#but then afterward he becomes all aggressive and confrontational and much more menacing | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

xoruffitup · 5 years

Text

Burn This: The Oversized Review/Analysis

I sat down this afternoon to write out all of my thoughts about this play, given that they��ve become more complicated after each viewing, and here I am just finishing up some 6 hours later. :’) Clearly, this play is much more complex than it seems!

I’ve now been fortunate enough to watch Burn This three times, and each time I experience something new. A lot of the reviews have been lukewarm about the play itself and skeptical of how well it functions as a revival on a modern stage. This play is absolutely a product of its time, and the revival consciously places itself in the original 80s setting through the costumes and music. Strictly speaking, I would have to agree that in some ways, the play doesn’t age well. A lot of my reservations upon first viewing towards Pale’s character and the portrayed relationship with Anna stem from this cultural shift – A modern audience watching this play has a lot more sensitivities and a higher bar of scrutiny towards an irreverent, aggressive male character like Pale than in the time of its writing. Although I believe a lot of the slurs in the original play have been removed, the audience still always makes an audible reaction of discomfort when Pale slings the words “cunt,” “oriental,” and “fag.” And yet, the audience spends practically all the rest of their time laughing up a storm at his crazy diatribes and curse-laden rants. The play is still an absorbing pleasure to watch, and for all the nitpicking I and many others are doing towards Pale’s character, at the end of the day I would still praise this production and argue its merits, its lingering universal resonance, and the brilliance of its writing.

Since Pale’s relationship with Anna is the main drive of the story, the story would lose all appeal if Pale were found completely unlikable. And yet, the reviews that have questioned their chemistry do so only partially for this reason. For the most part, reviewers are raving about Adam – Finding his portrayal to be the disarming, shocking highlight of the show. Like Anna, for all that he makes us uncomfortable, we find ourselves wanting more of his biting honesty, his crude humor, and his commanding, live-wire presence. So what is the play’s challenge? Aside from unchangeable aspects such as cast chemistry (though personally, I thought Keri and Adam had plenty) – The challenge may be that a play like this, exhibiting an ill-advised, volatile relationship like this one, can’t simply exist unquestioned anymore. This type of explosive man, hesitant woman, and tempestuous passion is no longer a reality we accept for standard. And so, perhaps some audiences fail to find the play’s story compelling or authentic.

This play contains several dangerous ledges. In the three performances I’ve seen, these ledges have been crossed to various extents. Here are what I believe to be the main tensions within the play that challenge a modern audience, and which are handled by the cast delicately and differently in each show.

Is Pale the archetype of the hyper-masculine? Is he disrespectful, inconsiderate, or worst – predatory towards Anna?

Why, comparatively speaking, does Anna have such a small presence? Does this compromise the integrity of the play, when it’s intended to be her story?

Is this really a story about romance? Are we supposed to want Anna to want Pale? Is their story one of snowballing tragedy, or of consolation, connection, and artistic fulfillment?

Is Pale the destructive archetype of the hyper-masculine?

I’ll start with the first point, as this is really the most crucial. From a storytelling standpoint, Pale needs to be dangerous. He needs to embody primal chaos, and make the audience just as uncomfortable and conflicted as Anna. I’ve used this quote in a previous post, but bringing it back because it’s so perfectly apt: “Menacing, profane, dangerous and yet oddly sensitive, Pale is both terrifying and fascinating and, in the end, the one who brings to Anna the unsettling but compelling love that, despite her fears and doubts, she cannot turn away.”

Without this response to him, the play simply wouldn’t work. Pale’s entrance into the play needs to completely upend and throw into disarray everything that came before. In the twenty minutes or so before his entrance, the world of this play is a quiet, thoughtful, and mournful place. Anna has just returned from the terrible experience of Robbie’s funeral. She’s questioning her inspiration and future as a choreographer. Burton attempts to wax about his writing and the ultimate force of great love or “some megapassion.” It is tame and innocuous. Burton’s dialogues seem charming, even bordering silly in their grandiose, guileless pretension. Then enters Pale, who barrels through the door in an explosion of curses, energy, and authenticity. He’s not standing there trying to find the fumbling words to describe a “megapassion” – In all his hot mess pain, he is one. And to Anna, his overpowering, magnetic presence is both more than she can bear, and a blessed cover for her own pain and lack of direction.

For all his political incorrectness and bad manners, I do sincerely love what Pale represents. To me – in this play about the search for artistic authenticity and inspiration, he represents the depths to which an artist might perhaps need to dive into their own uncomfortable, ugly emotions in order to create something honest. It’s no surprise that it’s through meeting Pale that Anna is finally able to choreograph the dance piece that gives her closure for Robbie’s death. His presence is the only thing incendiary enough to be called true inspiration. While Anna begins the play adrift and helpless in the expanse of her grief after Robbie’s loss, with no way to process this terrible suffering that can find no place or redress in her every day life, Pale’s massive vitality is the only thing equally as powerful. By the end, it seems to ground Anna. His destabilizing presence makes her confront the type of chaotic, profound state of being Robbie’s loss thrust her into, and ironically, sharing that space with Pale eventually affords her the equanimity and resilience to process her grief and ultimately create something from it.

While Anna seems to want to run from her grief rather than face it, Pale is the opposite – He tortures himself by wallowing in it. By the end of the play, the two seem to have pulled each other to a middle ground between their opposite coping mechanisms. Finally, this might be a place where they can each move on with their lives. While Anna’s manner of physically comforting Pale is kind and familiar, his manner of helping her is a bit more unconventional – Though arguably equally effective, knowing Anna ends the play in a more centered and productive position than she began it in. After their relationship has dragged on a while and Anna begins trying to break it off, Pale says, “You know, you’re a much different person in the sack then you are standing up.” Wince. Here’s the insensitive guy complaining that she won’t just stop talking and continue the convenient hook-up arrangement. But then, as he often does, Pale throws us for a loop. He pauses, then adds with emphasis and a hint of challenge, “Which one’s the lie?”

