I can not express just how wonderfully refreshing it is to see such intelligent and thought out debate on Youtube's comments section. Thank you to (most) everyone who has posted on this subject-- what a wonderful read!!!! :)
I'm not criticizing the actor, but she pretty much just ruined his entire life and this is how he reacts? It's not about whether he's innocent or not- he lost his job, his tenure is now gone, he has a mortgage on a house he can't pay for, and he almost doesn't seem to care. Look how much is at stake here. He doesn't even seem to get mad until the very end. Not trying to offend, but just wanted to make the point. I love the scene though, Mamet's fantastic
@Anchormanjkc I think he was trying to make it seem like his character was trying to remain professional and relaxed, even though he was raging on the inside.
I think her perception was so impaired by her feminist paradigm that she viewed everything as a power struggle when in fact the professor was just trying to help her with the class. He might be pedantic and inefficient as such, but that did not justify destroying his life.
@323guiltyspark Or you could see that this was the kind of person he was the entire time. This is how I felt when I saw it, although I was confused. That this girl had taken up with a feminist thought in order to deal with a teacher that had these tendencies. I'm not sure. It's interesting to see what everyone thinks.
This play, ultimately, is not about sexual harassment or even issues about gender dynamics, patriarchy, or feminism. It comes down to language and power and what happens when two people fail to communicate because they are denied access to a particular discourse. And, when an individual is denied access to a particular discourse but someone else does know it then the person with linguistic access (knowledge) has power over the one who does not.
I'm currently directing this piece for my second year of university and am only showing the 3rd act. From reading the play I, personally, felt that in a way it was mocking feminism. Look at what women can do when they get their own way.
I haven't had a chance to read or analyze the play, but judging solely on the performance I've seen here, and what I've read about the play in whole, I'm intrigued. This is a powerful scene done quite well by the two actors. (I'll quibble and say the actress' combat skills are a bit weak, but that's neither here nor there, I suppose.)
This play is about power. He was in the wrong in the beginning for being unprofessional, though he had some good intention....then she was in the wrong for the false accusations, then finally he was in the wrong for beating her (which the play does say he beats her then raises a chair). It is meant to be a tennis match of power between the two characters, and the whole point is to raise discussion. In the end, they both were equal in blame.
That was way over exagerated. Its obvious that they were trying to invoke sympathy with Carol. In the script he really only pushes her down and then threatens to hit her with the chair
@JaneDoeXCI actually in the plays script it says he beats her. how he goes about doing it is up to interpretation of director/actors. the ending is supposed to be shocking, though,in a lot of dramatiztions they have him just throw her down but in my opinion it takes away from the confusion that's supposed to be brought on at the end with john's savage behavior.
Here it is the first sentence, in wikipedia it says the second sentence.. which one is correct? because both make completely different statements and would change the way we perceive it?
There are two versions. The version my friend and I are doing in drama at the moment contains the first sentence, which I'm pretty sure is from the second edition (although I may be wrong). I'd be interested to see a video with the second setence.
(She cowers on the floor below him. Pause. He looks down at her. He lowers the chair. He moves to his desk, and arranges the papers on it. Pause. He looks over at her.)
... well...
(Pause. She looks at him.)
CAROL: Yes. That's right.
(She looks away from him, and lowers her head. To herself:) ... yes. That's right.
***
At least that's what my version says! There are loads of different ways that could be interpreted though.
The end wasn't quite how i expected it to be in this production. It's really a play about power, rather than sexual harrasement. Mamet is perhaps commenting that political correctness is something that can be so far exploited that it can only be fought by force. The main issue here is power though, especially the power of language and the lack of communication between John and Carol which could represent the conflict between genders on a larger scale.
The power ended up being in the hands of a radical "revolutionary" feminist, who used false accusations to steal the power from someone who had earned their position. When speaking of this play, I find it a very rare occurrence to encounter anyone, of either gender that sides with Carol over John. One wonders if this wasn't meant to be an intentional imbalance in the painting of the two characters by Mamet. I don't see it as a discussion as much as I do a warning.
my class is discussing this play now and i have to hold in my seething rage because im a room full of people who side with carol. it sickens me that people feel sympathy for this waste of space.
@MariiEllis how can you side with Carol? Have you read or seen the play? The whole point is that there isn't a realistic way to side with her. The only reason you could side with her after all she did is simple and thoughtless and only proves Mamet's point, which I had hoped to be too cynical to be true.
i don't agree with what she does, or the way she handles the situation, and i pitty john - he is a character in the wrong place at the wrong time, but i understand why carol does what she does. she's confused and lost and alone and has a massive inferiority complex. in answer to your question, yes i've read and studied the lay
@Zaphrod88 I'm not so sure that John 'earned' his position - he was pedantic to a major fault, posturing and reveling in the arrogance of academia. He benefited from what had been a male-dominated academic tradition - and she turned the tables on him.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
What an absurd story. The writer obviously lacked any experience with universities. Funny also how the white guy represents the evil and corrupt establishment and the woman represents the avenging force who will right all wrongs. Absurd.
