#both by my own idiolect and understanding of others'

[pride-of-storm]

i was a legal assistant for like two hundred hours and using 'v' for 'versus' will never leave me

[gisellelx]

Consider this ask a general prompt for any nerding you would like to do for us re: linguistic thoughts about various Cullens. Also: any particular headcanons of how they've influenced each other's speech in general? (I was going to say re: Edward emulating Carlisle but that might not be the most interesting example)

Okay commence much belated nerding out. Relevant post.

Under a cut because sorry, I went to town here. tl;dr--the Cullens sound different to each other, and their backgrounds and relationships have affected the way they sound over time. But they all can sound exactly how they need to any time they need to.

Here are two useful things we know about why people do or do not change the way they talk.

Communities of practice: this is a concept which comes from education but which has gotten adopted in several adjacent fields, including sociology and linguistics. Basically, the idea is, the way you talk will reflect the kinds of relationships you want to have with people around you, and how you want to draw lines separating your group from other groups. My easiest-to-understand example of this is that my friends from college athletic bands had some terms and inside practices which arose because of our shared experience of playing in those bands. We were in band twenty years ago, but if you're having drinks with a few other bandos and leave the bar, someone will go "ohhhhh see ya!" like the cheer we yell when someone gets put in the penalty box at a hockey game.

Convergence and accommodation: Speakers often try to sound like people they want to connect with in more than just practices and inside jokes. The more you want to connect with someone (combined with your personality), the more likely you are to adopt their style of speaking. This is in the short term, which is accommodation (you start to speak more slowly because the person you're speaking with speaks more slowly) or dialect convergence (over time your whole way of sounding starts to shift toward other people's.) Some evidence that extroverts do this faster, but it also depends on how desirable the connection is.

Convergence is probably more influential for the Cullens than CoP, although I imagine there are some CoP kinds of things that happen to vampires more broadly and the Cullens specifically. In particular, I suspect (and write) that the Cullens have lots of euphemisms for things: they talk about "mistakes" to avoid talking about murder, about "Royce" and "Charles" to avoid uttering the word rape, Edward's rebellion is called The Time or Edward's Sojourn (that's Carlisle).

The bigger question is, how would they sound and how would they naturally converge (or not!) based on their personalities and relationship.

So. You have the Cullens. Kind of a rough-and-tumble rundown of their varieties:

Carlisle: I headcanon Boston Brahmin . In the 1700s, the London accent was /r/-full, so Carlisle would've arrived to the US sounding more like a current-day American speaker than we associate now with British English (received pronunciation usually being the exported one). He would've hobknobbed with the educated elite on the eastern seaboard and picked up what they sounded like at the time. He loves being American--this is where he found his purpose and his family. So shifting toward that accent makes sense for him.

Esme: Lower middle class US midlands. The central Ohio accent is often perceived to be extremely neutral. It's not--there are some truly funky features--but people think it is, so there's not much reason to move away from it. She might have tried her hand at a transatlantic accent, but she slides back into her middle Ohioan often, because it's easy and it's not usually considered "bad" anywhere. She makes fun of the way Carlisle says rather. He teases her about how bag and egg are the same sound for her.

Edward: Northern Cities Shifted Chicago. If you've ever heard a Chicagoan pronounce the word Chicago, well, there you go. I realize this probably fucks with the gentle, sexy attempt-at-American accent delivered by Robert Pattinson. Edward was born too late to have transatlantic imposed on him, and so his accent was probably left to be.

Rosalie: Another reason they hate each other--they sound alike. Rosalie is on the other side of the Great Lakes, was born not that much later, and Rochester is another major source of Northern Cities Shift. So she and Edward sound...pretty much the same. They're both upper middle class/upper class and are picking up the prestige version of the NCVS.

Emmett: Appalachian. Pretty much enough said. The post I linked at the outset lays out a few things from Appalachian speech.

Jasper: East Texan. Texas is not general southern--there are a handful of features which make it notably different than say, Louisiana.

Alice: Upper class Mississippian. Now, this is somewhat indistinguishable to a northern American or non-American ear--maaaaybe you notice sort of "high class southern" but it's subtle. She's got a bunch of features of southern English, though, but the more prestigious versions of them. Not quite To Kill a Mockingbird--that's Alabama-- but that's not a bad place to start to hear it.

So that's where they're starting. Where do they end up?

Carlisle: sticks with Brahmin. The moment he arrived in the US means a lot to him, and so he defaults back to that first major change, when he adopted an American identity.

Edward: Probably goes without saying, but he sounds exactly like Carlisle. He shifted his default as soon as he was able, and his intense adoration of Carlisle means he converged on Carlisle's variety. He also picks up Carlisle's idiolect--particular phrases and verbal tics--again, because he wants to be like Carlisle in any way he can. "Oh my God will you quit; you're not Carlisle" is a phrase that gets uttered in annoyance often.

Esme: Keeps her central Ohio accent. She loves Carlisle more than anything, but there's nothing particularly stigmatized about her variety. So she keeps it. She's happy to be her own person.

Rosalie: Does not wish to be a part of this family and regrets her change. She certainly does not converge toward Carlisle's style, but the pressure of sounding anything like Edward, even if his dialect has shifted, is also grating. She brings her NCVS a little more toward Esme's Ohio variety over time.

Emmett: This man killed a bear* with his bare hands in the Smoky Mountains. He's real proud of being a mountain man and he sounds like one. He also has a healthy disdain for the upper-crustness of Carlisle and Rosalie and Edward and is determined to bring them back down to earth. Over time the most obvious parts of his dialect do fade--he doesn't use "a huntin'" very often, for instance. But he can shift into full on Appalachian on a dime and often does. It's fun for him.

Jasper: Stays East Texas. He's very proud of his cowboy identity, and is the least connected to the Cullen family as a community of practice. He can sound like whatever his paperwork says he does, but in default, he's still got the same Houston variety he's had for two centuries. I don't love darlin' darlin' Jasper in fic but I chalk that more up to writers learning how to have a light hand with dialect rather than it being something he fundamentally wouldn't say--he absolutely does say it. Also says bless your heart.

Alice: Biloxi is not that far from Houston, and she and Jasper, who are wound around each other, pick up each other's verbal mannerisms and reinforce subtle aspects of each other's gulf of Mexico accents. She both mellows Jasper's Texas English while also moving her own English toward his.

So in "default" mode, the Cullens sound a little different to each other. But there's no way a Twipire would somehow be unable to move perfectly and seamlessly between multiple English accents as they needed to. There's no reason to think that any of them showed up at Forks High School sounding like anything but exactly what their paperwork said their dialectal background ought to be.

*by the way this would've been a black bear, not a grizzly. I'm sure he loves grizzlies, but he wasn't fighting a grizzly in the Smokies. He probably got tangled up with a really mad mama bear. This is a pet peeve of mine, I admit.

[dontbreakstride]

I wanted to write about the Tigger Movie so I wrote about the Tigger Movie.

The Covid-19 pandemic, admittedly, has caused me to revisit a lot of older films and shows that I remember watching when I was much younger. I remember one night in the Xth week of lockdown where me and my friends dug deep and searched for all the old intros of shows we remembered on Youtube, just to get that hit of nostalgia, to retreat to features and shows that reflect more straightforward times of childhood where the weight of the world and responsibility weren’t so heavy, or confusing.

