I remember watching Pinocchio when I was a child. He frightened me because he was wooden, but still acted like a human being.  These days I laugh whenever I recall being frightened by him. But this time when I recalled that memory I realized that he’s helping me.

After watching Ivo Van Hove’s adaptation of “The Little Foxes” by Lillian Hellman, I remembered Pinocchio because he helped me realize an important aspect. So let’s say Lillian Hellman is the puppet maker who designs the marionettes and Ivo Van Hove is the puppeteer who manipulates the marionettes. He is the person, after seeing the marionettes, who decides how to present them in a performance. If he wants to change their designs, he can’t because he isn’t a puppet maker. What Ivo Van Hove can do is have the marionettes move according to his directions, but at the same time he has to work with them or else the strings may tangle. He has to interpret the play differently.  In other words, the director is, first and foremost, a reader. He is a reader who peruses through the play and envisions it. What makes him different from any other readers, such as us? And what makes him a director? Well, I don’t exactly know, but I can attest to it.

This brings me back to the point of my first blog, “What makes a classic?” or rather, “What defines a classic?” In terms of theatre performance, I believe one characteristic to be the fact that the play can be manipulated from its original script and be reborn into a new generation. Ivo Van Hove did this. He took Lillian Hellman’s play that was set in the early 1900s and transformed it into a play that can relate to the current time period. Although he kept the actors’ lines the same (for the most part), there is a reason for it. We have to realize that language is powerful and packed. “Nigger” is one of those words that is jam-packed with history and emotions. The way that word is used in the play has a derogatory meaning. To put it in today’s standards would not be too difficult because depending on the context, tone, and situation the word could either be negative or positive, but it still has that lingering deprecating feel whenever it’s spoken.

Another thing that Ivo Van Hove does is “strip the play to its bare essentials,” as Professor Healey mentioned in class. He places the characters in a rectangular room lined with purple walls. There is no furniture set up, except for the staircase, an upright electrical piano to the left of the stage and a short, small table in the front of center stage. There was use for two chairs, a coffee set, and a few other items. That’s it. By keeping the set “clean,” the audience is exposed to all the details such as the actions and positions of the actors and actresses. We aren’t distracted by extravagant beauty as Peter Brook mentions in his book, The Empty Space. Did you notice how the actors and actresses circled the staircase at times? I did and I felt that they were vultures gliding through the air waiting for the moment to feast on another animal’s kill. The same happens in the play because Oscar, Ben, and Regina are focused on gaining money at the expense of the people. They will go out of their way just to exploit them. Horace does it in a different manner. He does it to try and ruin the sibling’s plan because he realizes that it’s cruel and unethical. In addition, Birdie’s dress and clothing were red. It clashed against the purple walls. The same goes with her personality because it was child-like and pastoral. Her views of living “the life” were more rural and less extravagant than those of the siblings.

One more important aspect was the interaction the actors and actresses had with the audience. It is the role of the director to help them grow and inspire us. That’s what Ivo Van Hove did. The tone of Horace’s voice was child-like at times. It felt that his eyes were opened after being up North for 5 months, but at the same time it had a serious aspect to it. Horace had a job to do: expose Alexandra to the truth. Also, Birdie’s interaction with the audience, to me, was the greatest. The way she acted with her laughter and sadness swayed me. I laughed when she laughed became hurt and sad when she did. Her presence wasn’t overwhelming at the same time. It worked with the others. No one person had full command of the audience, especially with the L.E.D. screen overhead.

All this work and detail shows Ivo Van Hove’s great insight towards the play in relation to today. He was able to help the cast move and affect the audience. This is what makes him standout as a reader and makes him a director. His interpretation was able to relate to present-day New Yorkers. He startled us. He made us think. He made us remember.  And personally, he made me remember my memory of Pinocchio.

Truth to be told, I did not want to travel all the way to Manhattan to watch a play; Sunday nights are better spent in bed. Even though it was dark and rainy, I dragged myself to the subway station and arrived at the New York Theatre Workshop for a surprisingly entertaining night.

