The author says that variations in style are “always indicative of the characteristic approach of the artist to the subject” (100). I’m just curious if every piece of art has/needs style and is it always easily identifiable? Does an artist need to have the style in mind before they create their piece? I think this plays well into Ashley and Yoo Na’s questions, about whether these concepts need to be included in a work in order to be considered “true art”.

I would like to take Alina’s question one step further and ask if Shaw is saying something about children that are raised with no father. Can that play a big part in their erratic and sometimes rude behavior? Is Shaw sending a message about a single mother’s in society? As the main characters, what is their purpose to the story line?

I love that Sporre calls theater an interpretive discipline. He states that, “Between the playwright and the audience stand the director, the designers, and the actors. Although each functions as an individual artist who adds a specific form of artistic communication to the production, each also serve’s to communicate the playwright’s vision to the audience” (35). As a student that has been a stage manager, a hair and make up coordinator, and an actress in theater productions, I wonder what you all would say the most important type of communication is (i.e. the playwright, the designers, the actors). Do you think there is much room for each individual to add their own message/ artistic communication to the production? How so?

How can we tell the difference between a work of art that depicts fantasy and one that shows reality, and is there always a clear distinction between the two?

Can art contain balance or unity while portraying chaos?

Joanna DeJesus