Thursday, January 29, 2015

An Analysis of Jim Henson's Labyrinth (Part 1) Oops, I Summoned the Inciting Incident

Part One- Whoops, I summoned the Inciting Incident


Ah, Labyrinth, how I love thee. Way back when in 1986 when you first came out, you were a flop, but now you have grown into a cult film beloved by many. I was far more cynical upon my first viewing of you, but my heart has softened as time went by and I gave you a few more viewings. My love for you has blossomed past your many sins. It has blossomed past the sometimes awkward acting. It has blossomed past the cheesy dialogue. It has blossomed past the insanely tight tights of the Bowie Bulge that caused many people to either gasp, snicker, or stare. It has grown past the fact that the songs were probably pointless. Now people can see you at your heart- and you are a fun, insanely creative, and exciting fantasy adventure with everything from humor to characters to heart to fear to great music.
                Since the film was marketed more towards kids and teenagers, there are some messages that are very explicit to the point where the characters say them- such as life is not fair, stick with your friends, etc. But this is a film that can have a wide variety of meanings and messages depending on one’s interpretation. Now if you disagree with anything I say from this point onward (and some things I am going to say, especially about a certain popular goblin king), I am not saying that you are stupid or you are wrong, or that you should feel any sort of guilt. Labyrinth, like many other films, is a different experience for every person who views it. I would just like to express what my interpretation of the film (using more than one literary theory) was beyond the seemingly simple messages. Also, I will assume that you, the reader, have watched all of Labyrinth, and know everything that happens. Unless you have not, and want to watch the movie without knowing anything, then you might not want to read this.
                Without further ado, let’s start at the beginning of the film and take a look at our films protagonist, Sarah Williams (played by Jennifer Connelly).
                


                   Now Sarah is an ordinary 15 year old girl who lives in suburbia. What makes her unique is that she has a huge passion for fantasy and fairy tales. She reads books like The Wonderful Wizard of Oz and acts out her favorite stories- one of them being from a book titled “Labyrinth”- outside wearing costumes and make-up. Her room is filled with fantasy books, games, dolls, and stuffed animals. But since she is a teenager, she is often criticized for having interests that are considered too juvenile for her age. She is probably not very popular at school, and although she wishes she could receive romantic attention from most likely boys, she is still hesitant about plunging into the world of romance, dating, and sexuality, especially if it means giving up herself. 
              
           Sarah has a rough relationship with her family. Her father, Robert, divorced her biological mother, Linda, some time ago. Now he has remarried another woman, named Irene, and has had a baby boy, named Toby, with her. Although Irene loves Sarah and wants what is best for her, she can be a little harsh and pushy.  Although she acts out of love and concern, she criticizes Sarah for not being like “other girls” and often tells her what she should do, which often concerns doing things teenage girls are traditionally expected to do (“Girls your age should have dates, I’d like it if you’d have dates.”). It grows to the extent that Sarah feels trapped and pressured (“I can’t do anything right, can I?”).
                
                 The other female role model Sarah has is her biological mother, who she does not see often. In the films script, not much is said out loud about Linda Williams and Sarah’s relationship with her, but there is a lot that can be implied through looking at her room and reading the novelization of the film. Sarah keeps a scrapbook full of pictures and newspaper clippings of her mother. From the titles of the clippings we can tell that she is an accomplished actress (looks like Sarah is clearly her mother’s daughter!). The posters of various musicals hanging up in Sarah’s room, such as Cats and Evita, are various shows that starred her mother. Linda has not only achieved fame, and fortune, but beauty and romance as well. A couple pictures from an article taking about the couples onstage and offstage romance, show her mother beside a (familiar looking) handsome, blond man with high cheekbones (according to the novelization, his name is “Jeremy”). Sarah idolizes her mother. Linda has everything Sarah wants but feels that she does not have; fame, beauty, fortune, an extraordinary career of playing pretend, and a glamorous, exciting romance with a dream prince along with being praised and desired. But the pressures to grow up, including taking on responsibility and accepting the strict standards her stepmother wants her to achieve sounds demanding and contradictory to the glamorous world she wants to attain when she reaches adulthood…or at least dream about from a safe distance. This is something many teenage girls can relate to; they have many things they want for themselves when they grow up. But when they reach adolescence, everyone around them, whether it be family members or the media, tries to tell them many mixed messages about who they are or what they should be or want (for example; “You don’t want to marry or have kids? Oh, you’ll change your mind once you find the right guy”, “Don’t wear so much make-up all the time, people won’t take you seriously,” and they range from “Having dates and lots of sex is the only way you will be considered a woman”, versus “You’re just a child, you don’t know what you want”, and that’s to name a few!). This leaves Sarah confused about what she wants out of life. She wants the glamour of adulthood and the light-hearted fun of childhood at the same time.
                Her frustration climaxes when she is left alone at home to babysit little Toby while her parents go out on a date. There are a few ways we can interpret Toby, but the one we will touch on for now is that he is the physical embodiment of Sarah’s adult responsibility. Adult responsibilities include looking after other people other than yourself, according to Piaget’s developmental stages of childhood to adolescence, one vital quality of  preoperational staged children is egocentrism (only thinking about oneself), and playing make believe. As you grow older, you begin to think of people other than yourself and not be as grounded in fantasy as opposed to reality. These are two qualities Sarah, despite being past the preoperational stage (which according to Piaget occurs in children from ages two to seven), has yet to possess. She does not want to be a role model and take time doing something she doesn’t want to do, or think about looking after another human being other than herself. Toby has even been given Sarah’s stuffed bear, Lancelot and when she discovers that, she is furious! It is Toby is physical evidence that her mother is now out of her reach and that she has to face the bland reality of adulthood rather than the wide-eyed dreams of childhood. Considering that Sarah was an only child until he was born, he is a rude wakeup call out of her bubble. Not only does she now have to look after another human being, he is also a baby. He has more of a childhood to go than she has left. He can play with toys and pretend if he wants to, while she is no longer allowed to do what she loves.
                Her jealousy boils into outright hatred. She yells at Toby “I hate you!” When Toby won’t stop crying, she tells him a story; clearly it is a similar but not exact re-telling of the story from her book, “Labyrinth.” In the story, Sarah is the beautiful heroine she wants to be, and she makes her stepmother an evil stepmother who forces her to be a “slave” to the “spoiled child.” In the story, she is so beautiful that the king of the goblins falls in love with her, giving Sarah her desired male attention- she has a beauty so strong that even adult men are drawn to her! But the goblin king in the story offers to take the baby away to his kingdom so she could be “free.” The only issue is that the baby will eventually turn into a goblin once brought there. Despite this, Sarah, now acting it out, summons the goblin king to take the baby away. But it is when she accidentally uses the correct summoning words “I wish” (“I wish the goblins would come and take you away…right now”) does it come true.
                               