After the audience received a welcoming from a representative of NYTW, the lights flashed on and eerie music began to play. The first thing I noticed was the LED screen in the middle of the stage and immediately I recognized that it was hanging above a staircase. At the same time, I noticed a female walking to the front of the stage to stare at the screen. Since we weren’t supposed to look up anything about this play, I thought that it would be something set in the modern times.  However, after the entrance of Cal and Addie, both servants to the Hubbard family, I realized that something was definitely weird. The way that Cal and Addie spoke and the way that they were treated reminded me of the way many Blacks were treated way back in time. The use of the “n” word was the clearest indicator that this play was not set in modern times. Although people still use that word today, it is definitely not used in the manner that was portrayed in the play. The use of this word may have offended many people, but I feel that the director was right to include this in the play since it is such a clear indication of the setting.

In addition to the screen and the staircase, I also noticed the purple carpet looking walls and floor. Actually, I don’t recall if the floor was purple but I do know that the walls were! I actually thought that the room looked really tacky but over time it grew on me. There was a small keyboard off to the left, a bottle of wine on a small tray in the center front of the stage, and small light fixtures hanging from the ceiling at multiple points. Besides those things, the stage was clear and furniture was very minimal. I actually thought that the set design worked for the play. The same room was used throughout the play and I thought that it was brilliant. It wasn’t necessary to change scenes because everything seemed to be centered on the events that happened inside the house. Actually, the more I think of it, the more I view the room as a cage that held all the conflict inside.

Now let us move on to the clothes. That was another thing that confused me. If the play is set in the 1900’s, why are the clothes so common looking to a girl from 2010? All the men were dressed in suits while the females were dressed in cocktail dresses. Way too modern for the times. Although it might’ve helped to see the characters wear the “correct” clothes, I’d like to admit that I’m glad they did not. I’m sure that the director chose wisely to not incorporate period clothes since I was able to understand the setting and the conflicts of the time all without watching the actors parade around in funny looking garments.

Last but not least, I’d like to comment on the actors. I didn’t really enjoy the acting in the first 10-15 minutes but then I realized that it wasn’t the actors/actresses that were fake, it was the characters. Overall, my favorite character was Alexandra. She was the least corrupt and the one that grew throughout the play. I thought that the actress fit the role of Alexandra almost perfectly. I give her props for falling off the staircase in one of the last scenes. It seemed to hurt. Her Aunt Birdie was my second favorite because she represented a repressed woman that wants so badly to escape the life that she was granted. I almost wanted her to have the life that she wished to have. The way that her husband, Oscar Hubbard, treated her was very crude but sadly the way that many women were treated back then. Oscar, Benjamin, and Leo as the men of the Hubbard family wanted to profit so badly from the people of their neighborhood. The way that they manipulated Regina and Horace (parents of Alexandra) almost made me shudder at how mean people could be. The scenes between Regina and her brothers were usually playful and also hostile. I thought that the tension in those scenes was very interesting and representative of sibling quarrels. The part with Regina and Horace, however, drove me crazy. I didn’t understand where all the love went. ): Whatever to that though.

If you were to ask me to watch the play again, I would say yes. I wasn’t at my most attentive and I’m sure that I missed a few points here and there. The plot was attractive to me and the acting wasn’t bad at all. I’d say bring on the weirdness again.

“This play better be good.” That was the thought I had in my head and the thought I posted on Facebook as I was getting ready to leave. As we were headed towards the city, by train and subway from Long Island, I hoped more and more that this play would keep me entertained. Thank the Lord, it did that and much more.

I have to admit when the play first began it took me a little while to get warmed up to it. I thought the acting was a bit overdone and fake but afterwards as I realized the true intentions of the characters it made sense that they were overdoing it because their characters were putting on a facade. Overall I was really impressed with the actors, especially the woman who played Alexandra and the woman who played Addie. They really did a splendid job. Which also goes to show that there really are no small parts because Addie was one of my favorite characters with her sassy attitude.

