The apple never really falls to far from the tree

Usually when a person despises another person it is because they can see a little of themselves in that person. This play reminded me of Spinning into Butter in the sense that the main character is never seen on stage. In Spinning into Butter the main character Simon was never shown just like “the old man” is never shown in True West. Yet his absence in his son’s lives is what causes most of the uproar between the two. Austin or Lee does not want to be like their father but are not strong enough to break the generational curse that he has on them. By the end of the play they both seek isolation which is what the desert symbolizes. “Going to the desert means officially abandoning the American Dream and the false hope it represents.”
In the past few plays we have read they all have involved “The American Dream”. I should say they involved “The American Nightmare”. These plays portray the image of everyone trying to achieve the American Dream because it is what is culturally acceptable, but in the end everything turns out all wrong. If I did not get any other message from reading these plays I have definitely learned that “Being you” and living within your means is what will truly make you happy. We cannot worry about trying to please our neighbors because in reality they are trying to please us.

True west was an interesting read. Some scenes were amusing but others puzzling. It was very funny when Lee returned home with a stolen television and he told Saul Kimmer that he “just got Austin’s color T.V. back from the shop.” Both of the boys later become drunk and everything becomes a competition to the two of them. They do some pretty hilarious drunken acts but it began to seem like they were acting a bit crazy. Austin started to express that he was tired of his boring life and would like to live free like Lee does but Lee only denies that Austin would be able to last trying to live like Lee. It was so funny when Austin tried to prove he can be bad and steals a bunch of toasters. Austin and Lee switched roles mid-play. Austin became the uncontrollable drunk and Lee the more mature acting one. Lee was just trying to write his own screen play and Austin was acting like a fool. There were very emotional times, the brothers were constantly fighting and yelling at each other. They were drunk and winey as well. I wondered about the mother, if she was crazy or not. She returned home to a destroyed house and had very little to say about it, her plants were dead, she thought Picasso was alive and at a museum giving out autographs, and her sons were killing each other and all the time she remained calm and tranquil. I found it all strange but amusing at the same time.

Normal People

I'm not going to lie and say that True West was my favorite play. In fact, I was bored with it sometimes. The play seemed more of a slice of life for the first half. The second half was more active which kept me interested at least. The brothers' argument and little contest kept me interested, and I was amused to see that Austin had indeed succeeded in stealing multiple toasters. Austin was my favorite of the two brothers at first just because he seemed more normal, but Lee never tried to hurt his brother like Austin did despite his harsh nature. Saul was a character that I found to be just a regular businessman that lost a bet, but it seemed to work out for him anyway unless he lied about the other companies. Really the brothers were two normal brothers with pretty normal problems. Austin had the heat and drink get to him in the end though. The mother came from nowhere and did not really do anything important. She showed up, didn't like her house, told Austin not to kill Lee, and left. I actually did not like her just because she did not seem to care that one of her sons could die. The ending was the one part I really liked and not because it ended. It left a feeling of suspense and tension, and it was sort of the only high point for me. I wish it could have kept going because I really want to know what happens next because it could go in so many different directions.

What is the TRUE west?

I really loved reading True West. The relationship between Austin and Lee is very entertaining. I found this story to also be very comical and full of excitement. I liked how in the beginning of the story Austin is the very calm and level-headed brother who is in charge of the house and taking care of the plants and in the end Austin totally loses it, lets all the plants die, and also loses the upper hand he originally had with his brother. It was interesting that both brothers envied the others life. Lee lived in the desert because he had to basically (not because it was exciting to do so) and envied (yet criticized) Austin's rich suburban life. In contrast, Austin craved his brother's exciting life-on-the-edge in the desert and looked up to Lee. I found it comical/ironic how Austin was so worried about Lee being around Saul and embarrassing Austin, and Lee totally ended up hitting it off with Saul. It was funny how unexpected it was for Austin and how angry it made him. One thing I found to be very interesting was the elusive definition of what "True West" really meant. Austin's true west was the suburban, modern-day west; Lee's true west was the romanticized, desert setting, west. The funniest part of the whole play in my opinion was the scene involving the stealing of the toasters and the making of toast. I thought it was hilarious how Austin felt like a real criminal by stealing peoples toasters and his spiel about how wonderful and important toast is. I thought it was so interesting how the play had elements of a classic western story. Near the end when they are in dispute with one another, they stare at each-other, challengingly, like two cowboys would. Also in the end when they circle each-other like Cowboys readying for a duel. Overall, I really enjoyed True West; It was extremely exciting and entertaining.

What the desert heat can do to a man

This play was absolutely entertaining. Austin and Lee are great characters. They both represent so many things. Austin being from the new world where Lee is obviously representing the old world. Austin is sophisticated, refined, and has his life together whereas Lee is borderline illiterate, steals, and has no solid footing. Lee represents the free soul though and Austin represents the perfect American life that boxes people in. I love foils and look for them in every play we read and these two are great examples. At first I thought Lee really did something to Saul because I couldn’t even believe that he sold his story to him that easily. He is definitely a character that gets under your skin until you can tell that he he’s genuine and he loves his brother. The references to the desert and the old man are very dominant to overall meaning and outcome of the play. The desert represents a place without boundary, which Austin craves. It is important to note that they both want what each other has like any typical pair of siblings. The old man reference means that they are just as doomed as his is because they both resort to drinking. Austin even makes another important point in the second act “Yeah, well we all sound alike when we're sloshed. We just sorta' echo each other.” It’s funny to notice the significance of two acts because the play is about two brothers. Although very different, they are the same.

Im afraid of MarthAAAAA!

Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf is my one favorite plays!. The plot is risky and fun, while keeping my mind in constant wonder and suspense for things to become clarified and the constant arrangements arguments. Also, the dialogue is extremely well thought out and written. With each character revealing each other's personal information, and always telling each other about their spouses/affairs darkest secrets. I feel that Martha and George's relationship is one of the main points of the play, and the one that I find myself attracted to the most. This play is filled with sarcasm, sex and alcohol all three giving this play a little touch that revolutionized the theatre in this generation onward.  Ithought it was extremely odd how Martha and George had an imaginary son, that they eventually had to kill off leaving martha so dependent of George in the end. I thought that Nick played a great roll also, showing how people use other people to climb in social, and profesionall statuses. Overall, the play was easy and enjoyable to read. In addition, I found that each act having its own tytle was very inventing and a good little quirk to the play, it not only gave a preview to the act but it also gave a highlight of the most important concept of the act. 

Who's Afraid of Edward Albee?

After reading Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, I can’t help but think that Edward Albee had lost all faith in humanity. Martha and George alternately come across as criminally insane and monstrously deceptive, while Nick and Honey seem altogether stupid and weak-minded. Not only do both seem perfectly willing to flirt with their married hosts, but Nick goes so far as to begin consummating the flirtation with Martha in front of her husband, which also demonstrates the irrational risks that Albee seems to believe the younger generation are willing to take. Albee depicts both Martha and Honey as delusional drunks, and it comes across as terribly misogynistic. George seems to be the smartest character by far, but he too acts delusional at times. It should also be noted that both marriages were made for advantageous reasons, which seems like a criticism of marriage that is only more relevant in modern society. I must admit, while intentionally ambiguous at times, the dialogue is fantastically scathing; as Nick points out, Martha and George are experts in their barbs at one another. Overall, the play is a microscopic examination of human flaws and the dynamic of human relationships.