[arcadia_group] Re: The game plan- READ

  • From: Christopher Jones <cjones20@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: arcadia_group@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 03:45:09 -0400

a few corrections if it's not too late.

i'm all set and ready to go!  thanks for understanding and support, guys.

chris

On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 10:25 PM, Christopher Jones <
cjones20@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Here's what I have so far.  If I am unable to do more to my slides, I will
> at least cover everything in my presentation part.
>
> Sorry, guys.
>
> Chris
>
>
> On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 10:09 PM, Christopher Jones <
> cjones20@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> hey guys
>>
>> my stuff is coming
>>
>> life is quite unpredictable.  my boyfriend was beaten and robbed tonight.
>>
>>
>> ill have my slides in just a bit
>>
>>
>> On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Thomas Barrows <
>> tbarro1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> got it thanks
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 2:22 PM, William Robinson <
>>> wrobin3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hey Tom, here's my slide.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 5:31 PM, Christopher Jones <
>>>> cjones20@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> i am in the same boat.
>>>>>
>>>>> i just had a super busy and shitty weekend that i just need to move
>>>>> past at this point.
>>>>>
>>>>> what time are we meeting again?
>>>>>
>>>>> i am getting off work now, and need to go home and change and stuff.
>>>>> if it's at 6, im going to be a bit late.  i apologize
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 3:37 PM, R NOEMER <kevinnoemer@xxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Okay, I might not have my slides at the meeting. I have all of my
>>>>>> information, minus a few exact references from the script that I have to
>>>>>> write out, but I have a very solid amount of information typed up in a 
>>>>>> Word
>>>>>> document to look at when I put my slides together. But if I don't get my
>>>>>> slides done before the meeting, I can easily finish them afterwards when 
>>>>>> I
>>>>>> get home and then email them to Tom. I figure so long as we figure out 
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> order and everything, putting my slides in afterwards is as easy as copy 
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> pasting. I'll try to get them done, but yeah, this weekend hasn't gone
>>>>>> exactly as I had planned it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kevin
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>> Date: Fri, 1 May 2009 20:30:56 -0400
>>>>>> Subject: [arcadia_group] Re: The game plan- READ
>>>>>> From: tbarro1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To: arcadia_group@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>>
>>>>>> hey guys i was thinking bring your slides on a thumbdrive or email it
>>>>>> to yourself and when we get together on sunday we can put them together 
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> all of us there. T
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 5:03 PM, R NOEMER <kevinnoemer@xxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hey, sorry guys. I didn't get around to checking my email in the last
>>>>>> two days. I was lucky enough to get mono from God knows where. Hooray!
>>>>>> Anyways, I should have my slides done by Sunday. I've got a couple more
>>>>>> articles to read through, but this is more or less the only work I have, 
>>>>>> so
>>>>>> I'm not really too stressed about it. Also, Dan you seem to know a good 
>>>>>> deal
>>>>>> about the math in the play, so if you have any thoughts you'd like to 
>>>>>> share
>>>>>> with me, that'd be awesome. While I find all the iterations and 
>>>>>> naturalistic
>>>>>> geometry interesting, math certainly is not my forte. I'll let you guys 
>>>>>> take
>>>>>> a look at what I've come up with before we present in case anyone with a
>>>>>> better grasp on the concepts has some thoughts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kevin
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>> Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 18:48:34 -0400
>>>>>> Subject: [arcadia_group] Re: The game plan- READ
>>>>>> From: dsince1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>> To: arcadia_group@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  All;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dan here.  Tom and Will - I am attaching a few documents I found most
>>>>>> are either interviews or biographical content, and I am also including 
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> Stage as Hyperspace paper and another dealing with the music titled 
>>>>>> Waltzing
>>>>>> in Arcadia.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, I have a little more work to do on my presentation slides, but
>>>>>> will get those out soon.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for meeting today, guys, I think things are going to be fine.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dan
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --Forwarded Message Attachment--
>>>>>>
>>>>>>      Back
>>>>>> 1 article(s) will be saved.
>>>>>>  To continue, in Internet Explorer, select *FILE* then *SAVE AS* from
>>>>>> your browser's toolbar above. Be sure to save as a plain text file
>>>>>> (.txt) or a 'Web Page, HTML only' file (.html). In Netscape, select *
>>>>>> FILE* then *SAVE AS* from your browser's toolbar above.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> EBSCO Publishing   Citation Format: MLA (Modern Language Assoc.):
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *NOTE:* Review the instructions at 
>>>>>> http://support.ebsco.com/help/?int=ehost&lang=en&feature_id=MLA
>>>>>> and make any necessary corrections before using. Pay special attention
>>>>>> to personal names, capitalization, and dates. Always consult your library
>>>>>> resources for the exact formatting and punctuation guidelines.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>> Works Cited
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Zoglin, Richard. "Elitist, Moi?." *Time* 170.19 (05 Nov. 2007):
>>>>>> 69-71. *International Bibliography of Theatre & Dance with Full Text*.
>>>>>> EBSCO. [Library name], [City], [State abbreviation]. 26 Apr. 2009 <
>>>>>> http://search.ebscohost.com.proxy-tu.researchport.umd.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ibh&AN=27257715&site=ehost-live
>>>>>> >.
>>>>>> <!--Additional Information:
>>>>>> Persistent link to this record (Permalink):
>>>>>> http://search.ebscohost.com.proxy-tu.researchport.umd.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ibh&AN=27257715&site=ehost-live
>>>>>> End of citation-->
>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>> Section: Art THEATER
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Elitist, Moi? *
>>>>>> Tom Stoppard isn't trying to be highbrow. To prove it, his new play is
>>>>>> about rock music … and revolution
>>>>>> When his interviewer arrives, Tom Stoppard is standing outside the
>>>>>> Broadway theater where his latest play, Rock 'n' Roll, is about to begin
>>>>>> previews. Sporting an open white shirt with the sleeves partly rolled up 
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> tousled (if graying) hair that still gives him the look of an overage
>>>>>> college student, he's enjoying a cigarette in a circle of warm spring
>>>>>> sunshine that has managed to find a hole in the Manhattan skyline. But he
>>>>>> really should be off his feet. A few days earlier, in the rush to catch a
>>>>>> plane to New York City, Stoppard stubbed his toe hard in his London
>>>>>> apartment. He has just come back from the doctor, who told him the toe is
>>>>>> broken and ordered him to stay off it as much as possible--after which,
>>>>>> Stoppard walked 13 blocks to the theater.