When the play first opens up all you notice is purple and big empty stage? What in the world?? Well I have to say I believe the director really made a great choice with the set design. As I surfed youtube on other productions of “Little Foxes” I hated it when they used a very intricate setting. It looked as if someone threw up antiques all over the stage just to fill it up. I preferred the big emptiness much more. I came to the conclusion that the reason they did this was because, as you looked at the stage you could tell that they were wealthy and that they lived in a big house through simple objects, like the chandeliers, and through the way the characters presented themselves. But to make the stage empty just went to show how even though they had so much more than the average joe they felt as though it was not enough and they needed more. I also think it symbolizes the fact that due to their constant search for more material objects, each character ends up “empty” and alone in the end.

Colors really played a big role in this play. Notice how my blog is purple?(kind of…Haha) So I became really curious about the color usage and I decided to go online and research colors. I found some very interesting things. Purple  stands for royalty(as if you didn’t know already) and another interesting thing is that it also stands for being artificial because it is rare in nature. Just like Regina who was wealthy but fake at the same time. Her whole life was fake. She never really showed her true self to anyone until the very end when she made all her needs known. All Regina wants is power, and lots of it. She and her brothers are all very ambitious. When Regina first comes out she is wearing all black which denotes strength and authority. She came off all powerful from the very beginning. On the contrary, Birdie is wearing red which is the color of fire and blood. It stands for passion, desire and love as well as war, danger, power and determination which is why Oscar and Ben were wearing them as well. Oscar and Ben though were wearing a darker red which actually stands for malice, wrath and leadership. Going back to Birdie I believe that her character was actually very strong. She might have started out as weak but as time went on she became stronger. You could especially tell this when Oscar is beating her up and she keeps getting up and walking towards him confidently. I felt that this was sending the strong message that you can keep hitting me but you will never bring me down.

As the play went on Regina changed her color scheme toward more beige and brown colors which represent stability and denote masculine qualities. Throughout the play we see that Regina does not like how men in this society are regarded higher than women when she herself could be just like them if not better.

The girl who played Alexandra was simply amazing. She was really into character throughout the whole show and for someone so young I think she showed a lot of potential. After talking with my classmates I seem to have been the only one who actually teared up when she was asking her uncle to stop her mom and dad from fighting (I’m such a baby…I know :p). Another moment that was almost a tear jerker for me was when Birdie was talking about the past with Oscar and she started pounding the wall like a mad woman. I could feel all the pain she went through just by that powerful moment. It was crazy. I also want to comment on Addie because I fell in love with her character. Her attitude was hilarious especially when she was talking about Alexandra getting married and she was like “Over my dead body.” If I were to play any character in that play I think I’d choose Addie.

One last thing…I promise. We discussed in class how many people were shocked that they used the N word. Unfortunately I have to say that I really wasn’t shocked. I guess I kind of expected it because I knew what time period the play took place. I also feel that I’ve been exposed to that word so many times listening to my friends that it doesn’t really shock me anymore. It shocks me if they use it in a bad connotation but I’ve only really been exposed to it in a playful manner.

Lastly here is a funny video i found online on a parody of “Little Foxes.” I’m only going to post part one but if you really like it you can find part 2 on youtube. :p Peace out.

Little Foxes was definitely worth seeing.  It was worth the time in the theater, the time spent traveling, and having to sit in a cool theater with a soaked shirt. It is among the best plays I’ve ever seen.  That may not mean much, considering my extremely limited experience, but it is still true.  It is a great story and was well presented by the actors, director, designers, and everyone else involved.

