There is a major contrast between the way in which the settings of Translations and Stuff Happens are described in addition to the number of places that feature. For example, in Stuff Happens David Hare frequently changes the setting with generally brief descriptions of Hotel Pierre, Camp David and many other locations, cohering with the play’s chaotic style and numerous characters. The stage directions in Stuff Happens are shorter than in Translations and usually fixate on the characters and their actions as opposed to the set, possibly to highlight the importance of the public figures, demonstrated by the fronted conjunction used to describe De Villepin’s arrival (“And then in comes Dominique de Villepin”) for example.
Translations, on …show more content…
While the actor appears to use their lack of first person narration to present an unbiased view through statistics and an absence of direct opinions, Hare expresses disgust towards Donald Rumsfeld through the breaking up of the vague sentence and title of the play, “Stuff. Happens.” This is when Rumsfeld is asked to respond to the looting and pillage that occurred in Baghdad, in which 50,000 artefacts were taken from Iraq’s national museum, an event most modern audience members would associate with sorrow, causing them to stereotype Rumsfeld based on his lack of remorse. This also draws attention to the irrevocability of the events that occur within Stuff Happens. Although both plays were written with retrospect, the audience are aware of how America’s involvement with Iraq ends, with hundreds of thousands of deaths, and are reminded by Hare who mentions “the inevitable” in the opening line. He uses this hindsight to shift the time frame, placing contemporary speakers such as “an angry journalist” who uses past tense rhetorical questions such as, “do I like the people who did it?” after scene 5 when Tenet shows obscure photographs to the cabinet. In contrast, Friel’s ending is unbeknown to the audience, although the bleak mood foreshadows the ending of possible eviction. 200,000 Irish emigrants travelled to America between 1830 and 1835, around the time when the …show more content…
In Stuff Happens, Rumsfeld states that politicians were “too specific” during the First Gulf War (1990-1991), when George Bush Sr was president, by constantly referencing Saddam Hussein but never capturing him. This drawing on past experiences conveys that Rumsfeld knows that the target for the 9/11 response is ambiguous, suggesting a sense of purposeless to the war and increasing the level of frustration for the audience who know that hundreds of thousands died for an unknown cause. This is highlighted further when the Vietnam War (1955-75) is mentioned, as Powell was a soldier and Rumsfeld President Nixon’s assistant. The Vietnam War is also known to many as an interference on America’s part, so Hare was potentially draws parallels between the two wars by mentioning Vietnam. Hare juxtaposes the differing attitudes of the two cabinet members within the same scene, with Powell stating that “war should be the politics of last resort” and Rumsfeld using repetition of the word “doing” to imply that war is a reasonable solution. This foreshadows the conflict that occurs throughout the play between Powell and the other cabinet members, specifically Rumsfeld, Cheney and Bush. It also mirrors the contrast in the opinions of Lancey and Yolland in Translations. Lancey converses in a robotic style that lacks rhetorical questions and instead creates a barrier between him and the other characters, suggesting a
Translations, on …show more content…
While the actor appears to use their lack of first person narration to present an unbiased view through statistics and an absence of direct opinions, Hare expresses disgust towards Donald Rumsfeld through the breaking up of the vague sentence and title of the play, “Stuff. Happens.” This is when Rumsfeld is asked to respond to the looting and pillage that occurred in Baghdad, in which 50,000 artefacts were taken from Iraq’s national museum, an event most modern audience members would associate with sorrow, causing them to stereotype Rumsfeld based on his lack of remorse. This also draws attention to the irrevocability of the events that occur within Stuff Happens. Although both plays were written with retrospect, the audience are aware of how America’s involvement with Iraq ends, with hundreds of thousands of deaths, and are reminded by Hare who mentions “the inevitable” in the opening line. He uses this hindsight to shift the time frame, placing contemporary speakers such as “an angry journalist” who uses past tense rhetorical questions such as, “do I like the people who did it?” after scene 5 when Tenet shows obscure photographs to the cabinet. In contrast, Friel’s ending is unbeknown to the audience, although the bleak mood foreshadows the ending of possible eviction. 200,000 Irish emigrants travelled to America between 1830 and 1835, around the time when the …show more content…
In Stuff Happens, Rumsfeld states that politicians were “too specific” during the First Gulf War (1990-1991), when George Bush Sr was president, by constantly referencing Saddam Hussein but never capturing him. This drawing on past experiences conveys that Rumsfeld knows that the target for the 9/11 response is ambiguous, suggesting a sense of purposeless to the war and increasing the level of frustration for the audience who know that hundreds of thousands died for an unknown cause. This is highlighted further when the Vietnam War (1955-75) is mentioned, as Powell was a soldier and Rumsfeld President Nixon’s assistant. The Vietnam War is also known to many as an interference on America’s part, so Hare was potentially draws parallels between the two wars by mentioning Vietnam. Hare juxtaposes the differing attitudes of the two cabinet members within the same scene, with Powell stating that “war should be the politics of last resort” and Rumsfeld using repetition of the word “doing” to imply that war is a reasonable solution. This foreshadows the conflict that occurs throughout the play between Powell and the other cabinet members, specifically Rumsfeld, Cheney and Bush. It also mirrors the contrast in the opinions of Lancey and Yolland in Translations. Lancey converses in a robotic style that lacks rhetorical questions and instead creates a barrier between him and the other characters, suggesting a