Winnie the Pooh itself is a series that bases itself around the finiteness of childhood. Christopher Robin has to grow up. The theme tune suggests that he has already grown up and all the adventures are viewed with that same nostalgia of one’s own childhood. Previous films of the Winnie the Pooh series muse on the What Comes Next of growing up and leaving your childhood fantasies behind.

I’ve not met a person yet who hasn’t been at least slightly familiar with Winnie the Pooh while growing up, whether that be the original stories by A.A. Milne, the animations and films by Disney, or even through online memes. The one feature that I’d say exemplifies how nostalgic the Winnie the Pooh series is to me is Disney’s The Tigger Movie.

The Tigger Movie never really left me, I think. I remember the banner adverts at my local cinema, where the main cast, clad in Tigger-orange-and-black-stripe liveries, were on springs and would ‘bounce’ with every movement behind concessions, and it was one of the last VHS tapes on my shelf before they were all moved about and ingloriously exiled to boxes under the bed. I remember watching it in Screen 1, where I’d be leaning over the edge of the railings and watch as the songs boomed, and the avalanches fell around the cast.

As you can probably tell from the title, lockdown summoned The Tigger Movie back into my memory, and with the advent of Disney+ and the library of Disney and non-Disney stuff it had, it was on my Watch List very quickly.

THE ONLY ONE

The Tigger Movie is pretty stunning because it centers around the deeper existentialism of the character Tigger. Tigger himself is the archetype for chaotically cheerful and energetic characters, a patron saint of upbeat innocent child-like arrogance, a source of optimism, he is the personification of BOUNCE as a word.

But the movie takes the concept of Tigger’s own theme song and tips it on its head. Tigger brags and boasts that the most wonderful thing about tiggers is that he’s the only one. But… is that truly wonderful? Of course it is, he’s wonderful and unique, but… he is the only one. Tigger’s own uniqueness puts him at odds with his more sedate friends who lack his energy, he’s an outsider. Tigger himself was introduced after the rest of the main cast, and as a result was not namechecked in the Winnie the Pooh theme until 2011’s Winnie the Pooh. Even in spite of being one of the most iconic characters from the series, he is still an outsider.

There is an innate sadness in the film through this investigation. The animation of Tigger through the emotional moments uses every line on his face to push his sadness to extremes especially considering that this is Tigger, the established energy ball of optimism. The movie is set in the liminal space of autumn’s change to winter, matching Tigger’s own orange and white palette and giving the whole film a warm, nostalgic glow, but this also allows the film to fully invest into the inevitability of change, and the loneliness of growing up.

FAMILY AND THE PAINS OF GROWING UP

Tigger waits in the snow for a letter that will never come, he walks through a snowstorm, the juxtaposition of Tigger in his height in the warmth of autumn against his low in the cold of winter makes his loneliness even more palpable.

The film’s theme is about family. Tigger wants to find his family - to find others like himself - but doesn’t recognise that he has a family in his friends. Roo looks up to Tigger and hangs to his every word, and wishes he was his little brother. Kanga and the others all decide to be the family that Tigger doesn’t have by pretending to be tiggers like him, their determination to make Tigger feel better supersedes their own preparations for winter.

But it’s also a coming of age story. Tigger grows up. He is exposed to some harsh truths throughout the narrative. He is the only tigger, his friends deceived him through good intentions, the idealised family tree he dreams of is fantasy, he feels the weight of his world on his shoulders… BUT… he is not alone. His friends all come together to remind him that they are always there for him through his highs and lows.

THE SUPERFICIAL vs. THE REALITY

The story also has a lot to say about superficial expectations vs. reality. In Tigger’s Dream Sequence Musical Sequence ‘Family Tree’, Tigger dips into the fantastical history of his imaginary family, which includes Tigger-themed pastiches on the Birth of Venus and other paintings, the Brady Bunch, Jackson 5, Don Quixote, a Marylin Monroe ‘Tiggerella’ Seven Year Inch-ing into the stratosphere from her billowing dress, and ultra-skinny supermodel Tiggers, replete with the Tigger lantern-jaw. The outlandish nature of this pop culture imagery amplifies how much of a superficial fantasy Tigger’s dream is and shows how out of place it is in the world Tigger inhabits.

The animals of the Hundred Acre Wood all try to come up with a plan to live up to this fantasy. In the song sequence ‘How To Be A Tigger’, the friends spend the first verses musing how to become Tigger to more superficial aspects of Tigger as a character. Upon reflecting, they realise that the reality of being Tigger is not in his stripes, his idiolect of ‘TTFN’s and ‘hoo-hoo-hoo-hoo!’s, or his dislike of eating honey, it’s in his ability to fill everyone with happiness with his cheery nature.

Tigger’s family tree itself fits this theme. After a conversation with Owl; Tigger, being naive and innocent, presumes that a family tree is a literal tree for the whole movie, rather than it being the metaphorical branching lineage that family trees actually are. In the final act, Tigger finds a tree striped with snow and determines that it’s his Family Tree, a location he should wait at for his real family.

The stripes on the tree, much like the tigger costumes his friends adorned and the ‘family heirloom’ locket, are superficial. But, in choosing it as his Family Tree, and Tigger using it as their shelter from the avalanche, the literal becomes the metaphor as the tree he chose as his family tree protects his friends, the family that he chose as well. The ‘family heirloom’ locket is also imbued with meaning through Tigger’s own determined attachment to it, and eventual use of it to store a picture of his ACTUAL family. Tigger chooses his family and the things that protect and represent them and I think the finding the meaning in the meaningless things by giving it to them yourself really fits the themes in the movie.

TO ANIMATE A TIGGER

The animation, of course, is wonderful to look at with the more discerning eye of adulthood. Going frame-by-frame through shots allows you to appreciate the artistry on show and understand what it was about it that captivated you as a child.

The rough photocopied line art of the original shorts is reflected in the animation and, much like Aardman’s stop motions having evidence of thumbprints, the imperfections add to the style and beauty. It’s through watching it in not-VHS quality that you notice that Tigger’s stripes have a strobing animation boil texture to them, where each frame has new linework shading of the stripes, which fills him with energy even in his more subtle scenes.

Tigger himself is a veritable powerhouse of animation. Frame by framing his movements, you can see him squash and stretch with every bounce and pounce. The largeness and looseness of his jaw allows for very fluid arcs to be created in his head.

WHOOP-DE-DOOPER BOUNCE OF FAITH

In the final act, an argument between Tigger and his friends triggers an avalanche that threatens all of them. This sequence is the accumulation of the story, with the final scenes of the movie after it being the denouement resolution.

Tigger’s own self-centered search for his family immediately gets put to the side when his friends are in danger, leaping into action and helping his friends to the high branches of his tree. He even waits, arms outstretched to Rabbit, who had called his search for more Tiggers ‘nonsense’ and acted as a catalyst for his upset throughout the film. This puts Tigger’s positive nature on full display, he leaves no one behind, and this is in turn reflected outwards by Roo, who launches after Tigger as he gets swept away in the snow.

Throughout the movie, Roo idolises Tigger and wants to do anything to cheer him up, wanting him to be his big brother. Roo’s decisions and choices help drive the story alongside Tigger, and it’s a lot of his choices that end up building Tigger up for disappointment, but Roo is a child with stars in his eyes. He imitates him vocally and physically, and tries, and fails, to do the Whoop-de-Dooper bounce so that Tigger can have someone like him, tying back into the superficial against the reality. It is only when Roo acts on impulse with the determination to help someone in the same way as Tigger would that he succeeds at ‘being a Tigger’ and accomplishes the Whoop-de-Dooper bounce.

