Small Tragedy

by Craig Lucas

137 page drama by Craig Lucas

Genres: Plays

137 pages, Paperback

First published March 1, 2005

Reviews

[Yousseif Abdellatif · Rating 3 out of 5]

I finished Small Tragedy and honestly felt like I'd been lied to by someone I trust, and I mean that as a compliment. Lucas, Craig plays with what the narrator tells you versus what actually happened, and the dinner party chapter, where the story suddenly doesn't match the earlier version, made me flip back fifty pages to check. It's clever, but a little too pleased with itself. Who this is for: readers who love to catch a book in the act. Who should pass: anyone who wants a straightforward story told straight.

[Cary S · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was a deeply interesting, at times hilarious, read. That said, it very clearly was meant to be seen. Reading 7 people talking over each other was very frequently challenging... to the point of frustration. Moreover, I'm not 100% sure how I felt about the final scene, and the implications it espouses. I may need some more time to think this one over...

[Marissa · Rating 3 out of 5]

For most of its length, Small Tragedy is a sharply observed backstage comedy about 6 people in 1990s-era Boston trying to stage a small-scale production of Oedipus Rex. The characters are the usual suspects—the pompous director, the earnest young actor—plus a handsome and taciturn Bosnian refugee, whose presence spurs romantic intrigue as well as conversations about the relevance of Greek tragedy. The dense overlapping dialogue, frequent use of split scenes, and minimal stage directions pose a worthy challenge to directors, actors, readers, and theatergoers.

However, near the end of Act Two, there are some sudden and implausible plot twists, followed by a rushed ending. The mood of the play shifts from easygoing comedy to portentous drama. This all seems intended to illustrate how we (like Oedipus) are willfully oblivious to the true, tragic nature of things, and possibly even make us feel guilty for preferring the low-stakes humor of Act One. But this shift in tone, and this thematic point, seems like it'd be very hard to pull off in performance.

[Lola · Rating 2 out of 5]

I've never seen this play performed, so perhaps I would recognize its genius in performance, but strictly as a play I've read, I didn't like it. I didn't feel a connection to any of the characters, and as a result, I didn't really care what happened to them. I don't think any of them are likeable. I also wonder how the many and varied scenes in which all of the actors talk over each other could leave audience members anything but confused and frustrated. Personally, I think the last scene is a bit too forceful.