Catching up on Classics (and lots more!) discussion

Anyone interested in reading Mourning Becomes Electra by Eugene O'Neill is welcome to join Inkspill and Cynda as they read April 20th to May 20th.

Sounds like a great idea. Yesterday finished a new book regarding science.

I was looking for a classic to catch up with. I haven’t read anything from Eugene O’Neill yet. So, yes, please count me in. It will be my first group read.

Howard wrote: "Sounds like a great idea. Yesterday finished a new book regarding science.

I was looking for a classic to catch up with. I haven’t read anything from Eugene O’Neill yet. So, yes, please count me ..."

More the Merrier Howard. I am finishing up the Oresteian trilogy after which I will start this Eugene O'Neill triology.

I'd like to join in, too. I've never read any O'Neill and I always thought I should. This seems like a good place to start.

Welcome Joe,

Just so everyone knows: This O'Neill trilogy is based on the The Oresteian Trilogy by Aeschylus. I do not think that you have to read the ancient to understand the modern. There just maybe references that Inkspill and I may be able to explain, as you ask questions, if you need to ask questions. Looking Forward.

I'm in - thanks Cynda for setting this up - I've been meaning to read this one for awhile now - no excuse now :)

I am looking forward to reading a modern version of the Oresteian trilogy and to reading more Eugene O'Neill. I plan to do some some previewing today and start reading tomorrow.

Prepping Tonight.
I have drawn a rough rough map of the house and its grounds. I wrote out a more detailed character list for the first play Homecoming. Now I am watching old movie based on the trilogy. (Don't yet know how much of trilogy is covered.)
Wanna watch it too? Watch here: https://youtu.be/6RxzOMb4x3A

amazing Cynda - and thanks for link - I won't have time to watch it but I'm interested to know what you all think if you do.

So far, I've read the first scene - so all is not as it first seemed with Captain Brandt.

Hoping to read more soon.

Just about halfway into the movie, I see that the whole trilogy will be included in the movie which runs most of 3 hours (2:48). This would be right because all three plays are usually run one after the other in stage productions

This trilogy is completely accessible to those who have never read the Orestian trilogy. Those who have read the first play Agamemnon as might be read at university, will immediately recognize what is happening and the plot of the other two plays will fall into place. But again, no need to be familiar with any of the trilogy.

This is a well thought out re-telling that Eugene O'Neil wrote. Well thought out choice of setting:

Set immediately after American Civil War
1. The Mannon men returning from war have reason to appear wooden, lacking physical vigor and spiritual vitality.
2. The Mannon womem are also wooden. Maybe all the dishonesty saps all the vitality from the Manmons. Maybe something else?
3. The Greek Revival house indicate ties to Greek tragedy.
4. All the women wear a slightly out-of-date fashion shilouette of big hoops and many petticoats, thereby giving an impression of women who float as they walk, women whose feet are disconnected from the earth.
5. Being set in New England, there is no need for the play to be shaded by the Glorious Lost Cause of the South.
6. The house grounds are home to flowering plants inmwhich the gardener works, the gardener being the most down-to-/connected-to the Earth person in the play.

Do you too feel hints of cursedness, such as in The House of the Seven Gables by Nathaniel Hawthorne--and of course of the The House of Atreus inThe Oresteian Trilogy by Aeschylus.

O'Neill put much thought into the setting of this play.

In the second part: The Haunted, Orin says, "Death becomes the Mannons." Eerie use of language:
Orin: Death becomes the Mannons. (Part 2, Act 3)
Peter: [Lavinia's wearing color] certainly is becoming (Part 3, Act 2,
Title: Mourning becomes Electra.


Does anyone notice that in the end scene Electra walks back into the house that the imagery is something like the end scene in the 1949 movie The Heiress (based on Washington Square by Henry James )? The imagery may be less clear in the 1997 version Washington Square

Become/Becomes.

Just like all good literature, the main characters evolve, become something different. The word become/becomes seems to be applied to the Mannons in every act.

