David Lindsay-Abaire is known for being the playwright behind the play ‘Good People.’ This is one that got a lot of publicity. The play was aired in a number of theaters including Noel Coward Theatre, Marine Theatre Company (which was where I saw the play) and Vermont Stage Company. The play can be characterized as a drama with a bit of comedy. This play mostly revolves around the life of Margaret, who was commonly referred to as Maggie (hard ‘g)’. Maggie has spent a significant part of her life in the South end of Boston or ‘Southie’ as most people knew it. Her recent loss of a job after she was fired by her boss, Stevie. This led for her to seek after an old schoolmate and boyfriend Michael, who had managed to escape the Southie life and become a doctor.
Other characters in the play include Kate, Michael’s current wife, Dottie, who plays Margie’s landlady. Although Margie and Dottie are not the best of friends, circumstances force them to be in good terms as Dottie is also the babysitter to Margie’s daughter Joyce. Joyce, although an adult, is challenged with mental disabilities adding to a list of challenges that Margie had to face. The drama surrounding this play is immense. However, the comedy that the playwright included in the play gives it an interesting twist making the play very interesting. However, this does not mean that the play in itself was with no faults of its own. As much as the play had its selling points, it also had some areas which if had been tackled better, would have made the play a masterpiece to be reckoned with.
Writing
The script brings forth the assumption that people born to ‘disadvantaged families’ have very little opportunity to lead ’comfortable’ lives. This is seen when Michael’s prosperity is attributed to luck. The play seems to support the idea of the cycle of poverty. It only promotes the notion that our lives are predestined depending on where we were born to unless fate intervenes.
The script also was not for a universal audience. The use of some words displayed a more adult rated content and was not children friendly. Some of the themes also contained adult content. Some of the actors also had double lives. This portrayed a certain level of hypocrisy. For instance, at first, Kate seemed to agree with Maggie. However, as it is seen in the play, she shifts her standing to support her husband. She even managed to convince Maggie not to say that Joyce was the child to her husband. This made it almost impossible to identify who could be termed as ‘bad person’ or a ‘good person.’
Design
Props play a very vital role in acting. This is because the help creates the best scenery to make the play as realistic as possible. Failure to which, however, good the actors may be, the play will seem unrealistic, and the audience might be unable to relate to it.
Michael is a doctor and his wife, Kate, a lecturer. In the play, Michael is said to have found an escape route from the ‘uncomfortable’ life people in Southie have. This is not depicted in the setting of the home as seen when Margaret visits him. The use of the house as it was most likely depicted that Michael and his wife were living a middle-class life. This setting is contrary to the kind of house a doctor, married to a lecturer, is supposed to have. Had they used a more prestigious and furnished house, it would have worked better especially in trying to show the class differences if one compared it to the house that Maggie was living in.
Costumes enable an actor fit into the role that they are to play. It is a distinctive mode of dressing that is supposed to communicate to the audience the class, gender, profession or epoch of an actor on an actress.
The dressing by Michael did not properly and effectively communicate his class or profession. As a doctor, it is expected that one is seen dressed in some uniform or at the very least a white coat. This would have been the most appropriate costume to be dressed in when Maggie came looking for him. The lack of proper costume is also observed when Maggie comes to visit him in his house. He is dressed in a simple manner that does not communicate how ‘comfortable’ of life he lives. The least he is expected to wear is a certain well-known brand of designer clothes. Alternatively, he would have donned in something that will be eye-catching, and that will bring the audience to realize just how wealthy he is, say, for instance, a very classy watch or a pair of shoes.
Clear visibility of the stage and actors is crucial. It was commendable that the lights were dimmed to allow the audience focus on the stage and thus their full attention on the actors. However, there seemed to be moments where too much lighting was focused on the actors. This may have hindered the proper visibility of the actor’s faces. This was not the best lighting as one could not clearly see the actors face. The visibility is important as one would clearly see the actor’s facial expressions which serve a clear role in making a character fit properly into the role that they are playing.
For an audience to enjoy a play, it is vital that sound be moderated in a way that the audience can hear clearly what the actors are saying. There is a need to ensure proper audibility. In the theatre, there were no proper mechanisms to ensure that the actors were clearly audible. This, therefore, meant that not all of the persons in the audience heard properly what the play was all about.
The use of background music is also vital and must relate to the events happening on the stage. It is my opinion that the music played, and the sound quality did not communicate this message effectively.
Acting
Some of the characters were very proactive in going to achieve their objectives. Maggie makes the assumption that Michael lied in telling her that the party had been cancelled. She had a right to assume this as it had a first seemed that Michael never wanted to invite her to the party in the first place. She then decided to pay a visit to Michael despite the fact that he had communicated to her that the party had been cancelled. However, her character as one who would seek after what she wants is loosened. This is seen when she first admitted to Michael in the presence of his wife that he was indeed the father to her daughter Joyce. She succumbed to pressure and criticism by both Michael and his wife when she retracted her statement now stating that Michael was not the father to Joyce.
The act by Kate has some flaws which I thought were fundamental. She did not react as was supposed to when she learnt that Joyce was fathered by Michael. From the play, it can be deduced that Michael and Kate had been through a dark place in their marriage. With this in mind, the new information that Michael had supposedly fathered a child ought to have been annoying or shocking, to say the least.
The believability of an actor is dependent on several factors. This includes tonal variation and facial expression. I opine that at the moment that Maggie told Michael that Joyce was his child, there would have been a better reaction from Kate, the wife. It is noted earlier in the play that although Michael had mentioned to Kate that he had a childhood friend named Maggie but had not stated that they had been romantically involved. The show of shock thus would have been valid from Kate.
The role that Maggie had to play was perhaps the most important in the play. Many at times, it was up to her to bring out the humour in the play. This was not so. She took her role to seriously that one was not able to correctly identify the humorous scenes and statements
Directing
Generally, the directing of the play was good. However, more emphasis needs to be put on naturalism and realism of the play. This is in doubt when Kate does not express any feelings of hate, anger r even disgust after she learns that Michael supposedly had a child with Maggie. This is expected since it can be seen from the play that there was a possibility that she and Michael have experienced a rough patch before in their married life.
The theatrical form of the play was more of drama. The playwright, however, included some humour in it and, therefore, could also be seen as comedy. This was not clearly seen in the acting. The director has a duty to ensure that the play was acted in a manner as was intended by the playwright.
