Proof by David Auburn
Basics
Full length play with 2 Acts
Act 1, Scene 1, 2, 3, & 4
Act 2, Scene 1,2,3,4, & 5
2M, 2F
Approximate Running Time
2 hrs.
Genre
Drama
Modern American Drama
Bio
David Auburn (born 1970) is an American playwright. He was born in Chicago, and raised in Ohio and Arkansas. He attended the University of Chicago, where he was a member of Off Off Campus, and received a degree in English literature. Following a fellowship with Amblin Entertainment, he moved to New York City and spent two years in The Juilliard School's playwriting program, studying under the noted dramatists Marsha Norman and Christopher Durang. His first full-length play,Skyscraper, ran off-Broadway in 1997. His short play, What Do You Believe About The Future? appeared in Harper's Magazine and has since been adapted for the screen.
Auburn is best known for his 2000 play Proof. It won the 2001 Tony Award for Best Play, as well as the 2001 Pulitzer Prize for Drama. Auburn has adapted it into a film, which was released in 2005. He has also been awarded the Helen Merrill Playwriting Award and a Guggenheim Fellowship. Following Proof, he wrote the screenplay for the movie The Lake House, released by Warner Bros. in 2006. In 2007, he made his directorial debut with the The Girl in The Park, for which he also wrote the screenplay.
He currently resides in Manhattan, New York.
Auburn is best known for his 2000 play Proof. It won the 2001 Tony Award for Best Play, as well as the 2001 Pulitzer Prize for Drama. Auburn has adapted it into a film, which was released in 2005. He has also been awarded the Helen Merrill Playwriting Award and a Guggenheim Fellowship. Following Proof, he wrote the screenplay for the movie The Lake House, released by Warner Bros. in 2006. In 2007, he made his directorial debut with the The Girl in The Park, for which he also wrote the screenplay.
He currently resides in Manhattan, New York.
Publication Info.
Dramatists Play Service
Licensing and Rights
Dramatists Play Service
Characters
Robert - a male in his fifties, father to Catherine and Claire. Has recently died but appears in
flashback scenes and also appears to Catherine.
Catherine - a woman, twenty five, daughter to Robert and sister to Claire. Lives alone in her
father's house. Intelligent but is very removed since her father's passing.
Hal - a male, twenty eight, an eager former student of Robert's. In search of undiscovered works
left behind by Robert. Love interest to Catherine.
Claire - a woman, twenty nine, the well put together daught of Robert and elder sister to
Catherine.
Fable
On Catherine's 25th birthday her father Robert appears to her and they have a discussion about being crazy. Catherine trys to work out in her head that she is not crazy even thought she is having this discussion with her dead father.
Hal comes to her house to go through some of her father's old notebooks and trys to steal one from the house. There is an obvious attraction between the two characters. This is also when we discover that the notebook is very important and could possibly contain a very important proof.
Claire, Catherine's sister, arrives for the funeral of their father. Night and day she tries to persuade Catherine to go to New York with her, because she feels that Catherine should return to school and get her life back on track. They discuss Harold Dobbs, and Claire hassles Catherine about whether he is cute or not and if she is interested in him.
Next is the party that takes place after the funeral and Hal's band plays. Claire gets drunk and Hal and Catherine have sex.
Claire is about to leave for New York and Hal and Catherine find out that one of her father's notebooks contains a mathematical genius proof. Hal wants to try and figure it out and Catherine tell him that she wrote it.
The opening of Act 2 is a flashback scene to when Robert was alive and still teaching at the University of Chicago. Catherine is telling him about her getting into North Western and how she will have to leave. Hal enters and this is where him and Catherine meet for the first time, this is also Catherine's birthday. Robert, Catherine and Hal have drinks and decide to go out for dinner.
The next scene is a continuation of the the ending of Act 1. Hal doubts that Catherine actually wrote the proof and says that it is impossible and that it looks like her father's handwriting. Catherine becomes angry that no one believes her and storms off throwing the notebook on the floor.
Hal comes back to the house to try and speak to Catherine and Claire tells him that she will be taking Catherine back to New York with her and Claire gives Hal the notebook. She also tells him that Catherine got much more of her father's ability than she did.
Another flashback scene to when Robert is very ill, sitting outside in the cold writing nonsense in his notebooks and Catherine trys to coax him back inside. We discover that what her father was writing was truly just nonsense.
The final scene of the show Hal comes back and tells Catherine that he has the proof looked at and said that it was very "hip" and he starts to believe that is was possible for her to write it. Claire leaves for New York and Catherine stays with Hal, and the final moment of the show is her beginning to explain the proof to Hal.
Plot Summary
Proof is the story of a young woman named Catherine. She is the daughter of Robert, a brilliant mathematician, who misplaces both his brilliance and his sanity in his later years. Catherine, a budding mathematician herself, must give up her schooling and her most creatively productive years in order to take care of her father, who has become convinced that alien civilizations are communicating with him directly through the local library's Dewey decimal system.
