In the production of “Chinglish” that our class recently attended, one of the elements that stood out to me was the use of supertitles. Hence, I was intrigued by Ben Brantley’s article, The Writing’s on the Wall, where he discusses supertitles and their effect on plays, good and bad.

Mr. Brantley begins by saying that supertitles would come in handy when, occasionally, a viewer misses a crucial line in a play. He acknowledges that in “Chinglish,” supertitles were essential and used effectively. Additionally, Mr. Brantley mentions that supertitles sometimes allow audiences to appreciate plays that are written in foreign languages. However, he also goes on to talk about other productions he has seen such as the National Theater of Greece’s “Antigone” and the Berliner Ensemble’s “The ThreePenny Opera” where supertitles only served to confound and distract the viewer.

Personally, having seen supertitles only in “Chinglish,” I thought that they enhanced the experience on this occasion. I agree with Mr. Brantley when he writes, “Supertitles are the de facto stars and the leading comedians of “Chinglish””. Being privy to the translations through the supertitles ensured that I always knew more about what was going on than the characters did. So, I could empathize better with Mr. Cavanaugh. Besides, without the supertitles, the play wouldn’t have been half as funny – after all, who knew that one Chinese phrase, with different pronunciations, could mean anything from “I love You” to “Dead Sea Weed?”