I was impressed from the beginning because I loved the stage design.  I don’t feel that a large number of props and fancy furniture is necessary.  The purple walls and lack of furniture left me with no idea what to expect.  I had to really pay attention to what was going on.  I thought having the servants bring in the chairs and other props was a good way to slightly change the setting without having to actually stop the scene.  The only exception to the simplicity was the infamous screen.  I found it very interesting.  Though there were very few times that it made a difference, I liked having it there.  It was helpful to see Horace and Regina fighting, and I thought the slaughter of the lamb, though disturbing, was an effective symbol for the way the family exploited the poor townspeople.

The script was well written.  It was compelling and interesting, without a boring moment.  From the beginning of the play I was curious.  Curious to find out what kind of man Horace was, to find out why there was so much tension, and to find out if the plan to buy the mill would work out.  I wondered if Horace would be like the siblings or if, being from a different family, he would be kinder and less greedy.  Horace’s gentler nature, combined with his illness made him much easier to sympathize with.  I wanted him to win, and  my attention was held as his plan to punish his wife unfolded.  His death and failure to execute his plan was crushing.  Though Horace’s failure was upsetting, I enjoyed Regina’s turn around from being powerless due to her gender to being in total control at the end.  The family dynamic was well done.  The playwright did a great job of making it obvious that there had been tension among the family without providing much background information.  All we knew was that the family had money, and it was all given to the sons.  However, the numerous cases of violence and deceit gave us a clear idea of what the relationships between the siblings were like.

The actors did a great job throughout the play, especially in the scenes of explosive anger and violence.  The screaming and hitting did not feel staged, they felt real.  They showed impressive commitment to the play with their willingness to be hit and thrown around.  Their skill was not limited to fight scenes, however.  The actor’s playing the siblings and Leo were convincingly frantic at times when trying to ensure the purchase of the mill would happen.  In the opening scene, the brothers concern that Mr. Marshal would not make a deal with them was clear, and later Leo’s reaction to Cal’s message from Horace felt authentic.  Even the few calm scenes, such as the one featuring just Horace, Bertie, and Alexandra, were convincing.  I could feel the characters’ happiness and relief that they could have time without the rest of the family.

Though the modern clothing made it difficult to determine the time period of the play (all i could figure out was sometime between 1870 and 1965), I felt it helped the play as a whole.  Putting the characters in modern clothing made it easy to use costume to separate the siblings from the rest of the characters.  The siblings dark, business like dress gave them a serious, money-concerned appearance.  The contrast with Bertie’s red clothing, Horace’s disheveled appearance, and Alexandra’s simple clothing made it obvious that the characters were divided.

I felt that the acting was superb! I felt strongly about every single character. I hated all of the Hubbards and loved pretty much everyone else.

The Hubbards are the very definition of a dysfunctional family. I loved Bertie’s character! I loved her child-like innocence and her scatterbrained behavior. I felt so terrible for her when she told her story about meeting Oscar and falling for his transparent façade. Oscar was a misogynistic asshole. He shut down all of Bertie’s ideas and criticized everything that made her happy (ie. socializing and playing the piano). I felt bad for Leo. He is a product of his environment. All he wanted was to be accepted by his father and uncle. He was taught to behave violently by his father. Regina is a BITCH! She completely uses Horus. She took advantage of his love for her to get to his money when they were first married and doe sit again when she sends San to bring Horus back from the hospital and tells San to tell him that she [Regina] missed him.  She is selfish and as abusive as her brothers, not physically but emotionally. She uses her body and her quick wit to get exactly what she wants. Although he admits to having been a bad person in the past, Horus wants to live the last days of his life as a good person.  While he does deliberately screw with Regina, I think she deserves it. I am proud of him for relinquishing his role as her personal doormat. Zan begins the play like her Aunt Bertie: she is innocent and naïve. In the first scene she asks her mother for her first taste of port and in the last she essential tells her mother to go shove it up her ass. I think Horus is right when he tells Addie that it is better for Zan to understand what is going on around her and lose her innocence.  Once she sees the Hubbard’s for who they really are, then she’ll know it is better to leave. The scene when Zan spits in her mothers face was my favorite part of the play because I absolutely loathed Regina, more so than any of the other Hubbards. I hated Ben as soon as he opened his mouth. His cold, monotone voice reminded me of Lurch from the Adam’s family. I feel like the actor should be recruited for the next production of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. I liked Addie. She was sassy. She was wise. It was like she could see through everyone.

