Proof: A Play by David Auburn Summary and Reviews
|
List Price: Our Price: $7.23 You Save: $6.77 (48%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $4.67 (click here) Category: Book See more book details and other editions |
|---|
Book Reviews of Proof: A Play
Book Review: Prove It To Me.
Summary: 5 Stars
This is a wonderful, well-thought out play. The cast consists of only four characters and the plot moves back and forth in time from the present to the past and from dreams to reality. Catherine's father, Robert (who seems loosely based on the real-life John Nash) was one of the most brilliant mathematicians to have ever lived. By the time he was 25 he had changed the mathematics world twice. Then he became mentally sick and his brilliant and beautiful daughter Catherine drops out of school to take care of him. Robert dies, but Catherine has inherited some of his gifts. Though she was forced to drop out of college, she, too is a mathematical genius. The only problem is that her "boyfriend" Hal and her older sister Claire think she has also inherited some of Robert's dementia.
What starts off as a play seemingly about mathematics and the effects of dementia ends up really being a piece of theatrical genius about love and family. A great show if done right.
Book Review: Sanity in a crazy world
Summary: 4 Stars
I saw Proof performed a couple years ago on Broadway, and have read the script twice since. Any performance of Proof hinges on the casting of Robert (an aging mathemetician) and Catherine (his daughter). The performance I saw had two magnificent actors in these roles, which smoothed away some of the rough edges of the script itself.Don't get me wrong; this is an amazing piece of playwriting, better than 99% of everything else out there. But the setting of the play is so very static, and its language so toned down, that it takes a very talented and entertaining group of actors to pull it off. The writing of Proof is very much like Chekov -- brilliant, but somewhat unapproachable.
(Drama teachers take note: this is a great play for students to improve their acting skills, but a terrible play for students to actually perform.)
The plot, if not the style, of this play can be compared to the style of the recent big-budget film (based on a novel) Big Fish. But in that comparison Proof comes off looking brilliant, and Big Fish comes off looking overwrought. If this play is done right, there is a moment toward the end that can compete -- in terms of sheer pathos and emotionality -- with anything Sophocles ever wrote. Watch for the stage direction: "After a long moment Catherine closes the notebook." It brought tears to my eyes.
Book Review: Soap Opera but nicely done
Summary: 3 Stars
Katie postpones college to care for her crazy dad. When he dies, Hal, a young collegue of her dad seduces her while she is grieving, depressed and possibly delusional. She gives him a manuscript in what looks like her dad's handwriting presenting a phenomenal proof, claiming it's her own work. Will Hal trust Katie or will Hal decide Katie is crazy, which is what Katie's sister thinks? Hal withholds judgment. Now, it turns out that Katie is the next Ramanujan, a one-in-a-billion self-educated mathematician and it's her work. Will Katie go with Claire so her sister can take care of her or will Katie forgive Hal his lack of trust in her? To find the answer you will have to read the play, my friend.
I told my daughter that nothing interesting was going on in theatre these days and she gave me this nice little play to read. It is pleasant and milding engaging - a cut about TV soap operas.
What is this play about? All kinds of cliches. The wierdness of mathematicians. The romanticizing of mental illness. Discounting the abilities of women in math and science. The wrenching dilemmas faced by those who are inconvenienced by the need to take care of an ailing family member. How can you trust your partners in shallow promiscuous sexual relationships? Yawn.
Book Review: Takes Me Back to the Walter Kerr Theater
Summary: 5 Stars
In the past few years there has been a resurgence of plays with themes centered around math and science and characters who are mathematicians and scientists. Thank heaven! Michael Frayn's "Copenhagen" is magnificent. Then there are two plays produced by the Manhattan Theater Club: "An Experiment with an Air Pump" by Shelagh Stephenson and this play, "Proof" by David Auburn. I think both are wonderful.After winning the Pulitzer, a shot at a Tony, and a continuing run on Broadway, Auburn really has no need for my good words; however, let me give a few anyway. This is a cleverly written piece. Unlike "Copenhagen," this play really isn't about mathematicians and scientists. It is just framed around them. No math skills are necessary to enjoy this play. Instead, it is an examination of love, trust, madness and genius presented through the lives of mathematicians.
In fact, the only weakness in this play is when real mathematics comes up. I cringed when I heard the famous exchange between mathematicians G.H. Hardy and Srinivasa Ramanujan put in the mouth of Robert and Catherine, the father/daughter mathematicians at the heart of this play. It just rubbed me the wrong way.
Fortunately, this is the only time math actually comes up. Instead, this play takes us into the lives of four very interesting people. I was fortunate enough to see a performance of this play on its second night on Broadway. I was incredibly moved. Mary-Louise Parker's performance as Catherine was particularly impressive. Reading the script, I was carried right back to the theater and could relive the experience again. I loved it.
Book Review: The essence of genius in combination with madness
Summary: 5 Stars
This play captures the essence of mathematicians and some of the ways they do mathematics. Catherine is the daughter of her mathematician father Robert, who was brilliant and revolutionary in his early twenties, but has descended into madness. For the last few years Catherine has suppressed her desire to study mathematics at Northwestern University in order to care for her father. Robert has just died and Hal, one of his Ph. D. students, comes to the house to examine the notebooks Robert had filled in his last years.
At first, there is nothing of significance, but when Catherine gives Hal the key to a locked desk drawer, he finds a notebook containing some astounding mathematics. Catherine is circumspect about who wrote the proof, saying that it was her father, but hinting that she might have helped develop the proof. Hal is astonished at the discovery, asking if he can take it to his colleagues, as it is so complex that he doesn't feel qualified to evaluate it. The relationship between Hal and Catherine is complicated by their sleeping together shortly after Robert's funeral.
Catherine's sister Claire has arrived from New York and wants to take Catherine back with her so that she can be treated for her mental instability. Eventually, Catherine admits that she was the one who developed the proof, working on it after her father went to bed.
It is well known in the mathematics community that nearly all of the major advances in mathematics are done by people in their early twenties. Very few mathematicians have demonstrated greatness over the age of thirty. That is a fundamental theme of this book and is even mentioned by Robert in his moments for greater lucidity. There is also the appearance of the mathematical genius in the largely untrained Catherine, something that has also occurred several times in history.
In the end, Catherine is clearly moving along the same path as her father, although her mental instability appeared at an earlier age, probably induced by her regular exposure to her father. This thread is something that all people deal with, "How much of the traits of my parents will I demonstrate as I age?" In combination with the potential for greatness, all of these plotlines combine to create an engaging and interesting play. My pleasure was further enhanced by the fact that I am a college instructor in mathematics.