This always seems to be one of the most powerful lines of the play. The audience usually makes an audible reaction, as with just a few words, Pale shifts from seeming self-centered, to being the only one who cares enough to challenge Anna for her own good. Because really, this is the crux of what has caused her such pain and debilitation since Robbie’s death. She’s been wearing a mask to try to cover the depth of the loss she truly feels. Like Pale says a moment later in this same scene, and another one of my favorite lines – “People walking down the street, don’t mean a thing they’re doing.” Similarly, when she tells Pale she wants him to leave because he frightens her, he calls out that she knows he’s not dangerous – she’s simply afraid of “feeling something.” Anna and her friends talk about their artistic endeavors and ambitions. They talk about Robbie’s death, sure, but none of them feel and act their grief the way Pale does. This isn’t to say that each character needs to run around wailing in order to be authentic, but Pale’s call-out here is what wakes Anna to the fact that she needs to marry these two disparate areas of herself – Her immense, debilitating grief, and her work as a dancer/choreographer. At the beginning of the play, Anna can neither advance her work as a choreographer, nor deal with her grief. But by the end – By realizing the artificiality in pretending that she was fine and life could go on, she is able to direct the immense passion and power of her grief towards both artistic and personal resolution.

Now, examining this relationship from the lens of gender, rather than artistic fulfillment and emotional authenticity, is a thornier task. The first time I saw this play, I was a bit uncomfortable with my initial impression of Pale as the type of man who doesn’t take ‘no’ for an answer – if he even asks the question at all. Originally, I didn’t like that he assumes his welcome with Anna and initially tries to blow past her misgivings about their relationship. (Although when she tells him in no uncertain terms that she doesn’t want to see him, he does listen to and respect her wishes.) However, in the more recent performances, I appreciated that the first time they become intimate happened a bit more slowly. In the first preview, Pale seemed to kiss her out of nowhere, and only afterwards did he assess her reaction. But now, this entire scene has become more tentative. He sits back and looks at her first, saying a deliberate line about how she’s making him “riled up.” He reaches for her slowly, and waits to see that she remains where she is before he kisses her. (In one performance, he spent a solid 10 seconds just stroking her hair back first.) He then sits back again, looking at her carefully and asking if she’s alright. I loved the scene a lot more this way. His slow, gentle advances were touching, and made it so much clearer just how sincerely Anna reciprocates.

The single most important and potentially uncomfortable question about Pale is whether he might be called a predator taking advantage of Anna’s grief. On paper, I can see the threat. But watching Adam on stage? The thought barely crossed my mind. After seeing how thoroughly and wretchedly he falls apart under the weight of his own grief – The kind of wailing and hiccupping, red-faced crying he does, it doesn’t seem possible that this man is anywhere near calculating. He doesn’t make any advances or comments about her body until the point where they’re seated on the couch together, and Anna has already initiated physical contact by comforting him as he weeps. Sure, on paper one could make the argument that he’s taking advantage of the situation, but with the slower, cautious way the scene is now played, it certainly doesn’t feel that way. Pale doesn’t seem to have any kind of seducing agenda. If he did, breaking down in ugly tears in front of the hot woman certainly wouldn’t help. Instead, their shared grief and discussion about Robbie gradually draws them closer – emotionally, then physically – until they both tumble into intimacy that’s both demanding and healing at the same time.

Looking at the character himself – Is he the archetype of an entitled, hyper-masculine, egotistical man? The type that has blessedly lost appeal as a romantic figure? On the surface, yes, he might seem it. Every other word out of his mouth is a curse. He starts a drunken fistfight with Anna’s boyfriend. He shows up at her place drunk, and is then hard to get rid of. He throws around curse words with Anna when they first meet. He blows from one destructive habit or emotion to the next, without any real thought for how those around him will be affected. He willfully drives Anna and Burton apart. He doesn’t think it worth mentioning to Anna before they sleep together that he’s still technically married. In terms of character traits and temperament – No, he’s not likeable.

Enter the insanely charismatic, improbably empathetic Adam Driver – Who manages to turn the character’s cursing habits into cause for uproarious laughter; Who turns the air silent and reverent when Pale’s character slows to 0 mph for the first time when he kisses Anna; and who plays the character with startlingly endearing moments. (Coyly covering his face with the sleeve of her robe after he interrupts Anna’s phone call with Burton? Kissing her forehead like 5 times when he hands her tea? Clutching her so tightly in the final scene, she is clearly all that matters to him anymore? MY HEART)

One of my favorite things about Adam’s portrayal of Kylo Ren is the complexity of gendered behavior he brings to the role, just as he does for this role. Even while Kylo is physically menacing and unpredictably violent, his eyes tremble with cracked vulnerability and even in still silence, his being radiates crushing conflict and abject pain. Adam plays Pale with the same nuance. Pale is loud, crude, and irreverent. He clearly spends no time thinking ahead about what is ‘correct’ or ‘polite’, he is simply a being of impulse and instinct. But because Adam plays him with such convincing immediacy, he comes off just as honest as he is unrefined. To me, this is Pale’s saving grace. After spending a half hour vacillating between yelling, cursing, screaming, and crying, it seems clear that he is someone moved by emotions and instincts greater than himself – Rather than a person who chose to be disrespectful or rude. The moments when he ingratiates himself in our and Anna’s hearts are when his gentle, tender moments with her are every bit as impactful as his loud, noisy meltdowns. And there is nothing aggressive or intimidating (“manly”) about the way he weeps in front of her. There is something refreshing and moving about such honesty; Such helplessness to hide or restrain the brunt of one’s pain from others. A simplistic gendered reading of their dynamic might accuse him of preying on her from the beginning; But a reading of Adam and Keri’s performance would struggle to find such a gendered binary. After all, Anna doesn’t cry in front of him once. He is the only one of the two of them to be reduced to misery in the other’s presence.