I thought that the costumes where bland, with the exception of Bertie’s trampy red robe. The dresses were sort of ugly and the suits didn’t fit right. I understand the desire for a minimalist wardrobe, so it doesn’t take away from the play itself, but I prefer the spectacle. I like elaborate costumes and historical accuracy. I feel like it is easier for me to get into the play, the time period if people are dressed according to the time period. When I see a play, I want to become part of a different world, not see a replica of the one I am already living in.

I hated everything about the set design. I hated the ugly purple walls, floor, and ceiling. I hated the stairs in the middle of the room dividing the stage and I hated the LED screen, which was more distracting than supplementary to the performance.  I’m not sure if the carpeting was to make up for the lack of padding worn by the actors, but I just didn’t like it. The giant rectangle obstructing my view of the right side of the stage was irritating to say the least. What bothered me more that the rectangle was how it impacted the actors! While they thought they were out of sight, the actors would stand just in view, awkwardly shifting their weight from left to right waiting for their cue.

I think that realistic costumes and set add to a performance. I think if you want to go the minimalist route, you have to go all the way by having a completely empty, unremarkable space, and black boring costumes so that the actors get all of the attention. I think that the minimalistic set for Little Foxes would have been more practical if the LED screen was absent. When it comes down to it a giant television screen is more distracting than a good or elaborate costume.

The Little Foxes was mind-numbingly good. It was kind of like the tingly feeling you get when you eat pop rock candy or the sensation of cotton candy dissipating in your mouth. A sense of satisfaction that is instantaneous. This is what The Little Foxes imparted to me. Instant gratification as I watched the lights cue on, the actors walk into place, and the story beginning to unfold.

The stage was meticulously arranged but to be honest no one really cared for it. Well not me anyway. I won’t go into detail describing the flashy purple walls or the gaudy chandeliers, but the L.E.D. television was something else. Did anyone else notice this? I’m no historian but I’m sure there were no L.E.D. screens in 1907. I have to say that the half-naked Horus that appeared in the beginning was just a distraction. Don’t even get me started with the poor butchered sheep. A lot had bothered me. The director had obviously wanted to create a stark interpretation of the script, but there were several nuances that were blatantly irritating. If he was attempting to avoid the problems associated with 20^th century fashion why the heck would you need four theatrical chandeliers? See what I did there. Now I know I said the play was “good” but for all the right reasons a play is good. A strong standalone plot combined with several experienced actors. I still hated the props though.

As soon as the play began you were met with unique, and complex characters. The ambiguity behind the initial appearances of these characters is what makes the performance so enjoyable. As you approach the climax and ultimately the end it only got better. This was a strong incentive to keep you seated. That or make Professor Healey very angry. That would be a no-no. Many of the introductory characters put up a façade at first. As soon as the serious business was done, these very same people make a fool of themselves. Rolling around the lush carpeting. I immediately questioned the integrity of the Hubbard family. Acting in a peculiar fashion to mask your true intentions. Despicable! I hated these people. What I meant to say was characters but the acting was so good I almost started hating the people too.

I couldn’t help but cringe when Oscar beat Birdie. I wanted so badly to step onto the stage and beat the crap out of him. I know that sounds bad and is practically begging for a lawsuit but I was so won over by her character that I didn’t care. Hellman managed to capture my interest and win my heart over with this one. I felt like my heart was breaking alongside Birdie. The acting was already tearing me apart but it only got worse when the real “social issue” was brought up.

