Discussion Questions Week Six

*****You may want to consider watching a few of the scenes and other videos below before answering.

1. Consider John and Carol’s first interaction (not the entire interaction, but up to point at which Carol mentions her background in relation to her performance in the professor’s class). What do you think is established in this interaction? Who and what do the characters reveal themselves to be? In such revealing, then, do you identify any miscommunication, non-communication, or a simple lack of communication? (In your discussion, consider particularly the “term of art” (701) exchange, the way in which John tells Carol she’s failing his class, and/or Carol’s offerings with regard to her performance (the language John uses, her socio-economic background, etc.).

2.Consider the portion of the conversation (the first meeting) in which Carol offers up her reasoning, as it’s implied, for her performance in the class: “No, no, no. I’m doing what I’m told. It’s difficult for me. It’s difficult . . . I don’t . . . lots of the language . . . The language, the “things” that you say . . . It is true. I have problems . . . I come from a different social . . . a different economic . . . No. I: when I came to this school: . . . does that mean nothing . . . ?” (702-703). What is Carol trying to say? Are her points legitimate? (Consider the context in which she’s offering them). Why or why not?


3. Given the fact that the proposed lawsuit is based on the entire Act 1 interaction, discuss the events and comments that make up this interaction. Has Carol twisted John’s words? Is her lawsuit legitimate? Would it be legimitate in “real” life? On the other hand, has John, intentionally or otherwise, overstepped his bounds? How so? Remember that Carol’s accusations are not simply a matter of sexual harassment but of a perceived elitist, classist, and economic bias and privileging she feels John misuses.

4. Why do you think Mamet allows us a window into John’s life (signaled by the constantly ringing telephone, an apt metaphor for his connection to the outside world) but none into Carol’s (we have no sense of who she is or her life outside of this series of exchanges with her professor nor any events leading up to them)? Is Mamet empathizing with John by developing his character more than Carol’s? Do YOU sympathize with John and think perhaps the development of John’s character (as a professor, husband, father, recipient of a surprise party, etc.) might have something to do with where your empathy lies?

5. What do you think of John’s decision to “reveal” himself to Carol, to confess weaknesses and sins? Are these revelations part of a genuine attempt to identify with Carol gone wrong? Conversely, are they
disingenuous rhetorical moves designed to maneuver Carol where John wants her?

6. Carol repeatedly, almost doggedly, accuses John of failing to understand her and the position she takes. This inability to understand, as Carol perceives it, comes to a head in Act Three, as Carol exclaims, YOU FOOL. Who do you think I am? To come here and be taken in by a smile. You little yapping fool. You think I want “revenge”. I don’t want revenge. I WANT UNDERSTANDING” (725). What does she mean?

7. And where/how does John go wrong by lamenting that his job is “over” immediately following this outburst? Consider Carol’s response to this: “Oh. Your job. That’s what you want to talk about” (725). What does John’s response clarify about his motives and values? What does Carol’s response (to his words) say about hers?

8. On the playbill distributed at various performances of Oleanna, theatregoers were treated to TWO rather than the traditional one picture: one featuring Carol, one featuring John. A version of the words “Whatever you think/Whichever side you choose, you’re wrong” was imprinted on the program. What do you make of this statement? What does it mean? Do you agree or disagree?

9. Consider Carol’s most serious accusation: “You tried to rape me. According to the law. . . . You tried to rape me. I was leaving this office, you “pressed” yourself into me. You “pressed” your body into me. . . . under the statute. I am told. It was battery. . . . Yes. And attempted rape. That’s right” (728). Discuss your reaction to this accusation. As you do, consider carefully Carol’s addition of “according to the law”. Is she, at some or any level, in the right? Is John right to be undone by this accusation?

10. The first time John orders Carol to leave his office, with some force, he has just called his wife “baby”, a term we have not yet heard in the other one-side conversations to which we are privy. This is significant, as is Carol’s ordering John not to “call [his] wife “baby”’ (728). Why do you think it is this comment that fully engages his wrath and destroys his self-control?

11. All is decided in terms of John’s career and reputation once he physically attacks her. Carol seems to reiterate as much when she says, “Yes. That’s right. . . . yes. That’s right”’. Theatregoers, time and again, have cheered when John attacks her. Cheering and encouraging the physical attack of a woman on the part of a man is a dangerous maneuver, and much has been made critically about audience’s reactions to this moment. In many ways, though, the act offers a catharsis, and it certainly does provide the resolution to the debate at large here. What do you think of Mamet’s conclusion? Are they both, ultimately, responsible for how things play out? Why or why not?
_______________________________________________________________________________________

From the Broadway performance with Julia Stiles and Bill Pullman

Opening night of Oleanna at the Mark Taper Forum (various stars discuss their reactions to the play)

Julia Stiles on The View discussing her role

From the film:

Part of Act 1

"Fight Scene"

Interview with director (of the Broadway show) Doug Hughes