>>>>>> The spectacle of Tom Stoppard hoofing it through the theater district
>>>>>> on a bum foot would be disconcerting to people who think of the 
>>>>>> playwright
>>>>>> as something of an élitist. Ever since his sensational stage debut in 
>>>>>> 1967
>>>>>> with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead--his absurdist riff on a pair 
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> minor characters in Hamlet--Stoppard has become almost a genre unto 
>>>>>> himself,
>>>>>> taking intellectual, often abstruse subject matter and turning it into
>>>>>> challenging yet playful drama. His game, frequently, is the oddball
>>>>>> juxtaposition: moral philosophy and gymnastics (Jumpers); Fermat's last
>>>>>> theorem and Byron's love poetry (Arcadia); James Joyce and Vladimir Lenin
>>>>>> (Travesties). "Tom said to me once that he decides on one play, and then
>>>>>> shortly after decides on a different one," says Trevor Nunn, director of
>>>>>> Rock 'n' Roll and several other Stoppard plays. "And then he lets them 
>>>>>> crash
>>>>>> into each other." The Coast of Utopia, his nearly nine-hour trilogy about
>>>>>> Russia's radical political thinkers of the 19th century, was a relatively
>>>>>> straight-ahead historical journey (which is why this critic, at least,
>>>>>> didn't rank it among his best), but it was an unexpectedly huge hit, 
>>>>>> playing
>>>>>> to sold-out crowds during its run at New York City's Lincoln Center last
>>>>>> season and winning seven Tony Awards, a record for a straight play. And 
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> gives him the right to hobble into any Broadway theater with a play on 
>>>>>> just
>>>>>> about any subject he wants.
>>>>>> With Rock 'n' Roll, which took London by storm last year and opens on
>>>>>> Broadway Nov. 4, Stoppard is exploring two more of his passions, one old 
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> one relatively new. The play spans a couple of decades in the lives of a
>>>>>> group of Czech political activists and British academics and shuttles 
>>>>>> back
>>>>>> and forth between Cambridge and Prague in the years between the 1968 
>>>>>> Soviet
>>>>>> invasion and the "velvet revolution" of 1989. It's an exploration of
>>>>>> political repression and commitment (with a typically Stoppardian 
>>>>>> digression
>>>>>> into Sappho's poetry), but also a celebration of the rebel rock music 
>>>>>> that,
>>>>>> in Stoppard's view, was as potent a force for revolution as Vaclav 
>>>>>> Havel's
>>>>>> speeches. Scenes are punctuated with the sounds of groups like the 
>>>>>> Rolling
>>>>>> Stones and the Plastic People of the Universe, a Czech band imprisoned
>>>>>> during the Soviet crackdown--with a special nod to Syd Barrett, a 
>>>>>> founding
>>>>>> member of Pink Floyd, who was ousted by his band over his erratic,
>>>>>> drug-fueled, near psychotic behavior.
>>>>>> Rock 'n' Roll is the first stage work Stoppard has written explicitly
>>>>>> about Czechoslovakia, where he was born in 1937 but which he left as a 
>>>>>> baby
>>>>>> when his parents fled the Nazis, moving to Singapore and then India 
>>>>>> before
>>>>>> landing in Bristol, England.
>>>>>> Until the fall of communism, he returned only once to the country, in
>>>>>> 1977. "I began to have more identity as a Czech comparatively recently," 
>>>>>> he
>>>>>> says. "To tell you the truth, I think it was my mother dying about 10 
>>>>>> years
>>>>>> ago that gave me permission to be Czech. Because my mother's whole 
>>>>>> attitude
>>>>>> was to leave the past behind. So I tended to kind of just respect her
>>>>>> attitude." A pause. "That's not the whole truth. The fact is, I loved 
>>>>>> being
>>>>>> English. I was very happy to be turned into an English schoolboy."
>>>>>> Those schoolboy days ended at age 17, when Stoppard went to work for a
>>>>>> newspaper in Bristol. He covered the police beat and routine local news, 
>>>>>> but
>>>>>> he also got to interview visiting celebrities--New Orleans jazz 
>>>>>> musicians,
>>>>>> British movie-glamour queen Diana Dors. "I was so thrilled being a
>>>>>> reporter," he says, "because it gave you the kind of access to people 
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> you wouldn't ever get to meet." After a few years, he moved to London, 
>>>>>> where
>>>>>> he continued to write reviews and celebrity profiles. In 1960 he talked 
>>>>>> his
>>>>>> way into a trip to New York with a group of architects visiting the 
>>>>>> city's
>>>>>> buildings and did a story for the Yorkshire Post on Lenny Bruce, whom he 
>>>>>> saw
>>>>>> at the Village Vanguard and corralled outside for a 10-minute interview.
>>>>>> Stoppard was taken by the irreverent comic (he even recalls some of his
>>>>>> jokes, like Bruce's plea for world peace, urging all the nations of the
>>>>>> world to get together and "kick the s___ out of the Polacks"). "His act 
>>>>>> was
>>>>>> very scatological by English standards," he says. "But I was amazed by 
>>>>>> him."
>>>>>> Stoppard's passion for rock music dates from his days in Bristol,
>>>>>> where he would see most of the touring music acts that came to 
>>>>>> town--among
>>>>>> them Frank Sinatra (who played the Bristol Hippodrome in the early '50s 
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> didn't sell out), the Everly Brothers and Eddie Cochran, the rockabilly
>>>>>> singer whose British tour ended when he was killed in a car crash in 
>>>>>> 1960.
>>>>>> Like everyone else, Stoppard embraced the Beatles and Rolling Stones when
>>>>>> they came along, but he admits to being a late bloomer when it came to 
>>>>>> Pink
>>>>>> Floyd. "I ignored them completely at first," he says. "When Dark Side of 
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> Moon came out, a friend of mine, a photographer, came over with the 
>>>>>> record
>>>>>> and said, 'Please, listen to this. There's a play in this album.' I put 
>>>>>> it
>>>>>> on top of this big wooden filing cabinet, and it stayed there for a 
>>>>>> year."
>>>>>> The twice-divorced Stoppard, who turned 70 this year, is a grandfather
>>>>>> now, but he keeps up with groups like Arcade Fire and the Arctic 
>>>>>> Monkeys. "I
>>>>>> listen to what shows up, really out of curiosity more than anything 
>>>>>> else,"
>>>>>> he says. "It's not often that something really gets to me." He goes to
>>>>>> concerts only rarely--for the Stones when they tour and an occasional
>>>>>> experiment like Oasis (a "brilliant songwriting band"). "I'm a very 
>>>>>> boring
>>>>>> person," he insists. He doesn't go to movies, he says (though he writes
>>>>>> plenty of them; see box), and spends most of his spare time reading--most
>>>>>> recently Janet Malcolm's biography of Gertrude Stein and Alice B. Toklas.
