Book Nook Cafe discussion
Plays, Short Stories & Essays
>
Arcadia ~ August 2012
date
newest »
newest »
Arcadia Questions -- May Contain Spoilers !1- Does the play suggest that, if Thomasina had not died so young, scientific knowledge would have developed differently? Why or why not?
2- What might Hannah mean when she says, "it's wanting to know that makes us matter" (2.7)?
3- What would happen to the play if Thomasina and Septimus were switched, if he was the genius who died an early death and she was the one left behind, obsessed with continuing his work?
4- Why have the same tortoise in both eras? What about the same Gus/Augustus?
5- If Arcadia were a movie and had actual locations other than just the one room, what difference, if any, would it make to the story and its meaning?
6- There's plenty of conflict between Classicism and Romanticism in Arcadia. Does one side win at the end? If so, which one? Which characters are classicists and which are romantics? Do any shift sides over the course of the play?
7- How would Arcadia be different if it were a novel instead of a play?
http://www.shmoop.com/arcadia-stoppar...
I saw this on Broadway years ago. I remember it as cerebral and intricate and I recall that the subject matter on which the Classicism vs. Romanticism war was fought was landscape gardening and mathematics?? I won't be able to join in the discussion, but hope to follow it as I usually do. Michele
I didn't know it was performed on Broadway. I'll be reading it. I hope I can understand it ! LOL
It seems to me that reading it would be easier than following it onstage. However, that may be because this is the sort of "learner" i am--gotta see the words in print. I'm looking forward to reading this together. Michele, i'm glad you'll be following, if not contributing to the discussion.deb
I am going to start reading this tonight. I hope a few you will join in.
I intended to start this one last night but thought i'd read the play Copenhagen by Michael Frayn first. I should have looked because in addition to the play, about a real meeting between two world-renown physicists, there was a long, long postscript about the history behind the scientists, as well as the science discussed. Good play & material, just longer to read than i thought. Tonight...
Scene 1I am sure I am missing some of the references, but what I am understanding is quite funny. I can see how this farce would be quite funny on stage.
I love the line in the play when Lady Croom admonishes Mr. Chater after he corrects her regarding the author of a book.
"Mr. Chater, you are a welcome guest at Sidley Park but while you are one, The Castle of Otranto was written by whomsoever I say it was, otherwise what is the point of being a guest or having one?
As with Septimus and Chater he forgets that Septimus was with his wife after he is complimented on his book. :) Everyone just wants their egos stroked.
I found this character list to be helpful as I was getting a bit lost.* Note character lists contain SPOILERS
Thomasina Coverly - Thomasina is the young, impetuous genius child of Lord and Lady Croom aged thirteen and later sixteen. Thomasina miraculously theorizes the second law of thermodynamics and understands chaos theory way ahead of her time.
Septimus Hodge - Academic and tutor of Thomasina Coverly, Septimus works on his own research while teaching Thomasina. Septimus falls in love with Thomasina and, after her death, spends his time researching and attempting to prove her theories.
Jellaby - Jellaby is the distinguished, middle-aged butler of the Sidley Park who delivers many letters.
Ezra Chater - Ezra Chater is a poet and amateur biologist-neither of which he does particularly well. Mr. Chater's wife is constantly cheating on him and has made her rounds between almost all of the men at the estate. Mr. Chater dies in Malta of a spider bite.
Richard Noakes - Mr. Noakes is the gardener who excels at frustrating Lady Croom with his new garden plans, spying on carnal embrace, drawing beautiful pictures of the estate and building an improved steam engine. Noakes has drawn up plans to transform Sidley Park into a classical masterpiece.
Lady Croom - Lady Croom is the bossy, battle-ax who storms around the estate. There exists two Lady Croom's in Arcadia; however, we only meet one—the Lady Croom of the early nineteenth century. Lady Croom is perceptive of all things and knows all happening on the property.