           
                And BAM! Goodbye Toby! Clutter, clutter, dramatic music, noise, scuttering, evil cackling and POW! Magic, magic,  magic, window breaks through, dramatic wind and shadows!
One theme that pops up throughout the film is the importance of choice. Sarah must now deal with the consequences of her wish being fulfilled, since she chose to say the words (granted, she did not know they would really come true). Her wish is for the goblin king to fall in love with her so that he and the goblins could take the baby away. Now that the baby is gone, Sarah realizes how selfish her wish was; she has sent a defenseless infant out into an unknown environment to eventually turn into a monster. The goblin king, named Jareth, played by famed British rock singer David Bowie, appears before her and refuses to give the baby back despite her pleading. What is remarkable is that he is the exact same man in the photos with Sarah’s mother (Hello Elektra complex!). He is made to appear “completely alluring, completely a character that draws people in and that people are infatuated with,” like “a romantic hero” and “a young girl’s dream of a pop star”, glitter, leather, and all. He is the fulfillment of her wish for male attention similar to her mother.
But what kind of love does he have to offer her? Well, not only does he refuse to return the baby at the request of his beloved, but he demeans her as a child, telling her to go back and “play with your toys and costumes.” He offers her a magic crystal ball “that will show you your dreams” instead of returning Toby, but Sarah turns down the gift. 

We will see later what those dreams are, but for now, I can say that they consist of pretty dresses and fairy tale balls and romance. When Sarah rejects it, he turns it into a snake and throws it at her, with a warning of “Don’t defy me.” Already, we know that although he gives her romantic male attention, he sees her as a helpless child who needs to be taught submission and punished for doing otherwise.

The magic crystal ball he holds (insert masturbation joke) upholds traditional gender roles in the form of what he claims to be her “dreams.” When Sarah says no to that, he turns it into a snake in order to scare her into doing what he wants. Immediately, we get two images from that animal. One is a phallic symbol- and since he throws it at Sarah, he is using the fact that he is male and therefore more powerful than her, the “power –less” female, to threaten and attacks her into obedience. He has twisted her dreams into a form of suppression; something that will harm her into doing what he wants her to do- to stay childlike and helpless instead of accept the simultaneous power and responsibility of adulthood. 

Secondly, the snake quotes the serpent from The Genesis story of the fall of mankind. The devil in the form of a serpent also offered a supposedly round object to a woman claiming that it would give her what she wanted despite her protests that it was not the right thing to do. He is not only connected to masculinity and the superficial glamour of romance, but also the devil, the embodiment of evil.
The last offer he makes Sarah is that if she can solve the Labyrinth in his alternate fantasy world, and reach the castle in goblin city in 13 hours or fewer, than he will give back the baby or else “he will be one of us.”
Sarah hesitantly accepts his challenge, and moves forward with her rescue mission.
But the adventure has only begun.




Sources Cited:
Labyrinth. Dir. Jim Henson. Jim Henson, 1986. DVD.

Smith, A. C. H., Brian Froud, and Jim Henson. Jim Henson's The Labyrinth: The Novelization. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Print.

"Labyrinth (film)." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 2006. Web. 21 Jan. 2015. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labyrinth_(film)>.

Cherry, Kendra. "Piaget's Stages of Cognitive Development: The 4 Stages." Psychology.about.com. About.com, n.d. Web. 20 Jan. 2015. <http://psychology.about.com/od/piagetstheory/a/keyconcepts.htm>.