To be clear – This is not a matter of a character being “emotional” denoting the feminine, while loud yelling denotes the masculine. My response to the charge of Pale’s character being toxically hyper-masculine and predatory is simply that this is an ill-fitting characterization, given the assumptions that A) Being ‘predatory’ requires a certain amount of intent, cunning, and callousness – None of which could be attributed to the distraught, sentimental mess of Adam’s Pale who lives only in his immediate force of being; and B) The concept of hyper-masculine “macho”ness denotes a certain one-dimensional understanding of chauvinistic masculinity, which Adam’s Pale defies in its sometimes alarming complexity – Alarming precisely because his breakneck swings from a physicality of violence to one of broken helplessness fly in the face of the gendered expectations one might ascribe to a man of his stature.

(Wow, holy shit did I just write all that for only my first section? Jfc okay, promise I’ll start moving faster! But for the sake of comparison, my original conflicted thoughts about Adam’s Pale after the first preview performance are here.)

Why does Anna have such a lesser presence?

Examining this play from a feminist perspective requires acknowledging how much smaller Anna’s presence is compared to Pale’s. In their first scene together, there are literally stretches where Pale will rant and rave for solid minutes without Anna getting in a single line. No wonder Adam’s performance has dominated reviews. Keri really isn’t given much to work with.

I have two opposite responses to this problem. First – Perhaps the play simply isn’t written with a high regard for its female lead, and makes little effort to develop her character beyond her relationships with the men around her. The more I consider how the play functions, the more it seems to be the case that the men around Anna have all the important, witty dialogue as the ones who set the scenes and move the story along, while Anna is pulled along in their wake.

I realized upon later viewings that what initially seemed to be Burton’s pseudo-artistic ramblings in the first scene actually serve the purpose of establishing the play’s two main themes. The first theme – His idea to write a script about the wives of sailors out to sea, waiting for the men to return, introduces the idea of the search for some ultimate, profound form of love that sustains people through any manner of loss and suffering. (This is what Anna is searching for and what she ultimately finds in her feelings for Pale.) Okay, the very way this theme is introduced – women sitting idle, waiting for the men who are out doing the real work and having the real adventures – is lame. Second, we can’t even have the female character who’s actually trying to undertake this in her character arc narrating her own journey? Why is someone else laying it out for her? And to look at the story as a whole – Why is her fulfillment something she ultimately needs to receive through a man’s involvement? From the beginning, the fact that her resolution is tied to her connection to a man seems flawed.

The second theme is introduced from Burton and Larry’s discussion of the story of Senta and the Flying Dutchman. To make a long story short – Senta sacrifices herself in her great love for the Dutchman in order to “save him from perdition.” While Anna does participate in this conversation, she seems to remain unaware of how this meta dialogue is in fact reflecting her own underlying fear running through the whole play, as well as her greatest danger. The play vocally introduces at its beginning this idea of women sacrificing themselves on the altar of their great loves. (When Anna is retelling her experience at Robbie’s funeral, she indeed recalls how she felt she was expected to throw herself over his casket.) This could imply a number of interpretations. It could reflect Anna’s fear of loving someone again with the same intensity of her love for Robbie – And then suffering the same metaphorical ‘death’ she is experiencing at Robbie’s loss. Or, it could reflect the expectation of an imbalanced male-female relationship where the woman is expected to support and fulfill the man, while defining herself through him to the point of self-erasure. If we simply compare a word count of Pale’s lines against Anna’s lines, the second interpretation doesn’t seem completely far-fetched.

What I love about theatre is the great variability between what a script does and what actors can do with it. This very well could be a script that is completely disparaging to Anna, purposefully placing her in the path of a domineering man whose oversized personality smothers her to the point of losing both her grief and her personhood. However – that is not what Adam does with the script. That is not what this revival production seems to be trying to convey. There’s not much that can be done about the (small) number of lines Anna has; Just like there’s nothing to be done for the fact that she will unavoidably get a bit lost in Pale’s shadow, when he has these hilarious, ludicrous, show-stealing monologues and is played by an actor with such commanding stage presence as Adam.

Nonetheless – Even for all these misgivings, I have a defense for both why the script pays her less attention, and how the current production and Keri have done their best to move Anna more into the spotlight. Keri has an incredible portrayal of body language, and is often actively expressing her character’s experience even when she doesn’t have lines. For instance, when Pale first enters the apartment and spends the first ten minutes circling the room and bitching about parking, Keri keeps circling opposite from him. Her arms are crossed, and she keeps pointedly placing distance between them. When he moves towards her, she rotates away. Even though she speaks a lot less than him in this scene, her body language nonetheless clearly articulates when she begins to be moved by his suffering, and when she gradually stops distrusting him. By the time they’re sitting together on the couch and she’s embracing him as he weeps, she is physically open to him in a way she never is with any of the other characters. When she’s sitting with Burton on that same couch in other scenes, she shows in her stiff physicality that she does not feel as at ease with him, and does not trust him the same way. She always places herself opposite Burton, and keeps her legs folded between them and her torso often leaned away from him. While many reviewers said Keri’s acting seems to better fit the medium of television rather than theater, where small-scale nuance often gets lost, I found her acting through body language highly effective.