Similarly, Tigger doesn’t pay much attention to Roo, he enjoys his company but is looking too far beyond to see those who he already has as his family. But it’s when they both perform the Whoop-De-Dooper bounce in unison to escape danger and defy gravity that Tigger finally sees Roo properly.

After the avalanche, Tigger still looks beyond the horizon for more tiggers, but it’s when the other characters recite their letter that he is brought back to earth by being reminded of the family he chose. Tigger grows up, he realises he is The Only One, but that doesn’t mean he is without those who care about him and are his family.

He grows past his innocently-self-absorbed mindset and comes to project his energy outwards in a more benevolent and less chaotic manner by providing his friends with winter supplies, and celebrating them. Roo especially. Tigger finally acknowledges him as his little brother, and gives him his ‘family heirloom’ locket. Both characters have grown and have fully realised who their family are.

OTHER NOTES

The movie also works visually to bring Tigger into the main cast so he is no longer an outsider. This film is the first one to my knowledge that shows Tigger’s house, a chaotically hoarded, sporty treehouse, compared to everyone else’s more subtle housing. Prior films in the Winnie the Pooh series had Tigger simply appearing and disappearing out of the blue, but now Tigger has an official location that is his own, like everyone else in the cast.

Pooh, quite rightfully, is often depicted to the extreme of ‘bear of very little brain’. And granted, there are still moments where Pooh falls for the tricks and gets lost sometimes, but in this movie, Pooh is actually quite cunning and devious. He sneaks up a tree to get some honey because he tells the others that they are potential Tigger family members. He is the character Roo goes to when Tigger goes into the snowstorm, and comes up with the expedition to find him. He also knows to get Rabbit to lead as ‘he’s the only one who ever says he knows what he’s doing’. I think the memory of Pooh usually paints him as more ditzy, but it’s nice being able to revisit and relearn that Pooh has an extra layer of emotional depth to him.

Tigger himself is portrayed as being significantly less ditzy than in other Pooh media. He’s not as ‘book smart’ as Owl or Rabbit, but Tigger figures out the exact point he should hit the boulder to make it move, he frisbees records so they land exactly on the pin, he is the inventor of the Whoop-de-Dooper Loop-de-Looper Alley-Ooper Bounce, if the expertise and diagrams suggest anything. Tigger isn’t always a chaotic whirlwind, there are hidden depths of precision. The character is allowed fairly mature growth beyond face value.

Rabbit yelling at the others, who are determined to present themselves as the Tigger family of Tigger’s dreams, for not preparing for the winter by saying ‘At least I haven’t forgotten what’s REALLY important’ got a very loud laugh out of me because it’s such a Rabbit line.

Whenever the book transitions to a new scene, it’s fun to pause and see the story of the film being written out in Milne-esque prose. It even includes the Emphasis Capitalsation to specific Important Things. More on the book, I like Tigger arguing with the storyteller at the start and changing the direction of the story through sheer tiggerific chaotic energy.

The songs are wonderful in this. The decision to give Tigger both an upbeat number (‘The Wonderful Thing About Tiggers’) and a downbeat number (‘Someone Like Me’) is genius. I like that, for his sad song, it is mostly just guitar and piano compared to the fully orchestral theme to emphasize his loneliness. 

The songs that surrounded the film are great too. Kenny Loggins’ ‘Your Heart Will Lead You Home’ is one of those things that always gives me shivers from that rusty acoustic string reverb at the start. This is also the film that indirectly introduced me to ThirdEyeBlind’s ‘Semi-Charmed Life’ through the trailers of it.

CONCLUSION

The Tigger Movie will always hold a special place in my heart, and I am glad to have had the time to properly articulate how I feel about it. It is a film that I appreciate a lot more as an adult looking back, given its themes and the way the visuals capture them.

In some ways, in these uncertain times, I feel a bit like Tigger when he’s looking out with uncertainty over the horizon for more tiggers. It’s a lonely and uncertain visual as he looked out for What Comes Next.

And even with this movie acting as a blanket against the coldness of the real world, the moral of facing whatever’s next by protecting those who are your family, whether that’s the family you’re born into or the one you choose, will always be appropriate.

[incorrect-doctorwho]

more on my codeswitching headcanon because legit most of my classes are linguistics based. So like, when a language comes into contact with another language, both of those languages naturally change over time. Since the tardis translation keeps most of the gallifreyan from being heard by the companions, it’s really only the doctor’s personal idiolect (a personal dialect at least a little unique to the speaker) that changes due to contact with english so much. (1/2)

(2/2) so basically when they DO end up having someone to speak pure gallifreyan to (like the master/missy, who, having kept from mingling their idiolect too much due to spending most of their time away from gallifrey w/o their memories, and who generally looks down on humans so wouldn’t pick up too many language quirks), they’re like “wtf i can’t understand half of the shit you’re saying) because the doctor has basically made their own personal gallifreyan/english slang dialect. 

…   

By this logic, can you imagine what an absolute MESS the Doctor’s Gallifreyan must be? Because not only has their idiolect been influenced primarily by the English language for like…a couple thousand years, it’s been transformed by all the regional dialects/personal idiolects of the companions, AND by a couple thousand years worth of changing slang.

But I don’t know much about the canon of the TARDIS translation matrix - does it work on Time Lords communicating with each other? Because if it applies when the Doctor address someone in Gallifreyan, then the TARDIS would just tweak his weird slang to something that made sense. 🤔

[channelnewswire-blog]

When will New Zealand fiction overcome itself?

An essay by author Kirsty Gunn on the insistence of New Zealand fiction to keep harping on about problems of nationwide identity, 'embeded in a rictus of recognized figures and tropes'.

A long time ago now, I wrote an unique about a kid growing up, who likes the sea, enjoys to browse, and who has a day in the middle of summer season when the sea appears to wish to show something to him. That story was soaked in the New Zealand of my past-- with memories of a specific beach, one specific summer season-- it was pure fiction, pure made up stuff of sand and salt and shadows.The novel won

a prize in Scotland-- and, it's real, there were parts of Scotland in the book. My children were little women at the time it was composed and we spent many weekends at a beach about an hour's drive out of Edinburgh where we were based then. I also understood of the surfing scene up in the far north where my sister lives, where the kids browse in wetsuits all year round such is the permeating cold of the cold north sea. So Scotland, yes, remained in the story, for sure, it makes up a huge part of my imagination always.In basic

, however, it was the Wairarapa beaches of Castlepoint and Riversdale that constituted the landscape of that book-- so that it was New Zealand, most likely, that rose clear off its pages to many readers. At the end of the prize event-- I 'd made my speech, I 'd thanked the judges, the celebration was about to begin-- a woman came up to me and stated, "What's an unique like your's doing winning Scottish Book of the Year?"

She was standing actually close, smiling, however not smiling. "It's not a Scottish book at all," she went on. "I do not know what it is, however it's not Scottish."

