Reviews about Ruhl's "The Clean House"

“One of my favorite moments in the play is when Lane, the woman who wants her house cleaned, is imagining her husband with his soul mate (hint: it’s not Lane) and the maid walks in, sees the people Lane is imagining and asks “Who are they?” It’s such a great, theatrical moment, the acknowledgement that we are not looking through a window into the ”real” world, but instead, viewing the realities of our world with new eyes.”

“One of my favorite things about the costuming is the subtle shift in the second half of the play when everyone’s color palette begins to move from the extreme color/lack thereof, to a more moderate and similar place on the scale…except Matilde, who may be the protagonist, but who also seems to facilitate a journey for the other characters rather than taking one of her own.”

Works Cited

dramachicks. "Views and Reviews: THE CLEAN HOUSE by Sarah Ruhl." dramachicks. August 2, 2012 2012.Web. <http://dramachicks.wordpress.com/2011/11/08/views-and-reviews-the-clean-house-by-sarah-ruhl/>.

On a personal note, I really understood this play.  I read it and picked up the nuances and the subtle pieces that Ruhl was trying to point us towards.  So, when I read the reviews I was looking to see if the reviewer was looking at the surface of the play and ignoring all of the rest.  I wanted to know whether or not they were just tossing something onto the page (print or web) because they had to or were told to. 

            With my first pick I read the wordpress blog by dramachicks.  I was not disappointed.  I immediately knew that she “got” what Ruhl was trying to accomplish.  Admittedly, the author of the blog is a huge Ruhl fan, but that does not take away from her deep understanding of what Ruhl wanted with “The Clean House”.  The two quotes from the review above speak to the deep meaning of the play and the deeper understanding of the blog author.  She didn’t just see a funny play, she saw a play with a story with a fable and allegory and the romances of the heart, life, and spirit mixed in.  I agree with the thoughts of the author and I applaud her understanding and critique of the play.

“And yet thanks to the alchemical imagination of Sarah Ruhl, the gifted author of “The Clean House,” this strange grab bag of ideas and images, together with some more exotic ingredients, magically coheres to form one of the finest and funniest new plays you’re likely to see in New York this season.”

“But this peculiarity epitomizes a fundamental message of Ms. Ruhl’s odd and enchanting play: We may never come to a full understanding of the jokes life plays, but the wisest and possibly noblest response is to have a good laugh anyway.”

Works Cited

Isherwood, Charles. "Always Ready with a Joke, if Not a Feather Duster." The New York Times, sec. Arts: Theater: 31 Oct 2006. Print.

            However, when I saw the New York Times listed as one of the potential review sites I was intrigued because I wanted to see what a “well respected” and “highly esteemed” newspaper thought of the play.  I was really disappointed. 

            If I read this review and never read the play or saw the play I would think it was merely a fluffy comedy without substance.  In a time period in my life where I am pinching pennies and my entertainment budget is very small I have to be choosy with what I am spending it on.  I would not have gone to see this play based on this review.

            This reviewer does nothing for Ruhl’s writing or this particular play.  His comments about Ruhl are flippant at best; his words about her writing are the equivalent of patting her on the head and saying, “oh nice play sweetie now go play with your toys while the adults really write plays”.  I was insulted on Ruhl’s behalf.  He didn’t review the play either.  He glossed over it, he failed to convey that there was something deeper, something more in this play.  He failed to share with his readers that this play will leave you with conversation starters and mental self-awareness conversations. 

            His use of “strange” “grab bag” “magically” “odd” seem especially out of place in a serious review.  His last few lines are his attempt at making some far reaching message that the rest of his review fail to live up to. 

            He spends more time praising the actors of the play then actually telling anyone about the play.  If I was going to New York City as a tourist and wanted to find a show or two to catch, after reading this review I would not pick “The Clean House” and I would be missing something great, just like Mr. Isherwood has.