Angels in echecs16.info - Download as PDF File .pdf), Text File .txt) or read online . LBNNiuM Approaches • Frank Rich, fornner theater critic for The New York Times , points out that Angels in America is "a political call to arms for the age of AIDS. Tony Kushner's Angels in America or How American History Spins. Forward. Alfonso Ceballos Muñoz. Universidad de Cádiz [email protected] Abstract.
|Language:||English, Spanish, Indonesian|
|ePub File Size:||25.72 MB|
|PDF File Size:||15.88 MB|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Register to download]|
MATTHEW I L S O N SMITH ANGELS I N AMERICA A ProgressiveApocalypse I. A P O C A L Y P SDEE S C E N D I N G Outside of Chekhov, I can think of no. PDF | Angels in America's roaring success represents a real turning point in mainstream American drama. This article explores both Kushner's treatment of. PDF | On Jan 1, , Alfonso Ceballos Muñoz and others published Tony Kushner\'s Angels in America or How American History Spins.
Tell others about this book Lorem About Tony Kushner's Angels in America Angels in America paved a new way for American theatre in its combination of heightened theatricality and politics. Tony Kushner has emerged as one of the American theatre's leading playwrights and productions worldwide have meant that the play has been recognized as the most important American play in decades. With the scope of the characters' sexual, class and religious affiliations in the play, Angels in America offers a unique possibility to discuss the construction of American identity in the late s and s. This guide provides a comprehensive critical introduction to the play, giving students an overview of the background and context; detailed analysis of the play including its structure, style and characters; analysis of key production issues and choices; an overview of the performance history from the first performances of Millennium Approaches and Perestroika to recent productions and the HBO adaptation; and an annotated guide to further reading highlighting key critical approaches. Table of contents.
This decaying system is chiefly presented through Aleksii Antedillu- vianovich Prelapsarianov, the Oldest Living Bolshevik.
But there is a poignancy at their loss, and a sense that the historical questions they pose are still before us. The millennial structures, secular and religious, may have broken down, but the millennial longings remain.
Are we doomed? The Great Question before us is: Will the Past release us? Can we Change? In Time? I n Time. I t is a view of history that we might term progressive, if we mean by that a sense of history as a gradual motion toward greater happiness, equality, and freedom. Progressive in this sense includes both liberalism and moderate forms of socialism.
Broadly speaking, the socialist sense of history as a series of developmental stages toward ever greater eman- cipation may be termed progressive, while the occasional belief in the inevitable, his- tory-ending nature of the revolution and the utopian nature of the state to follow is closer to the apocalyptic model.
This often-uneasy combination of progressive and apocalyptic views of history has been at the heart of socialist theory since its inception, and is mirrored here in the musings of the Oldest Living Bolshevik- as well as those of Kushner himself.
O n the face of it, the apocalyptic and the progressive are radically different visions of history. In the apocalyptic worldview, transformation is generally sudden and total: A t the same time, both the destruction and the rebirth of the world are unstoppable and externally motivated; mortals do not, ultimately, shape their own his- tory. I n the apocalyptic, it is only when history comes to an end that liberation is truly possible; the Kingdom of G o d lies outside of history, not within it.
T h e progressive worldview might almost be defined as the precise opposite of such beliefs: Humanity is a powerful agent in this upward drive, if not the only agent; self-liberation, self-salvation, in difficult stages, is the hope of the progressive.
T h e progressive worldview, then, tends to embrace the fruits of human inventiveness, whether scientific, scholastic, technological, or indus- trial, as means toward the improvement of our collective condition. T h e apocalypticism ofAngels must be seen in the light of a contradictory impulse toward progressivism in the work. This rift inheres in the titles of the parts themselves: The sentence might serve as a summation of the kind of trust in a process of gradual, intuitive awakening that is the very opposite of the apocalyptic.