The Mannons develop masks, or become more artificial, both the men and the women.
When parents die, the children become something like their parents.
Orin becomes wooden and inscrutable (mask-like?)
Lavinia becomes more colorful in clothing, more mask-like in countenance.

These masks seem not only have to do being Mannon, but also with being of Puritan by culture even if not by practice. The clues that makes this clear to me:
New England setting + Portraits of family mem hanging = Reminder of Nathaniel Hawthorne who lived woth amdmtried to excise hos family ghosts.

Plus the masks might be a visual rerference to Greek tragedy practice of using threatrical masks. This trilogy is a re-telling of the Greek tragedy trilogy, the Oresteian trilogy.

Which brings me to dramaturgy, the presentation of one's self.
Which reminds me of Shakespeare: All the world's a stage.

So much much going on here.

Interesting posts and thoughts Cynda, yeah there is loads going on here.

In the movie you watched did it have strong Freudian themes as the play?

What I know of the The Oresteian Trilogy (that’s from my readings of other things as I haven’t read it), this story has a kind of different feel to it – but maybe I’ll think differently when I reach the end as I’ve only read the first two parts.

What does come across is the intensity of the drama, and I did not see the ending of the second part coming :o

This tension is balanced by the minor characters, where I liked the scene after the funeral for being lightly comical and breaking the tension.

For a moment I also thought the gardener was kind playing the part of the chorus, but then in the second part there are other scenes with minor characters with a kind of similar role – so maybe it’s a long shot.

Interesting thought on become and becoming Cynda – I had not considered that, it made me think about the title again.

I’m going to try and finish reading the last part in the next couple of days, and will post more soon.

Inkspill,
I have long ago forgotten my Freud. But other reviewer(s) mentioned Freud. Yes it us clear throught oyt the play that types were being played. The movie acting lacked uniformity, but the family acted types.

Mourning trilogy has some of the same elements of the Oresteian trilogy. Sins/Ethical missteps of the parents. Son helps kill. Daughter bears the secrets. Overall both trilogies show the end results of extremely dysfunctional families.

Mourning is definitely American. Shows what happens to dysfunctional American families over and over again. Significance or importance of the trilogy becomes clearer when compared with House of Seven Gables and Washington Square.


In my read, the gardener and the townsfolk are the chorus. The gardener speaks for employees of household while the visitors gossiping speak for the townsfolk.

I’ve finished reading and found it interesting. Chunks of dialogue reminded me of some Hollywood classics. As a read, I thought the dialogue had energy.

I am hoping to get round to Oresteian trilogy next year, of the Greek Myths I’ve read I got the impression Orestes was hounded by the furies for killing his mother at the time he felt it was just because of the crime she committed when she killed the father. There are other elements to it, my understanding from what I’ve read, this is the main thrust – but I’m also aware that there are different versions.

As for House of Seven Gables and Washington Square, I’ll keep it in mind when I get round to them.

According to Wikipedia, which indicates the play is too long (hard to believe three plays with four or five acts each could take a while, isn't it--yeah, I want to design those sets): "In many productions, the length is cut for the sake of practicality, and the chorus of townsfolk cut from productions due to the expense, leaving only the eight main players."

I have three questions about this:

1) What is lost by cutting the townsfolk's part out of the play? Did they contribute anything vitally important to understanding it?

2) Does cutting the townsfolk's parts out of the play save much time? Is their role in the written play substantial in terms of time, or is the sole reason for cutting them truly solely to reduce the number of cast members?

3) The quoted comment implies more than the townsfolk's parts are cut. What other portions are considered expendable? If you don't know, any guesses?

Wikipedia again: "In 1978, a five-hour television miniseries was produced for and shown on PBS' Great Performances, which starred Bruce Davison, Roberta Maxwell and Joan Hackett. It was well received by the critics, with Hackett, in particular, being highly praised for her portrayal of Christine."

Washington Post article on it: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archiv...

Has anyone seen this?

Some good questions Dan. The townfolks are important in the trilogy because they were important to the Mannons, particularly to Lavinia. Because the community judges her to be something less than she should be, Lavinia has difficulty feeling comfortable being a member of the community. That difficulty plays a large part in Lavinia entering her living entombment.