Capt. Brice - Captain Brice is the sea captain, apparently in love with Mrs. Chater. Brice takes Mr. and Mrs. Chater on his sea voyage to Malta, where Mr. Chater perishes.
Hannah Jarvis - Hannah is the champion of academic knowledge in Arcadia. While her discoveries are less important than young Thomasina's, Hannah has all but rejected any notion of romantic knowledge in favor of intellectual work. Hannah is an author working on the hermit of Sidley Park and is in her late thirties.
Chloe Coverly - Chloe Coverly is Thomasina's modern day equivalent. Chloe, aged eighteen, seems as perceptive as Thomasina, but lacks the education to have Thomasina's brilliance. Chloe argues that a Newtonian universe would be destroyed by the random nature of sexual acts.
Bernard Nightingale - Bernard is the modern fool and fop. In his late thirties, Bernard leaps over truth in favor of finding fame for his theory that Lord Byron killed Ezra Chater. The theory, eventually proved false by Hannah Jarvis, brings Bernard great shame and embarrassment.
Valentine Coverly - Valentine, aged twenty-five to thirty, is still supposedly a graduate student studying mathematics. The son of the Coverly estate, Valentine works out Thomasina's diagram and reluctantly shares Thomasina's genius with Hannah.
Gus Coverly - Gus is the self-elected mute son of Sidley Park. Gus is a connector and communicator between past and present; Gus intuitively knows where the foundation for the ruined outbuilding is. He dresses Augustus in Regency clothing and gives Hannah the trans-generational apple that Septimus eats. Gus is also present in the historical story—the actor is double cast as Augustus Coverly.
Augustus Coverly - Augustus, aged fifteen, is double cast with Gus Coverly. Augustus only appears in one scene as Thomasina's unruly young brother who wants Septimus to tell him about sex.
*From Sparknotes
I'll admit to getting lost in the weeds with this play. Sparknotes was helpful. Of course to explain the play it will have to contain SPOILERS
http://www.sparknotes.com/drama/arcad...
SparknotesTom Stoppard has used mathematics as the basis of many of his plays. Arcadia is influenced most by chaos theory or what is also called nonlinear dynamics. Chaos theory is often heralded as one of the greatest scientific advancements in the physical sciences after relativity and quantum mechanics. Stoppard's main source of chaos theory information came form James Gleick's book Chaos: Making a New Science.
Chaos: The Making of a New Science~~James GleickDeb, sorry but this play is way over my head. :(
I don't think I am going to be able to add much to a discussion of this play.
My eyes were watering most of the day yesterday, so i didn't get to begin this play. I'm sorry to learn that it's difficult. I'll give it a try tonight. I will say that sometimes this happens to me. I'll try to read a book or play & just not "get it" but when i see in acted out, it's all clear. Most likely the physical actions & obvious separation of characters are what help free my mind to the words & ideas.
Anyway, i'll give it a whirl tonight.
Deb, hope your eyes are better today.As for the play, it starts off easy enough, then after a few scenes it gets a bit more complicated with science and other topics. Also the play alternates between 1900 and present day. As the play progresses the delineation isn't as clear. Maybe a metaphor for chaos theory? I couldn't say. This caused confusion with the characters for me. So I hope by printing out the character list (posted above) it will help some.
Thanks for the well wishes regarding my eyes. I fear electric fans are the issue, so i'll have to lower the central air register. Goodbye $$$$!I read the play last night. While i think i understand what he was trying to present as far as the math & science, it was the misinterpretation of knowledge which kept me interested. As i understand chaos theory, this misinterpreting is part of it, but if i was supposed to draw much more from it, i fear i'll need more time. ;-)
Frankly, i couldn't even tell if the switch from stately garden to the major upheaval was part of the chaos theory or not. It's the catalyst for the modern-day characters, as the hunt for the hermit appeared to be the primary reason we meet our contemporaries, but that's as far as i got with it. I wanted photos of that garden! LOL!