>>>>>> His chief recreational passion is trout fishing, which he does four or 
>>>>>> five
>>>>>> times a year, usually in Hampshire, England, but with periodic ventures 
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> more exotic climes like New Mexico and Wyoming.
>>>>>> Stoppard, who rolls his r's with a Continental flourish that somehow
>>>>>> manages not to seem affected, bristles at the notion that his work is too
>>>>>> highbrow or élitist for an ordinary audience--never mind that the New 
>>>>>> York
>>>>>> Times felt the need to print a reading list for theatergoers who wanted 
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> bone up before seeing The Coast of Utopia. He notes that his intellectual
>>>>>> obsessions are hardly unique or rarefied. "The market for books about
>>>>>> science and philosophy on the level on which I deal with things is a
>>>>>> best-seller market," he says, pointing to authors like Steven Pinker,
>>>>>> Richard Dawkins and Richard Feynman. It tickles him when he gets good
>>>>>> reviews for his scientific accuracy in specialist publications. Yet he
>>>>>> insists his goal is not to lift the audience's brow but simply to explore
>>>>>> fresh subjects that engage him. "I've got no interest in educating or
>>>>>> instructing people. It's entirely about my getting interested in 
>>>>>> something
>>>>>> because of its dramatic possibilities. I'm not there to do Op-Ed on
>>>>>> Broadway."
>>>>>> Indeed, Stoppard has always stood apart from many other British
>>>>>> playwrights of his generation, like David Hare, for avoiding an overtly
>>>>>> political (usually left-wing) point of view. He describes his politics as
>>>>>> "timid libertarian." Yet he can rev up a pretty bold rant on Britain's
>>>>>> "highly regulated society," which he thinks is "betraying the principle 
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> parliamentary democracy." There was the garden party he threw recently, 
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> example, where because there was a pond on the property, he was required 
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> hire two lifeguards. "The whole notion that we're all responsible for
>>>>>> ourselves and we don't actually have to have nannies busybodying all 
>>>>>> around
>>>>>> us, that's all going now. And I don't even know in whose interest it's
>>>>>> supposed to be or who wishes it to be so. It seems to be like a lava 
>>>>>> flow,
>>>>>> which nobody ordered up. Of course, one does know in whose interest it 
>>>>>> is.
>>>>>> It's in the interests of battalions of civil servants in jobs that never
>>>>>> existed 10 years ago."
>>>>>> Don't call Tom Stoppard a snob. But try finding a political rant in
>>>>>> America as polished as that.
>>>>>> PHOTO (COLOR): Radical band Brian Cox and Nicole Ansari in Rock 'n'
>>>>>> Roll
>>>>>> PHOTO (COLOR)
>>>>>> ~~~~~~~~
>>>>>> By Richard Zoglin
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  Script Doctor How Hollywood has used (or not used) Stoppard
>>>>>> Film writing is "exciting and agreeable in the first half of the
>>>>>> process," says Stoppard. "And then you get reminded that it's a movie and
>>>>>> it's not yours."
>>>>>> Screenplays He Wrote SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE "The playhouse is for
>>>>>> dreamers," says the Bard (Joseph Fiennes) to Viola (Gwyneth Paltrow) in
>>>>>> Stoppard and Marc Norman's Oscar winner
>>>>>> BRAZIL Stoppard added jokes to Terry Gilliam and Charles McKeown's
>>>>>> futuristic sci-fi script, which earned an Oscar nomination and cult 
>>>>>> status
>>>>>> EMPIRE OF THE SUN Stoppard and Menno Meyjes streamlined J.G.
>>>>>> Ballard's novel for Steven Spielberg and a 12-year-old Christian Bale
>>>>>> Screenplays He Helped Rewrite SLEEPY HOLLOW Director Tim Burton
>>>>>> tapped Stoppard to add humor to the more somber early draft of the
>>>>>> Washington Irving story
>>>>>> STAR WARS: EPISODE III--REVENGE OF THE SITH Stoppard played Jedi
>>>>>> master with the dialogue on George Lucas' last Star Wars film; he did 
>>>>>> not,
>>>>>> however, tamper with Yoda's syntax
>>>>>> Drafts He Wrote THE BOURNE ULTIMATUM Director Paul Greengrass didn't
>>>>>> end up using Stoppard's take on Matt Damon's taciturn spy
>>>>>> HIS DARK MATERIALS: THE GOLDEN COMPASS His crack at the first film
>>>>>> adaptation of Philip Pullman's fantasy novel was rejected in favor of a
>>>>>> draft by director Chris Weitz
>>>>>> PHOTO (COLOR)
>>>>>> PHOTO (COLOR)
>>>>>>  ------------------------------
>>>>>> Copyright © Time Inc., 2007. All rights reserved. No part of this
>>>>>> material may be duplicated or redisseminated without permission.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Back
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --Forwarded Message Attachment--
>>>>>>
>>>>>>      Back
>>>>>> 1 article(s) will be saved.
>>>>>>  To continue, in Internet Explorer, select *FILE* then *SAVE AS* from
>>>>>> your browser's toolbar above. Be sure to save as a plain text file
>>>>>> (.txt) or a 'Web Page, HTML only' file (.html). In Netscape, select *
>>>>>> FILE* then *SAVE AS* from your browser's toolbar above.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> EBSCO Publishing   Citation Format: MLA (Modern Language Assoc.):
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *NOTE:* Review the instructions at 
>>>>>> http://support.ebsco.com/help/?int=ehost&lang=en&feature_id=MLA
>>>>>> and make any necessary corrections before using. Pay special attention
>>>>>> to personal names, capitalization, and dates. Always consult your library
>>>>>> resources for the exact formatting and punctuation guidelines.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>> Works Cited
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Gussow, Mel. "Happiness, chaos and Tom Stoppard." *American 
>>>>>> Theatre*12.10 (Dec. 1995): 22.
>>>>>> *International Bibliography of Theatre & Dance with Full Text*.
>>>>>> EBSCO. [Library name], [City], [State abbreviation]. 26 Apr. 2009 <
>>>>>> http://search.ebscohost.com.proxy-tu.researchport.umd.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ibh&AN=9512142530&site=ehost-live
>>>>>> >.