In the past---the 1860s Lavinia lives in--she might have asked herself any number of times: What would the neighbors say. Lavinia is definitely worried about what betrothed neighbor Peter Niles will think about her if he finds out that she engaged in sexual activities with Avahanni. When he finds out, he says that Lavinia is bad at heart. This kind of information is likely to be made public. How can Peter let his neighbors ever marry that bad-at-heart woman? The knowledge that Peter will warn men--and therefore women--off of Lavinia in effect kills her socially. She has no where to go but into the house and live a living death. For Lavinia and her contemporaries of New England's patriarchal society, the neighbors are important.

Hope this helps.

I'm not sure why I want to read this. I read the Aeschylus plays a long time ago in college and thought them melodramatic and completely unrealistic, the characters motivated by nonsensical concerns. But I have read two O'Neil plays during my life (The Emperor Jones a long time ago, which I mostly didn't care for, and The Hairy Ape, read last year, which I can't get out of my mind, especially when I see the coverage of meat processing factories in recent news) both of which were interesting as portrayals of pure forces of nature, neither of which I would call entertaining, but both memorable archetypes. This one calls to me too for some reason.

Obtaining it for Kindle is not possible, not that I have found anyway. So I have ordered a used hardback copy. Fortunately, they're not expensive. I'll be joining you all in a week or two.

Would you recommend holding off on the 1947 movie version until one has read the play?

Hi Dan. I have this thing that plays are meant to be watched. Even poor productions can inform the play. I found the blocking worthwhile. In the 1947 movie, the blocking in a center hall house is realistic as this is the type of house was popular among the upper middle class families at the time the play is set. I found the comparison between the exterior beauty of the house and the ugliness of the family memories to be effective. So watching the movie first gave me more clue of what/who went where. If that matters to you. . . .

I will see if I can find the 1978 movie, depending if I want to pay the amount charged to rent.

My hardbound copy of the book arrived today, a seventh edition of the original 1931 Horace Liveright, Inc. publication. The first six editions were all published in November 1931, the seventh in December. It's amazing to me a book could go through so many printings that quickly. Was this book somehow a major best-seller two years into The Depression? That's hard to imagine.

Another thing that's hard to imagine is being a lead actor and having to memorize this many lines to go into production. The Curtain comes on page 256 of the play. Granted, Act I does not start until page 17, but that's still 240 dense pages of lines to memorize! At one page per minute, which is moving, this is a four-hour play, minimum.

Enjoy! I will be reading your comments, even if I do not chimemin every time you comment. It's a pretty fast read. I hope you enjoy the trilogy.

Dan wrote: "According to Wikipedia, which indicates the play is too long (hard to believe three plays with four or five acts each could take a while, isn't it--yeah, I want to design those sets): "In many prod..."

Hi Dan, to answer your 3 questions in post 18:
I think there would be a loss in performance without the townsfolk, aside from being there to bridge the story, they are also give a lighter tone to the play (think Macbeth and the porter).
To me, cutting this out would be a loss and I can’t imagine how performance this would work without some tweaks / rewrite.

Though, I could understand it, running at this length sounds costly to produce and complicated re: breaks. And then there are the logistics of putting on afternoon performance and when does the play start – 6pm would be too early and 7pm would mean the theatre would have to stay open (basing it on a 5-hour run) midnight.

I’m also not sure if audiences would be happy to watch a play this long.

Dan wrote: "I'm not sure why I want to read this. I read the Aeschylus plays a long time ago in college and thought them melodramatic and completely unrealistic, the characters motivated by nonsensical concern..."

The Hairy Ape - I haven't read it but saw it a few (maybe+) years ago - fascinating to watch - though it left me kind of speechless.

Thanks for the info re: the play's publication history - that's interesting, especially your question re: The Depression, yeah, that's hard to imagine as it's not exactly a happy read.

I'm always in awe of actors especially if they have to learn loads of lines / or it's long performances with some days it's more than one.