The World of the Play Statement

*Think of this as a note that may be included in the program.

Sarah Ruhl is a brilliant new playwright whose words can lift your emotions and make you cry like a Nick Cassavetes movie. That is exactly what happens when you read her script Eurydice. In creating this script Ruhl became a sort of present day Shakespeare; she retold a Greek myth, but made it vastly more (MODERN) comic, dramatic and entertaining. She shifted the view from Orpheus’s story to Eurydice’s story. The research I did consisted of gathering information about Aeschylus’ version of the Greek myth of Orpheus and comparing it to Ruhl’s modern day version of the myth. To understand the world of Sarah Ruhl’s Eurydice, you must understand the original myth of Orpheus and Eurydice.

When I began research on the myth of Orpheus I found there were several connections made within Ruhl’s version. I found two major and clever substitutions in Ruhl’s version of the story. The first of my favorite findings was that the three Stones that guarded the gates of Hades were originally the three headed dog who guarded the gates of the underworld known as Cerberus. The second finding was about Ruhl’s River of Forgetfulness. In Greek mythology the River Lethe was a river that ran through the underworld. It was said that anyone who came into contact with this lethal river would not die, just forget everything it had known prior to being exposed to it. They forget everything, even their own language, which is exactly what happens it Ruhl’s retold tale. So cute, clever and fitting for Ruhl’s version of this myth. This is just the beginning, or a small portion of why it is so important to understand the myth before you get to fully appreciate Ruhl’s version.

There are also several directors’ notes that must be communicated to the audience in a straight forward manner. One example is the appearance of the underworld. It is stated on the first page of the play that the underworld should look more like a scene from Alice in Wonderland rather than the classical idea of the scary dark and meek idea that most individuals who are familiar with Greek mythology have. I think that this note was made so that in the design plan, there could be several added features that would give the story so many more different layers to play with. In Ruhl’s play, the Ruler of the Underworld explained to Orpheus that they liked to keep the underworld real comfortable so that people sent there would not mind staying there. An example of added layers is this comment. Yes the Ruler of the Underworld says that he provides a good atmosphere to keep those he rules happy, OR he could have just been saying this to make Orpheus think that Eurydice want to stay because the Ruler of the Underworld wants to make Eurydice his wife. It just works…

It should be addressed that this play moves along very quickly. At the beginning of the piece, two young children are in love and speak about marriage in youthful idioms and metaphors. Then into the next scene they are at their wedding. It is almost like time is flying and that we are just whizzing through this play. It may seem just like that, but upon studying the original myth, it happens just the same way. As in wedding, death, second death. Luckily, this play ends on a much happier note than the original myth. At the end of the original myth, Orpheus looks back at Eurydice before she is out of the underworld; she is then taken away from him for good. Orpheus proceeds to play his sad music and is killed by an angry band of Maenads who tore him to pieces. His head and his lyre were found by a Thracian Muse, (one of his people), and was buried by Mount Apollo.

In Ruhl’s version however, Eurydice calls Orpheus’ name and causes him to turn around sending her back to the underworld. There is no concrete statement for what happens to Orpheus, I don’t think he gets killed by a band of Maenads because it is not stated, but to my interpretation, he too is sent back to the underworld ending this story with a happily ever after.