My other defense for why I’m not totally convinced of the sexism of the original material is that this really does seem to be Anna’s story. She is the character most often present, on stage for almost every scene. Yes, the main action of the story is Anna and Pale’s relationship, but the telling of that story stays more closely centered on Anna’s perspective. Even though Burton and Larry are the ones who articulate the play’s structural themes at the beginning, it is Anna’s experience and hardship at Robbie’s funeral that opens and frames the play. She is the character we get to know first. And following on that – perhaps the play is then meant to progress through her eyes, meaning the audience becomes her proxy, and hence why there might be fewer lines necessary to understand her experience.

What I mean by the audience becoming her proxy is that the play is framed in such a way that the audience’s experience watching the play closely mirrors Anna’s experience in the play. When Pale is being played by an actor that succeeds in making him empathetic to the audience, then the audience travels through the same progression as Anna in its evolving understanding of and connection to Pale’s character. The audience feels the same conflict of discomfort and attraction, the more time Anna spends with him. Anna doesn’t need lines to explain her misgivings about becoming involved with him – They’re already completely clear. And when Anna breaks off the relationship and Pale leaves – The audience feels much the same way Anna does and expresses to Larry: Relieved but “like shit.”

There is also the fact that although Anna is given less voice, her presence is, in a way, much stronger and put-together than Pale’s. Even though he is louder and more attention-grabbing, she is the one in control of their dynamic. She is the one usually looking after and comforting him, trying to manage him, and so long as their first kissing scene is played in the new, more tentative way where he waits for her response, she is the one defining the terms of their relationship. Though she connects with Pale because she is suffering just as much as he is, she is unquestionably the more stoic of them both, with a subtle inner strength she does not need Pale to bestow upon her - only to remind her of.

Is this a story of romance or disaster?

NOW finally – Is this really a story about romance? Or an explosive disaster doomed to fail? In my first post after seeing the first preview of the play, I described Anna and Pale as “star-crossed lovers” – in the proper, tragic sense.

(“Whatever is between them should not exist. Whatever is between them threatens them both. Whatever is between them is not long for this world, and doesn’t belong in it. (…) They are polar opposite people - Sharing no visible common interests and with temperaments that couldn’t be more opposite.”)

It’s certainly difficult to envision these two in a stable, long-term relationship. Most likely, they’ll continue on as they are – Finding their way to each other in explosive bursts, then attempting to disentangle before they’re drawn back together. A woman like Anna, sensible and talented, seems far too levelheaded to fall for a temperamental firebrand like Pale. So what attracts her to Pale in a way she isn’t attracted to Burton? Why does she find more fulfillment with him, when she finds no stability?

Pale both challenges and needs her in a way Burton does not. Burton comes from a rich kid background, who never really had to fight for anything and admits himself that he’s never really felt loss in his life. Anna and Burton work well in the sense of their lives and interests aligning together, but Burton never gives the impression of needing Anna in any true sense. Not the way Pale does – when he entreats her not to go when they’re sitting together on the couch, or when he comes to her in his most pathetic, broken state. She is the only one who knew Robbie deeply and can share Pale’s crushing sense of loss, and as such is the only one who can provide him the solace he so desperately needs. There is nothing Burton needs from Anna, or relies on her for with such urgency. As discussed in the first section, Pale also gives Anna something in return. It may not be what she knew she needed, but he forces her to confront the true brunt of her grief, and look at herself honestly rather than hiding from her pain. She shies away from this at first, and tries to avoid caring for someone again as deeply as she did for Robbie. (He accuses: “You’re afraid you’ll get interested. Afraid you’ll feel something.” She objects: “I feel, Pale!”) At this point in her life, this type of burgeoning attachment to someone new is not something she wants or feels equipped to deal with. She thinks she wants to end things with Pale and does so, but after he leaves, she’s faced with the rising realization of how much she doesn’t want him gone. Her following dialogue with Larry is some of the most intriguing: “I’m sick of the age we live in.” “What, you’d rather be pillaged and raped?” “I am being pillaged, and I am being raped!” Sensible, put-together, talented Anna has no place in her life and in her career for this type of affair. She has no patience for it, and is frustrated with herself for wanting it despite how much of a terrible idea it is, and how little she thinks she likes Pale as a person. She’s fighting her feelings for him, and she hates that they’re winning. But the fact remains – His need for her and the way he has bared himself to the soul has left its mark on her heart. No one else has ever been so honest with her. Just as it seemed to both pain and soothe her when she told Pale he reminded her of Robbie; It both fulfills and distresses her to grow closer to him. No matter how they get there, the urgency with which they fall into each other’s arms and cling to one another in the final scene is unquestionably one of the play’s most heartfelt and powerful moments. They may not be the type of couple that lasts forever, but this isn’t that kind of story. It is the story of two people attempting to navigate profound grief, and only through finding each other do they find their way free.

My last comment on this question is that I’ve had different impressions of the depth of their feelings for each other in different performances. In one performance (4/16), the cast seemed to be playing up the comedy so much that the two moments I had remembered as most touching and intimate between Pale and Anna became drowned out. The first was what Pale says to her between kisses, the first time they become intimate:

“Let’s just start up the engines real slow here … maybe go halfway to the city and stop for somethin’ to eat … You talk to me, okay? … You’re gonna find out there’s times … I’m a real good listener.”

