It’s been a couple of days since we’ve seen the play and even now I have yet to come to terms with how I feel about it. This is quickly becoming one of the hardest blogs I’ve had to write, even though this play is centered around two issues I hold dearest in my life. I’m trying to avoid getting into the political side of this play, because this is after all an arts class. I will say though that I am pleased with the way Stephen Gracia chose to represent these issues because it did, at minimum, show us that they exist, whether we want to believe it or not. The purpose of this play complies with something Richard Stremme mentioned when he came to our class (if your art doesn’t reflect something of the oppression of your society, why bother?) because it presents the parts of society that seem lacking and creates a sentiment that something should be done to fix it.          In that respect, I am content with the play. There is however another side to the play that seemed unfulfilling, aside from its lack of a happy ending. I believe the problem might lie in the fact that the writer expects the viewer to make their own conclusions, nothing is ever blatantly stated, a lot of assumptions have to be made. For example, we never find out what happens to the kids, or Alice, or any of Joe’s “friends”. Additionally, the story is narrated in third person, but it is not omniscient because we never find out what goes inside all the characters minds, aside from what they reveal to other characters.  In my opinion adding these things could’ve provided that missing link.