After a rousing response from students to last week’s performance of BOGED, we now ask about key similarities in approach and intention and key structural differences that playwright/adapter Arthur Miller and our Israelis Boaz Gaon and Nir Erez exampled in their respective revisions of Ibsen’s original drama. We’ve read Miller’s introduction to his adaptation. It’ll be great to read a student summary of Miller’s intention. And others can build on that; on Miller’s intentions and the key ways in which he changed the scene structure and dialogue from Ibsen’s original.
And just as interesting will be to hear from students taking a second critical look at the Israeli BOGED now that they’ve had a chance to read the text and consider the wide ranging series of responses from critics.
For a run-down of the press page, click here
Review:”…a significant—and successful—reworking of the classic” - Washingtonian, Missy Frederick
Review: In Theater J’s ‘Boged,’ an Israeli whistleblower is seen as toxic - The Washington Post, Peter Marks
Review: In a time plagued with controversy, a thought-provoking intensely profound new work - DC Metro Theater Arts, Amanda Gunther
Review: Boged Hits it’s mark - The Georgetown Dish, Judith Beermann
Review: “…an inspiring play, covering delicate themes of corruption, greed, and power” - The Georgetown Voice, Dayana Gomez
Review: “..it’s well worth your time” - MD Theatre Guide, Elliot Lanes
Israeli tensions spill onto the stage in new ‘Enemy of the People’ - The Washington Post, Nelson Pressley
‘Boged’…relevant to Israeli audiences - Washington Jewish Week, Lisa Traiger