I saw a different production of it recently and everyone I went with was on the guys side. It's a story about opinion vs fact, right/wrong fairness/justice feminism and sexual/physical abuse.
It's not at all about corrupt establishments and avenging - in fact she even says its not revenge.
It's about believing you are right. And it's about humans.
I think you should maybe go read or see it, the point is to provoke discussion about who was right...
I have read it and seen it performed. It is absurd. Yes, it is feminist you're right; feminist bullshit. In order for there to be justice, there must of been some crime; there was none. "Belief" in "being right" is not the same a being right. Much harm has come to people from those who believed strongly in their absurd opinions; feminist hysteria is found there also. The entire scenario is contrived to the detriment of the "establishment".
The whole point of the play is not 2 be "enjoyed" or "agreed with"...its 2 be discussed. When I saw it I thought she was a dick, but then...I knew he wasnt in the right either, cause he did abuse her in sum way.
It's a fascinating take on people, society and the nature of the Uni society. It's not a femenist play at all!!!
So ur original point about what the white guy represents is wrong, because he doesnt represent tha...thats wat u saw in him.
Mamet is actually commenting on political correctness which was hugely contentious at the time, and started in universities, and at the time it wasn't as far fetched as it may seem now.
I am very aware of what political correctness meant at the time this play was produced. This play is a celebration of political correctness; it embraces and relishes it. One notion that it conveys is that of destroying what was perceived as the old white male establishment because someone's feelings were hurt in ways that no one could predict or should even care about. It was held up as a feminist triumph at the time and is an excellent example of the delusions enjoyed by such people.
I think that that is what the author is trying to say. People in America are condemned when they attack a woman or a minority without anyone checking into it. They just assume that the white person was in the wrong.
A person who attacks another person is almost always wrong. (Self-defense in the face of a physical attack is of course different.) Indifference to the plight of abused people everywhere, such as yours, makes my blood run cold.
@hobbitgirl08 This is correct in the real world, but not in Mamet's world with these characters. The play is very misogynistic and Mamet intentionally makes you hate Carol. Even though John is a little on his high horse at the beginning he makes every attempt to help Carol, who just screws him over for some self righteous reason that she kind of invents. It isn't realistic in how people would normally act. There's a reason the audience applauded this the first time it premiered.
I can not express just how wonderfully refreshing it is to see such intelligent and thought out debate on Youtube's comments section. Thank you to (most) everyone who has posted on this subject-- what a wonderful read!!!! :)
jbatten27 1 month ago
I love it how John used Carol's head to mop his desk. ;D
JustAddWid 1 month ago
I'm not criticizing the actor, but she pretty much just ruined his entire life and this is how he reacts? It's not about whether he's innocent or not- he lost his job, his tenure is now gone, he has a mortgage on a house he can't pay for, and he almost doesn't seem to care. Look how much is at stake here. He doesn't even seem to get mad until the very end. Not trying to offend, but just wanted to make the point. I love the scene though, Mamet's fantastic
Anchormanjkc 3 months ago
@Anchormanjkc I think he was trying to make it seem like his character was trying to remain professional and relaxed, even though he was raging on the inside.
costerluver 3 months ago
I think her perception was so impaired by her feminist paradigm that she viewed everything as a power struggle when in fact the professor was just trying to help her with the class. He might be pedantic and inefficient as such, but that did not justify destroying his life.
323guiltyspark 3 months ago
@323guiltyspark Or you could see that this was the kind of person he was the entire time. This is how I felt when I saw it, although I was confused. That this girl had taken up with a feminist thought in order to deal with a teacher that had these tendencies. I'm not sure. It's interesting to see what everyone thinks.
SarahLeeAnn 3 months ago
This play, ultimately, is not about sexual harassment or even issues about gender dynamics, patriarchy, or feminism. It comes down to language and power and what happens when two people fail to communicate because they are denied access to a particular discourse. And, when an individual is denied access to a particular discourse but someone else does know it then the person with linguistic access (knowledge) has power over the one who does not.
Habanero14 11 months ago
I think there both knobs
and what the hell is she doing at university, do they have courses in dishwashing or something?
EdwardTheBooble 11 months ago
Comment removed
EdwardTheBooble 11 months ago
I think Carol is a paranoid idiot.
flipmaya 1 year ago
dude totally cops a feel @ 7:49-7:50 you have to pause at juuuuuuuust the right spot and his hand is on her boob
Katio888 1 year ago
I'm currently directing this piece for my second year of university and am only showing the 3rd act. From reading the play I, personally, felt that in a way it was mocking feminism. Look at what women can do when they get their own way.