As the play opens, Robert has just died and Catherine, conversing with his ghost, wonders if she may have inherited his tendency toward madness. Robert had first shown signs of madness in his mid-twenties. Catherine has just turned twenty-five. Her suspicions seem confirmed when her sister Claire and Robert's protégé, Hal, begin to treat her as if she is mentally unstable. Claire, returning for her father's funeral, wants to take her "fragile" sister Catherine back to New York where Claire can keep Catherine safely under her wing and submit her for psychiatric treatment. Hal, who becomes Catherine's lover on the night of the funeral, defends Catherine to Claire, but retains suspicions of his own about Catherine's stability when she claims to be the author of a proof so advanced it overshadows all of Robert's previous work.
Catherine drops her bombshell at the end of Act 1, claiming that she is the author of the proof. Act 2 opens with a flashback to Catherine and Hal's first meeting. They had met on her twenty-first birthday. Hal was handing in his senior thesis while Catherine was still hoping to begin undergraduate school, but only if her father's remission into lucidity continued. The audience is thus introduced to the depth of the sacrifice Catherine has made to tend her father. Not only did she give up school and career, but, revealingly, on her twenty-first birthday she has no friends with whom to celebrate. She and her father invite Hal to her birthday dinner, but he declines.
Four years later, Hal invites Catherine out on a date, but she is suspicious of his motives. Hal is now a teacher in his own right, while Catherine has yet to be able to return to school. To make matters worse for Catherine, conventional wisdom states that mathematicians are already past their prime at twenty-five. If Catherine has not done her best work by now, she will never have the chance again. The existence of the brilliant proof is Catherine's only saving grace. It represents her one chance at success on her father's level.
When Hal and Claire doubt her authorship and conspire to take the proof away, Catherine sinks further into depression. Claire views her outlandish claim and symptoms of depression as evidence of severe psychosis similar to their father's and intends to drag Catherine to New York with her whether her sister likes it or not. Meanwhile, Hal and his colleagues have examined the proof and Hal returns in the nick of time to tell Catherine that he now believes the proof to be her work. As the play draws to a close, Hal begins to treat Catherine with the respect she deserves as a mathematician. Catherine's bitterness makes her initially resistant to Hal's overtures, but ultimately she cannot resist the prospect of discussing her work as an equal with a colleague whose respect she has earned.
http://http//litsum.com/proof/
As the play opens, Robert has just died and Catherine, conversing with his ghost, wonders if she may have inherited his tendency toward madness. Robert had first shown signs of madness in his mid-twenties. Catherine has just turned twenty-five. Her suspicions seem confirmed when her sister Claire and Robert's protégé, Hal, begin to treat her as if she is mentally unstable. Claire, returning for her father's funeral, wants to take her "fragile" sister Catherine back to New York where Claire can keep Catherine safely under her wing and submit her for psychiatric treatment. Hal, who becomes Catherine's lover on the night of the funeral, defends Catherine to Claire, but retains suspicions of his own about Catherine's stability when she claims to be the author of a proof so advanced it overshadows all of Robert's previous work.
Catherine drops her bombshell at the end of Act 1, claiming that she is the author of the proof. Act 2 opens with a flashback to Catherine and Hal's first meeting. They had met on her twenty-first birthday. Hal was handing in his senior thesis while Catherine was still hoping to begin undergraduate school, but only if her father's remission into lucidity continued. The audience is thus introduced to the depth of the sacrifice Catherine has made to tend her father. Not only did she give up school and career, but, revealingly, on her twenty-first birthday she has no friends with whom to celebrate. She and her father invite Hal to her birthday dinner, but he declines.
Four years later, Hal invites Catherine out on a date, but she is suspicious of his motives. Hal is now a teacher in his own right, while Catherine has yet to be able to return to school. To make matters worse for Catherine, conventional wisdom states that mathematicians are already past their prime at twenty-five. If Catherine has not done her best work by now, she will never have the chance again. The existence of the brilliant proof is Catherine's only saving grace. It represents her one chance at success on her father's level.
When Hal and Claire doubt her authorship and conspire to take the proof away, Catherine sinks further into depression. Claire views her outlandish claim and symptoms of depression as evidence of severe psychosis similar to their father's and intends to drag Catherine to New York with her whether her sister likes it or not. Meanwhile, Hal and his colleagues have examined the proof and Hal returns in the nick of time to tell Catherine that he now believes the proof to be her work. As the play draws to a close, Hal begins to treat Catherine with the respect she deserves as a mathematician. Catherine's bitterness makes her initially resistant to Hal's overtures, but ultimately she cannot resist the prospect of discussing her work as an equal with a colleague whose respect she has earned.
http://http//litsum.com/proof/
Exegesis
Prime number - any integer other than 0 or ± 1 that is not divisible without remainder by any other integers except ± 1 and ± the integer itself
Proof - In mathematics, a proof is a convincing demonstration (within the accepted standards of the field) that some mathematical statement is necessarily true. Proofs are obtained from deductive reasoning, rather than from inductive or empirical arguments. That is, a proof must demonstrate that a statement is true in all cases, without a single exception. An unproved proposition that is believed to be true is known as a conjecture.