At the exact same reward ceremony, the late Gavin Wallace, the literature director of Creative Scotland (for Scotland had followed New Zealand's lead by the early 21st century and was no longer The Scottish Arts Council but Creative Scotland-- with all the comparable entailments those modifications brought to both financing bodies) had actually spoken about an "International Scottish Literature", a means of considering how the culture of a nation might be specified as much by all that it gives it, all that is beyond its coasts, as it speaks of its own indigenous colours and tastes and histories.Gavin Wallace was

a motivating and erudite spokesman for such a literature. His unfortunate death in 2013 seemed then, and today, to mark a change in the way Scotland views her novels and narratives and plays. It was Gavin Wallace who introduced a funding stream that would enable books to be translated out of and into the nation-- an intelligent, generous reciprocity of interests that might only broaden and deepen our understanding of Scottish letters. That stream has actually been dammed and now is dry. The literature bursaries that he helped establish are gone-- literature must now take on film and the music company as far as financing by means of Creative Scotland is concerned-- and any books or plays or poems that are made it possible for by grants and awards must be shown to have "advantage", as is specified in the manifesto produced by Creative Scotland in line with ever brand-new directives coming out of The Scottish National Celebration with its targeted, politicised interest in Scottish culture and ideas.Everything needs to be Scottish, for Scotland, about Scotland, and with everyone in Scotland in mind. Noise familiar? It's familiar to me.Familiar due to the fact that

when I think about growing up in New Zealand in the 1970s it was for these type of factors precisely that I wished to leave. Reasons that were to do more with politics, as I saw it, than literature. All those unrelentingly New Zealand very male type of men writing about the land of livestock farms and slaughter, of willing ladies and flagons of beer ... All those endless tales about what it was to be a New Zealander, about how we spoke or might speak, and how we ought to speak if we were to be real to ourselves, if we were to discover our way ... It had to do with nation-building, to my mind, this type of activity, not the imagination; it was pushing away, to state the least.At my girls'school we checked out Mansfield and Janet Frame and Fleur Adcock and Marilynne Duckworth by method of a remedy-- however the flavour of the country was strong. Frank Sargeson and Dan Davin and all who followed had actually developed its tone. Sam Hunt was on the increase in his singlet and with his bottle of red; the tones of Barry Crump had well and genuinely eclipsed the figure and work of his advanced, London domiciled ex-wife-- she barely counted as a New Zealand writer, as I seem to bear in mind; there was the shape of her absence in discussions and media of the time. Even studying American poetry with the urbane Bill Manhire could not rather make me think there was a place for anyone who didn't have the kind of named-town, idiolectic particularity, an "authenticity"( the speech marks are my own but the word was everyone's) that was being put about by method of genuine writing, the honest to goodness New Zealand stuff that would get released. I would send out off my little brief stories to the Listener and Landfall and the rejection notes would return telling me that what I 'd sent wasn't what they were after at all. I even have among them somewhere: A handwritten message on that thrilling Landfall stationery they had at that time stating" It's good, this, but it's not actually a New Zealand story, is it?"

By the time I pertained to the politics and feminism of Fiona Kidman and the gnarly indigenous poetics of Patricia Grace, by the time I had been introduced, by the late Frank MacKay, to the subtle classical and European inflected locales of Vincent O'Sullivan's work, that had actually followed in turn that very same teacher's modernist parsing of James K Baxter (who till then I had foolishly, shamefully, put among those other "blokes") it was too late. I 'd fled. I wished to live somewhere where I might compose whatever I desired in the design I wanted about anything I wanted.The truth that New

Zealand lakes and rivers and watercourses go through my pages, and have done since I initially made my fiction, doesn't change that concept. I could not stay somewhere which felt so willfully detached from other places, so constantly ... nationalist, really, is how it felt, in its top priorities, so fixed on a voice that needs to be permanently talking about what it was to live here, what that signified, and how it might look, identity-- as a sentence on the page-- and how those sentences might include up and sound.To me, all

that was exhausting. For New Zealand to be set on a job to specify itself to the world, as a nation that may exist quite apart from Britain ... On a mission to create itself as an independent area of letters and culture that could drift in glorious isolation in the Pacific sea, not responsing to anybody ... To my mind then-- though I might comprehend it now-- that sort of engagement might only be restricting, to the creativity, imaginative volition, and to the free-and-easy passage of believed itself. When I contemplate the nation that is Scotland in 2018, determining its own form of detachment from a royal Britain, the activities and sensibility follow almost to the letter the state of affairs disputed in New Zealand all those years ago: the literary program simulating the exact same figuring of identity politics, stating itself as an intellectual and cultural endeavour and finding benefit for that in public acknowledgment and award and financial support.I have actually expected

something in both Scotland and New Zealand that felt more like a synthesis, of attempted and tested methods with new techniques, an amalgamation of old tropes with bold, unexpected concepts that come from artists and thinkers and risk takers and that have nothing to do with past requirements that literature may be so responsible for clothes the country in its culture. For it seems to me that the writing I have actually followed from New Zealand since my own leaving, for the many part, from what I have actually seen, has not shifted much from those concerns established at that time when I was a girl.I myself have actually shifted; now on visits back to Unity Books purchasing up whatever I can that has about it the whiff of the pohutukawa tree, the tang of wool, that rings and clatters with the sounds, those cadences of house. My viewpoint has opened that method. On a recent visit to the UK Fiona Kidman gave me Lauris Edmonds' In White Ink, a selection of her life's work, and I read it through in one rapt session, sitting as I remained in my mind in a house above Asian Bay in Wellington with the wind rumbling through the macrocarpas, and the harbour water listed below me dark and large. I can't get enough of Dan Davin and Frank Sargeson now.Yet an evaluation of Vincent O'Sullivan's most current book, All This By Chance, in this year's winter season issue of New Zealand Books is proof of the fact that though I have actually changed, literary politics in New Zealand have not. I'm promoting books, instead of making a case for the poetry of, state, the worldwide phenomena that has actually flown into view by way of young women like Hera Lindsay Bird. Novels are what I understand. And from those I read, and in the publications whose evaluations I follow, and the discussions I have with authors and scholars and critics and literature enthusiasts in New Zealand, it appears all too clear to me that old practices die hard.The chap

may no longer be ranging through the pages of the stories everyone is talking about now (although he is an existence, I do note) however the old cultural identity problem is still out there-- in Polynesian and Māori garb, or in feminist and gender ethics clobber, possibly-- writ large. In a recent review of The Migrant Misconception: New Zealand Writers and the Colonial World by Helen Bones, Simon Hay discussed the need to resolve power structures within New Zealand that would reduce particular sort of social groups, sensibilities, in any introduction of the literature. "If Bones were to swap 'New Zealand culture' for 'bourgeois, white inhabitant New Zealand culture'... I think I would basically concur with her," he wrote. He's referring to a specific period in New Zealand letters, however the belief is up to date. Keep coming to grips with those problems to do with identity and self and for goodness' sake, both book and review are stating: Get the identity right!

Frank Sargeson, Dan Davin, Barry Crump, Sam Hunt

It's the kind of sensibility that is expressed in the evaluation of O'Sullivan's novel, that, in one sweeping, dismissive reading marked down an universe that had actually been carefully put together. Here was a New Zealand that existed as a location both in the imagination of a North London chemist, all sunlight and beaches, and the reality for a family who find themselves split apart and darkened by the atrocities of a past that can barely be articulated. "Yet the words 'Jew' or 'Holocaust' are almost absolutely missing," composed reviewer Ann Beagehole, as though all imaginative product, and ethical and social and moral and spiritual, need to show itself plainly on the tin. What kind of New Zealand story is this, her review appears to recommend, to describe a history that attempts not speak its name?Casting my eyes over the latest wave of modern books-- on both sides of the hemisphere, mind you-- this sort of thinking appears to prevail. The hesitancies of art have been silenced in favour of promoting sure results. Where are the spaces, the occlusions? The locations for reticence, for suggestion? Where is the poetry and poetics in the kind of story that must emerge on the printed page as a 100 %variation of this method of believing or that? The novels that aren't set in a rictus of known figures and tropes? I'm barely stating that Scottish and New Zealand authors are lacking in verve and colour. Only that those down-at-heel outsiders that were once so fresh in the novels of James Kelman have actually now staled into numerous replicas regarding render the story of marginalised metropolitan lives redundant. In the same way that the inheritors of New Zealand's own kind of dirty realism have actually hardened their art into self mindful tales of people like us, like us, like us, over and over, set on limitless repeat.O'Sullivan is one of numerous writers in the country who has constantly withstood such simple compartmentalising, naturally, to the advantage of all who like books and think in literature's power to alter and enlarge our lives. However arts agendas all over the world are simply that-- programs-- and they are powerful. My own thinking has taken me just recently towards research being undertaken at Oxford around the concern of literary credibility-- how a lot of our so-called works of imagination and/or textual and linguistic originality are in fact-- consisting of for a lot of the reasons I have actually detailed here-- variations of a state sponsored programme of letters.It leaves the imagination gasping for air, all this. For in ticking the boxes and showing ourselves to be taking part in what are considered the important arguments of the day we lose raw idea. Trait. Special, and monstrosity.

