Play Groups Books

I consider these to plays to be probably the most entertaining that we have in the English language. Shakespeare, they're not, but that is precisely why they can be enjoyed by a modern audience. Don't get me wrong, when shakespeare is good he's the tops (much ado about nothing, taming o. the shrew), but even with these plays one has to put one's sixteenth century english cap on, and start thinking in english like that renaissance bard did. What's more, with shakespeare, even the comedies had some serious dark, somber undercurrents. None of that with Wilde. Everything is left to the wit of language, which is ample, and usually uproarious. You really owe yourself the opportunity to become acquainted with these plays. Go out and watch a stage or film production of these plays if you can...

Which is the best play out of the three presented here? Importance of Being Earnest, no question.

I have decided that since so many people are obviously blind to how dumb this play is, I should write a review to enlighten anyone that might read it. The humor is dated and because of that, very boring. The situations are completely inconceivable and it makes no sense! The characters are flat and serve no real purpose. I suggest that no one else ever ever read this play.

An extraordinary play; witty, profound and beautiful. And even better if you read all of it. Which you won't if you buy the Penguin copy with Edith Evans on the front, since this version is heavily abridged. Which is fine except the publishers make no mention of this at all in the volume. And cultural vandalism of this kind should, I feel at least be acknowledged.

All you Wildeans take note: this is the only edition of the plays wherein the lines are properly numbered for specific citation and easy reference: very, very important!!

I had no knowledge of Oscar Wilde and had only seen ten minutes of the movie, The Importance of Being Earnest, as I flipped through the cable channels on my television. However, due to a class that I am enrolled in, not only do I now know who he is but I am blessed to have been introduced to his work.

The Importance of Being Earnest, makes a very humorous yet profound commentary on money, marriage, status and image as it pertains to the aristocracy of that time. It seems that Oscar Wilde utilized this medium of artistic expression to cleverly expose the twisted way that those with wealth perceived themselves and the lengths they would go to the preserve that perception. It has been referred to as a "comedy of manners" because so much of what defined or distinguished the aristocracy from the common man was not necessarily the wealth that they actually had but what men and women did to appear like they had it.

Ernest, who is the main character in the play, has done all of what is necessary to appear as though he comes from wealth. He wears the clothing, keeps the company and talks the talk of the aristocrat. However what he soon finds out is that all of those whom he is trying to impress and fit in with, have more unresolved issues in their closet than he does. I believe Wilde addresses this social paradox with impeccable wit and an amazing sense of human psychology. He not only challenged those who belonged to the aristocracy to examine what they placed value in, but continues to challenge each reader today, that these superficial values might not stand as valuable at all.

Dinner with Friends is an interesting, if seriously disturbing. Revolving around two couples that believe themselves extremely close, the play begins with news that Beth and Tom have separated and that Tom has run off with his travel agent. The story that ensues paints all of the characters in an incredibly believable way in which nobody is completely honest, everyone believes that they are right, and the boundaries of friendship for everyone are clearly defined.

As a twenty-five year old man, I found it incredibly disturbing how truly Margulies was able to capture the middle aged experience. The logic of the characters evolution is flawless, and paints a rather grim future for all of us that believe that we're in love and know who our true-blue friends are.

If you haven't read Dinner With Friends, you won't be disappointed. I thoroughly enjoyed it...great plot, great dialogue, great characters, and a bittersweet ending. Definitely a good choice.

This is an emotionally charged, witty, and brilliantly told drama of four friends struggling to understand marriage, divorce, intamacy, and each other. One of the best plays I've seen/read.

Reading an unfavorable online comment from "Plattypus", I came across this sentence -- "Also, Margulies's use of conversation is not believable. Characters are always interrupting each other, which is certainly true in real life. However, in this play they do it constantly, and nobody ever seems to notice." This is a statement that has to be challenged. People in conversation -- particularly heated conversation -- interrupt each other (and themselves) all of the time. I have done experiments transcribing tape-recorded conversations that bear this out. If you're gonna knock a work, do so with a valid argument.