This is nothing short of brilliantly written dialogue, because the first time I heard it, I didn’t even realize the sexual innuendo. In the first preview, the lines were delivered so gently and sincerely, there was no laughter at all. It was a moment where Pale seemed to be promising her that this was meaningful – That he wanted to be there for her in more ways than just the physical. Instead of a metaphor for sexual acts, it sounded like “Before we go all the way… I want you to know I’m here for you. What we’re starting is bigger than just this.” It was a palpable, tender moment of connection.

The second time I saw the performance was when the audience caught the metaphor and the moment became comic. I’m not sure what exactly Adam did differently (I think he was kissing her during the ellipses, rather than pulling back and saying the whole line in one heartfelt go), but the moment was completely different. Yes, it’s actually hilarious dialogue and brilliant because it can be delivered in such different ways, but I couldn’t help feeling that a central moment of emotional intimacy was lost.

The second moment is in the final scene, when they’re reunited for the first time in weeks. In the first preview, I think they were sitting together when Anna said in a helpless voice, “I don’t want this.” Pale looked at her and responded, “I don’t want it too.” The moment was mournful and touching, because the way they were looking at each other made it clearly inevitable that their personal wills would have no say in the matter. No matter how much they might not want this – no matter the fact that they both know they’re not good for each other – they know they’re being pulled together by forces greater than themselves.

In later performances, the blocking was changed so they’re saying these lines between kissing. This made the comments comedic rather than tragic, because obviously it’s hard to believe he “doesn’t want it too” when he’s enthusiastically kissing her back.

In my personal opinion, this shift towards the more comedic made the whole thing a little less impactful, since to me, the most compelling element of the play the first time was the beautifully tragic nature of that final scene. My friend was reduced to tears during it. The play is funnier now rather than bittersweet and Adam is uproariously hilarious, but I think what makes this play unique and most powerful is the fated/tragic nature of Anna and Pale’s relationship. Rather than a romping “oh yeah, they know it’s a bad idea but they’re falling into bed together anyway” – The beautiful writing and the exchanges between these two characters really can elevate the story to the level of the profound.

Well. Apparently I had much more to say about this play than I realized! I hope one or two people out there found themselves as interested by it and Adam and Keri’s performances as I did. Thank you kindly if you actually read through that entire rambling mess!! And please, if you have any thoughts at all about anything I wrote above or any other element of the play, I would really love to hear! :D

#Adam Driver #Burn This #Broadway #Keri Russell #Lanford Wilson #Burn This Broadway

95 notes · View notes

fourjokersandajudge · 3 years

Text

Impractical Jokers, Season 1, Episode 5 "Drawing a Blank"

Liveblogging observations/opinions:

Five episodes in...how’m I doing? :) I am really enjoying the journey.

CHALLENGE ONE: DISASTER DATES

The guys are on the streets of NYC posing as beat reporters. They have to interview strangers to give quotes to be used in news articles by asking questions that the other guys have written for them. If they refuse to ask the questions provided, they lose.

Murr’s turn - His first topic is laws regarding sex. He asks a group of three people if sexual predators should have to identify themselves to which all three answered in the affirmative. Then Murr adds “Well, I’m James Murray then.”

His second topic is space exploration. He approaches a young man and asks him “Do you have any interest in letting me explore Uranus?” LOL!!!! He can’t get through the question and therefore, takes the thumbs down.

Q’s turn - At first, Q struggles to find a willing participant. LOL @ the other guys making fun of the way he speaks. Eventually he gets a small group of people to give a quote. His topic is women’s health. He tries to asks the group “Do you think titty implants are healthy?” but he struggles to get the words out. The young man in the group grabs Q’s notepad and says that he will ask the question. The young man actually has to translate the question for the two young ladies as it appears that they don’t understand English. When the question is translated, the two girls laugh but don’t answer, appearing to not fully understand the questions. Q jumps in and tries to reiterate the question (really, he just keep repeating the word “titties”...but that’s neither here nor there. LOL) Eventually they say no...and Q gets the win.

Joe’s turn - Joe approaches a young man who agrees to participate. Joe’s topic is weather. He asks the young man, “When people say ‘it’s hot as balls’, how hot is the average ball?” The guy is confused a bit, so Joe tries to explain his question. The young man eventually answers “80 degrees”. LOL!!!!!!!! Sal and Q laugh heartily at the response.

A short montage is shown of Joe asking different questions of various people. I loved it when he tries to ask a couple of girls a question and the girls decline by saying that they didn’t speak English to which promptly points out “But you just said that in English!” HA HA! He finally gets a young lady to stop and answer “Do you think that it’s time for the subways to install toilets in the subway cars because I don’t want to sh*t my pants again?” The girl quickly answers “no”.

Sal’s turn - Sal’s first topic is prostitution in America. He asks a young lady nervously how much the average white male should have to pay for a handjob. Sal. The young lady considers the question, Sal starts to repeat it and the young lady’s mother walks up to them. Sal nervously says, “Oh hello mom...how are you?” Q tells Sal to ask the mother the question. Sal decides to no longer ask the question saying that he’s deciding to quit his job. Thumbs down!

LOSER - SAL and MURR

While Joe was giving his little recap of the first challenge, Q was looking off to the side....not sure what he was looking at. LOL

CHALLENGE TWO: SKETCHY ARTISTS

The guys are in a mall posing as caricature artists. LOL at Joe when he said “big head” and pointed at Q and “little body” and pointed at Murr. Someone else has pre-drawn the sketches, but the guys have not seen them. The first time that their “client” sees the drawing will be the first time the Joker sees it to. The goal is to get a tip from the mark. If they don’t, they lose.

Murr’s turn - Murr quickly gets a willing participant who sits down in a chair while Murr starts to “draw” her. Murr and the young lady flirt with each other throughout, and Joe tells him that he can get a date afterwards. Sal’s look of anticipation as Murr reveals the sketch is hilarious. The sketch is an exaggerated drawing of a young white lady with red hair and VERY large boobs. When he shows his “client”, she just laughs and looks away...then she tells him it’s horrible. When Murr mentions a tip, the young lady just laughs and tell him he needs a new job...but ultimately gives him a small tip. Thumbs up!

Joe’s turn - A young lady has sat down in the chair. Joe has to tell her that her hair smells good...like taco meat. LOL!!!! After he’s done, he reveals his sketch - two snowmen who are engaging in a lovemaking session. Joe gives the drawing to the girl and tells her that there’s no charge for it, but that he will accept tips. Not only did she NOT give him a tip, she also left the sketch sitting on the table next to Joe. Uber-fail! LOL

Q’s turn - Q quickly gets a young lady who’s keen to participate. Joe tells Q to ask how much of the “Cleveland, Ohio” he should include in the sketch and point at her cleavage. He asks the question and she answers “as much as you want.” Q flips the sketch revealing a young white lady who’s sitting on a toilet and really trying hard to do her business. When shown the drawing, the young lady laughs and gives Q a $5 tip. Q offers to sign the drawing for her. I wonder if she still has it. What a funny and unique memento that would be to have...LOL!

Sal’s turn - Sal gets a young man to sit down in the chair. Joe tells him to say “they say beauty is in the eye of the beholder. In your case, yikers!” Sal flips over the sketch to reveal Adolph Hitler eating a banana. Sal almost looks hesitant to show Raj (the young man), but he eventually does. LOL Raj laughs and says “it’s totally differents”, but decides to give Sal a $5 tip. Joe’s flipping out reaction to the tip is hilarious! LOL!!

LOSER - JOE

CHALLENGE THREE: OPEN HOUSE (of Horrors)

The guys are conducting interviews to strangers who have applied to become their new roommates. The guys have to give each applicant a tour of the apartment, interview them, and apprise them of their unique living habits. While explaining out the challenge would work, Joe tells us that he and Murr are currently roommates.

For some reason, no one answered Q’s fake ad...I have NO idea why...he didn’t look THAT menacing in it. LOL!! So...bottom line, Q didn’t participate in the challenge.

Joe’s turn - A man named Tim is Joe’s applicant. Joe starts giving him a tour of the apartment. The first strange item Tim observes is a log (hanging on the wall by the bathroom) that Joe keeps of his bowel movements. Joe then starts the interview portion. He is told to tell Tim that he sleeps nude, sleepwalks, and has very loud orgasms. Joe throws a quick glance towards one of the cameras and then proceeds to demonstrate - a very high pitched screechy sound. LOL! Tim agrees to become his roommate. Thumbs up.

Throughout this challenge, as they show the other three guys in the back, there is a LOT going on behind them. Hard to really see much, but it looks like people moving around furniture. Might just be the production crew. Weird.

Sal’s turn - Sal’s applicant is a man named Frank, who brings a friend with him. Sal introduces himself with a deadfish handshake. He starts giving Frank a tour of the place - he tells Frank to follow him and then proceeds to powerwalk very quickly back to his bedroom. They go to begin the interview, but first Sal goes into the kitchen and a wine glasses filled with water. He plants himself down on the couch to speak to Frank and his friend...first handing one of the waters to the friend. Frank is already visibly unsure of the situation. As they are speaking, Sal is told to raise his glass higher and higher. Then he is told to take the water away from the friend and hold that one up high in his other hand. He is told to slowly sit on the floor...and then to lie down. While still lying down, he slowly uses his legs to push himself out of the room. Frank and his friend are very perplexed. When asked to move in, Frank is non-committal and says that he’s still got a few other places to see first. Thumbs down.

Murr’s turn - Sidan is the name of the man who is Murr’s applicant and wow, is he enthusiastic! LOL!!! Sidan is VERY excited to be there and Murr is told to try to match his enthusiasm. Joe, Sal, and Q are cracking up watching Murr try to keep up with Sidan. Murr give a quick tour of the place. When they go back to the living room to do the interview, Murr jumps up on top of the sofa and starts bouncing on it. Sidan does it too. LOL @ two grown men bouncing very happily on the couch. Also LOL at W, Joe, and Sal also jumping up and down. HA HA!!! Of course, Murr gets a thumbs up.

LOSER-SAL

During the challenge summary, Murr continues to bounce on the sofa while Q looks at him as though he’s very annoyed. He’s grateful that he didn’t have to participate in the challenge.

CHALLENGE FOUR: LINE JUMPERS

The guys are back on the streets of NYC at a place where discounted Broadway show tickets are sold. Their goal is to cut the line, get to the front, and buy tickets. If they are thrown out of the line before scoring tickets, they lose.

Murr’s turn - He climbs under one of the switchback ropes to start his journey. He continues to climb under more ropes to cut the line under the guise of him taking pictures with his phone. About halfway through, he is spotted by someone working security for the line. A guy in line approaches Murr and forces him out, threatening to call security in the process. A loss for Murr.

Sal’s turn - Sal approaches the roped off line and unclips a barrier to let himself in. Immediately, a couple who is in the line calls him out on it. He tries to do a little song and dance to justify his place in the line, but security quickly approaches and escorts him out of the line. Thumbs WAY down!

Joe’s turn - Joe strategy is to go through the line yelling for his imaginary friend “Larry” who’s supposedly further up in the queue. The other three guys admire his approach until he gets confronted by someone in the line who forces him out. A loss for Joe.

Q’s turn - Q has the most aggressive and ballsy approach to the challenge. He just approaches the line and passes each person in it until he gets to the ticket window, all the while saying “I don’t wait on lines!” He is the only one who’s successful in getting the tickets and a thumbs up. The other three guys seem to be quite amazed that Q’s approach worked.

LOSER-MURR, SAL, and JOE

EPISODE LOSER - SAL

Punishment time - Sal is brought to a bookstore (Book Culture). He is posing as the author of a brand new book who’s at the store to do a reading of his work. Poor Sal looks so nervous as he is prepping to do the task. He starts. The fictional book title is “Keeping the Faith: My Battle with Chronic Flatulence”. LOL!!!! He picks up a copy of the book sitting in front of him to begin reading, but is shocked to see that all of the pages are blank, forcing him to make it up on the spot. Joe, Murr, and Q very much enjoy Sal’s embarrassment and they laugh very intensely in the back. LOL @ the way uses the book to cover his face as he leaves.

Number of belly laughs: 10

My personal rating - 7 (out of 10)

#impractical jokers #season 1 #episode 5 #opinions #commentary #s1e5 #review

0 notes

whittlebaggett8 · 5 years

Text

Afghanistan’s ‘China Card’ Approach to Pakistan, Part 1: 1991-2014

With the establishment of Afghan Countrywide Unity Govt (NUG), the Afghan authorities has been trying to get Chinese enable in jumpstarting moribund peace talks with the Afghan Taliban. Kabul hopes to entice China to use its leverage on Pakistan, which hosts the Afghan Taliban leadership.

Having said that, this is not the initially time that an Afghan authorities turned to China for assistance in a determined situation. There have been at the very least 3 other makes an attempt in the past three decades all of them went in vain. The piece will talk about the current historical qualifications of this kind of makes an attempt Portion 2 will aim on the NUG’s tilt towards China and its outcomes.

There are two major explanations behind Afghanistan’s use of the “China card” to strategy Pakistan in excess of peace and security in Afghanistan. Initially, China has excellent neighbor relations with Afghanistan, but also strategic ties with Islamabad. 2nd, China has major problems over the “three evils” of terrorism, separatism and extremism not only in the area but in China as properly. Having said that, the previously lack of distinct Chinese passions in the area (compared to the driving force of the Belt and Street Initiative right now) built Beijing mainly unresponsive to Afghan outreach.

Having fun with this write-up? Click on right here to subscribe for comprehensive entry. Just $5 a month.

Najibullah, the 1st ‘China Card’ Participant

Soon after the failure of Jalalabad functions, the Afghan Mujahideen grew to become much better united to attack and besiege the city of Khost in 1991. The Mujahideen had been preventing versus the military services forces of previous President of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan Mohammad Najibullah. The Mujahideen forces ended up underneath the management of Commander Jalaluddin Haqqani, an influential commander and a native of the location, who was connected to Hezb-e Islami (Khales), a single of the 7 main jihadi militant teams based mostly in Pakistan.

All through the siege of Khost in 1991, Afghan Mujahideen attacked the town from 3 distinctive instructions. Inside of two months, they had captured not only the town of Khost but also the army posts and the airport, and they also cut the provide routes of the Afghan military from Kabul via Gardez. Najibullah experienced only one particular solution to offer his adult men and struggle in opposition to the Mujahideen: airlifts and airstrikes. However, the undesirable weather made this unachievable.

To escape this condition, Najibullah tried out to play the “China card” to impact the ongoing siege to his gain. He hoped that, as a result of China, he could influence Pakistan, which Najibullah believed to be mostly accountable for the continued siege of Khost. This was a very last vacation resort — Najibullah viewed as China along with the United States, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia to be liable for jolting his authorities for the duration of the Soviet invasion. Even so, irrespective of this reality, he framed his request as a humanitarian one particular.

Therefore, on April 4, 1991, Najibullah wrote a letter to Chinese President Yang Shangkun, describing the circumstance as currently being induced “by the immediate and blatant interference of the Pakistani military and militia.” The Afghan president complained that, although he experienced “extended palms of friendship in the direction of Pakistan, Pakistan experienced dismissed our sincere attitudes, and the Pakistani Junta had as soon as again put us in entrance of a armed forces obstacle.” He added that his authorities “has [already] educated the Secretary-Normal of the UN [about this].” Najibullah’s letter finishes by asking China to support, as it has “influence in the region and can participate in an crucial function in restoring peace and reduce regional tensions.” He notes high anticipations that China will “prevent serious Pakistani violations over Afghan land, in particular in the province of Khost, and cease Pakistani aggression in opposition to Afghanistan.”

There is no evidence of Beijing’s reaction — it was silent. Najibullah possibly understood China was unlikely to respond. That’s why he gave his ask for more a humanitarian touch. In his letter, he said that “due to 1000’s of Pakistani rockets, several innocent little ones, gals, and elderly had died.”

For Beijing, it was not possible to help Najibullah out of a determined condition. Chinese leaders knew that shortly their allies or allies of their allies (the Mujahideen) would get electrical power, and therefore, there was no strategic explanation to strain Pakistan, who was China’s sole strategic lover in the area — in particular for the sake of the Soviet-backed Najibullah. Aiding Najibullah may incur great prices as opposed to any advantages attained. Therefore, China had minimum amount contacts with Kabul, besides for a couple lower-amount exchanges where Afghan and Chinese delegations visited China and Kabul for conferences and seminars. From 1989 to 1992, there ended up no exchanges of higher-degree bilateral visits, no bulletins of assist, no signing of MoUs, and no congratulatory messages despatched on anniversary instances — all typical techniques in bilateral ties prior to the Soviet invasion.