>>>>>> <!--Additional Information:
>>>>>> Persistent link to this record (Permalink):
>>>>>> http://search.ebscohost.com.proxy-tu.researchport.umd.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ibh&AN=9512142530&site=ehost-live
>>>>>> End of citation-->
>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *HAPPINESS, CHAOS AND TOM STOPPARD *
>>>>>> In Tom Stoppard's radio play, Where Are They Now?, the author's
>>>>>> surrogate looks back nostalgically on his school days, and defines 
>>>>>> happiness
>>>>>> as "a passing change of emphasis." A dozen years later, the protagonist 
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> The Real Thing reiterates the statement with his observation, "Happiness 
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> equilibrium. Shift your weight." For Stoppard, equilibrium had become a
>>>>>> credo, as he repositioned himself to suit the shifts in the world. Call 
>>>>>> it a
>>>>>> Stop-pardian sense of gravity. The playwright provides his own ballast, 
>>>>>> as
>>>>>> he tries to remain in the moral center of his own universe. If one needs 
>>>>>> a
>>>>>> symbol of Stoppard's own inner balance, consider the pronunciation of his
>>>>>> name. It is STOP-PARD, with the syllables evenly accented.
>>>>>> His life and his work are crowded with apparent contradictions.
>>>>>> Although he was born in Zlin, Czechoslovakia (as Tomas Straussler) and 
>>>>>> spent
>>>>>> his early years in Singapore and India, he has become one of the most
>>>>>> English of Englishmen. He currently lives in both Chelsea, London and 
>>>>>> Iver,
>>>>>> Bucks, where he is a country squire with an English garden, a lawn for
>>>>>> cricket, a tennis court and his neighbor's cows peeping through the 
>>>>>> windows
>>>>>> of his house. His idea of Arcadia, of an idyllic environment, is the 
>>>>>> English
>>>>>> countryside. Yet he spends most of his time in cities, is frequently 
>>>>>> flying
>>>>>> from one to another, and has a very cosmopolitan nature
>>>>>> Stoppard is one of the wittiest and most literate writers of the
>>>>>> English language, but he left school at an early age and found his 
>>>>>> education
>>>>>> working on a provincial English newspaper. (Coincidentally, none of
>>>>>> England's pre-eminent living playwrights--Harold Pinter, Alan Ayckbourn 
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> Stoppard went to university.) Although he has a gift for inventing 
>>>>>> epigrams,
>>>>>> metaphors and circumlocutions, in his own reading he has great admiration
>>>>>> for the understatement of Ernest Hemingway. Stoppard has no background in
>>>>>> philosophy, philology, physics, metaphysics, mathematics or circus
>>>>>> acrobatics, but his plays are filled with knowledgeable references to 
>>>>>> these
>>>>>> and other specialized fields. In contrast to Pinter and Ayckbourn, he is
>>>>>> untutored in the techniques of theatre, except for what he learned during
>>>>>> his years as a drama critic and from working with and watching his
>>>>>> directors. Yet his plays have a brilliant theatricality. He is, in fact, 
>>>>>> an
>>>>>> exemplary autodidact, and a very quick study.
>>>>>> In the plays, things are never quite what they seem to be. There are
>>>>>> plays within plays, and in The Real Thing, a play outside the one we are
>>>>>> watching. The image is that of an endless series of Chinese boxes or an
>>>>>> exercise in recursion. Time plays tricks, as past and present coexist and
>>>>>> sometimes brush against each other on the same stage. In many of his 
>>>>>> plays,
>>>>>> there are echoes of his previous writings. The subject matter may shift 
>>>>>> from
>>>>>> moral philosophy to quantum physics, but the voice is that of the author
>>>>>> caught in the act of badinage, arguing himself in and out of a quandary.
>>>>>> Most of his plays are inspired by a single central image (philosophy
>>>>>> as gymnastics, a madman who thinks he has a symphony orchestra in his 
>>>>>> head).
>>>>>> But, as the plays evolve, they become prisms, reflecting and refracting 
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> author's ingenuity. Is Stoppard too clever by half, an intellectual 
>>>>>> rather
>>>>>> than an emotional playwright? He confronts this and related questions 
>>>>>> during
>>>>>> our conversations.
>>>>>> When I talked to Stoppard in December 1994 in New York, he was on the
>>>>>> brink of a very busy season. Hapgood, in its new version, was opening the
>>>>>> following evening in Lincoln Center Theater's intimate Mitzi Newhouse
>>>>>> Theater in a production starring Stockard Channing. That was to be 
>>>>>> followed
>>>>>> several months later by Arcadia at Lincoln Center's large Vivian Beaumont
>>>>>> Theater. Arcadia was a continuing success in London, and in February 
>>>>>> Indian
>>>>>> Ink, his stage version of his radio play, In the Native State, was 
>>>>>> scheduled
>>>>>> to open in the West End.
>>>>>> Arcadia is one of his most ambitious and satisfying plays, a prismatic
>>>>>> exploration of English history, horticulture, the chaos theory and the
>>>>>> difference between the classical and romantic traditions. In the subtext 
>>>>>> are
>>>>>> such issues as the pursuit of epiphany and the nature of genius. Along 
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> way, people keep leaping to the wrong conclusions, which heightens the
>>>>>> hilarity and the complexity. One of the many mysteries is who did what to
>>>>>> whom in the game room or, rather, the game book, where Lord Byron, as a
>>>>>> guest in this elegant country house, is recorded as having shot a hare. 
>>>>>> At
>>>>>> the center of the play is an historian, Hannah Jarvis, but she is only 
>>>>>> one
>>>>>> of a houseful of kaleidoscopic characters that emerge from the 
>>>>>> playwright's
>>>>>> fervid imagination.
>>>>>> In contrast to Arcadia, Hapgood had not been a critical success in its
>>>>>> original production in London (in 1988). Since then, Stoppard had revised
>>>>>> the play and clarified the plot. This devious comedy-mystery equates the
>>>>>> wave-particle theory of light with the doubledealing world of espionage. 
>>>>>> The
>>>>>> new version is 20 minutes shorter and clues the audience earlier that the
>>>>>> spy named Ridley might have a double. In this Rubik's cube of a play, 
>>>>>> there
>>>>>> are triple, perhaps even quadruple agents and a multiplidty of secret
>>>>>> identities.
>>>>>> After sudden shifts in his busy schedule, the peripatetic playwright
>>>>>> was in a suite in a New York hotel, prepared for a long conversation. He 
>>>>>> lit
>>>>>> the first of many cigarettes. His body was reasonably at rest, his mind
>>>>>> restlessly in motion.
