Post 13

I attended Southeastern's production of The Imaginary Invalid and watched the entire play.

The Imaginary Invalid was a unique and creative production. I enjoyed a number of things:

-The creativity worked through the costumes and stage
-The overly dramatic acting from all the performers
- The modernity of a 17th century play


I will admit, I left the play with an excruciating headache and a handful of questions. I place most of the blame on the fact that I felt like there was too much going on that I could not focus on the dialogue of the play. But that is not to say it was a bad play. I just felt unsettled about the ending and the purpose of the play that I immediately, after viewing it, I went and did some research:

The Imaginary Invalid was Molière's last play. The bitter irony that comes from the play is the Moliere wrote about and played a man who thought he was dying when Moliere, himself died hours after the finale of the play. The play was made to entertain King Louis XIV. Firstly viewed as strictly comical and a joke, but throughout years of criticism the dialogue has been triumphed for its creative connection between the artist and the creator. The drama serves almost as a comical act poking fun at drama while communicating the connection with the real world.

After viewing the play and reading several critques about it, I have come to the conclusion that I wish that I could see the play at its original intended performance. I would therefore be able to compare the changes and modernization Professor Dixon added to it. But from what I could see from the play, I believe Dixon did a fair job at making it an appealing performance for the reasons I listed above and more. But for those same reasons, I feel that I did not get to experience the full intended purpose of the plot.