|
Post by housemouse on Mar 13, 2006 8:16:19 GMT -5
This is for those of you who have seen the play. I have got to hear opinions!! Who thought he did it? Who thought he didn't?
I thought he did, my sister thought he didn't. I have to say, I am a lapsed Catholic and my sister is a practicing Catholic so I wonder if our perspective had anything to do with it.
In the end, I figured he did it because of his reaction to the final showdown with Sister Alouicious (sp!). Why, after she finally confronted him, did he ask the Bishop to transfer him? Why didn't he just ask the Bishop to help him clear his name? Because of the heirarchy of the church they could easily have brought the nun down and ruined her reputation.
Please, everyone who saw it, share you takes!
|
|
|
Post by anna on Mar 13, 2006 9:17:33 GMT -5
I thought he did it. That one word, "Wait!" as Sister Aloysius started out the door, convinced me.
|
|
|
Post by Katryna on Mar 13, 2006 9:29:25 GMT -5
In the end, I figured he did it because of his reaction to the final showdown with Sister Alouicious (sp!). Why, after she finally confronted him, did he ask the Bishop to transfer him? Why didn't he just ask the Bishop to help him clear his name? Because of the heirarchy of the church they could easily have brought the nun down and ruined her reputation. Please, everyone who saw it, share you takes! I read the play twice before seeing it. After reading the play, I really did not have a stong opinion either way. After Saturday' performance I thought he was innocent and had just asked to be transferred to avoid having to go through the ordeal of clearing himself. But after Sunday's performance, and bouncing some ideas back and forth with Mary - I think he was guilty. And that is only because of Fr Flynn's response to the Sister's question to him asking if he had given the wine to the boy to drink and my reaction to his final scene with Sr. Aloysius. There does seem to me to be some strong evidence to believe, though, that he is truly concerned with the children and not for the reason that he has been accused of.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2006 11:33:46 GMT -5
I'm jumping in if y'all don't mind.
I've tried desperately to keep an open mind - some of you know that I sing for the church and I know of three priests that were "carted away" for this very reason. I've read the play - seen it twice and tossed the idea back and forth in my head. I thought I was coming around to innocense.
But, alas. "Maybe take the boys on a camping trip..." would not leave my mind. "Have you never done anything wrong..." "There are things I can't say..." These lines troubled me as well.
I don't know - I think he did do it, I truly do.
|
|
|
Post by housemouse on Mar 13, 2006 12:08:24 GMT -5
From Anita's post in the other Doubt thread:
Did he do it? I don't know. He shouldn't have given the boy the alcohol, but I can't decide if his emotion and asking for a transfer at the end is an admission of guilt or just a reaction to all the trouble that lay ahead if he stayed. I'm positive of one thing though: he loves kids and really cares about them and the nun says that it's our job to get them through school. I guess I'm left wondering if she just didn't like the fact that he cared about the kids more than she thought he should and read things into his actions that weren't there.
|
|
|
Post by dogma on Mar 13, 2006 12:12:03 GMT -5
can you take pix when they come out for the ovation at the end?
severe, severe storms here,, have to sign off for awhile,, our one golden, frisco , hates storms, woke up this morning with a heaviness on my chest,, it was frisco,, he lets us know when storms are coming, ,about 10 minutes ahead of time need to potty the dogs before it gets worse,, later,,
|
|
|
Post by bjobsessed on Mar 13, 2006 12:24:51 GMT -5
can you take pix when they come out for the ovation at the end? No, but you're free to take as many as you like outside the stage door.
|
|
|
Post by bjobsessed on Mar 13, 2006 12:28:15 GMT -5
Do you really think he'd do anything on a camping trip with a whole bunch of boys? There would be more than one boy to a tent. It wouldn't be as easy as it would be one on one and there's more chance of getting caught. I don't know. I think I'm going to read the play again. Maybe that will help me decide.
|
|
|
Post by housemouse on Mar 13, 2006 12:33:31 GMT -5
Do you really think he'd do anything on a camping trip with a whole bunch of boys? There would be more than one boy to a tent. It wouldn't be as easy as it would be one on one and there's more chance of getting caught. I don't know. I think I'm going to read the play again. Maybe that will help me decide. Sadly, yes, I think he would. With all the information coming out about the Catholic Church and child sexual abuse lately, I am prepared to believe just about anything. After the show I struck up a conversation with two of the women waiting at the stage door. We were all raised in the Catholic church (we all admitted to crossing ourselves after the sermons!). Two of the three of us had priests in our parish removed because they had molested young boys. That is a pretty sad state of affairs. I'm guessing that John Patrick Shanley (the play write), was raised Catholic too. I wonder if he had a pedophile priest in his parish.
|
|
|
Post by bjobsessed on Mar 13, 2006 12:43:44 GMT -5
Wow! I'm not Catholic, but I hear about priests molesting boys on the news all the time. Quite a coincidence that two out of the three of you had priests removed for that very reason. Maybe it's more widespread than the rest of the world knows.