>>>>>> MEL GUSSOW: You've said, "If there's a central idea in Hapgood, it is
>>>>>> the proposition that in each of our characters is the working majority 
>>>>>> of a
>>>>>> dual personality, part of which is always there in a submerged state."
>>>>>> TOM STOPPARD: That was the hypothesis which generated the play
>>>>>> itself--that the dual nature of light: works for people as .well: as 
>>>>>> things,
>>>>>> and the one you meet in public is simply the working majority of that
>>>>>> person. It's a conceit. It may have some truth to it.
>>>>>> And the dual personality doesn't refer simply to counter-spies, but to
>>>>>> Hapgood herself and others.
>>>>>> It's not really dual personality. It's just that one chooses to "be"
>>>>>> one part of oneself, and not another part of oneself. One has a public 
>>>>>> self
>>>>>> and a submerged self. It's that sort of duality.
>>>>>> Is one real, the other false?
>>>>>> No, they're both part of the whole person.
>>>>>> And it's something other than multiple personalities.
>>>>>> It's not multiple personalities. It's a complex personality only part
>>>>>> of which runs the show.
>>>>>> Is that true in your life as well?
>>>>>> Well, I wouldn't have the presumption to exempt myself [laughs] from
>>>>>> this general rule.
>>>>>> When you were a journalist, you operated both as a critic and as an
>>>>>> interviewer, and you used different names.
>>>>>> I did, only because it seemed a bit second-rate to write too many
>>>>>> things on the same page. It wasn't that I was trying to conceal half of
>>>>>> myself. But the thesis is really to do with people's temperaments. Their
>>>>>> personal histories, like my personal history, is not central to the idea 
>>>>>> at
>>>>>> all--the fact that I was born into one language, and grew up in another, 
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> so on. That doesn't sound irrelevant by any means, but ifs not supposed 
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> be a comment about that kind of life, about my kind of life.
>>>>>> Do all your plays have an element of autobiography?
>>>>>> I wonder. Perhaps it's something which it's impossible to escape, and
>>>>>> one shouldn't protest against it, though I wouldn't have thought 
>>>>>> Rosencrantz
>>>>>> and Guildenstern [Are Dead] had anything autobiographical in it. I'm not
>>>>>> really the right kind of writer to oblige such a speculation because the
>>>>>> area in which I feed off myself is really much more to do with thoughts I
>>>>>> have had rather than days I have lived.
>>>>>> A number of misconceptions have sprung up about you and your work,
>>>>>> that your plays are divorced from your own life; also that you're very
>>>>>> intellectual and unemotional. One certainly doesn't feel that in the 
>>>>>> scene
>>>>>> in which Hapgood is so moved that she cries.
>>>>>> That particular duality has become a bit of a cliche about me. It's
>>>>>> rather a high-tech production of Hapgood, so it does encourage that view 
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> the work.
>>>>>> But there is a heart there.
>>>>>> I don't think you would bother to write about it if it was about
>>>>>> robots. It's only interesting because they're human beings.
>>>>>> In searching for the arc of your career, I made a list of the
>>>>>> principal subjects in the plays: Rosencrantz and Guildenstern,
>>>>>> theatre-philosophy; The Real Inspector Hound, theatre-journalism;
>>>>>> Traveslies, lit-phil; Jumpers, phil-gym; Dirty Linen, pol-sex; Night and
>>>>>> Day, journ-pol; Every Good Boy Deserves Favor, music-pol; Cahoot's 
>>>>>> Macbeth,
>>>>>> theatre-pol; The Real Thing, theatre-love; Hapgood, sci-spy; Arcadia,
>>>>>> lit-math-hortarch; Indian Ink, lit-art-pol-soc. It seems that the plays 
>>>>>> are
>>>>>> becoming more inclusive or expansive.
>>>>>> And yet Indian Ink is actually a very intimate play. It's a play of
>>>>>> intimate scenes. There's something working against the notion that the 
>>>>>> plays
>>>>>> are expanding in them horizons. There is a lot of lit in the plays and a 
>>>>>> lot
>>>>>> of phil, which I think is a fair comment on what I'm made up of.
>>>>>> A lot of lit and phil and more and more sci and phys.
>>>>>> I've got a funny feeling the sci and phys are a phase, like
>>>>>> delinquency, which one goes through.
>>>>>> It's lasted two plays.
>>>>>> Exactly, it's two plays. Two suggests purpose, misleadingly.
>>>>>> One is singular, two is a coincidence, three is a trend.
>>>>>> In the case of those two plays, they began because I stubbed my toe
>>>>>> against two pieces of information or two areas of science which I found
>>>>>> really interested me. It didn't seem to be a release of some scientist
>>>>>> within me. On the contrary, it seemed to be going against what really
>>>>>> interests me, what I choose to read, and so on. I thought that quantum
>>>>>> mechanics and chaos mathematics suggested themselves as quite interesting
>>>>>> and powerful metaphors for human behavior--not just behavior, but about 
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> way, in the latter case, in which it suggested a determined life, a life
>>>>>> ruled by determinism, and a life which is subject simply to random causes
>>>>>> and effects. Those two ideas about life were not irreconcilable. Chaos
>>>>>> mathematics is precisely to do with the unpredictability of determinism.
>>>>>> Hifalutin' words, but it's actually a very fascinating door, a view 
>>>>>> through
>>>>>> a cracked-open door. Pinning myself down to your question: I have no 
>>>>>> sense
>>>>>> of looking for a third such fascinating scientific metaphor, and I have 
>>>>>> no
>>>>>> reason to suppose that I'll stub my toe on a third one.
>>>>>> How did you stub your toe against those two?
>>>>>> Casually.
>>>>>> Books in an airport?
>>>>>> I joke like that, but it's not one book on one day. My life is
>>>>>> sectioned off into hot flushes, pursuits of this or that. Rather in the 
>>>>>> same
>>>>>> way as a year ago or more, a fairly quiescent interest in or sympathy
>>>>>> towards Roman poetry and literature of antiquity suddenly had its turn. I
>>>>>> think it turned into something more obsessive through reading about A. E.
>>>>>> Housman, again somebody whom I had read for years on and off. That was
>>>>>> another quiescent interest.
>>>>>> Do you read Latin?
>>>>>> I can't say I read Latin. I studied Latin up to what we call in
>>>>>> England A level. So it's not gibberish to me. But I read it with cribs. 
>>>>>> What
>>>>>> I enjoy is reading a particular poem or a poet in numerous translations, 
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> see how different translators try to find the original. There's a play 
>>>>>> to be
>>>>>> written about translation, I think.