I can see why this would be an exhilarating theatrical event. However, i am not sure i would have liked it much at all had i not spent recent/adult time exploring the scientific (& a wee bit of math) and literary references. It all had me wondering how many humorous lines i missed by not knowing all the topics on which the play alit! In a theater, at least, we might have some clue. Presuming a rather well-read audience, that is.
Madrano wrote: Frankly, i couldn't even tell if the switch from stately garden to the major upheaval was part of the chaos theory or not. It's the catalyst for the modern-day characters, as the hunt for the hermit "---------------
Did I understand this correctly. There were a bunch of misunderstandings. Did Lord Byron kill Ezra Chater for one. But regarding the hermit, didn't Thomasina just draw that into the picture. There wasn't any hermit.
* Edit... I see from wiki I missed this important element.
"When she is older, he begins to fall in love with her, and after her death it is implied that he becomes the "hermit of Sidley Park", working on the young girl's theories until his own death."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arcadia_...
scene 6Not being a morning person, I loved this line.
Septimus: The dawn, you know. Unexpectedly lively. Fishes, birds, frogs...rabbits...and very beautiful. If only it did not occur so early in the day.
Scene 6Lady Croom: It is a defect of God's humor that he directs our hearts everywhere but to those who have a right to them.
Chapter 7Chloe: The future is all programmed like a computer-- that's a proper theiry, isn't it?
Valentine: The determistic unverse, yes.
Chloe: Right. Because everything including us is just a lot of atoms bouncing off each other like billiard balls.
Valentine: Yes, there =was someone, forget his name, 1820s , who pointed out that from Newton's law you cold predict everything to come I mean you'd need a computer as big as the universe but the formula would exist.
------------
I can't say I understand this part. If I am understanding ti correctly, chaos theory is that in the confusion/randomness there is a pattern.
Scene 7This part seems to connect to page 75 (near the end of scene 6)
Chloe: That's what I think. The universe is deterministic all right, just like Newton said, I mean it's trying to be, but the only thing going wrong is people fancying people who aren't' supposed to be in that part of the plan.
Page 75
Lady Croom: It is a defect in God's humor that he directs our hearts everywhere but to those who have a right to them.
Scene 7A few more lines I highlighted....
Hannah: I t can't prove to be true, it can only not prove to be false yet.
Valentine: (pleased) Just like science.
Scene 7A few more lines I highlighted....
Valentine: That you can't run the film backwards. Heat wa the fist think which didn't work that way. Not like Newton. A film of a pendulum or a ball falling through the air- backwards, it looks the same.
----------------------------------------
This ties into the idea at the start in scene one. You can stir something into a mix, but by reversing the motion you can not un-stir it out.
-----------------------------------------
Scene one
Thomasina: When you stir your rice pudding, Septimus, the spoonful of jam spreads itself round making red trails like the picture of a meteor in my astronomical atlas. But if you stir backwards, the jam will not come together again. Indeed, the pudding does not notice and continues to turn pink just as before. Do you think this is odd?
Thomasina: well, I do. You cannot stir things apart.
Septimus: no more you can, time must needs run backward, and sine it will not, we must stir our way onward mixing as we go, disorder our of disorder into disorder until pink is complete, unchanging and unchangeable, as we are done with it for ever. This is knows as free will or self-determination.
1- Does the play suggest that, if Thomasina had not died so young, scientific knowledge would have developed differently? Why or why not?----------------------------
I don't know. It was stated to do the type of maths that she was attempting one needs a computer.
2- What might Hannah mean when she says, "it's wanting to know that makes us matter" (2.7)?-----------------
There are all types of learning going on in the story.
Thomasina doing that math equation.
Septimus teaching her.
Bernard searching for the truth of the past.
To name just a few.
I can't find the exact quote from the question. So I don't have the context to comment on that.
--------------
Further edit: I think this NY Times quote explains it will.