More food for thought.
|
|
|
Post by Eyphur on Mar 13, 2006 13:26:32 GMT -5
OK I haven't seen the play (and I'm not expecting I'll have the chance too) but I have read it a few times. The first time I read it I was very definitely on the not guilty side. The next day tho I went back and reread it along with the introduction and decided that he is guilty. I don't remember exactly what caused me to change my mind (it's been a few weeks since I read it) but I think that the title also made me think because the subtitle of the play is "A Parable".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2006 13:38:54 GMT -5
Do you really think he'd do anything on a camping trip with a whole bunch of boys? There would be more than one boy to a tent. It wouldn't be as easy as it would be one on one and there's more chance of getting caught. I don't know. I think I'm going to read the play again. Maybe that will help me decide. Sadly, yes, I think he would. With all the information coming out about the Catholic Church and child sexual abuse lately, I am prepared to believe just about anything. After the show I struck up a conversation with two of the women waiting at the stage door. We were all raised in the Catholic church (we all admitted to crossing ourselves after the sermons!). Two of the three of us had priests in our parish removed because they had molested young boys. That is a pretty sad state of affairs. I'm guessing that John Patrick Shanley (the play write), was raised Catholic too. I wonder if he had a pedophile priest in his parish. Yes, I agree with Mouse - it's just disturbing. True, there would be a group of boys, but to me it's a perfect opportunity for him to be alone with the ONE boy he's after. Unfortunately, the priests we used to look up to are not all we thought..... Shanley was raised Catholic - he attended Catholic schools in the Bronx and it wouldn't shock me if this play were written based upon the summation of his own personal experience (in some way).
|
|
|
Post by inuvik on Mar 13, 2006 16:18:37 GMT -5
Sadly, yes, I think he would. With all the information coming out about the Catholic Church and child sexual abuse lately, I am prepared to believe just about anything. After the show I struck up a conversation with two of the women waiting at the stage door. We were all raised in the Catholic church (we all admitted to crossing ourselves after the sermons!). Two of the three of us had priests in our parish removed because they had molested young boys. That is a pretty sad state of affairs. Not just the Catholic Church either. It was very widespread in the residential school system (Natives) in the late 1800's till about 1970's here in Canada. These schools were under the control of the federal government but churches ran them--Catholic, Anglican, Presbyterian, and one other I think too. The lawsuits and courts are full of cases relating to these. I do wonder though, if it happens (or seems to) happen more with Catholics, because priests are celibate? NOT an excuse of course, but I am of that impression too--it seems more widespread in the Catholic Church.
|
|
|
Post by rducasey on Mar 13, 2006 23:01:55 GMT -5
After seeing it for the first time on Sat. night, I felt he was innocent, and that she was just out to get him. Sister James said, "you just don't like him cause he uses a ball point pen, etc..etc..." And of course with Ron playing the part, I guess I just did not want to think that he would be guilty. My sympathy definitely was with him. Strangely enough, after seeing it the next day, I was leaning toward guilt. I think, too, as someone said, that word, "wait" but particularly when she confronted him and asked had he given the boy the wine, and he said, "Have you never done anything wrong?" when she pressed him again, he adamently said "no" but why that first response? I wanted him to call her bluff, and challenge her to prove it. When he didn't do that, well, I had doubt. But then again, the times, was it easier to just remove himself from an uncomfortable situation. I think this is the beauty of the play. Ron again said outside the theatre when asked, that he knew the answer but of course would never say.
I thought the acting was incredible. The body language alone elicited so many laughs that I did not expect from reading it. (When he was on Tony Danza, he said, "come to Doubt, its fun." I thought "fun?- I don't think so" from having read it. But they do make it work. When she tells Fr. Flynn to take a seat and he sits at her desk, the look on her face was priceless. How dare he! Her attempts to beat the optimism and enthusiasm out of poor Sister James. So typical of nuns of that era elicited a number of laughs. She, the Dame, was terrific as Sr. Aloyisis. And Ron in the locker room scene, speaking practically to members of the audiance as if they were the boys- lots of humor there. And Lori, we thought of you with the "hip action".
|
|
|
Post by Katryna on Mar 19, 2006 9:24:34 GMT -5
I am a little late in adding this to the Guilty or Innocent discussion that went on earlier in the week! But I have been thinking quite a bit about the play this weekend since it was last weekend that.....well, you know. As much as I want to believe him innocent, and not just because Ron portrays Father Flynn, I think he probaby was not. In addition to things already mentioned, there were the references to the length of his fingernails. Which was an obvious attempt from my point of view to make him appear a little "off". I have also been thinking about that little hip wiggle in the basketball scene. Very cute and I enjoyed it immensely as I am sure all of the women in the audience did. BUT, was it Father Flynn's attempt to make the boys laugh, or was there something inappropriate about his doing it in front of a group of young boys?
|
|