>>>>>> For your own translations, do you always work from a literal version?
>>>>>> Yes. I've done two Schnitzlers, a Nestroy and a Molnar, and I worked
>>>>>> on a Lorca. It doesn't feel like much over 30 years. Years and years ago,
>>>>>> one of my resolutions--now a failed resolution was to learn a language 
>>>>>> well
>>>>>> enough, Russian by choice, not simply for purposes of translation but so
>>>>>> that I could read things the way they were meant to be understood.
>>>>>> And what have you done about that?
>>>>>> Nothing. I postponed reading War and Peace until I could read Russian.
>>>>>> The result is now I cannot read Russian and I have not read War and 
>>>>>> Peace.
>>>>>> Perhaps you need a long sabbatical.
>>>>>> I don't know about these sabbaticals. My ambition is to retire, and
>>>>>> has been for ages. When I say retire I mean just pladdly writing at my 
>>>>>> own
>>>>>> speed without owing anything to anybody, without anybody waiting for what
>>>>>> I'm writing. I never seem to manage to do that. I think it's a 
>>>>>> temperamental
>>>>>> defect. That's pretty clear by now.
>>>>>> To return to Arcadia, where did it begin? With James Gleick's book,
>>>>>> Chaos?
>>>>>> I think so. At the same time, I was thinking about Classicism and
>>>>>> Romanticism as opposites in style, taste, temperament, art. I remember
>>>>>> talking to a friend of mine, looking at his bookshelves, saying there's a
>>>>>> play, isn't there, about the way that retrospectively one looks at 
>>>>>> poetry,
>>>>>> painting, gardening, and speaks of classical periods and the romantic
>>>>>> revolution, and so on. Particularly when one starts dividing people up 
>>>>>> into
>>>>>> classical temperaments and romantic temperaments--and I suppose it's not
>>>>>> that far from Hapgood in a way. The romantic temperament has a classical
>>>>>> person wildly signalling, and vice versa.
>>>>>> You and I tend to talk about all this as if it really works like that,
>>>>>> as if there's this acorn that you find somewhere and put manure around, 
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> water, and hope it grows into some kind of sapling, and so on and so 
>>>>>> forth.
>>>>>> It doesn't seem to me to be that kind of orderly natural development.
>>>>>> No single acorn?
>>>>>> It's more than that. I have the feeling that you throw the acorn away
>>>>>> at some point. You encourage me to talk about a book or a thought which
>>>>>> generates everything that follows. It's true in a limited sense, but an
>>>>>> alternative way of making a picture of the process would be to say that 
>>>>>> it's
>>>>>> something that starts you up, like a motor gets started up, like a 
>>>>>> cranking
>>>>>> handle. Then you throw the handle away, and drive off down the road
>>>>>> somewhere and see where the road goes.
>>>>>> What's an acorn that you've discarded?
>>>>>> When it comes to it, I don't think Arcadia says very much about these
>>>>>> two sides of the human personality or temperament. I don't think it's in 
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> play. It's by no means in the foreground. And yet, it's firing all around
>>>>>> the target, making a pattern around the target.
>>>>>> Where does the texture start? Suddenly horticulture enters, and then
>>>>>> Lord Byron. You didn't set out to write a play about horticulture and 
>>>>>> Byron?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, I didn't, but I had read one or two books about Byron over the
>>>>>> years, and I was reading them with a faint sense of undisclosed purpose. 
>>>>>> [
>>>>>> suppose if you're my kind of writer you're always working. One's leisure
>>>>>> reading is subconsciously purposeful.
>>>>>> You still write in longhand and then dictate it into a tape recorder?
>>>>>> Yes. I do exactly that with new work, but when I'm rewriting or
>>>>>> changing things, I now prefer to give my secretary lots and lots of pages
>>>>>> with longhand and squiggles, "insert here." I love working on a 
>>>>>> typescript.
>>>>>> I love the power of the blue pencil. "This is rubbish, take it out. Put 
>>>>>> this
>>>>>> in. Turn it around."
>>>>>> Is it a canard that you're a conservative?
>>>>>> Would it be one? I always thought of myself as a conservative, not in
>>>>>> a sort of ideological way. I'm really a bit of a failure talking about
>>>>>> politics because I never get into the subject or issues in the manner in
>>>>>> which a responsible citizen really ought to. I respond in some other way
>>>>>> aesthetically even, certainly emotionally. Emotionally I like to 
>>>>>> conserve. I
>>>>>> don't like impulsive change. But what I like and don't like certainly
>>>>>> doesn't divide up into things that the Conservative Party or the Labor 
>>>>>> Party
>>>>>> does.
>>>>>> I was very pleased with Mrs. Thatcher at the beginning. I thought of
>>>>>> her as being a subversive influence, which I found very welcome. The
>>>>>> Wilson-Callaghan pre-Thatcher years in English politics I thought were
>>>>>> nauseating. I thought politicians had become people one didn't bother to
>>>>>> listen to because they seemed desperately anxious not to expose their 
>>>>>> flanks
>>>>>> to any side. There were very few unqualified statements of intent. I 
>>>>>> loved
>>>>>> the way she came in. I was very personally interested in the whole saga 
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> print unions, for example, a huge corrupt scandal which government after
>>>>>> government wouldn't tackle.
>>>>>> Which brings us to [Rupert] Murdoch as well. I think he's a very had
>>>>>> influence on English, or indeed global, cultural life. Ten years ago, he 
>>>>>> was
>>>>>> a sort of hero for me, for sending the printers packing. The printers 
>>>>>> were
>>>>>> making newspapers into an impossible economic proposition, and I love
>>>>>> newspapers. I was excited when Murdoch came in his Australian underhanded
>>>>>> way with a lot of money behind him and just destroyed them. It was well
>>>>>> overdue.
>>>>>> You've been so strong on human rights. What about human rights for
>>>>>> printers?
>>>>>> I don't think you have a human right to cheat and steal. There were
>>>>>> printers signing on as Mickey Mouse. I just think they pushed their luck.
>>>>>> Murdoch said, it's not a union, it's a protection racket. I think that 
>>>>>> was
>>>>>> probably quite fair.
>>>>>> But then you turned against Murdoch.