TheSpilster 1 year ago
@TheSpilster I did feel this too.
SarahLeeAnn 3 months ago
I haven't had a chance to read or analyze the play, but judging solely on the performance I've seen here, and what I've read about the play in whole, I'm intrigued. This is a powerful scene done quite well by the two actors. (I'll quibble and say the actress' combat skills are a bit weak, but that's neither here nor there, I suppose.)
An excellent job overall by these two.
EmeraldOceans 1 year ago
Aside from that, I think he was amazing and she did a fairly good job as well...a lot better than others I've seen posted.
jckaluv 1 year ago
This play is about power. He was in the wrong in the beginning for being unprofessional, though he had some good intention....then she was in the wrong for the false accusations, then finally he was in the wrong for beating her (which the play does say he beats her then raises a chair). It is meant to be a tennis match of power between the two characters, and the whole point is to raise discussion. In the end, they both were equal in blame.
jckaluv 1 year ago
That was way over exagerated. Its obvious that they were trying to invoke sympathy with Carol. In the script he really only pushes her down and then threatens to hit her with the chair
JaneDoeXCI 1 year ago
@JaneDoeXCI actually in the plays script it says he beats her. how he goes about doing it is up to interpretation of director/actors. the ending is supposed to be shocking, though,in a lot of dramatiztions they have him just throw her down but in my opinion it takes away from the confusion that's supposed to be brought on at the end with john's savage behavior.
Vitiare23 1 year ago
everywhere i see this scene, in the movie, in the plays it always disturbs me :S
hazza20082009 1 year ago
This is the worst Oleanna endgame I have ever seen.
ChoklitBizkit 1 year ago
What did he say at the end before she said "that's right?"
Joyness333 1 year ago
john was good, carols voice fucking annoyed the shit out of me.
caustic77755 1 year ago
Omg.that was soo goodd !!
Chris92Clark 1 year ago
That was VERY VERY GOOD
AbouHalab 1 year ago
Those punches sucked but it was good all around.
HiroAkemi82 2 years ago 4
...Wow. That was incredible. o.o
Weakenedasiam 2 years ago
love your acting dude you speak mammet very well
drummaross1015 2 years ago
Now THAT'S an intense final scene. Saw this on Broadway last night and was VERY disappointed in Pullman's physical violence.
ozzian2000 2 years ago
Powerful stuff. I am seeing the show on Broadway on Dec. 28th.
lizziesecondstreet 2 years ago
this actor is great; the girl can't "speak" Mamet for shit
BarnabasFrid 2 years ago
is the last words said by Carol:
"That's right.. That's right"
or:
"Don't worry about me, I'm alright"
Here it is the first sentence, in wikipedia it says the second sentence.. which one is correct? because both make completely different statements and would change the way we perceive it?
shokola 2 years ago
There are two versions. The version my friend and I are doing in drama at the moment contains the first sentence, which I'm pretty sure is from the second edition (although I may be wrong). I'd be interested to see a video with the second setence.
InvisibleAutoMail 2 years ago
I'm holding the script right now from DPS and it says. "Yes. That's right......yes. That's right.
actsingdancelive 2 years ago
(She cowers on the floor below him. Pause. He looks down at her. He lowers the chair. He moves to his desk, and arranges the papers on it. Pause. He looks over at her.)
... well...
(Pause. She looks at him.)
CAROL: Yes. That's right.
(She looks away from him, and lowers her head. To herself:) ... yes. That's right.
***
At least that's what my version says! There are loads of different ways that could be interpreted though.
fizzletto 1 year ago
I love how plays and films like this make fools of so many people, haha.
VariedInterest 2 years ago
I wouldn't interpret it that way, but fair enough lol, it's meant to split people down the middle.
Junkie7492 2 years ago
The end wasn't quite how i expected it to be in this production. It's really a play about power, rather than sexual harrasement. Mamet is perhaps commenting that political correctness is something that can be so far exploited that it can only be fought by force. The main issue here is power though, especially the power of language and the lack of communication between John and Carol which could represent the conflict between genders on a larger scale.
Junkie7492 2 years ago
The power ended up being in the hands of a radical "revolutionary" feminist, who used false accusations to steal the power from someone who had earned their position. When speaking of this play, I find it a very rare occurrence to encounter anyone, of either gender that sides with Carol over John. One wonders if this wasn't meant to be an intentional imbalance in the painting of the two characters by Mamet. I don't see it as a discussion as much as I do a warning.