I'll avoid giving a synopsis as so many have already. I had the pleasure of seeing this play on stage. I had a conversation afterwards with one of the actors (Gabe) who is a good friend. There's one thing in particular I'd like to point out from the conversation with him. He told me that the play "doesn't read well" - you wind up thinking it's just another overwrought "Thirty-Something". But, it "plays" entirely differently. I will freely admit that the complicated issues brought up by the play had me crying most of the way through it. (Yes, I'm a guy.) Who's right? Who's wrong? Uh... yes! They all are... both right and wrong.

It would certainly be easy to dismiss this work as just more "Thirty-Something" or as being too "Boomer"-esque. I'm not a Boomer. I'm an X-er, as a matter of fact, and it's resonating very loudly. My partner and I have struggled with the issues raised, as have partners of any generation, and will for generations to come.

I don't want to discourage anyone from buying the book/script. But please remember, this is a play. Let in be enacted in your mind as you read. Feel the situation. If it's totally foreign, try to go outside of yourself and make it your own. The depth of the drama will come through.

I recieved this book years ago for a christmas present. I reread it this year for a project I was doing on The Monkees and was appauled by the number of typos I found! There are three pictures missing (it's that blatent that I can tell), repeated sentences, and an entire section where the person who said the quote was credited in the wrong spot.

The content, on the other hand, is excellent. I love how everything in this book is a personal quote. It really helps you get a deeper understanding of each Monkees personality.

To finish this review, This is a great book for a Monkee collector. It has some funny stories and great information. If you can get over the numerous typo's, it should be an enjoyable read.

I LOVED HEARING FROM EVERYONE ABOUT EACH OTHER, AND THOSE INVOLVED WITH MAKING THE SHOW. IT WAS ALSO FUN TO FIND OUT HOW THE SHOW WAS SO DIFFERENT FROM OTHERS BEFORE AND AFTER IT. IT WAS SO UNIQUE AND UNIQUELY DONE, THAT I DON'T THINK IT'S BEEN TOPPED SINCE. I LOVE THAT IT'S BACK!

I just got this book recently, and I was pretty disappointed with it. Although it's not The Monkees fault, almost every passage in this book has been quoted on one website or another, making almost everything in the book lose it's freshness. Also, the Monkees don't talk about the group's long breaking-up period (from when Peter left in spring, 1969, to when Micky and Davy finally called it quits in 1970) or their lives individually after they broke up and very briefly about their lives before they were picked for the show. Still, the few parts that weren't quoted on websites before are interesting (like the Micky-making-fun-of-Don Kirshner story), and it's charming to read their recollections, particulary Micky's and Peter's. In short, this is a good book, but it's missing some stuff, and don't be surprised if you've read pratically everything in it before.

I think this is the best Monkee book I've read so far. It tells the tales in the Monkees' point of view, and the pictures are awseome. Plus they had interviews from people like Peter Noone, Ward Sylvester, Bobby Hart, and others. If you're a Monkee fan I highly suggest it.

the pictures in this book are great, and show a lot of what the monkees were all about. lots of candids. but the best thing about this book is not the pics, but the stories told by micky, davy, mike, & peter. first hand info from the men who lived in the monkees phenomenon. a must read for a good laugh or a good sigh.

This is the greatest baseball book I have ever read! Eric Davis was one of the hardest playing players of all-time and would definately be Hall of Fame bound had he not played so hard. But Eric couldn't hold back a bit and instead left a legacy of how to play the game right. His story of how he overcame cancer through his faith in God is very inspirational reading even for the non-baseball fan. Davis is my all-time favorite player and this book did not disappoint! I highly recommend this book to any sports fan or fans of winning against the odds!

Back in the late 80's I went to a Reds game with a group of friends, one of whom told me that he wanted to sit next to me during the game so he could hear me rip Eric Davis to shreds. I told him that if he wanted to hear me rip on someone, sit by me when Rickey Henderson came to town because I was then, and had always been a big fan of Eric Davis. Davis spent his whole career in Cincinnati as an object of scorn because of what some felt was an overdeveloped willingness to spend time on the disabled list. This always puzzled me because I felt that it should have been obvious to anyone who watched the game that Davis played with an almost complete lack of concern for his body. There wasn't anything resembling padding on Eric, so when he hit something at full speed, he often paid the price. As far as I could tell, he sacrificed a hall of fame career by playing the game as hard as anyone before or since him. This book isn't a must read unless you watched him play on one of the myriad of teams that he played with during his career and wondered what made him tick. He comes off as being impressed with himself, but I'd have been impressed with myself if I could do the things he did over the course of his career.