Lillian Hellman is a friggun genius. Not only was the play good, it emphasized the need for social reform. Throughout the play a caste system was developed. Men were placed on the top, women followed after and colored southerners were on the bottom. Hellman very easily indicated the inequality among the three. The n-bomb was thrown around like a casual saying. Women were being beaten every few minutes. Men were like financial kings hoarding all the money. I felt like I was thrown back to a time where racism still existed.

Correction* it still does.

This performance has taught me a good deal. How to restrain yourself against spiteful wife beaters. Oh and to appreciate your civil rights. This play was awesome, nuff’ said.

Why is there a man laying on a table on a LED screen right center in the middle of the set? While sitting in the audience watching Little Foxes, this question just kept running through my mind. As much as I loved the performance, I kept getting distracted by this screen. Why was this screen placed here? Was there a point to having a frozen image in the middle of the set?

I really enjoyed the overall performance of the Little Foxes, and I must say that it would be one of my favorite plays that I have ever seen, except for the fact that this LED screen just didn’t seem to make much sense tome. I absolutely loved all of the other aspects of the play. The actors did an amazing job of getting into their characters. For example, the actor who played Birdie did a phenomenal job of expressing her emotions through all of Birdies lines and actions. The actor who played the Ben did an exceptionally well job in his role. They way he conducted himself, for example the way he walked across stage with his confident stride and broad shoulders just showed how he really believed that he was the alpha male.

Okay so the actors did an amazing job, but what else did I love about this play? Well I loved the fact that the stage was so simple. The set design didn’t have too much going on. Because it was so simple I wasn’t able to get too distracted by the props that were present on stage, but instead I could focus more on the actual plot and characters. The only thing I didn’t  understand which was already mentioned is why if the set was so simple, why would there be a LED screen to draw our attention away from everything that was occurring on stage. At times I would notice that something was moving on the screen, and so I would focus on this image in anticipation that something extraordinary was going to happen, and instead the image would freeze again, and all that it had accomplished was distracting me from what was occurring on stage.

The sounds I felt did a really good job of suiting the emotion that was present within the play. The music followed the plot, in that whenever something serious or dramatic would happen there was music to express this. Another aspect of sound that was present in the play was all the screaming that was done. How could someone fall asleep during this performance? The answer is they couldn’t have. Whenever there may have been a few moments of silence, or soft spoken conversation, it would quickly come to an end with someone starting to yell and before you know it everyone was screaming again. This really helped to keep the audience awake and keep them focused. At times it kept me so awake, that whenever a scream would come I would sometimes even get scared.

When first watching the play without really understanding the plot, I was really confused about a few things. One was why they had chosen a purple wall for the set, and another thing was why everyone kept laying down and rolling around on the floor. At first I just thought that these things were extremely strange, but after careful thought and finally understanding what the play was about, I was finally able to realize that there was meaning behind these things. The purple was the color of the walls because its supposed to represent wealth, power, and luxury. Several times throughout the play you see the characters utilizing this purple wall by banging it and expressing their anger through hitting this wall. Once you understand the plot of the play, you soon realize that this is supposed to resemble the characters struggles with obtaining wealth and power. As to the characters rolling around on the ground, this could be seen as the childish aspects of the characters and how, in particular Regina, they wanted to obtain this money so that they could have their dreams come true.

Another thing that bothered me about the play was the scene on the LED screen that showed the sacrificing of the sheep. Although this may have had a purpose in the plot of the play, and definitely was bringing up a very important issue, this was an extremely powerful image that I would have preferred to not have been in the play. Since I’m very big on animal rights, this was a very hard thing for me to watch, but since the screen was placed in the center of the set, it made it very hard to not look.

Initially I thought that there was no way I would enjoy sitting in a theater while being damp from the rain, but after the play had began I found myself getting more and more interested in what was going on. I truly enjoyed the overall production, and I felt that everything was very well thought out and planned, and in the end it all payed off.

This play was absolutely one of the best I have ever seen. The staging was perfect for the play, the actors were all very connected with their characters, and the plot was intense, drawing the viewer in like a moth to a flame. No one could get enough.