Often Angels gains its apocalyptic force from a sharp indictment of progress. There is an implicit attack here on modern progress- the decay of the ozone layer, as we all know, is linked to the rising tide of industrial pollutants- and a spiritualization of that attack, a rendering of it in terms of Revelation. Harper returns to this image of the ozone layer at the end of the play, see- ing its restoration in terms of the apocalyptic vision of the rising dead, so that the dead themselves are the stuff of ozone, healing the sacred skin by their ascension.
It would be wrong, though, to associate Harper too closely with any single posi- tion: The Angels are the representatives of an antiprogressive, indeed antimodern, impulse taken to its furthest extent: Angels hover, anxious fingers worry T h e tattered edge.
Before the boiling blood and the searing of skin Comes the Secret catastrophe. According to the Angels, humanity must reject intermingling, progression, migration, understanding: Forsake the Open Road: Neither Mix Nor Intermarry: Let Deep Roots Grow: Consumed by a terror of progress and the modern world, hurling versified warnings of the E n d from on high, the Angels come across as virtual parodies of modernist prophets of apocalypse, winged grotesques of Heidegger, Eliot, Pound.
For the sake of humanity, they urge humanity to cease being human. John F. Department of Education, Washington, DC. Funding also provided by the Kennedy Center Corporate Fund.
For other guides in this series, see CS In Millennium Approaches, the couples are drawn so that they make overt sense. It is all neatly set up, but then it doesn't work because of all sorts of internal stresses: the Mormon who is married is gay, and one [mem- ber] of the gay couple has AIDS and the other can't deal with it.
It is helpful to be aware of the cast of characters see list, page 3 and to know that the plot weaves two stories into one fabric, in one, the latent homosexual, oe, is hired by Roy Cohn to work with the Justice Department in Washing- ton to help achieve Cohn's personal agenda.
In the other, Louis must decide whether to care for his AlDS-afflicted homosexual lover. Prior Walter, or leave him. The stories interrelate with one another in a rever- berating fashion.
Pldpngtil Tonij Kustirier chose tnese lines from Stanley Kunilz" s "The Testing Tree" to precede the script for Millenniumjipproaches In a murderous time the heart breaks ami breaks and Hues bij breaking. Also Prior's former lover. The unprecedented attention and praise given to Angels in America is the stuff of writers' dreams. But, as Kushner points out as though cautioning himself, "Celebrity does sick things to people. I'm still sort of a nerd. I'm a very insecure person.
I think I'm interesting, that I have a reasonably sophisticated political analysis, which in America is not the usual thing. Kushner feels that his homosexuality is not only central to his identity but is c. Chicago Tribune. Ilpril When playwright Tony Kushner was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for Millennium Approaches, it marked the third time in what was then the Fund's eighth year that a grant recipient achieved that recognition.
Preceding him were Wendy Wasserstein for The Heidi Chronicles and Robert Schenkkan for The Kentucky Cycle, Established by the Kennedy Center's founding chainnan Roger L Stevens, the Fund supports playwrights in their writing and helps to fi- nance productions of their works in the na- tion's leading regional theaters.
Each year, ail not-for-p'-ofit theaters in the na- tion are invited to subm. Each play is read by the chairman and director of the Fund and by the Fund's artistic advisors - 1 0 leading theater professionals - who constitute the se- I lection committee. I felt that a lot of what you could identify as gay theater in America in the late '60s and '70s was focused very extensively on domestic issues and relational issues.
I think that was appropriate to its histori- cal moment and to what was of concern to the community at that time, because the notion of gay liberation was relatively new.
I think there's a shift in attention happening now, and Angels is an example of that. There are other lesbian and gay writers in the States who are beginning to address issues that connect per- :onal dynamics and questions of relationships with the political issues that are of such tremendous significance to the lives of gay men and women. AMI Why is the angel such a Western-tradition angel?
Would Mormon angels be different? It's not described as having wings.
This is Prior's angel, not ;oseph Smith's. Prior's angel would definitely have wings. Audience question Could I ask you about the Jewish side of the play?