We lose the lovely wastes of exploration and tentativeness and the topics and figures that may take their location within it, feral and numerous and new.Not everything has to do with the familiar. Unusual animals walk, and are books. We need to keep in mind that culture is protean as much as it is an expression of some set status quo. Let the other locations sound, and silence, sometimes, resonate. Let creativity reveal us what to write, open to fictions that may be as sweet and unforeseen as those revealed by my Wairarapa kid finding himself cleaned up in a marquee at the Edinburgh festival. Worldwide we're occupying now, scarier than ever, to keep repeating what we already understand does not appear to be moving us forward, so may we not instead permit ourselves to be released into a sea of the mind?As the movie writer and public intellectual Michael Wood composed recently, resolving the type of art that is the opposite of certainty, that confuses us and makes us alert, "forms talk to our bewilderment, to everything we can not master. They may recommend too that mastery is not precisely what we need."The Spinoff Review of Books is happily given you by Unity Books.

[beckydramablog]

made in Dagenham textual analysis Q1-35.

Made in Dagenham textual analysis

1.) which genre does the piece fit in to?

Made in Dagenham is classed as a Musical, this is the definition of a musical “a play or film in which singing and dancing play an essential part. Musicals developed from light opera in the early 20th century.” In made in Dagenham There are 17 main numbers which involve large amounts of singing and some dancing, these help to tell the story. Making it a musical.

2.) Where is the piece set?

The musical is set in the working class area of Dagenham, a suburban area of East London. It Is set at mainly the Ford factory where most of the areas inhabitants work. It also mainly focuses on the womens sewing department of the factory.

3.) What is the significance of the location?

The location is significant to the story as Dagenham is a predominantly working class area, so the women have to work to contribute to their families a well as most of them being full time mothers as well. Showing a working class population of women shows their strength. which is the message of the story.

4.) When is the piece set?

The musical is set in 1968.

5.) Are there any any specific references to the day, seasons or year?

In the song ‘Busy Women’ it doesn’t specify a season, but eddie refers to it being Tuesday but thinks it maybe pancake day, in 1968 pancake fell on the 7th of February, this suggests it may be in early spring as that’s traditionally when pancake day occurs. but the song ‘storm clouds’ at the start of act two its describing the pathetic falicy as the rain allegorically describes the mood of the number. The fact of the rain could suggest ‘April showers’. Although in the song pay day, its saying that the girls have received their pay, but this means that between the song ‘pay day and the scene in which the girls get their strike pay a month must have passed.

Also the fact that Harold wilson is prime minister at the same time Barbra castle was Secretary of State for Education and Employment productivity describes the year to be between 1968-1970. also  Eddie says in scene 6 just after pay day that “Millwall’s last season in Division 3 South, so that’s 1958. I been married about ten years.” Which indicates that the Musical is set 1968.

however i have found contradictory research that in the actually historical records, the trike occurs in June, but the text implies it occurs in late April as that’s when the Eastbourne meeting for the TUC occurred.

6.) How much time passes?

The musical starts on a Tuesday as in ‘Busy women’ Eddie states he day is Tuesday. The ford women walked out on strike on June 7 1968, as the 7th was a Friday, then the previous Tuesday discussed in ‘busy women must be the 4th of June 1968. The strike lasted for three weeks taking the date to june 28th after the TUC conference in Eastborne was held an earned them for an equal pay amendment which was finalised in 1970. So in total the duration of the musical spreads over 24 days.

7.) How is the passage of time represented?

The passage of time is represented in the emphasis of specific days and the emotion of each day, for example, the song ‘pay day’ describes the end of another working month for the factories workers and the relief and element of hope and happiness as they actually get some enjoyment besides work and looking after their families. There is also a scene where the women are given strike pay, this shows that a month has passed within the story, it also shows the ‘change in the time’, from a time f fun and menial purpose, to a time of struggle but also of importance.

8.) How wealthy are the characters?

The characters Lisa , Hopkins, Babara castle, Harold Wilson, the Aids, and tooley are all highly wealthy characters as they all work in politics or are married to politicians.

The factory workers such as Sid, Monty, Bill, Connie, Rita, Clare, Cass, Sandra, Emma, Tracy, Jo, Rachel and Beryl are all lower working class characters, as because they work in a factory their pay grade is b which is classed as un-skilled which means that they are only payed the minimum wage, also the girls only get a fraction of what the men get, so their monthly income is even less.

9.) Is there a hierarchy?

This is a basic diagram I made of what i believe to be the heighrachy in the musical.

I have described the relationship between the characters like this because I feel Tooley is the highest in the hierarchy because he has all the say in who gets to keep their jobs and who gets paid, he creates this control with his violent use of language e.g. ‘mate, ill blow you out of my ass!’. This is an aggressive and intimidating choice of plosive lexis which helps to control his employees by using fear.

I have listed that my character of Clare is lower down in the hierarchy because both beryl Rita and Connie have all told Clare off for something and scolded her in a way that suggests them being of a higher authority. For example Connie dismisses Clare’s offer to assist her to the meeting saying ‘it won’t work’ this is a very authoritive statement, as it’s short and concise and doesn’t ask her opinion, but declares the statement, because she’s got more power over the situation than clare does.

 10.) How does their wealth or lack of it affect their characters?

Wealth and status affects the hardship each character has faced, so the hardships faced by the lower paid and lower classed women factory workers will be hardships such as poverty, poor health and working conditions. So as a result their characters/ personalities have developed to withstand these hardships, e.g. they are more comfortable with the idea of hard labour, working hard and putting u with lower standards of living. The factory wrkers also affects their level of education that they have recieved, for example none of the ladies i the factory went to college because they couln’t afford to as the were expected to get a job and contribute to the household income. this therefor means that their use of language uses only basic vocabulary mixed with idiolects of where they were raised. so for Dagenham raised factory workers, they use phrases such as “’kinell!” to make up for more educated or eloquent phrases. This is shown in the scene between Rita and Mr Buckton, Rita asks ‘Ergo? is that Latin?’. This shows her lack of education and there for, lack of wealth.

