The play I chose to read is Mud: a Play in 17 Scenes by the Obie-Award winning playwright Maria Irene Fornes. It was first written and produced in 1983, and the play saw its premiere as a summer stock production at the Padua Hills Playwright’s Festival in California with Fornes as its director (Database). Today, this play is frequently produced by University theatre programs and regional theatre companies across the country. Mud is most easily accessed through the North American Women’s Drama database (Database).
The story follows three uneducated, mentally unstable housemates living in rural America, and the play follows the progression of their relationships and daily struggles. Mae is a housewife-like figure who lives with Lloyd, who is her mentally and physically ill “sibling with benefits.” Although Mae takes night classes in hopes of bettering her reading skills, she finds Henry and brings him into their home to help read a note from Lloyd’s doctor. Soon after, Mae decides that she wants Henry to move in with them, as she realizes she loves him and “wants [his] mind” (Fornes 21). This adjustment sparks much jealousy and hatred in Lloyd, considering Mae asks Henry to take Lloyd’s spot in her bed and suggests that Lloyd sleep on some newspapers spread out on the floor. The tension between the two men constantly mounts, as their health slowly deteriorates and the two grow more desperate for money, medicine, and caretaking. When the difficulties of living with Lloyd and Henry becomes too much, Mae decides that it is time for her to free herself from all restraints and move out in order to make a better life for herself. After Henry and Lloyd exclaim “Mae” for two pages in a variety of tones, Lloyd decides the only logical way to prevent her from leaving is to *SPOILER ALERT* shoot her (Fornes 52-53). The play ends with Mae declaring that she is a starfish.
One interesting dramaturgical choice Fornes makes is the childlike structure, syntax, and vocabulary of the characters, as well as the inverse relationship Henry and Lloyd have in regards to intelligence. Especially in the first few scenes of the first act, there is a ton of repetition between Mae and Lloyd, and the sentences don’t really exceed more than four or five words. Exchanges generally go along the lines:
Lloyd: What do you learn?
Mae: Subjects
Lloyd: What is subjects?
Mae: Different things.
Lloyd: What things?
which really brings out the childlike ignorance found in both Mae and Lloyd. Another interesting occurrence regarding the language of the play is the inverse relationship Lloyd and Henry possess when it comes to speaking. In other words, in the scenes where Henry is more “intelligent” (and note that intelligent is in quotations), Lloyd’s lines seem to get dumber and vice versa. After Henry’s injury, he regresses to the repetitions and three-word sentences similar to those that Lloyd spoke in the first act, and in comparison, Lloyd seemed to be the more educated one. While all this is happening, Mae’s lines start to get more and more complex, displaying her newly-acquired literacy skills.
Another interesting choice is the extended metaphors of a starfish and a hermit crab. In Act I, Scene 6, Mae reads a description of a starfish as a part of her lessons, and the passage she reads reflects the qualities that can be found in herself. For example, she states, “The starfish is an animal, not a fish. He is called a fish because he lives in the water” (Fornes 26). This can be interpreted to mean that she is not willing to define herself by where she lives or what her background entails, but she is working to make a better life for herself by getting an education. Further evidence for this metaphor can be found in the last scene, as her dying words begin with, “Like the starfish…” (Fornes 52). To go along with this, Henry and Lloyd are compared to hermit crabs in similar manners, as Mae reads, “…he lived in empty shells that once belonged to other animals” (Fornes 30). Although these metaphors do not really relate to the plot or characters in any other ways other than this, these were an almost unnoticeable touch to the complexity of the characters and their relationships with one another.
I've always wanted to read Mud but have never gotten around to it. The first dramaturgical choice you focused on reminds me of Howard Barker's Judith. I know you remember, but I enjoyed how the language in that play drifted between Shakespearean, high class dialogue and cockney, "silly bitch cunt!" language. It seems like Fornes was going for a similar idea with her flow of rising and falling intelligence found in her character's lines. I always admire writers who don't depend on flash and action to lure audiences in, but rather stay true to essence of storytelling and make it a point to create a distinct language. (Edward Albee is another playwright that comes to mind where understanding patterns, rhythms, and levels of class in language is indeed crucial to grasping the beauty of an Albee play). Short lines and simple dialogue can sometimes be frustrating, but it seems like you enjoyed it. Thanks for link, now maybe I'll finally get to reading it!
ReplyDeleteI think that the characters in Mud, though portrayed so simply in intelligence, are very complex characters. I like how you highlighted her identifying with the starfish. I feel like this was a very strong element to Mae's character.
ReplyDelete