Zaphrod88 2 years ago 11
my class is discussing this play now and i have to hold in my seething rage because im a room full of people who side with carol. it sickens me that people feel sympathy for this waste of space.
scrambledpenis 2 years ago
thats weird, my entire class side with John!
fizzletto 1 year ago
they should god dammit.
scrambledpenis 1 year ago
@Zaphrod88 i side with carol :)
she's wrong, but she does what she does because of the person she is
x
MariiEllis 1 year ago
@MariiEllis how can you side with Carol? Have you read or seen the play? The whole point is that there isn't a realistic way to side with her. The only reason you could side with her after all she did is simple and thoughtless and only proves Mamet's point, which I had hoped to be too cynical to be true.
muffliato2009 1 year ago
@muffliato2009
i don't agree with what she does, or the way she handles the situation, and i pitty john - he is a character in the wrong place at the wrong time, but i understand why carol does what she does. she's confused and lost and alone and has a massive inferiority complex. in answer to your question, yes i've read and studied the lay
moliver227 1 year ago
@Zaphrod88 I'm not so sure that John 'earned' his position - he was pedantic to a major fault, posturing and reveling in the arrogance of academia. He benefited from what had been a male-dominated academic tradition - and she turned the tables on him.
jpsartrean 6 months ago
That was very good. I'm doing this scene in my grade 12 drama class. I'm John. This really gave me a good idea of what it should be like. Thanks
costerluver 2 years ago
love the floor
letsplaymusic 2 years ago
Fantastic acting there! Really great!
Thought the violence was a little much at the end though...I don't think it needed to be quite so gratuitous, less is more.
But I would have loved to see this production!
MvyMkr 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
What an absurd story. The writer obviously lacked any experience with universities. Funny also how the white guy represents the evil and corrupt establishment and the woman represents the avenging force who will right all wrongs. Absurd.
Blndrfist 3 years ago
Erm...you're wrong. In like ever way.
I saw a different production of it recently and everyone I went with was on the guys side. It's a story about opinion vs fact, right/wrong fairness/justice feminism and sexual/physical abuse.
It's not at all about corrupt establishments and avenging - in fact she even says its not revenge.
It's about believing you are right. And it's about humans.
I think you should maybe go read or see it, the point is to provoke discussion about who was right...
MvyMkr 3 years ago
I have read it and seen it performed. It is absurd. Yes, it is feminist you're right; feminist bullshit. In order for there to be justice, there must of been some crime; there was none. "Belief" in "being right" is not the same a being right. Much harm has come to people from those who believed strongly in their absurd opinions; feminist hysteria is found there also. The entire scenario is contrived to the detriment of the "establishment".
Blndrfist 3 years ago
But Mamet doesnt take sides...thats the point.
The whole point of the play is not 2 be "enjoyed" or "agreed with"...its 2 be discussed. When I saw it I thought she was a dick, but then...I knew he wasnt in the right either, cause he did abuse her in sum way.
It's a fascinating take on people, society and the nature of the Uni society. It's not a femenist play at all!!!
So ur original point about what the white guy represents is wrong, because he doesnt represent tha...thats wat u saw in him.
MvyMkr 2 years ago
Mamet is actually commenting on political correctness which was hugely contentious at the time, and started in universities, and at the time it wasn't as far fetched as it may seem now.
Junkie7492 2 years ago
I am very aware of what political correctness meant at the time this play was produced. This play is a celebration of political correctness; it embraces and relishes it. One notion that it conveys is that of destroying what was perceived as the old white male establishment because someone's feelings were hurt in ways that no one could predict or should even care about. It was held up as a feminist triumph at the time and is an excellent example of the delusions enjoyed by such people.
Blndrfist 2 years ago
@Blndrfist You stupid or something? You come here with that shit, I;ll show you assualt, and put you back in the kitchen making sandwitchs.
johntheinze 1 year ago
She's very weak compared to the girl in the film, who really was a monster incarnate.
MarcusCMarcellus 3 years ago
ok this may seem immature but i like the part where he starts hitting her and throwing her around.you all know she deserved it.
xxSnapexLoverxx 3 years ago
I think that that is what the author is trying to say. People in America are condemned when they attack a woman or a minority without anyone checking into it. They just assume that the white person was in the wrong.
Number656 3 years ago
A person who attacks another person is almost always wrong. (Self-defense in the face of a physical attack is of course different.) Indifference to the plight of abused people everywhere, such as yours, makes my blood run cold.
hobbitgirl08 2 years ago
@hobbitgirl08 This is correct in the real world, but not in Mamet's world with these characters. The play is very misogynistic and Mamet intentionally makes you hate Carol. Even though John is a little on his high horse at the beginning he makes every attempt to help Carol, who just screws him over for some self righteous reason that she kind of invents. It isn't realistic in how people would normally act. There's a reason the audience applauded this the first time it premiered.
muffliato2009 1 year ago