>>>>>> That's part of a shift of feeling about the press as a whole. Night
>>>>>> and Day contains statements which are still flourished. I read one last 
>>>>>> week
>>>>>> by people who want to leave the press completely untrammelled. I don't 
>>>>>> know
>>>>>> what I want now. I've arrived at a kind of defensive position, which is 
>>>>>> not
>>>>>> entirely where I stand intellectually. I've decided that getting cross 
>>>>>> about
>>>>>> the press is like getting cross about the Flat Earth Society. It's 
>>>>>> become an
>>>>>> awful joke. What I find upsetting about the notorious end of the British
>>>>>> press is what it says about the readership. I think the tabloid press 
>>>>>> treat
>>>>>> their readers almost as if they are morons. And it's awful the way the
>>>>>> readers don't seem to mind.
>>>>>> You've said, "Journalism is the last line of defense in this country."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think that's still true. I think people would be getting away with
>>>>>> much more, were it not for newspapers blowing the whistle, or just being
>>>>>> there to observe.
>>>>>> Could you imagine having stayed in journalism and not being a
>>>>>> playwright?
>>>>>> No. Looking at it now, I would think of that as an unhappy outcome,
>>>>>> not because I love the theatre, in quotes, but because it was wonderful 
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> work for myself and not have to be accountable to somebody. I have a
>>>>>> formulation about the luck we've had, which is that people like myself
>>>>>> appear to have promoted a recreation into a career. We're getting away 
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> it, and it's the getting away with it part which I don't want to lose. It
>>>>>> seems quite capricious, the way one profession is rewarded over another 
>>>>>> one.
>>>>>> There's an evolution in every kind of society, particularly now in what 
>>>>>> we
>>>>>> call the free-market society, where certain pursuits are amazingly
>>>>>> over-rewarded. Being a popular singer, or in a band. There's no logic in 
>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For you, having chosen playwriting, it's a kind of super freelance.
>>>>>> You're not beholden to anyone.
>>>>>> No. I'm one of the people who fall into the over-rewarded category, I
>>>>>> suppose. I don't coast on it. I work harder than I used to when I was a
>>>>>> reporter. But it feels different. I do it for myself.
>>>>>> You've talked about writing a play about your growing up in India. Is
>>>>>> Indian Ink the play?
>>>>>> No. I had talked about writing about the ethos of empire, and I
>>>>>> suppose that's a very good example of what we were speaking about 
>>>>>> earlier:
>>>>>> the acorn hasn't been thrown away. But it's not really just that. It's 
>>>>>> much
>>>>>> more an intimate play than a polemical play. One kids oneself along that
>>>>>> every little shred of reference to the larger subject resonates through 
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> whole piece, and enlarges the play. That's just a kind of sweet thought 
>>>>>> by
>>>>>> the playwright.
>>>>>> Does it surprise you that you've dealt with so many different
>>>>>> subjects?
>>>>>> No. I'm a bit of a gadfly. Different things catch my interest for a
>>>>>> while, and I have a hot flush about it, and something else catches my
>>>>>> interest. Of course, a gadfly is not the ultimate compliment.
>>>>>> It borders on the dilettante.
>>>>>> Precisely. What we're leaving out: The cake is upside down. Theatre is
>>>>>> a popular art form, it's part of the world of relief and release, of
>>>>>> entertainment. That's what it's for. The other bit of the cake which is 
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> do with formulating and promulgating and examining and revealing issues,
>>>>>> life that's a program that can be continued through other means: 
>>>>>> journalism,
>>>>>> television, essays. There's a case for the view that if you've chosen to
>>>>>> work for the theatre, your fundamental objective is to be part of an art
>>>>>> form that diverts, entertains and instructs rather than that you're 
>>>>>> engaged
>>>>>> in teaching your fellow citizens certain lessons.
>>>>>> You said that if you wanted to change the world, the last thing you
>>>>>> would do is write a play.
>>>>>> What I really meant was that if there is a local concrete problem
>>>>>> which you want to change, yes. I said that, but I'm not sure that it's
>>>>>> entirely watertight. Maybe the way to continue our conversation about
>>>>>> newspapers would be to write a play.
>>>>>> Is plot still difficult for you?
>>>>>> Can't you tell? [Laughs.] With Arcadia I got lucky. I didn't know it
>>>>>> would work out like that. Like most writers like most people-- if I could
>>>>>> live a slightly different kind of life, it would make an enormous amount 
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> difference to how much I wrote, and the quality of what I wrote.
>>>>>> Occasionally you get into a period where mentally you're living with this
>>>>>> play, nothing is interrupting you, and all the possibilities the neurons 
>>>>>> or
>>>>>> nerve ends you're aware of them all and, consciously or subconsciously, 
>>>>>> you
>>>>>> make the best possible use of them. If you have enough solitude and
>>>>>> concentration, you can make the best of the opportunity. But a lot of the
>>>>>> time I'm writing in a kind of harassed, interrupted way. I came to the
>>>>>> conclusion the other day that the information is being fed in the wrong
>>>>>> order in the second act of Indian Ink. I came back from Hapgood and 
>>>>>> looked
>>>>>> at it for an hour and a half before I fell asleep. It's all done in the
>>>>>> space of an hour here, an hour there. That's not how to do these things.
>>>>>> You might say from the evidence that you thrive on that process.
>>>>>> Well, no. With Arcadia, I had a really good period of time, where
>>>>>> somehow I could keep it all in view and look further down the road and 
>>>>>> see
>>>>>> where things were heading, and manipulate the material so I could 
>>>>>> intersect
>>>>>> properly. The more I got into it, the more I realized that this was 
>>>>>> going to
>>>>>> work as a piece of storytelling. Hapgood was a kind of struggle from the
>>>>>> word go, and I was still dealing with it at Lincoln Center, trying to
>>>>>> explain, simplify. We started off by referring to it as a melodrama. The 
>>>>>> way
>>>>>> you label something is very helpful; it gets you out of the corner. Once 
>>>>>> I
>>>>>> began to think of Hapgood as a melodrama, I felt much more comfortable 
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> it, because it is melodramatic. It's not satiric about the spy business. 
>>>>>> It
>>>>>> operates on a heightened, slightly implausible level of life. It's 
>>>>>> probably
>>>>>> the only play I've written, as far as I can remember offhand, in which
>>>>>> somebody shoots somebody else on stage.
>>>>>> It has to work on that level for the audience to accept it.
>>>>>> It absolutely does. The thing about melodrama is that if the audience
>>>>>> makes the right decision about it, they accept everything. If they make 
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> wrong decision about it early on, then the drama actually becomes silly.
>>>>>> How would you categorize Arcadia?
>>>>>> Because I was happy with it anyway, I didn't need to label it. I
>>>>>> didn't need to get myself off the hook.
>>>>>> Some people think it's your best play.
>>>>>> I know they do. I think that's what they're talking about: the story
>>>>>> works best.