Imaginary Number - An imaginary number, in mathematics, is a number in the form bi where b is a real number and i is the square root of minus one, known as the imaginary unit. Imaginary numbers and real numbers may be combined as complex numbers in the form a + bi where a is the real part and bi is the imaginary part. Imaginary numbers can therefore be thought of as complex numbers where the real part is zero. The square of an imaginary number is a negative real numbers.Imaginary numbers were defined in 1572 by Rafael Bombelli. At the time, such numbers were regarded by some as fictitious or useless, much as zero and the negative numbers. Many other mathematicians were slow to adopt the use of imaginary numbers, including Descartes who wrote about them in his La Geometrie, where the term was meant to be derogatory.
A Note on Casting
The most important areas I would focus on when casting “Proof” would be age and gender. It is vital to the story that all that are male parts and all that are female parts be cast accordingly. Since it deals with a father and daughter relationship and also the blossoming relationship between and young woman and a young man, it would simply not enhance the story to change this.
I find the accuracy of age to be very important to the play and its story. The actor cast in Robert’s role could simply not be and younger than forty years of age. With what he goes through in the show, loosing his sanity, already having two adult daughters and being a mathematical genius who is working as a professor at the University of Chicago could not possibly be any younger than that. I also don’t think that an individual younger than that would have gone through the experiences in life that would allow us to believe his age on stage. It is also important that Catherine, Claire and Hal be played age accordingly as well. Anyone in their twenties could pull off any of the three roles with believability.
I don’t think that race should play an enormous part in the casting. While there is a distinct family unit in the show, Robert and his two daughters, Catherine and Claire, I don’t see a problem with them being different ethnicities. If it was cast colorblind it would not in any way affect the storyline if Robert was a black man and Catherine and Claire were Hispanic. I think that it should be the actor that fits the listed requirements above and is most talented and deserving of the part, if the director so chooses to keep race together in the show, that is his or her choice.
The sexual orientation of any of the actors is completely irrelevant and as long as they are able to play a believable straight character, I see no issue. I say this because there are no homosexuals in the show.
Disabilities is an interesting topic for this show though, I believe that the actor playing Robert could be wheelchair bound and that would not in anyway hinder his performance at all. I’m not quite sure that they would be able to perform any of the other parts, given that the show requires some up and down movement of them. If the director so chooses I don’t see a problem being deaf but blind would not work, since Catherine does write the proof by hand. This area in my opinion really sits on the director’s shoulders; it is all about what their vision is. I don’t see how any disabilities would affect the story and author’s intent.
I think the show would be most successful in performances and story telling as long as the characters were cast age and gender accordingly. I think if either of these two areas are tampered with it would greatly distract from the author’s intent and would distract the audience members and they would be taken out of the experience all together. This is a piece that would be very successful with colorblind casting and I believe that should be taken advantage of.
I find the accuracy of age to be very important to the play and its story. The actor cast in Robert’s role could simply not be and younger than forty years of age. With what he goes through in the show, loosing his sanity, already having two adult daughters and being a mathematical genius who is working as a professor at the University of Chicago could not possibly be any younger than that. I also don’t think that an individual younger than that would have gone through the experiences in life that would allow us to believe his age on stage. It is also important that Catherine, Claire and Hal be played age accordingly as well. Anyone in their twenties could pull off any of the three roles with believability.
I don’t think that race should play an enormous part in the casting. While there is a distinct family unit in the show, Robert and his two daughters, Catherine and Claire, I don’t see a problem with them being different ethnicities. If it was cast colorblind it would not in any way affect the storyline if Robert was a black man and Catherine and Claire were Hispanic. I think that it should be the actor that fits the listed requirements above and is most talented and deserving of the part, if the director so chooses to keep race together in the show, that is his or her choice.
The sexual orientation of any of the actors is completely irrelevant and as long as they are able to play a believable straight character, I see no issue. I say this because there are no homosexuals in the show.
Disabilities is an interesting topic for this show though, I believe that the actor playing Robert could be wheelchair bound and that would not in anyway hinder his performance at all. I’m not quite sure that they would be able to perform any of the other parts, given that the show requires some up and down movement of them. If the director so chooses I don’t see a problem being deaf but blind would not work, since Catherine does write the proof by hand. This area in my opinion really sits on the director’s shoulders; it is all about what their vision is. I don’t see how any disabilities would affect the story and author’s intent.
I think the show would be most successful in performances and story telling as long as the characters were cast age and gender accordingly. I think if either of these two areas are tampered with it would greatly distract from the author’s intent and would distract the audience members and they would be taken out of the experience all together. This is a piece that would be very successful with colorblind casting and I believe that should be taken advantage of.
No comments:
Post a Comment