The dialectic of Top Girls is wide-ranging, covering universal dilemmas facing women, but focuses on major themes of contemporary life. The critique of feminist ambitions is a clear central theme and Churchill's selection of women from the past and modern world shows sympathy for the feminist cause and disdain for the male oppressor, but there is no sentimentality an no
Whenever I read a five sta ...more
I read Churchill's Top Girls as part of my A Level English Literature class and was truly amazed by how much I loved it. When we started reading the play, I wasn't too sure what I thought partly because of the strange situation it throws you into but also due to the fact that I'd never read a play before. Once I got into the way of reading a play, I was totally submerged in what was happening.
Loved the outcome of this play, especially the way it wasn't obvious and took some working out. Ca ...more
And yes I did cry at the end so how can I not like a play that moved me this much !?
Loved different female characters Churchill created. I could identify with each of them in a different way. I felt like each of them carried a little part of my soul.
While on the one hand the characters in Top Girls are passionate and examples of strength, they are also figures of regret and uncertainly.
Luckily Churchill doesn't take a strong-side and make this a message play (claiming that working women are empty without a family, or that housewives are without identity other without their families), but ins ...more
What I loved most was the way the play enfolds. First we are shown the so called successful women of the past and some reflection of their life and characteristics in Marlene. Then we see the amazing transition of every career woman's idol changing into a social hazard, a woman who had abandoned family for work. The structure of the play is ...more
This is just so confusing. First off, every act is so different that they could all be from separate plays. They don't have any relation to one another at all. The only constant in all three is Marlene and I'm not even sure why. There isn't a plot, there isn't a story-line or any type of goal for Marlene, and it just doesn't make any sense.
Maybe I'm missing the point. I understand that this play is set in the 1980's, around the Thatcher ...more
It saddens me that as different as each of the characters were they still were insanely unhappy. I don't want to spoil any of the events but there is something in the play that shocked me. It definitely made the whole play a whole lot more interesting. There are a ton of questions in ...more
I understand that all the debates on feminism etc. were a product of their time (the '80s) and that this play deals with important, complex subjects. But I didn't care for much of what was going on. The only section I liked was when all of the different characters from different countries and periods of histories gathered at a table together ...more
I did however like the femininity and behind the play and I thought that the cut ins when other characters are talking is so clever and it is very hard to perform and so confusing despite the cleverness behind it.
Churchill made me think about my own fantasy dinner party that was apart of act 1, I think it was so clever to have women talk about t ...more
Her early work developed Bertolt Brecht's modernist dramatic and theatr ...more