These mirrors also portray a misjudgment of the placement of power. Just like the card dealer, Lincoln makes the gunman believe that they have control and hold a chance at winning. The mirrors reflect deception. This then raises the question out of Abraham Lincoln and the gunman, the card dealer and the mark, and Lincoln and Booth: "who is the 'topdog' and who is the 'underdog'?"
Saturday, December 7, 2013
Topdog/Underdog by Suzan-Lori Parks
This was my first time reading a piece by Susan-Lori Parks and I overall thoroughly enjoyed it. Referring to the prompt, Topdog/Underdog was laced with very obvious theatrical mirrors and foreshadowing. These two mirrors (the assassination of Lincoln and three-card Monte) though extremely different, still manage to tie the story together. When presented in the script together, these mirrors support each other and the idea that it is impossible to "win" in life unless allowed. While working as a performer, Link tricks the audience into believing that they hold a position of power as they take on the role of John Wilkes Booth. He leads them to believe that they are the top dog, when in actuality he is by choosing to allow them to shoot him. Booth as the card dealer deceives the audience into believing that such a simple game is merely a shot of change and luck. The reality of the game is that Booth controls the placement of the card and if the mark will win or lose.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I like the idea that you presented to support the mirror events, but I would like to know how "impossible to "win" in life unless allowed" is seen in Parks' play. But I did the idea that the :mirrors also portray a misjudgment of the placement of power." The card game and the assassination have a person that holds the power. And then the question of who as power like you state at the end of your post.
ReplyDelete