That is the unquenchable human urge to acquire knowledge, whether carnal, mathematical, historical or metaphysical. It is the itch to discover what lurks beneath concealing clothes and clouds and dusty layers of accumulated years. Success in these quests is irrelevant, since full and true knowledge of anything is impossible. As one character says toward the play’s end, in a declaration that soars, “It’s the wanting to know that makes us matter.”
http://theater.nytimes.com/2011/03/18...
4- Why have the same tortoise in both eras? What about the same Gus/Augustus?----------------
I thought this was used to show what happens in the past impacts the future.
Maybe like the butterfly flapping its wings theory?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butterfl...
Or
It could be the "stiring idea" from chapter 1.
Septimus: no more you can, time must needs run backward, and sine it will not, we must stir our way onward mixing as we go, disorder our of disorder into disorder until pink is complete, unchanging and unchangeable, as we are done with it for ever. This is knows as free will or self-determination.
---------------------
We keep stirring until it is done.
This is so over my head. I fear I will be of little use to you, deb. However, you do need to give me points for effort. :)
5- If Arcadia were a movie and had actual locations other than just the one room, what difference, if any, would it make to the story and its meaning?-------------------------------
It all has to take place in the same spot. Then you can see the overlap or the merging of the two different times.
For example, the items on the table from both eras.
I thought this from Wiki was helpful.Within the chaos that develops over the course of the play—through the overlap of time periods, through increasingly complicated ideas that are presented, through the variances between what is correct and what is assumed—connections and order can still be recognized. The characters attempt to define the order of the world through their ideas and theories, and they are continually overturned (as with Bernard's theory).
The table which collects props from both time periods throughout the play is a strong example of the chaos/order dichotomy.
In Science in Hapgood and Arcadia Paul Edwards, professor of English and History of Art at Bath Spa University, explains what this represents: "At the end of the play, the table has accumulated a variety of objects that, if one saw them without having seen the play, would seem completely random and disordered. Entropy is high. But if one has seen the play, one has full information about the objects and the hidden 'order' of their arrangement, brought about by the performance itself. Entropy is low; this can be proved by reflecting that tomorrow night's performance of the play will finish with the table in a virtually identical 'disorder'—which therefore cannot really be disorder at all."[13]
6- There's plenty of conflict between Classicism and Romanticism in Arcadia. Does one side win at the end? If so, which one? Which characters are classicists and which are romantics? Do any shift sides over the course of the play?--------------
To be honest, I didn't have a clue how to answer this one.
So I will just post an exerpt from Wiki.
A secondary theme within Arcadia is the dichotomy of Classicism versus Romanticism. It is exemplified primarily through the argument between Lady Croom and Mr. Noakes over the changes being made to the garden. This shows a direct shift between the tidiness and order of Classic style to the rugged, Gothic appearance of the Romantic. This dichotomy is also presented through Septimus and Thomasina, as she argues her new theories and ideas that refute classic Newtonian ideals while he defends them. Hannah's search for the poetic meaning behind the hermit of Sidley Park also remarks on this theme. She passionately exclaims to Bernard, "The whole Romantic sham, Bernard! It's what happened to the Enlightenment, isn't it? A century of intellectual rigour turned in on itself. A mind in chaos suspected of genius...The decline from thinking to feeling."
This from wiki is was also helpful. I'm sorry not to have any original comments on the play. But I am finding this Wiki and other articles helping my understanding. I hope you are finding them helpful, too. ============
wiki
Another theme of the play, which falls under the category of chaos, is the irreversibility of time. This is examined scientifically through Thomasina's remarks on Newtonian equations, which work both backwards and forwards. And yet in reality, things, like Thomasina's rice pudding (which inspires these remarks), cannot be "unstirred." Heat flows in only one direction. The idea of heat (and the second law of thermodynamics) is thus represented through the actions of the characters. They burn bridges in relationships, they burn letters, candles burn, and in the end, it is revealed that Thomasina will burn to death. The finality of things is always present.