Thursday, January 8, 2015

Pippin 2013 Revival Review!

When I first viewed Pippin with Ben Vereen in the DVD of the 1982 Toronto production, I had one giant problem with it that was keeping from absolutely loving this musical; it was dated. Weather it was the hair, the music, or the overall staging, the cobwebs somehow kept me from completely appreciating this wonderful musical.
And then came this revival, and it did just that. I can describe it in just 2 words: circus spectacle. It is easy to have a big Broadway musical that is spectacular in the fact that it shows off how huge the budget is, but here, the spectacle is important, it is part of the story, and it makes the story more recognizable, more modern, and even more powerful. Watching it now and all of the things it does made me feel not just like a 4 year old chewing cotton candy with my jaw open at all the fancy, difficult tricks they were doing without nets and closing my eyes whenever I thought a trick was going to be too dangerous and I was about to watch someone die right before me-which they never do (because they are professionals), but as an adult facing the question of how to spend my adulthood. Yes, you will be amazed, but you will think too.
Most of the cast (except perhaps a couple characters), are trained circus performers and dancers. The choreography mimics the original production and uses the classic Fosse style (supposedly they looked at his original notes!), but this is definitely the most extremely physical show I have seen, and the cast, especially the ensemble, pulls it off perfectly. It is a visual wonder, they perform on aerial swings, they jump through hula hoops, and they bend their bodies in ways you did not know bodies could bend. Most of the numbers have an individual identity; it has its own color, its own tricks and complex choreography and staging. Never once was I bored watching it onstage. As for the sets look, it was incredibly simple (a circus tent as the walls and your average circus stuff), and only had to change the lights or add a few set pieces from the fly space or wings to tell us we were someplace else. For example, there was green lighting and  green bouncy balls to make Bethe’s house and there was also yellow lighting and wooden animal stalls to make Catherine’s farm. The costumes were also useful in communicating character while staying true to the circus and spectacle themes.



The performances were a mixed bag. The strongest were, of course, from the Leading Player, played by Carly Hughes and Berthe played by Priscilla Lopez. Both had strong character development , wonderful singing (and dancing for Hughes part), and were a joy to watch as long as they were onstage. The understudy for Fastrada, Lara Seibert Young was on that night, but she nailed the simple character of Fastrada. She looked like she was having fun, which in turn made it fun to watch her. Plus her phenomenal dancing was a huge advantage to her performance as well. John Dossett as Pippins father, King Charlemagne, was not impressive in singing or acting, but he was able to keep in character and be believable, but too believable to the point where the character of “enormous power” seemed weak. Rachel Bay Jones as Catherine was annoying at first, but her humor and unique take on the character- emphasis placed on her normality and plainness as opposed to the greatness Pippin craves throughout the plot- grew on me, especially her comic timing. Sadly, the weakest link was the central character; Josh Kaufman, the winner of last years “Voice” as Pippin. Despite his naturally good singing voice, he made Pippin more spoiled than sympathetic and gave him no interesting qualities outside of that.
There were new orchestrations, cuts and additions that did a great justice to the show. I will not spoil it for those of you who want to see it without knowing, but let me say this one thing. In the original show, there were a few lines and little scenes that either could be taken uncomfortably or glued the show to its period. Cutting them (except for one line, my favorite from the original “Some men raise flags when they can’t get anything else up!”) except for a few of the more necessary “discomfort” lines and scenes trimmed the show to what it needed. The extra scenes reminded me something about this show; it is hilarious. Pippin has a wonderful, smart, and sometimes bawdy (but not to the point of gross) sense of humor. The best addition was the ending. You can guess at what it is if you listened to the revival soundtrack, but it never the less adds a new dimension and closing thought to the story that in addition to the circus element makes it all the more powerful. It is one of the best endings in Musical Theatre history.

With all of these amazing circus tricks, with all of the people singing while hula hooping or being held upside down from an aerial swing, it is not pulling a Weber. It is not spectacle for the sake of spectacle. The circus represents the “incredible” destiny Pippin seeks. Even when he is faced with the realities of a more  mundane life, there is not a break from the circus tricks because that is him trying to  change  reality to meet his own standards. However, it gets in the way of him being able to accept the happiness of the mundane. Pippin is a show that questions the idea of there being a grand destiny for each person, if an ordinary life makes a person ordinary, and what someone is willing to do in order to be considered great. Whether you are an adult facing your mid-life crisis, a high school student about to enter college and form your adulthood, or a college student questioning whether your major is what you want to do for the rest of your life, than there is something in this show, that  will strike a chord with you. And the chord has never been struck in a way like this.
So overall, Pippin is an exceptional revival. The cobwebs have been swept from it and trimmed and fitted to fit this new, different generation. The simple yet creative sets and costumes clearly communicate character and setting. The main cast may not be at their zenith, but they all perform physically impressive feats. The brilliant circus staging not only makes it look dazzling, but it also makes the main themes and messages of the show all the more relevant. If you missed the production, then by all means, see the National tour when it comes the closest it can to your town. They have magic to do, it is not a false parlor trick- the magic, indeed, is genuine magic.