The higher classed characters in the story are used to working using their intellect and education rather than with their labour and skill. This means that their characters have adapted to fit their expected role within society. Hardships someone of that class and wealth would be more social or political e.g. Lisa Hopkins is emotionally isolated and ornamented by her husband. Hopkins earns enough money that, it is seen as unnecessary for Lisa to work or raise her own child, so they send their child to boarding school and all Lisa doe is serve Hopkins as a doting wife with nothing more to do other than pick out nice dresses. This adapts her character, as she has become bitter by her situation. Due to her education, intellect and wealth, she puts across her views very eloquently and concisely e.g. ‘I thought Ford was merely in the habit of shooting strikers’ . This explains her complete disdain for the situation herself and society is in, but rather than go on, she intelligently puts it into one sentence. This is largely due to her wealth and education.

11.  What are the social environments of the characters like?

The factory workers social environment is very strongly social, as they all perform manual labour working together in the same space all day, so they all interact with each other and have all developed a strong bond. They all go out to celebrate one another as their relationships are all very informal. This is shown in the song ‘pay day’.

Harold and Barbara’s social environment is the houses of parliament, in which the workers all work in separate offices and get on with their jobs separately, so the environment is much more formal.

12.  Are their differences in the social backgrounds and current environments?

For the factory workers there aren’t any differences as they were all raised in Dagenham and went straight to working in the factory, and so are in pretty much the same environment, apart from Cass, who is used to the poverty and lower classes of Jamaica and so is a lot more serious about working hard and earning her own way of living as she has had to work really hard to be given the job in the first place.

Barbara was raised in Chesterfield, which is a predominantly working class area, so to move to London to become an MP will be a huge change in environments, as London earns a lot more money than working class areas such as chesterfield or Dagenham.

13.  How will this affect how the characters will interact with one another?

This affects how Barbara interacts with the women factory workers, as she came from an area similar to what the girls have come from, so she understands their points of view and what they want out of the strike. So for example, in the scene after ‘Cortina’, Barbara and Rita converse. In this scene Barbara asks ‘would you like a lift? That my Rolls Royce.’ To which Rita replies with ‘no its not, it’s my car, I paid for it with my taxes.’ Barbara is very honest and down to earth due to her upbringing, so as oppose to getting offended she responds with ‘You’re right, it is. Can I have a lift?’. This shows how much she understands how rita and the other ford women think.

14.  Are any of the characters influenced by events/beliefs?

Sandra gets offered a promotion contract with the marketing team for ford to be a model for the launch of the 1500-e Cortina, this event influences her to quit the strike and become a spokes girl. This therefore influences fall out/argument with Rita at the end of the song ‘cortina’.

One of the main influencing events within the musical is the re evaluation of the women’s pay grade, this triggers all of the women to feel betrayed by the men and as a result they want to change their situation.

Lisa Hopkins is influenced by her knowlagde of Fords history, this includes the michignan 1932 strike disaster.

15.  What effect does this have on the way the characters behave?

Sandra changing to promotions work influences the way that the women treat her in the scene where the women have arrived in London. For example she walks in and says ‘am I late?’ to which all the girls in unison reply ‘yes.’ This is very short and sharp as they all feel betrayed by Sandra leaving.

The re-evaluation of the pay grade causes the behaviour of the women to be very volatile and emotional as they feel betrayed and victimised. So they respond with comments that are disrespectful to the male management such as Beryl’s line to Monty ‘you want a paddle mate, I’ll fucking knit you one.’ This shows her complete aggression and disrespect for the character of Monty.

Lisa’s knowledge of the strike shooting of 1932 in Michigan causes her behaviour towards Tooley to be very abrasive and disgusted as she knows he represents Ford America and its history. She shows this in lines such as ‘I thought Ford was in the habit of simply shooting strikers.’ This sarcastic tone shows to Tooley that she dislikes him and what he represents as well as showing her knowledge of the subject, showing she is not to be fooled.

16.  What clues are there to the past lives of the characters?

In the scene in the Bernie Inn, Connie describes her past life, for example, she describes her love life to Rita ‘I was already married to the labour party, and what a lousy husband he turned out to be.’ This describes her long term commitment to the labour party and how she has never received any rewards from her efforts.                                                                                                   

17.  How will their past affect their futures?

Connie was affected by her past, because she was so devoted to the labour party that she never looked after herself, and as a result never took her cancer treatment seriously, so she died and never had a future. This is due to her past being filled with too much hard work trying to make the world a better place and not enough time taking care of herself and her physical health. ‘what is it? A headache?’ ‘yeah’ you lying?’ ‘yeah’, this shows her health deteriorating but her choosing to do nothing about it as she is committed to attending this meeting and presenting her speech in order to get equal pay.

18.  Are there any references to key events prior to the play?

There is a reference to the home game of 1958 in the scene after ‘payday’ Eddie is asked how long he has been married, and he uses this date in history to measure how long himself and Rita have been married.

There is a reference to The Michigan shooting and hunger strike of 1932 made by Lisa Hopkins in ‘Storm clouds’ ‘I thought Ford was in the habit of simply shooting strikers’ ‘michingan 32 is history’.  

19.  Do any of the characters carry scars or memories from past events?

20.  How does this affect them now?

Lisa describes fords history with strikers in storm clouds with president Tooley ‘Michigan ‘32 is history’ in which Lisa replies with ‘five strikers dead and sixty chained to their hospital beds with shotgun wounds’. I made the link that Connie would have been a mature teen when this occurred and so she remembers the Michigan incident of 1932, here is an article I found describing the tragic events http://www.workers.org/2009/us/ford_hunger_march_0402/. As a result, for thirty years she was scared of holding a strike, for fear of what could happen to them. It’s also why she’s so passionate about trying to put across her views and is savvier about understanding her rights. For example, in ‘pay day’ Connie doesn’t join in with the fun because she has to ‘finish this speech’. Also, in the scene in the Bernie inn, she admits to never getting with Monty because she was ‘already married to the labour party, and what a lousy husband he turned out to be’. This describes how mistreated she has been for her beliefs, this affects how she treats Rita, as she is always very serious and tries to inspire Rita ‘nothing changes if it isn’t challenged’ as she is constantly trying to raise the issues and themes of equality but is ignored by the men ‘I was out voted by the men’, and so tries to get Rita to stand with her.

 21.  Are there conflicts of tension between what the characters want?

Yes, at the start of the show, Rita goes to the TUC meeting to get C grade back, but Connie wants equal pay ‘this don’t just have to be about C grade’ ‘I only came to get C grade back’. This shows the conflicting interests.

Sandra wants a career in modelling, no matter whether the pay is equal pay or not, where as Rita wants to stay in her job but with equal pay. These conflicts are shown in the scene after ‘Cortina’ where Rita says ‘it’s about equal pay’ after which Sandra replies with ‘even if we get equal pay, it’ll still be a shit job, only a shit job with equal pay’.

22.  Do the main characters want to change their situations?

Clare wants to change her situation, by working overtime enough so that she can save enough money by for a flat and a wedding for her and ken, so she can live with the man she loves despite her low income ‘yeah I got two hours of – overtime – tonight’ ‘what you saving up for?’ ‘ a – deposit, on a – flat’.

Other main characters such as Rita, Connie, Barbara, Harold, Beryl, Sandra and Lisa all want to change their situations at the start of the musical.

23.  Is there a difference in what the characters say they will do and actually do?

Clare says she is going to tell the manegment what she thinks, this is shown in the number ‘wossaname’. However, she meets Barbara Castle in the scene leading up to the number ‘ideal world’, but spends a lot of the time silent, other than a few remarks which imply that she doesn’t understand the conversation ‘what was all that about eating elephants’.

President Tooley says he will ‘move to Belgium’ if the strike isn’t broken, however the women achieve equal pay and yet there is no evidence of him or ford transferring to Belgium.