This autobiography is the best book I have ever read. I have followed ED for the last fifteen years and I still cannot find a better role model to look up to (disregarding my parents). His strength and ability to overcome numerous injuries and colon cancer are still amazing to me. I'm only 22 years old and I highly doubt I will ever find a greater person to admire. His book talks about his love for family, God, and baseball. Please do not have any doubts concerning the content of this book. You will find no greater athlete to read about and be amazed by.

When I was 10 years old I went to a Mets/Reds Game at Shea Stadium. After the game was over I was standing outside the player's exit area and a new rookie named Eric Davis came out of the door. I could only tell he was a player and I had no clue what his name was. It was "bat day" that day and I asked this man to sign my bat. He signed it 'Eric Davis' and stopped to ask me some questions about myself which I wasn't thinking he would...I figured a bigshot ball player would sign their autograph quickly and move on. Being only 10 years old, I had never encountered any type of person in the public eye such as a celebrity or major league ball player. I then followed Eric everyday in the papers. When I met him, he was just up from the Minors and hadn't gotten any notice yet. I took such pleasure following him and seeing him excel in the game. My parents would mail me box scores of the Reds' games when I was in sleepaway camp over the summer. I still remember getting excited when following Eric in the summer of 87 when he was on fire.

This book gives the reader an idea of what a warm person Eric is. His courageous struggle through cancer and his triumphant return to the game are simply amazing. I hope that Eric reads this one day, and realizes that a fan from the age of 10 (27 now) still follows and admires him. From reading the book, I agree with one of the other reviewers that said that after reading the book, they weren't just a fan of Eric Davis, the baseball player, but they were a fan of the person.

I did not know what to expect from this book. The reviews were mixed and I did not know enough about Eric Davis to have an opinion of him.
I found this book to be refreshingly honest. Davis was a star for a lot of years in baseball. His book is not the standard star bio. Davis tells the good and the bad of his career. He certainly does have an ego (probably a necessity to be a real star), but he comes across as genuine. It is not a problem to say how good you were, when you were that good. He isn't bragging, just stating the truth. He also relates times when his career wasn't going so well.
His battle with cancer and the comeback are really inspiring. His desire to give back a bit is also inspiring. His relationship with his brother provides another good glimpse into the real Eric Davis.
Davis put up solid numbers over the course of his career. He is just a notch or two below Hall of Fame calibre. I would say the same about this book.

I fellow collegue had purchased this book a while ago and after reviewing the contents I knew that the book would be a great resource!

The interventions are creative. I did not like that the interventions called for specific 'toys'. I don't think the game 'hot pototato' is made anymore

Great book with useful activities for my job counseling troubled youth and teens! Thanks a bunch!

Great book...I use it again and again. Good adaptations of regular childhood games, good ideas for working with kids in elementary school! Very much worth the price!

I am finding fun ways to help kids with coping issues and identifying feelings.

This is a performed audio play, not just read by one voice. It is very easy to follow along, and distinguish the different characters.

The quality of this recording is excellent and the performers give very skillful interpretations. Fiennes and Miles are particularly effective as the "star crossed lovers".

Before I listened to this play, I had read the Folgers Shakespeare Library version. I believe that helped me enjoy the play much more.
I am not going to review the play, only this audio version.
The music set the mood of the scenes, and the sound effects brought the landscape to life in my imagination. The cast acted out the parts superbly! The only complaint I have is, When Romeo says, "He jest at scares that never felt a wound," I didn't feel he conveyed enough emotion on that part. After all, in the previous scene, or the same scene depending on how you interpret the scenes, MERCUTIO was mocking his love for Rosaline harshly.
If you are not familiar with the play I highly recommend reading it first, that will make it easier to follow.

This is a terrific recording. My son's teacher recommended he buy this to listen while he read the written words. It made Shakespeare so much more accessible.

It's worth the price just to hear an unabridged version. Capulet is wonderful. The friar is the best ever. Juliet is understandable but has the passion in her voice of a person who's been there a few times too many. But Romeo...a one-emotion three-hour agony to listen to. I've taught teens for thirty years; they don't languish in one emotion. If wallowing were an art form, Fiennes would be the grand master. He obviously doesn't remember how it was long ago when he was a teen.

