|View single post by Laphillyboy|
|Posted: Tue Jun 3rd, 2014 09:15 pm||
|I enjoyed reading this. It pulled me right in with the specific voices of the two characters being so different. I think this accomplishes something many short plays don't accomplish, it manages to stay "on point" throughout without becoming boring.
That said, I have a few critical remarks that you can take or leave as you wish:
1 - I agree with the Anthony that it should be made clear to the reader in the beginning that the female character is a prostitute. The reason I say this is because it will give more weight to some of the dialogue and pull the audience into the play more quickly. There is no benefit as it stands in having us confused for the first couple of minutes.
2 - To my ear, the female character occasionally sounds more like a gay man. In fact, I kept waiting for some reveal that she is a transvestite or Transgendered character. One of the reasons for this is her use of the word "boy" for men. Women rarely refer to men as boys unless they are referring to a group of men (i.e. Boys' Night out, one of the boys, etc.) This is especially true in a sexual context. Very few women are interested in the idea of having sex with a boy - a young man, absolutely, a boy no.
3 - The female character's emotional shift at the end feels legit until she starts to expound on her feelings about her profession. This doesn't ring true to my ear. It is too "on the money." When she says "they never kiss me" that totally threw me out of the play. Most prostitutes do not kiss their Johns - it is an unwritten rule in the profession - not the other way around. The sex is transactional by nature - not intimate. If you want to address that you should do it in another play - it clouds the issue in this otherwise very specific piece. It is okay for her to get emotional at the end, that part is great, but you don't have to have her come out and define it. Her emotional defenselessness, her ability to be recognize both pleasure and pain, is part of her characters purpose in this scenario - she is the catalyst that draws the male character forward. We've already accepted that she is like this from the first few minutes of the play.
4 - I believe you meant to write "role play" not "roll play" (2 times).
5 - I had no problem with the characters not having names, except the way this piece was formatted it became very distracting having all those A's and B's lined up on the left. One simple solution to address two issues at once would be to just refer to them as "John" and "_____" (insert generic term for hooker). LOL.
Nice piece. Has a beginning, middle and end. Structure is important. I see quite a bit of work both on this site and elsewhere that seems to be sorely lacing in that regard.