24.  How does morality or upbringings affect the characters actions?

The upbringing of the characters affects mainly their re-actions, for example clare hears Barbara say ‘mastication’ and giggles with a smutty undertone, indicating her level of education due to a lower class upbringing. This therefor affects her reactions to the world around her.

Barbara was raised In a lower class compared to most politicians at the time, and as a result still maintained her down to earth, left wing morals, these affect her actions, for example she invites Rita and some of the working class strikers to sit in her office and talk about the situation. Other higher class politicians might not have wanted to talk to working lower class women. Barbara’s morality also shows in the way she treats Rita and the other strikers, ‘I’m gonna do something unheard of for a politician, I’m not going to lie to you’. This shows her understanding of what the lower classes think of politicians, the source of which comes from her upbringing.

25.  Are there direct references to the characters appearances?

There are a few references to the colour of Barbara castle’s hair within the comical line ‘fiery, like her hair’, this describes her red hair to be the colour of fire as well as adding comedy to her character.

Another link I have made through studying the text is that in a scene within the number ‘storm clouds’, Hopkins makes the comment ‘it’s a swiss dish, like lisa.’. Even though Lisa denies this fact, the reference could have been made as a result of her appearance i.e. she appears of swiss origin. When I looked up a swiss appearance, it came up with pale skin, blue eyes and fair hair. This gives an indication to Lisa’s appearance.

26.  Are there any connections between how a character looks and behaves?

The previous reference to barbara’s appearance ‘fiery, like her hair.’ Is also a description of Barbara’s personality, in that it is ‘fiery’ i.e short tempered and brave and at times rash. This is also a common stereotype that people with red or ginger hair are more likely to have short tempers and stronger emotions.

27.  What is the significance of the title? (Metaphoric or literal)

‘made in dagenham’ could be a reference to the trade of the workers who live in Dagenham as they ‘make’ cars for a living. It could also mean that a significant moment in history was ‘made in dagenham’.

In a more literal sense, it could refer to the majority of main characters within the musical were created ‘in dagenham.’

28.  Are there any key lines or speeches that summarise or capture the mood of the play?

At the end of the song ‘stand up’ Barbara Castle gives a speech

This summarises the amazing progress that the characters have made to change history, this creates an atmosphere which is inspirational and full of pride.

Throughout the musical there a few key lines within the larger musical numbers which encapsulate what the characters are thinking and feeling. For example, ‘stand up’ is the main line within the number of the same name. By repeating the same line, it allows for interpretation, so although the literal meaning of the line is asking the men to stand up to vote for the equal pay amendment, the metaphorical meaning could be to stand up for yourself. This repetition is effective as it creates an atmosphere of pride and inspiration.

29.  What is the main plot and how does it develop?

The women Ford factory workers get re graded to an unskilled grade which pays a lot less, as a result they register a formal grievance, and Rita and Connie attend a meeting with the TUC in which it becomes apparent that it’s about getting equal pay. After coming out of the meeting Rita decides that they need to hold a strike in order to achieve equal pay. They strike for three weeks in which they are made poor by strike pay, the Ford factory is closed down which means 3,000 of the men get fired. The women strikers meet with Barbara castle who offers them 92% percent of the mens pay, but Rita turns it down. The ford Dagenham work force then attends a TUC conference in Eastborne, In which Rita gives a speech which convinces the men to agree to the equal pay amendment. This then develops to the women workers of Ford Dagenham getting equal pay.

 30.  Is there a sub plot?

There are a few sub plots within the musical:

Barbara and harolds – PM Harold Wilson has gotten britain into severe debt after owing large amounts of money from the second world war, also the musical is set at a period of severe industrial unrest, in which masses of strikes are causing the trade figures to suffer. In order to find a solution to the situation, he hires Barbara Castle (who at the time is head secretary for transport) to be the secretary for unemployment. Barbara then seeks to ban the strikes, but is denied the order by Harold. Barbara then meets Rita by accident and arranges a meeting with the other girls from the factory in which she offers a deal of 92% men’s pay in exchange for their return to work. Rita also denies this request, Barbara admires this and sends her best wishes to the women with hopes for their success.

Rita and Eddie – husband and wife, their storyline is based on how the marriage copes with rita being on strike. Eddie leaves rita half way through act 2 and takes the kids because he feels so neglected by his wife, he then makes it up to her when he comes to see her perform her speech to a large TUC audience.

Lisa, rita and mr Buckton – Rita and lisa’s sons are both getting caned at school by the latin teacher mr buckton, so Lisa influences rita to sign a petition to fire mr buckton for abuse to students. This is successful and mr buckton is forced to resign. This event happens at a time in the musical that it shows rita what a difference she can make if she stands up for what she believes in. making it a key subplot in the character development of Rita.

Hopkins and tooley - Throughout the musical Hopkins and tooley plan to try and bust this strike by using unethical tactics which will break the womens solidarity, so they originally they offer sandra promotions work, which she accepts. But after she walks off on the job due to persuasion by her colleagues, they shut down the assembly line and fire 3,000 of the men, as they know that these are the husbands of the women strikers and this will divide the working class solidarity that is keeping the strike going. But Rita takes the strike to the TUC conference in Eastborne, this means that Equal pay is given to women working at Ford UK. 

 31.  How can the shape of the play be best described – a story? Episodes? A journey? As a diagram or map?

See appendix one.  

32.   Which scenes are the most important? Why?

In my opinion the three most important scenes are:

The scene before ‘age old story’ in the Burnie Inn – This is a crucial scene because this is where Connie makes Rita realise what the meeting is really about, Connie also makes Rita realise why it is important for women to have equal pay, that it isn’t just her pay, but Sharon’s pay and her future. I feel this is a crucial scene as this is when Rita is inspired to change her situation.

Stand up speech – This falls at the end of the musical, when Rita is so utterly desperate for this whole situation to be resolved, she has lost her husband her kids, her job and Connie has passed away before seeing her dream through of presenting the speech at the TUC conference. So her speech in this is very heartfelt and desperate, this has a huge impact on the story as it makes the men vote for the equal pay amendment. This speech resolves most of the issues throughout the musical.

The meeting in front of the TUC management in the Burnie Inn – This is the scene in which a lot of Rita’s character development happens, as we see her go from being silent when asked as a submissive subdominant female, to standing up for herself, speaking her point across eloquently and effectively to the managers of the TUC. This is a very important scene as for the first time Rita finds her voice and gains a little bit of confidence in what she believes is right.

33.   Which scene is the least important? Why?

The least important scene in my opinion is the first scene between Lisa and Thomas Hopkins, they are sat in their kitchen discussing the food they are eating and their relationship. So although this scene gives a background to the two characters involved, it is the least important as none of the actions performed influence the rest of the plot.

 34.   How important to the piece is the set/lighting/costume/props/sound?

The set is really important as there are a very large amount of different settings in which the scenes and songs are held, so in order to show the separate locations described, a detailed yet effective set is needed to fully describe the transitions in location. For example, the trainsition between pay day and I’m sorry I love you is very fast and the location changes from being inside a pub to on a park bench, the only way to effectively show this to the audience is by having an effeicient set that could smoothly transition between one setting to another.

The sound is crucial for a smooth production of this as it is a musical, so a lot of the storyline is told through singing to backing music, this music helps the performer to keep the vocals on the correct melody and key, the backing sound also helps the performers on stage to pitch the correct harmony lines in order to create a more accurate and in depth vocal sound.