I think that this book has the ability to capture a person's attention on an emotional level as well as a political one. Rachel Corrie was a very profound writer, even as a teenager. In this book you get to experience her life the way that she did. She was a very special person and you can see that as you read this book. It was a tragedy the way she died, and I think that this book kind of does her memory some justice.

This is a tough review to write.

As to the book, it deserves five stars.

But as to Rachel Corrie, who was an American member of the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) who traveled to the Gaza Strip during the Al-Aqsa Intifada, she brought about her own death when she was defending the wrong side.

The Al-Aqsa Intifada was started by Yasir Arafat when he refused to take the 99% of the West Bank that Ehud Barak offered him.

Arafat had to start the Al-Aqsa Intifada because if he did not, people would comes to terms with his own incompetence, arrogance, and greed. Which has all been documented since.

First off, Fatah, Hama and others, who Rachel defended, besides being anti-Israel, are anti-American.

Second off, these two organizations have killed innocent people, including many Americans.

For Rachel Corrie to defend these people is criminal at best, immoral at worst. Rather than defending terrorists, Rachel should have been defending the innocent Israelis.

She was killed when she tried to obstruct an Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Caterpillar D9 armoured bulldozer operating in Hai as-Salam, a Palestinian area of Rafah, close to the border with Egypt, an area the IDF had designated a security zone.

Why was the bulldozer there? For security operations designed to uncover the network of smuggling tunnels connecting Egypt to the Palestinian side of Rafah - tunnels used by Hamas and other groups for smuggling weapons from Egypt in Gaza strip.

Let's see, illegal weapons are imported to kill innocents and Corrie wants to defend such people?

She brought about her own death.

Rachel Corrie was a beautiful person with a good heart. She was also misguided. That mistake took her life.

This is a sad tale about a good heart, who defended evil people.

She stood with a bullhorn and a bright orange vest in front of a doctor's home protecting the children who lived there, unarmed.

The invader's armoured tank kept on coming, hitting her, and backing up over her to make certain she was dead.

But she wasn't. Her spine snapped, she died painfully hours later as she was stopped at the invader's "security" checkpoint.

As any decent human being she stood unarmed and defenseless to protect children's ancient homes from destruction and land grab, even to the ultimate consequences. Such morality and courage is very rare today and shines in such great fellow American heroes as Jean Donovan, Sister Ita Ford, Sister Maura Clark and Sister Dorothy Kazel.

But they were in the last millenium, raped and murdered by other US allies and organs. Rachel is now, a hero for our new millenium. Our only American hero.

Please read her words and weep, not for her, but for all the children who loses homes and lives to faceless, relentless immoral military aggression.

I read a lot of political websites and was very familiar with the story behind this book when I decided to catch the play at the Minetta Lane Theater.

What surprised me about this book was the quality of Corrie's writing itself. A lot of Corrie's detractors hate her passionately because of their support for Israel's policy against the Palestinians in Gaza but they should give this book a closer look.

"My Name is Rachel Corrie" is not strictly a piece of anti-Israel agit prop, although it is certainly that. It's also a very personal story of an American confronting the effect of her government's foreign policy in a part of the world most of us will never see, an emotional travelogue to the heart of the darkness of the American Empire.

Nobody, of course, would compare Rachel Corrie to Joseph Conrad (who hadn't even learned English by the age of 23). But the process of exploring the self by traveling to the margins of the empire is the same. Corrie feels a sense of dread and purposelessness in Olympia (a first world city, one of those "whited sepulchers" Conrad mentions) that becomes more and more urgent after 9/11 so she decides to travel to the Gaza Strip and become a partisan for one group of people the American and Israeli governments would simply like to see disappear.

To argue that she should have become an objective witness instead of an openly partisan activist is to miss the point. An objective witness stands above the people stuck in a war zone (think of Eddie Adam's famous photo of the VC guerilla being executed) and this wouldn't have allowed her to confront the power relationship that exists between Americans and people like the Palestinians. By getting involved, she was able to free that part of herself that all Americans feel closed off to by our hostile relation to the rest of the world.

And the remarkable thing is that she was quite aware of this. Compare the surrealistic little vignette about her time as a volunteer at a mental health center where she's accused by her clients of putting herself above them to the way the older Palestinian woman argues against taking money from rich Americans. "We're not a hotel." Rachel Corrie struggles to let these people speak for themselves, even while she's using them to explore herself.

