My first review: The Jurymen

The first full review of my first play, The Jurymen.

'“The Jurymen” is complex and intricate. This play has many of the traditional components of a Greek play, like the Chorus, for example.While many may consider the standard Chorus song to be long and excessive, the songs in “The Jurymen” are necessary, and serve as an opportunity for more popular culture to be incorporated as well as an extension of the storyline. Moreover, I commend the writer for his or her ability to smoothly and comically transition into these songs.

Throughout the play one is reminded of these intentions, particularly that of education. The writer manages to both eloquently and deliberately incorporate elements of Classical mythology, philosophy, politics and history all while discussing the trial of Socrates. For example, on page thirteen the character Aristophanes suggests that a Greek chorus is needed to which Aristodemus replies, “…A chorus would help give the needed melody, which would work hand in hand with verse composition.” This serves as a contribution to the development of the chorus as a character as well as an introduction to audience members who may not be familiar with the significant role the chorus plays in a Greek comedy.

Furthermore, “The Jurymen” is able to remain loyal but also original, in regards to the classic style of comedy, largely because Greek comedies are topical. That is, the jokes are often specifically intended for ancient Athenians. Without knowledge of the social issues surrounding ancient Athens, many jokes are overlooked. “The Jurymen” discusses relevant twenty-first century social issues such as the Al Gore recount and the Texas Board of Education. This is perhaps the most insightful and surprising aspect of “The Jurymen”. A mark of thoughtful writing is found not by the mere inclusion of comedic definitions and characters named after philosophers, rather this mark is found in the writer’s ability to grasp the work of an era.

After being awed by the writer’s ability to successfully understand the larger workings of Greek comedy, the writer then pays an impressive amount of attention to detail. The writer anticipates all potential problems in terms of staging such as stage directions, audience inclusion as well as many reoccurring jokes. For example, the Chorus is from Idaho, which the characters eventually understand to be Ephesus. The mention of Ephesus is made through the play on multiple occasions. The writer even allows for extra time to be given to the audience as they cast their “vote” and decide Socrates’ fate.

It is this combination of large understanding and attention to specific details that deems this play publishable. Moreover, the writer shows a mastery of style in his or her efforts to create a successful portrait of Athens as an “ongoing dialogue”. This dialogue may mirror the philosophy that is so prevalent throughout the course of the play.

When examining the dialogue between the characters, it is obvious that the writer is familiar with classical philosophy and the commonly held beliefs associated with philosophers such as Socrates and Plato. For example, on page 20 the writer allows Plato’s “Allegory of the Cave” to be introduced. In fact, the writer goes so far as to define the “Allegory” for audience members who may not know. Again, the primary goal of education is achieved.

Despite the amount of praise I may give the writer as a Classicist, “The Jurymen” successfully mocks many of the stereotypical aspects that are often associated with philosophers. This is incredibly evident in the first scene with the persistent mentioning of drinking (mentioned in some 10 pages!), which brings to mind Monty Python’s “Philosopher’s Drinking Song.” Also, the way Socrates’ character talks in circles and has moments of absent-mindedness adds an additional element of depth to Socrates as a character. This separates him from the man in history books.

There are many struggles that one may encounter when developing fictionalized yet historical characters. The viewer has many expectations when concerning philosophers such as Socrates. What distinguishes a historical and comic character from a biased character? To avoid such problems the writer must include significant historical details such as hemlock, which is often associated with Socrates, as well as Apollo’s “accidental” mention of Roman rule.

“The Jurymen” is a well researched comedy that has an overwhelming amount of detail. The “Commentary” on page sixty-one provides an enormous sum of information about Aristophanes, Socrates, and many of the other educational elements of “The Jurymen”. If it is not apparent by the writer’s grasp of Greek comedy that the writer is well-versed in the culture and politics of ancient Athens, it becomes abundantly clear by examining the “Commentary” as well as the works cited by the writer.

I am left with little doubt that “The Jurymen” should be accepted and published. I am convinced that “The Jurymen” is successful in its attempts to first and foremost educate. Also, I feel confident that this play could be performed, and not to mention be well received, at most colleges and universities. It is with this simple fact that allows “The Jurymen” to be an undeniable triumph.'

I'm being published!

As I have recently announced, a play that I wrote earlier this year is going to be published. For those of you who haven't been in direct contact with me to hear the whole story as it's developed, here's the basic plotline of how all of this came to be:

1. The story begins in my sophomore year, when I took Dr. Schwartz's Classical Philosophy course. I always suspected I loved Plato, but I didn't really know it until then. As Dr. Schwartz was skillfully explaining the cave allegory, he off handedly said: "It would be neat if we could perform this in the Dell (our college's outdoor Greek theater)". Being bright eyed and bushy tailed, I wrote this down immediately, and started playing with the idea of staging such an event in the future.

2. Senior year roles around and I need a senior project. I start out by looking into the archaeology of Greek theater spaces, but soon lose interest and voice to Dr. Cohen my now 2-year-old idea to turn Plato's philosophy into something that could be shown in the Dell. She bravely agrees to let me attempt a creative project for my senior project.

3. As the year progresses, my project begins to take form and becomes a full-formed play based on the trial and execution of Socrates modelled after the Old Comedy of Aristophanes that expresses the philosophies of Plato and Aristotle, discussing mostly philosophy of drama and justice. I write a 50 page play complete with a 20 page commentary citing everything imaginable, from verses of Plato to explanations of Athenian democracy.

At this point, all I really hope for is that my professors will be satisfied that I made a creative project academically relavent and let me graduate with my BA in Classics.

4. Everything after that snowballed, in an incredible way. Dr. Cohen and Dr. Stevens (my Classics professors) were in fact so pleased with my project that they not only granted me an A but also submitted for consideration for the college's Best Senior Paper award.

5. In the meantime, I also have the delight of seeing part of the play performed for the future cast of Dr. Cohen's Hecuba. My wonderful actors were several of my wonderful and incredibly supportive friends: Dr. Cohen, Sam Henderson, Megan Barrett, Alex Barrett, Rhiannon Knol, Eric Struble, Lindsay Wood, and Lorenzo Alvarez. Thanks again, guys. :)

6. My project won the Best Senior Paper award for my college, and one of the options I was offered as a result of this was to submit it to Apollon, a new academic journal that would consider my project for publication. I agreed to try for it.

7. In mid June, I got the following email from the Apollon office:

"Based on our initial reading of your play, The Jurymen, we believe that your paper has the potential to be considered for publication. We are interested in publishing material that are distinct both in content and style. However, your paper does not fulfill our submission requirements, as we seek to publish research papers that are within 2000-6000 words. Having said that, I would stress here that we are willing to make an exception and ignore the word limit for your paper as it seems unique and polished."

I do a few edits and sent the play off again, with the expectation of hearing back in August.

8. Tuesday I sent an email asking about the progress of my play. I got the following in response:

"The editors were highly impressed by many things in your work and have come to the conclusion that “The Jurymen” is a highly creative and an exceptionally well written play that strives to educate and entertain both Classicists as well as the average reader. Although we had initial reservations about your work due to its length being much longer than our usual submissions, we are glad we have had the chance to receive your work..."

9. After a few "minor changes", I'll send it back, and they'll publish it! :) It's a small and new academic journal, so it's not incredibly visible, but it's still a big step for me. This whole experience has already been far more rewarding than I was expecting; all I wanted to do was pass senior sem! xD

Thank you so much to everyone who encouraged and supported me while this was coming together. I couldn't have pulled it all off on my own.

I received a review from Apollon, as well, which I will post here in a few moments.