Do you think Jewishness is a main theme or an incidental issue? Also, I'm interested in the fact that both of the main Jewish characters are quite unsavory and unpleas- ant. Obviously Roy Cohn is, but I wondered why you chose to make Louis such a miserable individual as well.
TK Oh Cod, I don't think he's miserable! He's certainly miserable in the sense that he's incredibly unhappy. Louis is an interesting character to me. I think Louis car- ries the biggest burden of the play.
One of the things it's about is that it's incredibly hard to take care of someone who is catastrophically ill. I think this is going to become an issue that is inescapable, because people are getting sicker all the time. We live in a very bad time for the human body, and this is a problem that all of us are going to have to face at a much younger age than our parents did. Louis wrestles with that particular angel and sometimes people are very upset by the choices he makes, but he's struggling tremen dously with it.
I'm very critical of Jews because I am one, and for instance, Jewish homophobia makes me angrier than Goyishe homo- phobia. I think, good God, after what we've gone through for the last six hun- dred years and before. So I've been kind of hard about it.
But there are also two other Jews in the play: there's Ethel - you see a lot more of her in Part Two - and the Rabbi. Audience question Could I ask about positive images? What I found fasci- nating and exciting about the play is that it seemed to have moved beyond simply doing a glossy propaganda exercise in a very good cause.
You didn't seem to be too worried about possible homophobes in the audience maybe drawing the wrong conclusions. What do you think are the benefits and restrictions of a positive-images policy? We desire.
Even if we go faster than we should. And wait for what? But perhaps I am making too much of this dichotomy ofprogressive and apocahptic -there is a sense, after all, in which Angels is profoundly confused.
Fifteen years till the third millen- nium. Maybe Christ will come again. T h e suspense, Mr. LIES: I suggest a vacation. To add to the confusion, Mr. For though Mr. I n this sense he is the twin of the Angel, whose exhortations of stasis threaten life as much as Mr. Kushner ultimately lan- guishes in his own indecision, the argument would go, and his skepticism of universal historical claims makes genuine prophecy impossible.
Indeed,pace Bloom, I would suggest that Prior does have a sort of prophecy, as does Harper, one that attempts to combine progressive and apoca- lyptic narratives into a single, overarching framework.
I n this respect, the visions of Prior and Harper at the end of the play echo a central theme of American religious his- tory: postmillennialism. T h e term refers to the place assigned to the return of Christ, which was to occur after, rather than before, the coming of the millennium hence post- rather than premillennial.
Her early confusion gives way to the unambiguously millen- nial vision of her final speech, referred to earlier: But I saw something only I could see, because of my astonishing ability to see such things: Souls were rising, from the earth far below, souls of the dead, of people who had perished, from famine, from war, from the plague, and they floated up, like sky- divers in reverse, limbs all akimbo, wheeling and spinning.
And the souls of those departed joined hands, clasped ankles and formed a web, a great net of souls, and the souls were three-atom molecules, of the stuff of ozone, and the outer rim absorbed them, and was repaired.
It is a vision that exhibits both apocalyptic and progressive views of history. Harper shares this outlook with Prior, whose final speech also combines the apocalyptic and the progressive. First Prior looks forward to the season when the Foun- tain of Bethesda will flow again, an event that has already been imbued with eschato- logical significance. After this millennial image, Prior turns to the AIDS crisis and the struggle for gay rights, subjects that could easily be charged with apocalyptic intensity, but Prior renders them, instead, in a progressive mode: This disease will be the end of many of us, but not nearly all, and the dead will be commemorated and will struggle on with the living, and we are not going away.
The world only spins forward. We will be citizens.
The time has come. Prior does indeed have something to prophesy: he is the prophet, with Harper, of history as a slow, painful progress inspired by the promise of a New Jerusalem. This vision partakes of both apocalyptic and progressive elements; if they are not quite brought into synthesis, then neither are they totally opposed.