In other words, even if you're opposed to Corrie's politics, this book is still worth reading. Maybe the writing itself should get 3.5 stars. But I gave it 5 simply because I was touched by the fact that this book allowed so villified a woman to speak for herself from beyond the grave.

This young lady brutally murdered by an Israeli soldier, was very aware of what was truly going on in "The Palestinian Holocaust" that still is ongoing today. This book is a book of a true "American Hero." Her heroic death must not be in vain, but give courage to all to stand up to the racist atrocities being perpetrated in the world today. The brutal savagery and humiliation against the women, children and men of Palestine is one such, present day "Holocaust." Rachel Corrie had incredible foresight for someone so young. Her cause is now proven and backed by some of the greatest human beings and scholars on this earth: Former President Jimmy Carter has gotten the same message Rachel was getting out to the world in his present best-seller: "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid." In another new best-seller "THE ISRAEL LOBBY, AND U.S. FOREIGN POLICY," by John J. Mearsheimer (of U. of Chicago) and Stephan M. Walt (Harvard), clearly shared young Rachel's view that the savage and horrific treatment of the Palestinian People and "their" lands, was not good for Palestinians, Israeli's, and Especially for America's Safety and Reputation to the World. The list seems endless, especially today, proving and backing Rachel's heroic mission. May she rest in peace. Her parents must be so proud that Rachel tried to help the oppressed and brutally occupied people of Palestine. Rachel Corrie, be proud as your message of justice is being carried on by the great authors mentioned and many more.

Just something to think about readers: Be careful or take great caution with amateur reviews that try to distort Rachel's pure and humane message. Whose words do you give more weight to, a reckless, insensitive, amateur reviewer, or some of the notable icons and scholars mentioned. Yes, everyone is entitled to an opinion,(that's what makes AMAZON the best) but some spend years researching specialty topics and are more up to speed - weigh everything. Do Former President, and probably todays greatest humanitarian, Jimmy Carter's words have weight and substance? What about other great and acclaimed scholars such as Professor John J. Mearsheimer, who is the Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor of Political Science and the co-director of the Program on International Security Policy at the Univ. of Chicago. Add, Professor Stephen M. Walt, who is the Robert and Renee Belfer Professor of International Affairs at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard. Who do you believe? I leave that rhetorical question to you.

Rachel Corrie and her beautiful messages in her writings, this book, and her heroic and tragic death keep her lagacy and message of justice alive. Now, more than ever, notable people and scholarly authors are writing an array of necessary books supporting Rachels cause and, important message. A message that, finally, is getting to Americans,i.e., The horrific plight of the Palestinian peoples. Rachel, the world will not forget that you died for the justice of the Palestinians. Rachel's life should be a academic course in and of itself. Rachel was a true martyr. Read Rachel and be inspired and moved forever....

If you like the dramatic and enjoy plays that move your heart and soul, then Rabbit Hole is for you. This wonderfully written play revolves around a family still coping with the death of their four-year-old son, Danny, who is killed when he accidently chases the family dog into the street. It is a play about bereavement, loss, coping, family and finally, forgiveness. The great thing about Rabbit Hole is that it is very contemporary and ready for the modern theatre audience.

More beautiful, whimsical, touching, absurdist fare from David Lindsay-Abaire--in the vein of another terrific young playwright, Napoleon Ellsworth. It seems as though these two writers (along w/ perhaps Padriac Duffy) are spearheading a revolt against the dead, naturalistic world of theater. And it couldn't've happened a moment too soon! BRAVO!

The story is a very well plotted look of a family after a horrific death in the family. Starts out in the very middle of the family's struggle to get through their ordeal. There is turbulance with the parents and siblings and of course, ends with a bit of a surprise. The actual production would be a great one to see performed - definitely worth reading then watching a performance.

Dealing with the most traumatic event any parent can endure--the death of a child--David Lindsay-Abaire manages to involve his audience in the grieving process and illustrate how we all grieve differently and for different lengths of time. Despite the subject matter, this 2007 Pulitzer Prize-winning play is often extremely funny, setting up emotional contrasts between ironic humor and infinite sadness which make the loss of the child more poignant, without dissolving into bathos.