>>>>>> But you know some of your plays are better than others.
>>>>>> Of course. And in spite of defects I'm aware of and would like to
>>>>>> correct on all of them, I also think that some of them actually are good,
>>>>>> better than good sometimes. I'm now contradicting myself. If I have to 
>>>>>> talk
>>>>>> about them at all, which I never volunteer to do, I'd rather use a phrase
>>>>>> like "madcap comedy," to dissemble. In a much simpler sense, there's a
>>>>>> modest person hiding a proud person, I suppose. I never thought I would
>>>>>> manage to write a play at all. It was something I wanted to do, but I was
>>>>>> astonished when I managed to do it. Just seemed to be something that 
>>>>>> would
>>>>>> be too difficult for me to do when I was starting out.
>>>>>> You used to say, and I never entirely believed it, that all your
>>>>>> characters sounded like you.
>>>>>> I used to say it because I used to think it was true, and maybe it was
>>>>>> true in those days. i think everybody in Night and Day, sounds like me, 
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> example. It's less true now. This was literally true of Night and Day in 
>>>>>> one
>>>>>> isolated case: I took a speech away from one character and gave it to
>>>>>> another, and it made no difference. I just needed somebody to say 
>>>>>> something
>>>>>> at that point. In that sense, they were all speaking with my voice. In a
>>>>>> limited way, you might say that they were interchangeable. So I meant it
>>>>>> when I said it, but I wouldn't say it nowadays.
>>>>>> It's not true of Arcadia, and it's not true of Indian Ink.
>>>>>> No, it's not.
>>>>>> Years ago, at the time of The Real Thing, Mike Nichols said you were
>>>>>> one of the few happy people he knew. When I mentioned that to you, you 
>>>>>> were
>>>>>> offended by the word happy, you said that you were as unhappy as the next
>>>>>> man.
>>>>>> Boasting about my unhappiness!
>>>>>> Are you a happy man?
>>>>>> Yes. I'm just looking at the word happy for a moment. Mike was always
>>>>>> tremendously pleased by the definition of happiness in that play. 
>>>>>> "Happiness
>>>>>> is equilibrium. Shift your weight." Attaining your happiness, if you're
>>>>>> talking about me, is learning that lesson. You try not to stand in the 
>>>>>> way
>>>>>> of the onrushing train, to change the metaphor. But in fact I suppose 
>>>>>> what
>>>>>> you're remembering is that happiness seems to imply a turning away from
>>>>>> whatever might compromise your happiness. One is exposed naked in the 
>>>>>> winds
>>>>>> of the world, and everybody around you has got problems. Some are acute,
>>>>>> some are less serious than others. You live in the little world of your
>>>>>> family and the larger world of your colleagues and the huge world of
>>>>>> newspaper and television news. So happiness is not really a very adequate
>>>>>> word. When I said I felt blessed by good fortune, that's generally the
>>>>>> truth. Clearly your life and everyone's life is full of things that make 
>>>>>> you
>>>>>> unhappy from time to time. You just deal with them.
>>>>>> That reminds me again of the boy in your play, Where Are They Now?
>>>>>> That indeed is the play where that character says happiness is a
>>>>>> passing shift of emphasis. I do have an idyllic vision of life. Whether 
>>>>>> one
>>>>>> has a right to live it is another matter. It's to do with self-reliance.
>>>>>> It's cultivating your garden without being pulled, without having one's
>>>>>> sleeve tugged by what's happening outside the wall.
>>>>>> PHOTO (BLACK & WHITE): Tom Stoppard
>>>>>> PHOTOS (BLACK & WHITE): Classical or romantic? You be the judge in
>>>>>> Stoppard's Arcadia, seen here in two productions directed by Trevor 
>>>>>> Nunn. At
>>>>>> right, Felicity Kendal and Samuel West appeared at Britain's National
>>>>>> Theatre. Below, Billy Crudup and Jennifer Dundas at New York's Lincoln
>>>>>> Center Theater.
>>>>>> PHOTOS (BLACK & WHITE): "Hapgood is not satiric about the spy
>>>>>> businesszz It operates on a heightened, slightly implausible level of 
>>>>>> life."
>>>>>> Above, Jo Ann Carney, Dan LaMorte and Gus Bustinice, left to right, in a
>>>>>> production directed by Mary Zimmerman at Chicago's Center Theatre 
>>>>>> Ensemble.
>>>>>> Below, David Lansbury and Stockard Channing in Jack O'Brien's Lincoln 
>>>>>> Center
>>>>>> Theater staging.
>>>>>> PHOTOS (BLACK & WHITE): "I'm a bit of a gadfly." Above, a scene from
>>>>>> Rosencranz and Gaildenstern Are Dead, in a production at the New Jersey
>>>>>> Shakespeare Festival; which featured, from left, Davis Hall, Bub Ari, 
>>>>>> Eric
>>>>>> Tavaris, Eduardo Patino and John Nichols. Above right, Michael Gross and
>>>>>> Linda Purl in The Real Thing at the Doolittle Theatre in Hollywood. Below
>>>>>> right, lsiah Whitlock Jr. and DeAnn Meats in Night and Day at San
>>>>>> Francisco's American Conservatory Theater.
>>>>>> ~~~~~~~~
>>>>>> AN INTERVIEW BY MEL GUSSOW
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mel Gussow, who writes about theatre for the New York Times, is the
>>>>>> author of Conversations with Pinter and Conversations with Stoppard (both
>>>>>> Limelight Editions). This article is excerpted by permission from the
>>>>>> latter, which was published last month.
>>>>>>  ------------------------------
>>>>>> Copyright of American Theatre is the property of Theatre
>>>>>> Communications Group and its content may not be copied or emailed to
>>>>>> multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's
>>>>>> express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
>>>>>> articles for individual use.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Back
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  ------------------------------
>>>>>> Windows Live™ Hotmail®:…more than just e-mail. Check it 
>>>>>> out.<http://windowslive.com/online/hotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_more_042009>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  ------------------------------
>>>>>> Hotmail® has ever-growing storage! Don’t worry about storage limits. 
>>>>>> Check
>>>>>> it 
>>>>>> out.<http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/Storage?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tutorial_Storage1_052009>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>  --
>>>>> Christopher W. Jones
>>>>> Towson University '09
>>>>> Dartmouth College '08
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Christopher W. Jones
>> Towson University '09
>> Dartmouth College '08
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Christopher W. Jones
> Towson University '09
> Dartmouth College '08
>



-- 
Christopher W. Jones
Towson University '09
Dartmouth College '08

Other related posts: