Finish the HW with quailty work.
Production Analysis Papers—25 points each
For each production that you attend, you must save your ticket stub. Use a pen to sign your name across the front of the ticket. Then, take a photograph or scan it and upload the image file at the end of your response paper. Without proof of attendance, you will not receive full credit for this assignment. We will not accept any part of this assignment via email.
Keep your program. We recommend that you keep your program from the show so that you can properly reference artists’ names in your paper. Failure to credit properly artists will result in a loss of points. Often the program will contain a note from the director or dramaturg, information that you might find helpful on this assignment.
Instructions—Read Carefully!
Write an analysis that responds to the prompts below with your original analysis and insight about the play and its production. We want to know what you thought about what you experienced and saw on the stage, not what you liked or didn’t like.
Your analysis must express a point of view about the production and must be at least 2 full pages but no more than 3 pages long. Assume your reader attended the production. Provide context for your discussion and analysis without retelling the entire plot of the play if a brief synopsis of the story might help you to set up your arguments.
I. Prompts
· A Design Element. Examine the use of ONE design element in the production. (A design element includes scenery, costumes, props, lighting, sound, or media design). Properly credit the artist whose work you are critiquing. How did these specific design choices create meaning and contribute to the world of the play and the storytelling? Use specific moments from the production to support your aesthetic interpretation and analysis. How does this reinforced the setting of the play or the status, class, gender, or relationship of a character;
· Choice of a Staging Moment or a Performance or another Point of Interest. You are free to choose another aspect of the production to analyze; for example, a specific director’s choice, an actor’s performance, a piece of choreography, or something else that captured your interest. How did this particular specific create meaning? What does this specific piece of the production suggest about the production as a whole?
· Issues of Diversity: Examine the politics of the play by choosing an issue of diversity (such as race,
ethnicity, gender, sexuality, class, religion, disability) and evaluating its depiction. How does the play’s depiction reinforce or challenge conventional (traditional) understandings of the issue under examination? What does this particular issue under examination suggest about the play as a whole?
Do not let the above prompts limit your response; rather, use them to inspire, expand, and deepen your thinking about the play and its production.
( 4 )
II. Format
Follow MLA style guidelines: MLA Sample Paper. You paper must contain your name, the course number, your recitation instructor’s name, and the date, formatted per the example provided. MLA guidelines can be found at ( http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/747/01/ ).
· Give your paper a creative title.
· Italicize play titles. They do not belong in “quotation marks.”
· When talking about a production that you have seen, use the past tense.
· You should name each artist whose work you are discussing.
· This is a scholarly paper. Use a formal voice. Avoid slang. Writing should be polished— your grade for presentation includes grammar, syntax, and spelling.
· Proofread. Your writing should be free of typos, misspellings, and other mistakes.
· If you use any sources, be sure to include a citation. This applies to the dramaturg’s program note. Here is the general format for citing a show’s program:
Program Notes. Name of Play by Playwright. Producing Company. Location. Date you saw the show.
SUBMISSION DIRECTIONS
· Upload your production analysis paper and include the image file of your signed ticket stub or program at the end of your paper (in Word or PDF format only) to the correct Carmen Production Analysis assignment. We reserve the right to refuse late or emailed papers.
· Failure to turn in your paper in a readable format will result in a loss of points.
NOTE: This is an individual, not a collaborative assignment. The essay you turn in should be your own work. In this course, we use Turnitin originality check on all written work. Avoid plagiarism!
III. Other Tips
Be honest! You do not have to express any particular opinion just to try to please your instructor. But remember, you must support your opinions using specific examples and thoughtful analysis about the production. It is not enough just to have an opinion, positive or negative. You must tell your reader why. Talk about what really interested or excited you about the production!
Grading Rubric:
5 pts A Design Element 5 pts Point of Interest 5pts Issues of Diversity
5pts Presentation (organization, grammar, etc.)
5 pts Proof of Attendance and proper credit to production crew and actors
IV. Grading Rubric 25 points
|
Criteria |
5 Sophisticated
(Paper goes above and beyond the assignment) |
4 Skilled
(Paper successfully fulfills the parameters of the assignment) |
3 Competent
(Paper fully meets the parameters of the assignment) |
2 Fairly Competent
(Paper does not address some aspects of the assignment) |
1 Not Yet Competent
(Paper does not address the assignment) |
0 No Marks
(Paper demonstrates no effort to fulfill the assignment) |
|
Design |
This paper contains an |
This paper |
This paper contains |
This paper contains |
The ideas in this |
This paper failed to |
|
Element |
exemplary examination |
contains a strong |
an adequate |
a lackluster |
paper are |
fulfill the |
|
|
of a production design |
examination of a |
examination of a |
examination of a |
unfocused, |
requirement. |
|
|
element. The writer |
production design |
production design |
production design |
underdeveloped, |
|
|
|
presents specific and |
element. The |
element. The writer |
element. The writer |
and/or |
|
|
|
compelling examples to |
writer presents |
presents relevant |
engages in |
unconvincing. |
|
|
|
support his/her aesthetic |
specific examples |
examples to support |
description rather |
Argument is |
|
|
|
interpretation. The |
to support his/her |
his/her aesthetic |
than analysis. The |
repetitive and |
|
|
|
argument clearly and |
aesthetic |
interpretation. The |
argument consists |
provides no critical |
|
|
|
compellingly articulates |
interpretation. The |
argument articulates |
of opinions rather |
insight. |
|
|
|
how the design choices |
argument clearly |
how the design |
than critical insights |
|
|
|
|
create context and |
articulates how the |
choices create |
that articulate how |
|
|
|
|
meaning in the world of the play. |
design choices create context and |
meaning in the world of the play. |
design choices create meaning. |
|
|
|
|
|
meaning in the |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
world of the play. |
|
|
|
|
|
Point of |
The writer choses an |
The writer choses |
The writer choses |
This writer’s choice |
This writer choses |
This paper failed to |
|
Interest |
exceedingly compelling |
an interesting |
an important aspect |
betrays a lack of |
an insignificant |
fulfill the |
|
|
aspect of the production |
aspect of the |
of the production to |
interest in the |
aspect of the |
requirement. |
|
|
to examine. He/She |
production to |
examine. He/She |
production. He/She |
production to |
|
|
|
demonstrates keen |
examine. He/She |
demonstrates |
fails to provide |
examine. His/Her |
|
|
|
critical insight about the |
demonstrates |
insight about the |
insight about the |
ideas are unfocused, |
|
|
|
significance of this |
critical insight |
significance of this |
significance of this |
underdeveloped, |
|
|
|
aspect of production. |
about the |
aspect of the |
aspect of the |
and/or |
|
|
|
The argument clearly |
significance of this |
production. The |
production. Little |
unconvincing. |
|
|
|
and compellingly |
aspect of the |
argument articulates |
effort is made to |
Argument is |
|
|
|
articulates how this |
production. The |
how this point of |
connect this aspect |
repetitive and |
|
|
|
point of interest informs |
argument clearly |
interest informs the |
of the production |
provides no critical |
|
|
|
the play as a whole. |
articulates how this point of |
play as a whole. |
back to the play as a whole. |
insight. |
|
|
|
|
interest informs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the play as a |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
whole. |
|
|
|
|
|
Issue of |
This paper contains an |
This paper |
This paper contains |
This paper contains |
The ideas in this |
This paper failed to |
|
Diversity |
exemplary examination |
contains a strong |
an adequate |
a lackluster |
paper are |
fulfill the |
|
|
of an issue of diversity. |
examination of an |
examination of an |
examination of an |
unfocused, |
requirement. |
|
|
The writer presents |
issue of diversity. |
issue of diversity. |
issue of diversity. |
underdeveloped, |
|
|
|
specific and compelling |
The writer |
The writer presents |
The writer engages |
and/or |
|
|
|
examples to support |
presents specific |
relevant examples |
in description rather |
unconvincing. |
|
|
|
his/her critical analysis |
examples to |
to support his/her |
than analysis. The |
Argument is |
|
|
|
of the play’s politics. |
support his/her |
critical analysis of |
argument consists |
repetitive and |
|
|
|
The argument clearly |
critical analysis of |
the play’s politics. |
of opinions rather |
provides no critical |
|
|
|
and compellingly |
the play’s politics. |
The argument |
than critical insights |
insight. |
|
|
|
articulates how the |
The argument |
articulates how the |
that articulate how |
|
|
|
|
play’s politics inform |
clearly articulates |
play’s politics |
the play’s politics |
|
|
|
|
the play as a whole. |
how the play’s politics inform the |
inform the play as a whole. |
inform the play as a whole. |
|
|
|
|
|
play as a whole. |
|
|
|
|
|
Presentation |
This paper is written in |
This paper is |
This paper is |
This paper is not |
This paper has all of |
This paper has all of |
|
|
formal language, |
written in formal |
written in formal |
written in formal |
the following |
the following |
|
|
consistently uses strong |
language, |
language. It |
language and is |
problems: informal |
problems: informal |
|
|
and varied sentence |
consistently uses |
attempts to use |
hindered by one or |
tone and language; |
tone and language; |
|
|
structure, and employs |
strong and varied |
varied sentence |
more of the |
poor organization; |
poor organization; |
|
|
precise and |
sentence structure, |
structure and |
following: |
awkward sentence |
awkward sentence |
|
|
unambiguous wording |
and employs |
precise and |
disjointed/illogical |
structure; imprecise |
structure; imprecise |
|
|
and coherent and logical |
precise and |
unambiguous |
organization; |
wording; grammar, |
wording; grammar, |
|
|
organization. The |
unambiguous |
wording. The |
confusing sentence |
spelling, |
spelling, |
|
|
writing demonstrates |
wording and |
writing |
structure; imprecise |
punctuation, and |
punctuation, and |
|
|
clear enthusiasm for the |
coherent and |
demonstrates care |
or ambiguous |
formatting errors. |
formatting errors. |
|
|
topic. All sentences are |
logical |
for the topic. The |
wording; grammar, |
|
|
|
|
complete and |
organization. The |
paper had one or |
spelling, |
|
|
|
|
grammatical. Paper has |
writing |
more of the |
punctuation, and |
|
|
|
|
been spell-checked and |
demonstrates an |
following problems: |
formatting errors. |
|
|
|
|
proofread, and has no |
interest in the |
organization was |
|
|
|
|
|
punctuation or |
topic. The paper is |
difficult to follow; |
|
|
|
|
|
formatting errors. |
generally free of |
contained multiple |
|
|
|
|
|
|
grammar, spelling, |
spelling, grammar, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
punctuation, and |
punctuation, and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
formatting errors. |
formatting errors. |
|
|
|
|
Proof of Attendance and proper credit to production crew and actors |
This paper provides proof of attendance that is submitted correctly and gives proper credit to all artists included in the paper. |
This paper provides proof of attendance and give proper credit to the artists included in the paper. |
This paper either does not provide proof of attendance or fails to give proper credit to some of the artists included in the paper. |
This paper either does not provide proof of attendance or fails to give proper credit to most of the artists included in the paper. |
This paper either does not provide proof of attendance or give proper credit to the artists involved in the production. |
This paper fails to provide proof of attendance and fails to give proper credit to the artists discussed in the paper. |