Danny, a four-year-old chasing his dog, has been struck and killed by a car driven by a seventeen-year-old driver, and the family is trying to cope with their grief. As the play opens, Becca, the child's mother, is folding the laundry--Danny's clothes--which she has just washed in preparation for giving them away. She has internalized her feelings, refusing group therapy, any religious counseling, and especially the advice of her overbearing mother. Her husband Howie goes to work, attends group therapy, becomes friends with some of the other grieving parents, and tries to coax Becca into becoming a wife again.

Among the other characters, Nat, Becca's mother, has all the pat answers, and she equates the loss of this child with her own loss of her adult son, something she insists on emphasizing to Becca. Izzy, Becca's sister, an off-the-wall case of arrested development, has been having an affair and is now pregnant, an eventuality with which Becca must now learn to cope, especially since Izzy has used Danny's death as an excuse for her irresponsible behavior. Jason, the seventeen-year-old driver of the car, is also trying to come to grips with the events, blaming himself, reliving every moment, searching for some sort of forgiveness which he is not sure he deserves.

As the characters interact, we see them as individuals, not just as participants in the terrible drama of their shattered world, but we also see that grief is not and cannot be a full-time activity. Many moments of humor make their lives more realistic and provide relief for the audience. As the eight months from Danny's death until the end of the play elapse, we see changes in all the characters, but the play ends (blessedly) without pat answers. Each character is different, reacting differently to the Danny's death, grieving their loss differently, and learning to cope differently. The audience, drawn into the events, will also react differently, respond to different characters in different ways, and imagine differently how they themselves would respond. Moving, memorable, and ultimately uplifting. n Mary Whipple

While well written, this is a standard movie-of-the week script which belongs on the Lifetime channel.

Oliver Goldsmith (c. 1730-1774) was born to an English clergyman in Ireland and is often described as an "Anglo-Irish" author. Originally trained in theology, he later studied medicine and worked as an apothecary's assistant. Both then and now, critics regard the vast bulk of his writing as "hackwork"--poorly written material undertaken for the money offered. Even so, Goldsmith was indeed an exceptional and often innovative author when he put his mind to it, and his finest works rank with the best of his age. By most accounts Goldsmith wrote the comedy SHE STOOPS TO CONQUER in 1771; it was first performed in 1773 and has remained a favorite of the English stage ever since.

The play concerns the Hardcastle family, who are country gentry living living outside the common realm of English aristocracy of the day. Mr. Hardcastle dislikes "society" and frequently battles with his silly wife over his refusal to spend a season in London; Mrs. Hardcastle is in turn besotted Tony Lumpkin, her wayward son by a first marriage. Indeed, the only sensible member of the family is daughter Kate--and as the play begins she is told by her father that his choice for her husband, Charles Marlow, will arrive that very night. But things do not go as planned: due to a prank by Tony Lumpkin, Charles and his companion George arrive under the impression that Hardcastle's house is actually a roadside inn. Needless to say, complications abound, and Kate finds herself assuming the role of rural barmaid the better to study her intended and bring all complications to a happy resolution.

SHE STOOPS TO CONQUER is often considered a turning point in English theatre. Earlier comic authors tended to emphasize themes of hypocrisy for comic effect; Goldsmith certainly makes use of this, but instead of giving us cuckolds and strumpets he takes a more kindly point of view. His characters may sometimes be foolish and silly, but they are not so much vicious as playful and although the plot is farcical the situations are never unkind. The result is a charming confection of smiling entertainment. SHE STOOPS TO CONQUER has remained a favorite of the theatre for over two hundred years for a reason: it is as spritely, elegant, and amusing as it was when first produced. Recommended.

GFT, Amazon Reviewer

This play is a wonderful little comedic satire that is as funny now as when it was written in 1773. Mr. Goldsmith's characters are wonderful, and the storyline is funny without being "sappy". His characters are so very human! He does not shy away from exposing human frailities, and he does it in such a way that no one would take offence to it. His characters make common human mistakes based on misunderstandings and practical jokes, but his characters are not tragically changed from these occurences. They, as well as the audience, understand human frailties, and look upon these as things that help us grow. This is a jovial, friendly play that is well worth the time it takes to read it. I find that reading plays is a nice alternate to reading long novels. A little different from short stories. I like the economies of a play. So much is written and so much is implied all in five scenes.