Michele wrote: "I saw this on Broadway years ago. I remember it as cerebral and intricate and I recall that the subject matter on which the Classicism vs. Romanticism war was fought was landscape gardening and mat..."------------------------
Here is the NY Times review of the play.
http://theater.nytimes.com/2011/03/18...
Wow! So many posts. I read the Wiki article & was surprised to see how many scientists have written reviews of the play. Good thing, maybe it helps folks like us. :-)For me the biggest problem with chaos theory is its name. It implies chaos but isn't. They couldn't call it dichotomous theory or something? Of course that wouldn't work either. The "chaos" refers to a sort of lack of order in a system which still obeys particular laws or rules but i just don't care for the term. ANYway...
Alias Reader wrote: "1- Does the play suggest that, if Thomasina had not died so young, scientific knowledge would have developed differently? Why or ..."
You know, when reading her computations & notes, i was headed in another direction. I am familiar with Ada Lovelace, who is sometimes considered the first computer programmer. So, i thought this is where Stoppard was heading. However, that part of the play is 100 years earlier than those computing notions, which i forgot. And, as you can see here, she was the sole legitimate child of Byron. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ada_Love...
There are many layers to this play & i think a person could find many examples of what Stoppard was attempting. The idea that science might have progressed further, faster had Thomasina not died reflect part of that chaos theory, don't you think? There was a predictable event occurring in her understanding but then fire ruined it all. Or was it romance? Was there really a romantic attachment or was that, too, something else. And on! LOL!
I disagree a bit with the question you addressed re. a movie & whether it could be filmed with more locations. The table in the room seems vital but i think some scenes could have occurred in the garden with valid effect, too. Particularly that hermitage, if items were left there too. It would be fun to see someone tackle this, if for no other reason than i'd like to see the dialogue & whether the way it's acted sheds better light on the ideas. I don't think seeing a video of the play would help, though.
I think i mentioned yesterday that i wasn't sure about Bernard & his search for knowledge. It seemed to me quick fame was more his goal. Perhaps i have higher standards but his leap of faith, not even bothering to wait for further research which could have been right at hand, with some patience with Hannah, led me to wonder about this. However, since none of the characters stated so outright, i suppose we are intended to let it pass. This is particularly so since it is what introduced Byron to the events, which led a merry chase. Still, i wish someone had utter a line or two about this sort of knowledgeable pursuit.
I didn't see the Classicism vs. Romanticism throughout the play. It's obvious in the garden & the upheaval Lady Croom & Noakes created but i didn't see it in the characters until our discussion. I can see it better now but it's more a minor theme. You'd think with my appreciation for lit & poetry i'd be drawn to it but i wasn't. Go figure.
Deb--. The idea that science might have progressed further, faster had Thomasina not died reflect part of that chaos theory, don't you think? -----------------
I believe it was said she was on the right track, but she wouldn't have been able to bring her idea to fruition without computers.
Deb, if you could ask the author a question, what would you ask?
I think i'd like to know about the construction of this play. Did the idea of so many different threads occur before pen met paper or did he find he needed/wanted to incorporate more as things developed? I ask because it seems to me there are more intellectual ideas in this play and i want to know what his first plan was--chaos theory? Romanticism vs. Classicism? Geniuses before "their time"? Or something else altogether.This is a good question. How about you, Alias? Any question pop into mind for Stoppard?
Oh, i just thought of something else. The fact that Thomasina drew in the hermit--what, if anything, did that signify? Did she plant the seed for Septimus when tragedy struck? Originally i thought that it was a sort of humor, with the audience knowing there was no hermit, just a whimsical addition. Then, when it appeared there was one, my mind kept coming back to what we learned in the first scene. Neat.
I would ask about his background. Is he a science nerd ? What is his education?What overall message is he trying to convey to the audience?
