Questions about Death of England: Delroy

I didn't think that anyone in my cohort of loved ones had watched the National Theatre's Death of England: Delroy that streamed on Friday.  

Now from notes in the comment box, I see that Rebecca watched it.  

And as well, Bonnie watched it for she said that she had some ideas that she thought we could discuss about Death of England: Delroy, when next we meet.

I had wanted David Camps to watch the show and so had sent him 10 questions to be answered, at $1 a question.  The right answer would get him $1 per question.  Sometimes only an attempt at answer the question would get him the cash,.

If you happened to watch the show, here are the questions.  Do you think they were too easy?  Too hard?  Just right?

Question 1.  Name 4 other characters that are mentioned by the protagonist but not seen.

Questions 2, 3, 4, 5.  Tell me four of the settings of the show (for example, his work as a bailiff where the setting is that the public sphere where Delroy is out throwing people out of their homes).  Now without using that one, name 4 others that occur in the play.

Question 6.  What is the significance of the red cross on the floor of the stage.

Question 7. At the end of the play, what would you say the wrap up that Delroy gives concerning the situation he is in.

Question 8.  Who wrote the play.  You are welcome to go to Wiki or any review to get this answer.  It is co-written, so 2 names, please.  You can also find the answer at the end of this post.

Question 9. What do you think about the references to food in the play.  the Jamaican patties, for eg.

Question 10. Name two political references in the play.  You can look at a review to find these, or just get get help from  your life-lines (either Joaquim or Bonnie)

Oh yes, for a bonus dollar, what is the significance of the title?

Next time I have to get the questions to David a little sooner.

Arta

Answers: 

Question 8.  Clint Dyer and Roy Williams

Thoughts on a Two Day Teach In

I woke this morning thinking about the 2 Day Teach in (#ScholarStrike) and I was remembering that in my lifetime I am no stranger to protest.  The Korean War in the 1950’s (1950 – 1953) was part of the news when I was in my early teens.  I was 10 years old when it started, 13 when it finished.

The Sexual Revolution of the 1960’s is now seen as a period of profound societal change.  I was only marginally aware of it and that because some of my friends moved to California.  I only knew second and third hand about that movement.  I followed it in Canadian newspapers, which is at least one degree away from the original reporting.

I am often taking a break to look at the world.

Vietnam and the walk outs from college and university campuses in the 1970’s happened when I was in my 30’s.  By now the newspapers were giving fuller reports about protests, and of course we had news on the TV.  And I came to know some of the draft dodgers since some of them moved to Alberta.

I missed the Stonewall Riots in the 1990’s (originating in the Stonewall Gay Bar in NYC).  Absolutely missed it.  I had to have a going-back-to-school year as an adult to hear about it.

I was thinking about all of this after listening to the first day of the Scholar Strike yesterday.  I decided to be there as first-hand as COVID will allow.

Bonnie and I could only get in 3 of the 6 sessions.  I did take 6 pages of notes, which was not required, should anyone be afraid of watching it today by my reporting. I did read "Teleology on the Rocks" from Patricia J Williams's The Alchemy of Race and Rights: Diary of a Law Professor where she talks about her (black) sense of being invisible at Harvard in the 1990’s – so invisibility is not a new topic.  Just an invisible one.  And that was about it for pre -"Two Day Teach In" reading.

As Bonnie and I wrapped up the evening, checking in with each other about what we had heard, I was thinking as well about the gift of going to the conference:

1.     I got to watch these panel sessions from the comfort of my own dining room table, pens and paper spread in front of me, a cold drink of water there and at times a delicious bowl of Peanut Butter Cup & Chocolate ice-cream.

2.     Since the sessions were streamed, I could watch them at times that were convenient to me.

3.     If there was a telephone call or a knock at the door, I could put the conference on pause.

4.     The issues being addressed are current with the thinking of my grandchildren.  I am getting to see what is on their minds, and on the minds of their peers and their teachers.

5.     I am attending this conference at no extra cost.  I know the hidden costs.  A person has to have access to the internet and a device from which to watch – but I have those at my home, whether I watch or not.

6.     I am often looking back on my life to see if I can say I have lived it without regret.  And if not, I try to  name that regret.  One is that I would like to have added to my life, learning more about my own country.  So yesterday and potentially today I can drop "learning more about Canada" right into that bucket list, though I think there is either a hole in the bucket, or the bucket is much larger than I had previously thought.

Just my thoughts for the day.

Arta