SHE STOOPS TO CONQUER is one of the best plays to be written during the Restoration era. It's full of wit and great one liners, not to mention that it's a comic satire on the dramatic conventions of the day. The play is quite funny and when performed is one of the few "classical" (meaning anything pre-20th century) plays that all audiences seem to enjoy. Unfortunately, Goldsmith's masterpiece is seldom performed nowadays. Most American's have never heard of Oliver Goldsmith (is that the guy who directed PLATOON? is a typical response), let alone SHE STOOPS TO CONQUER. SHE STOOPS TO CONQUER instead tends to be one of those plays that everyone in theatre knows about, but that most people outside of the theatre universe don't even know exists. It's a shame because the play is a masterpiece of wit and comic timing and has so much to offer to modern day audiences.

This play is a rollicking satire on the British caste system of that era, seen through the mischief, mayhem, and mistaken identities of this work. Almost a must-read!

Few English plays dating from the eighteenth century appeal to modern audiences. For much of that period comedies were characterized by an exaggerated sentimentality and intense moralizing. Independently, the playwrights Oliver Goldsmith and Richard Brinsley Sheridan rejected this moralizing mode, returning to the English stage a humorous, mildly satirical form of comedy.

In a short period they created three plays that are still enjoyed today: She Stoops to Conquer (Goldsmith, 1773), The School for Scandal (Sheridan, 1775) and The Rivals (Sheridan, 1777).

In recent months I have read all three play. All are quite good, but I especially liked She Stoops to Conquer and The School for Scandal. While The School for Scandal is widely admired for its witty dialogue, She Stoops to Conquer offers the most hilarious situations.

The basic theme in She Stoops to Conquer is familiar. The guardians, her father Mr. Hardcastle and her aunt Mrs. Hardcastle, have arranged a suitable marriage for young Miss Hardcastle. She, of course, has other plans. Oliver Goldsmith adroitly transformed this overly used situation into delightful comedy. The plot is complicated by a shy suitor, friends with their own plans of elopement, and an unruly prankster, all leading to utter confusion in the rustic Hardcastle household. I quickly became engaged with the ridiculous happenings; I read She Stoops to Conquer in a single sitting. Five stars.

Possible Interest - Another Comedy and Two Moralizing Plays:

John Gay's The Beggar's Opera, first staged in 1728 in London, was another exception to the moralizing trend in the eighteenth century. This delightful, satirical comedy is considered the first modern musical. Five stars.

In the prologue to The Conscious Lovers (1722) Sir Richard Steele states his objective: "To chasten wit, and moralize the stage" and to "Redeem from long contempt the comic name". Steele's objective was to instruct and to ennoble rather than to amuse. Humor is clearly subordinate. Two stars (plus perhaps 1 star for historical interest).

George Lillo's moralizing melodrama, The London Merchant (1731), was a resounding success in the summer of 1731 and was apparently performed 179 times by 1776. Its repetitious moral lessons seemingly resonated with eighteenth century audiences. Three stars.

The script is a much better read if you've seen the performance, otherwise it's kind of hard to tell what's going on. For fans only.

This is an excellent play that explores the true grit behind being a youth in America. Touching on some of the things that effect teens today, Bogosian brought to life the true picture of the beatnik degenerate youth of today. A vivid picture of suburbian teenagers struggling with life. It was almost as if you'd taken a piece of my youth and written a screenplay surrounding it. My only negative is the word choice. Bogosian portrays the truth behind teenagers in America today, but overly typifies their language. The slang Bogosian uses wavears from accurate to grossly inaccurate. Overall high remarks for Bogosian.

...you have to read the book! SubUrbia is one of my favorite movies, and I thought I'd read it also. There are several parts in the book that didn't make it to the movie. Also, I finished it in two sittings, so it's not very time consuming.

i prefer bogosian's monologues to his plays. suburbia was good, but i preferred talk radio. a quick enjoyable read. if you are only going to read one of his books read "pounding nails into the floor with my forehead"

This is one of the most powerful plays I've read (and performed in). Eric Bogosian has captured Gen. X and raised his middle finger to all those who question us. Tragic and beautiful! Skip the movie though. It didn't come close to the play.