The stage, when first viewed was shocking. Purple, everywhere…and I asked myself, why? Unlike most plays where the stage is a dark color, brown or black, it was bright purple, and that caught my attention the entire time. Midway through the play, I began to realize what a large role color had in the play. The purple began to symbolize wealth and the regal state of their home. Their pride and selfishness also became clear. Their were many instances when a character, out of rage, would fling his/herself against the walls or onto the floor, beating the color. At first, it may not seem like it means anything, but after careful thought, one can realize that their selfishness and greed has made them all miserable, and they are subconsciously taking their anger out on it.

Another color that stood out a lot was the color red. Whereas everyone in the play wore dull colors, mainly grays, blacks, browns and dark blues, Birdie was always wearing red. Ben, too, wore red in his tie. In the beginning, I assumed that Birdie and Ben were a married couple, because of their color coordination, but I soon learned that was not the case. And red began to be a symbol of flightiness and freedom. A desire for more than what is given. Although Regina was the more greedy of the two women, she wanted money whereas Birdie wanted happiness. Red is usually a color of energy, strength, determination and desire. Birdie uses red to stand apart from the other characters, showing the audience that she is the odd one out, the only one who doesn’t care about the money. She proves to everyone that she is stronger than they are, by resisting the temptations and corruptions of monetary agreements. Ben’s red tie, although not as noticeable as Birdie’s consistently red attire, was a call out to his power and influence over his siblings, especially Oscar. Although it is unclear which of the brothers is older, when deciding whose percentage will be lessened in order to increase Horace’s share, Ben immediately decides and overrules anything but that it will be out of Oscar’s cut.

The screen above the stage was disturbing and haunting. At the start of the play, it looks like there is a dead body, just laying there, and thoughts of who it could be and what it means swirl about in the mind until we realize that it is Horace. It later shows the horrors of what the “amazing” family company would be doing:slaughtering the lambs, gutting them, and watching the blood pour out. The screen provides an x-ray type feel to the audience, allowing us to see past what we see on stage, into other rooms and into other situations at the same moment we watch the primary scene unravel on stage. It allows us to see into Horace’s hospital room, the kitchen where the coffee pot sits, and finally, into Horace’s bedroom, where we see the fights between him and Regina, and where we also see the bond between him and his daughter.

Of all the characters, Alexandra’s was the most heart-wrenching. As a 17 year old girl, not even yet an adult, she is faced with many hardships that she must face on her own. From the very beginning she was forced to mediate between mother and father, a choice no daughter should ever have to make. She is a strong girl, and very loyal to her father. She knows the cruel intentions of her mother, and even though she is tricked at first into helping her mother, she turns her back on her and finally, at the end of the play, shows Regina that she will always love her father more because he was the one who truly cared about her.

The idea of the play, while very original, was somewhat hard to see. We see that greed is a horrible thing and can overtake any sane thoughts in one’s mind. Monetary selfishness can lead to rifts among family members. The brutality towards each “little fox” in this family came as a shock, and the audience gasped every time a character abused another. Everyone was rolling around, animalistic tendencies in everyone. In some cases, it was men hitting women, which came as a huge surprise, but was not totally unexpected. What was shocking, however was that when Ben hit Leo, Oscar just sat there and ignored it, without a care. The entire family was blinded by the thought of wealth, so blinded that they could not see what was right and what was wrong. Regina was so concerned with the possible acquisition of wealth that she did not blink, much less shed a tear when her husband passed. She once again showed little emotion at the desertion of her daughter, only concerning herself  with her upcoming move to Chicago.

Overall, the storyline was interesting and captivating. The constant battle between characters was an enticing way to keep the audience on edge, anticipating what is to come. The actors were all very in tune with their characters, and it adds a sense of realism to the play. Because of the way the characters interact with one another, the play runs smoothly and effectively encapsulates the theme intended by the author.