1979 EXAMINATION AND THESIS REPORT Candidate: J. Michael Phillips Major Field: Speech Title of Thesis: Modern American Prizewinning Plays (1965-1975) Structural Analysis and Criticism Approved: Major Professor and Chairman V ^ Dean of the Graduate School EXAMINING COMMITTEE: crr^ t- L t* r *>■» J? Date of Examination: November 15, 1979 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. Introduction ................................. I II. P l o t ........................................ 15 III. C h a r a c t e r .................................. 54 IV. T h o u g h t ....................................... 133 V. D i c t i o n .................. 193 VI. M u s i c ......................................... 250 VII. Spectacle ..................................... 281 VIII. Summary and Conclusions ........................ 342 Bibliography ......................................... 366 ABSTRACT This study presents a structural analysis and criticism of thirteen contemporary American plays. Emphasis is on the playwrights' uses of the elements of drama as identified by Aristotle: plot, character, thought, diction, music and spectacle. The point of this analysis is to gain knowledge of contemporary usage of these elements, pointing out relative emphasis the writers made of them, and describ­ ing any experimental forms which appear. Selection of the plays studied was on a basis of critical acclaim received. The dramas were published be­ tween 1965 and 1975; each has won one or more of three major awards— The New York Drama Critics Circle Award, The Pulitzer Prize for Drama, and the Antoinette Perry Award The dramas and playwrights included in this study are The Subject Was Roses, Frank D. Gilroy; A Delicate Balance and Seascape, both by Edward Albee; The Great White Hope, Howard Sackler; The Effect of Gamma Rays On Man-In-The-Moon Marigolds, Paul Zindel; The House of Blue Leaves, John Guare No Place To Be Somebody, Charles Gordone; That Championship Season, Jason Miller; The Hot L Baltimore, Lanford Wilson; Sticks And Bones, David Rabe; Short Eyes, Miguel Pinero; The River Miger, Joseph A. Walker; and The Taking of Miss Janie, Ed Bullins. This research consists of eight chapters. The first is an introductory unit. The next six succeeding chapters deal one at a time with the use of the six elements— plot, character, thought, diction, music, spectacle— in the thirteen plays. A final chapter contains a summary and conclusions. The study determines that no particular method of plot arrangement is evident in nine of the dramas. Gilroy, Miller Pinero, and Walker all utilize causally developed plots. In their characterizations, the playwrights reduce dis­ tinctions between protagonists and antagonists. The writers make limited use of auxiliary characters. Two unique types emerge— the discontented youth and the angry black person. There are no completely admirable characters in these plays. Character delineation occurs through speeches of the charac­ ters about themselves and others, and their appearance. Concerning thought, none of the plays are didactic. All of the dramatists infer thought, with varying degrees of clarity, through the actions and speeches of the charac­ ters , Conversational prose is the principal form of diction in these dramas. Poetry exists in some of the plays, but never as an integral part of any script. The playwrights employ different methods to make their prose interesting, including direct address to the audience, intimate state­ ments of self-disclosure by characters, dialects and idioms of ethnic groups, and vulgarisms. There is a breakdown in traditional distinctions between incidental and dramatic music in these dramas. Some of the writers give music an essential role in contributing to the total effect of their plays. Regarding spectacle, realism is the prevailing scenic style. Innovations include the use of lighting to direct the audience1s attention in a manner similar to some cam­ era techniques in films. Violent and naturalistic action onstage marks many of the dramas. The thirteen plays depend mostly on the appeal of their spectacle for favorable critical attention. There­ fore, the playwrights give spectacle the greatest emphasis among the six dramatic elements. All six elements which Aristotle identified as basic to drama still appear in the works of contemporary play­ wrights . v CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION This study presents a structural analysis and criti­ cism of selected contemporary American plays. Beginning with The Poetics of Aristotle (c. 384-322 B. C.) theorists and critics of dramatic art have identified as essential elements in the structure of a drama plot, character, dialogue, thought, music, and spectacle. Contemporary practitioners still accept these elements as the basic principles of drama. Vera Mowry Roberts said, "... these six elements are 'necessary parts of all possible unique 1 creations in the art of the theatre." Roberts maintains that changes in dramatic structure from ancient to modern times occurred when playwrights gave different emphasis to one or several of the six clas­ sical elements. As an example, Roberts says that tragedy emphasizes thought, whereas comedy stresses character, and melodrama features plot. In modern drama, which Roberts calls "nonhuman and nonliterary, where man is a 'thing* 1 Vera Mowry Roberts, The Nature of Theatre (New York: Harper and Row, 1971), p. 51. 1 and there is no sense nor logic." 2 she sees spectacle underscored. Vera Mowry Roberts defines "structure" as the "rela­ tionships of the various parts to each other and to the whole." A new dramatic structure, according to Roberts, is the consequence of a distinct synthesis of the basic six elements.3 Alvin B. Kernan punctuates the differences between ancient and modern dramatic structures. A Greek tragic dramatist of the fifth century B.C. wrote in a tradition which prescribed the use of certain poetic meters, limited the num­ ber of characters who could appear on

Load more

  380

Copy Link