I did find parts of the play funny. However, most of it went over my head. Still, I'm not sorry I read it. I like to try, new to me, plays.
I agree. It's fun & interesting to see what playwrights can accomplish--how they ply their trade. In this case, as it could be read on several levels, it truly whet my appetite to see the play. This sort of reading has helped me (in the past, at least) want to read more science. Indeed, i owe my interest in science to my reading of science fiction novels. I'm glad you joined me in reading it, Alias. I feel less alone in being lost. :-)
What did you think of the books structure, the going back and forth between past and present?I didn't find it has difficult as I thought I would. I think he the characters and their actions were clearly delineated.
Madrano wrote: This sort of reading has helped me (in the past, at least) want to read more science. ---------------
Would you read another play by this author?
While I didn't dislike the play, I think I won't be seeking out any more by him.
I had no problem with the back & forth of the time periods, even at the end where they are combined. It makes an effective way to tell this particular story. And it gives a purpose to the ideas under consideration.About reading another play by Stoppard. As it turns out i have read one already,
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead, years ago. Later i saw the film but wasn't awed by either. At the time i attributed this to the fact that i wasn't familiar enough with the characters from Hamlet to understand it all. Now i am reconsidering that position/opinion.
And i have seen the 2-minute version of his 15-Minute Hamlet. Funny as all get-out! But that's the intent, isn't it? It might be curious to see that longer 15 minute version, though. :-)
Finally, to answer your exact question. There is one play by him i would read but it's not available where i live. Artist Descending a Staircase has as part of its base the Marcel Duchamp painting Nude Descending a Staircase. (Link to image of the painting-- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Duc... ). I like the painting, as well as a poem by X. J. Kennedy, which i've shared here, based on the painting. (poem link-- http://english.emory.edu/classes/pain... ). According to Wiki the play is a play about the murder of an artist who dies from falling down a set of stairs It's supposed to be funny, as well as an "exploration of the meaning and purpose of art."
How about you, Alias? Anyone else read any Stoppard? Any plans to do so?
deb
No, this was my first Stoppard.I do recall that Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead was popular on Broadway many years ago. I didn't see it.
Thanks for the links, Deb!
My pleasure. I remember hearing about R&G but it may be just that it was such an odd title and, so, lingers in my mind.
Book Nook Cafe
Books mentioned in this topic
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead (other topics)Hamlet (other topics)
Artist Descending a Staircase (other topics)
Chaos: Making a New Science (other topics)
Copenhagen (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Marcel Duchamp (other topics)X.J. Kennedy (other topics)
James Gleick (other topics)
Michael Frayn (other topics)
Tom Stoppard (other topics)
Book:
Author:
Tom Stoppard is the author of more than twenty plays, including, most recently, Rock 'n' Roll. He lives in London.
Where: The discussion takes place in this thread
When: The discussion will begin on August 1, 2012
Spoiler Etiquette: If giving a major plot element away, please type SPOILER at the top of your post.
Book Details:
Paperback: 112 pages
Publisher: Faber & Faber; reprint edition (September 24, 1994)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 0571169341
synopsis: Arcadia takes us back and forth between the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, ranging over the nature of truth and time, the difference between the Classical and the Romantic temperament, and the disruptive influence of sex on our orbits in life. Focusing on the mysteries—romantic, scientific, literary—that engage the minds and hearts of characters whose passions and lives intersect across scientific planes and centuries, it is “Stoppard’s richest, most ravishing comedy to date, a play of wit, intellect, language, brio and . . . emotion. It’s like a dream of levitation: you’re instantaneously aloft, soaring, banking, doing loop-the-loops and then, when you think you’re about to plummet to earth, swooping to a gentle touchdown of not easily described sweetness and sorrow . . . Exhilarating” (Vincent Canby, The New York Times).
Amazon link: http://www.amazon.com/Arcadia-Play-To...