Props is important in numbers such as busy women, as not having a hair brush to brush Sharon’s hair within the number would look like mime and would look highly staged and take away the illusion of reality.

35.   What is the climax of the play? Are issues resolved at the end? How much direction is given by the playwright in terms of stage directions?

The physical climax of the musical is in the lines just before’ Everyone out, as this is when Rita makes the executive decision to strike for equal pay. ‘right, we’re having a vote’ ‘what are we voting for?’ ‘A strike’. This is the physical climax of the musical because although the emotional journey of the characters has not yet peaked, the physical journey has.

The emotional climax of the musical occurs within the end of storm clouds, when Connie is rushed into hospital, and the lines that follow. I believe the climax to be within the pause within the last chorus of storm clouds, as this is when all characters have taken a second to breath and to take in the emotions.

In the story, the issues of equal pay are resolved, as the men vote for the Equal pay amendment, however according to my research, the Equal pay act wasn’t signed until 1970, two years after the TUC conference. However, I do feel that the way ‘stand up’ is portrayed to the audience shows that the issues are resolved at the TUC conference in Eastbourne.

36.   Which character is the antagonist? (Opposes the main action)

President Tooley would be classed as the main antagonist, as he foremost opposes Rita and Connie’s action to get equal pay for women. This is shown in moments such as ripping up Connie’s speech before Rita publicly speaks in ‘stand up’ at the TUC conference in Eastbourne. He shows this also throughout the piece especially in the sexist ways he talks to Rita ‘don’t forget you’re just a little girl’. This shows him belittling and trying to have authority over rita as he opposes the main movement of womens rights and sexual equality. By referring to her a s a little girl, he is saying that she is less than he is.

Another antagonist is Stan, Eddie O’Grady’s friend at work. He constantly demotes the women’s main action for equality this is shown in payday when he says ‘you can’t have 3,000 hairy arsed blokes earning less than a woman.’ This statement is very assured as he says ‘you can’t’ this shows that the statement isn’t open for discussion, it also shows the general opinion of working class men, as he includes everyone in the statement ‘3,000 hairy arsed blokes.’

37.   Are their other protagonists or antagonists?

There are more than one protagonist in made in Dagenham as there are many strongly shown characters who support the main action, the main two I would say are Connie and Rita as they are the driving force behind the women’s equal pay movement. However, all of the main factory women e.g. Clare, beryl, Cass and Sandra are protagonist as they support the cause and join the strike in an act of solidarity, this is shown in the first four bars of music within ‘everybody out’ when all the girls vote for a strike, this shows each women empowering herself with the right to vote and the right to strike. I feel that Barbara castle and Barbara Castle are also protagonist character, as she wants what’s right for women and understand what political games are needed to be played in order to achieve women getting equal pay, this is shown in their individual actions towards Rita and the Girls which guides them on their journey to getting equal rights for women.

 38.   Do any of the characters change from one to the other?

The character of Eddie starts very neutral and mildly supportive like the rest of the male factory workers, but as Rita’s strike pay and his own unemployment puts a strain on family life Eddie becomes an antagonist, but opposing Rita’s choice to strike and Leaving with the kids, this action opposes the main action as it prevents Rita from believing in her own abilities and that her actions are right, which almost stops the strike all together. However, at the end of ‘stand up’ Eddie apologises to Rita and they make up as he is positively supporting her actions and is regretful of his prior actions making him a protagonist.

39.   How formal is the language used by the characters?

Lisa Hopkins uses quite formal language as it is very concise and uses more educated vocabulary e.g. ‘they are trying to break your solidarity.’ The word solidarity is a word that would only be known through education, this shows her class and wealth.

Beryl has very informal language as she fills in more intelligent words with abbreviations and swear words e.g. “‘kinell” this is an abbreviation for fucking hell, which is an expletive that indicates her short temper and lower class. She is even too informal in her use of language to say a full swear word, instead she is lazy with her speech and abbreviates it.

40.   What is the level of education of the characters?

As mentioned before, Lisa is over a higher class than beryl, which is shown by the use of their language.

Lisa has a first class honours degree in modern history as she shows with comments such as ‘did you know women in America have had equal pay since 1963?’. This shows advanced knowledge of modern history. This is due to her higher level of education.

The education of most of the factory girls is very minimal, as most of them left school at fourteen to work in the factory and support their families. This meant that they didn’t finish their education, or get any significant qualifications. However, they had to take three tests in order to be allowed to work at Ford; therefore all of them must have a basic level of intelligence in order to pass the tests. This is evidence in quotes such as ‘I been at this game, since I was 14’ and ‘yeah we had to take 3 tests to get in here!’

40.   Do the characters use certain phrases or words or ways of speaking?

Barbara – chesterfield/ northern accent + Harold Huddersfield

Musical phrases i.e. motifs

Beryl has a very distinctive way of speaking, as she uses a lot of expletives and Slang e.g. ‘kinell!’ this is due to her lower working class, this also adds to her character, as by understanding her language is so blunt we understand that her personality is also very rough and blunt, but also she is very vulgar so her using explete terms such as ‘you couldn’t find your arse with both hands.’ This is comical as well as effective at describing Beryl’s character to the audience.

41. How are the songs structured? (Monologue, dialogue, duologue, triologue, short sentences

etc)

 My character, Clare has a solo song which is called wossaname, this is structured as a monologue, as she is the only person speaking and she is describing her own thoughts and feelings. Throughout this song, Clare only speaks in short sentances, I believe this is due to her lower intelligence, as this means she struggle to form and eloquent or structured sentence. The song has two very repetitive verses, which is followed by a middle 8 starting from ‘life aint fair’ and then leads in to the schorus on ‘ooja ooja!’. The end of the song has the same rhythm and melody as the first to verses but is slightly slower as well as being the outro. The song ends with Clare saying ‘do I make myself clear?’ and her sitting proudly back down on her seat.

 everbody out – scenes and chorus

42.   What kind of imagery is used?

In the song the storm clouds, the line ‘storm clouds on the horizon’ describe the appearance of the sky being dark and cloudy, not only is this pathetic fallacy (describing the mood with the weather), but it also creates imagery of there being dark clouds in the sky, also the repeating pedal note that is at the front of the music in the first eight bars gives the feeling of the sound of raindrops, further adding to the illusion of a stormy day.

 43.   What is the objective of each scene/unit? What is the super objective of the play?

The super objective of the musical is to tell the historical true story of the women who striked for equal pay and giving them the recognition that history denied them.

In my opinion there are three possible objectives for the scenes:

Scenes that describe a sub plot – these are scenes that only mildly affect the main plot as they are following the journey of certain characters in their own subplot e.g. scene 8, the school. This scene doesn’t affect what is going on in the story for equal pay, but its objective is to describe a separate story/sub plot to the audience.

Scenes that describe the main plot – just like there are scenes which purport to tell the sub plots, the a re likewise scenes whose objective is to describe the story and journey of the main plot. E.g. Scene 11, this scene describes the conflicting views between the men and women as to whether equal pay should be given to the women factory workers. This dispute and the content of this scene influences the main action and so there for is a scene that Is crucial to telling the story, such is its objective.

Scenes that describe and give background to the characters – Some of the scenes don’t have much effect on any story line, but their main objective is to show depth of the characters to the audience. For example scene 2 shows the character and background of each person as they enter the stage before the main story begins, this is crucial in getting the audience to connect with the characters created.

44.   What are the characters motivations and do they change in each scene?

45.   Does the play relate to any previous theatrical or written work?

46.   If so what are the links between them?