Thus, the first Afghan attempt to enjoy a “China card” to influence the protection situation in the nation fell flat, with no response from Beijing.

Rabbani’s Distress Phone calls to Beijing

A next endeavor to involve China to stop army conflict in Afghanistan happened throughout the Afghan Civil War, when the Taliban had been climbing and becoming a real menace to President Burhanuddin Rabbani’s govt. When the Taliban gave Rabbani in ultimatum in November of 1995, demanding that he hand around Kabul to them, Rabbani — like Najibullah just before him — tried out to participate in the “China card.” He despatched a letter to Chinese President Jiang Zemin on January 18, 1996, just prior to Kabul fell into the Taliban’s hand. Rabbani mentioned that the country confronted many complications thanks to Pakistan and expressed his hope that China will perform an energetic and constructive position in fixing the Afghan challenge and avoiding overseas intervention.

Even though Rabbani’s diplomatic initiative did not deliver the wished-for result, it did persuade Chinese Vice Overseas Minister Tang Jiaxuan to invite Afghan Deputy Foreign Minister Abdur Rahim Ghaforzai to China on January 22-26, 1996. The two sides achieved on January 24 in China. According to Afghan diplomat Ghulam Muhammad Sokhanyar, who was a part of this meeting and later on recalled the situations in his e-book, the Afghan delegation explained the developments associated to the Afghan peace method, significantly the UN-led course of action and the willingness of the Afghans to get Chinese aid in this regard. Sokhanyar recounts that for the duration of the conference, the Chinese side emphasized its common international plan and supported the UN initiatives to solve the Afghan issue.

Karzai’s Ask for for China to Bring Peace

Following the U.S.-led overthrow of the Taliban in 2001, China was “sleeping” on relations with Afghanistan, in accordance to a former Afghan minister and a near aide to then-Afghan President Hamid Karzai who spoke to The Diplomat. It was Karzai who approached China to initiate Beijing’s proactive position in Afghanistan, primarily all through his second term. On the other hand, 1 simply cannot forget the point that Chinese engagement in the Afghan peace system would not grow to be really proactive right until the roll-out of the BRI in 2013. Prior to then, China adopted a deliberate “hands-off” method.

Karzai, like his predecessors, experimented with to engage China in Afghanistan in the hopes of employing Beijing’s leverage over Islamabad to safe peace in Afghanistan, and thus affect the Afghan economic and stability landscape.

It is in this regard that Karzai proposed a trilateral dialogue in between Afghanistan, China, and Pakistan to concentration on safety cooperation in between these a few international locations in 2010. Dependent on the proposal, the initial Afghanistan-China-Pakistan trilateral dialogue at the director normal level was held in Beijing on February 28, 2012. These dialogues were being performed with the purpose to enhance cooperation between the 3 nations, maintain peace and security in the area, and triumph over worries, such as the Afghan peace method. Importantly, officers at these talks expressed their aid for an Afghan-led and Afghan-owned peace approach.

Through Karzai’s 2012 formal visit to Beijing, in which he signed a strategic agreement with China, he also talked about the “China card” in a speech at China Foreign Affairs College. According to Karzai: “We have been of the watch that China can participate in a very substantial function in bringing Afghanistan and Pakistan collectively toward a cooperative ecosystem in the war on terror and radicalism. So no person in this location would truly feel that a person or the other would want to rely on the use of radicalism as an instrument of coverage. There China can enjoy a sizeable part.”

A lot of trilateral dialogues in between Afghanistan-China-Pakistan have been held one particular right after a different afterwards these tripartite talks distribute to Keep track of II triangular diplomacy. In 2015, beneath the new NUG, the 1st round of trilateral Afghanistan-China-Pakistan strategic dialogue was initiated.

Karzai’s tilt towards China was extra delicate than those people in the previous. He needed Beijing to participate in a mediator role concerning Kabul and Islamabad, and hoped that general Chinese involvement in Afghanistan would assistance boost the protection landscape. It can be much better comprehended in his very own terms. Four a long time right after leaving the presidency, Karzai claimed that “China is a incredibly close and strategic close friend of Pakistan and Chinese terms with the Pakistani federal government carry weight… China getting a great mate of Pakistan is an asset for us we imagine that China can use that asset in a way that provides about very good relations concerning us and Pakistan and also leads to peace in Afghanistan.”

Karzai’s outreach resulted in much more Chinese financial engagement in Afghanistan, and the laid the groundwork for trilateral cooperation among Afghanistan, China, and Pakistan. Later on, with the introduction of the BRI, it paved the way for extra strategic bilateral ties amongst Afghanistan and China. But there have been no noteworthy developments in the Afghan peace method for the duration of this time.

The following posting will explore the NUG’s solution to China and its effects on the peace course of action.

The creator is thankful to Halimullah Kousary, the acting director of Conflict and Peace Scientific tests, and Borhan Osman of Worldwide Crisis Team, for studying the first draft and furnishing remarks.

Ahmad Bilal Khalil is a Kabul-based mostly Afghan researcher and has lately posted a book on “Afghanistan and China: The Bilateral Ties (1955-2015)” in Pashto. He follows Afghan foreign policy, Islamists, regional geopolitical and geo-economic matters, and Kabul’s relations with its neighbors (specifically China, Pakistan, and India), and tweets at @abilalkhalil.

The post Afghanistan’s ‘China Card’ Approach to Pakistan, Part 1: 1991-2014 appeared first on Defence Online.

from WordPress https://defenceonline.com/2019/04/11/afghanistans-china-card-approach-to-pakistan-part-1-1991-2014/

#Afghanistan-China relations #Afghanistan-China-Pakistan trilateral cooperation #Burhanuddin Rabbani

0 notes