What do you think?
Rate this book
The House of Blue Leaves & Chaucer in Rome
In his new play, Chaucer in Rome, it is the year 2000, and Ron and his wife come to Rome to search for their son. And with his inimitable wit and understanding, Guare has written a scathingly funny satire on the warping hunger for fame, and the betrayal involved in creating art.
286 pages, Paperback
First published June 1, 2002
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
December 29, 2018
I'm not a theater person and I am dubious about "high art," "high literature," all that stuff incredibly educated but also condescending people tell me I should like. Or not even like, really. Stuff I should value, but I digress. What I mean is consider the source, I don't know what I'm talking about. But I'm going to talk anyway.
I read the two plays raw, no reviews, no ideas what to expect. Never heard of Guare, don't know what anything is about, I only picked it up because someone recommended "House of Blue Leaves," and later recalled what she meant was "House of Leaves," but the word "House" was written in blue in her copy so she got them confused. That's how raw I went into these plays and I have to say, going into art raw is highly, highly underrated. Is it comedy, is it tragedy, is it romance I don't know, and when you don't know the predictable becomes unexpected and new, like when you were a kid and didn't know all the tropes yet and it's all fresh. So that's my first recommendation, which is to quit reading reviews and just dive into whatever and who knows? You might enjoy it more and if you don't, you don't. You experienced something new.
If you're still reading and ignoring my advice that's cool too, I'll tell you a little about what I liked about these two plays and that is, they are insane. Both of them. They are raucous, outrageous, irreverent, and self aware. I like it when high art makes fun of high art, it appeals to my dubiousness and reassures me that not all high artists take themselves as seriously as it seems to take itself. "House" is set in the late 70's, in Queens. Not New York. Queens. This is important, but if you read the introduction Guare explains the significance so don't worry. "Chaucer" is set in 2000, the Holy Year, but that's also explained. In this sense, Guare does an excellent job in making this high art at least somewhat accessible to the uninitiated, and he deserves a gold star for that. The characters are hilarious and a little seamy, but most important they are desperate, and desperation is fun to watch. That's what I liked most about these plays; they are fun. And yes, there's more in there that we can pick apart and can speak to you on some angsty, existential level. We can justify all the hilarity because of the wry observations, the clever self examination and disquieting introspection they can bring if we want to pay attention to that kind of thing. But these are also fun, and don't you dare tell me I'm not allowed to enjoy art.
I don't want to be anything like any of the characters in either of these plays. They are tragic, they are nuts, they are all screaming inside for something they need but can't have. I wish I could help them, but the only way I can do that is to listen to their sad, cautionary tale and move on. Time well spent, I say.
I read the two plays raw, no reviews, no ideas what to expect. Never heard of Guare, don't know what anything is about, I only picked it up because someone recommended "House of Blue Leaves," and later recalled what she meant was "House of Leaves," but the word "House" was written in blue in her copy so she got them confused. That's how raw I went into these plays and I have to say, going into art raw is highly, highly underrated. Is it comedy, is it tragedy, is it romance I don't know, and when you don't know the predictable becomes unexpected and new, like when you were a kid and didn't know all the tropes yet and it's all fresh. So that's my first recommendation, which is to quit reading reviews and just dive into whatever and who knows? You might enjoy it more and if you don't, you don't. You experienced something new.
If you're still reading and ignoring my advice that's cool too, I'll tell you a little about what I liked about these two plays and that is, they are insane. Both of them. They are raucous, outrageous, irreverent, and self aware. I like it when high art makes fun of high art, it appeals to my dubiousness and reassures me that not all high artists take themselves as seriously as it seems to take itself. "House" is set in the late 70's, in Queens. Not New York. Queens. This is important, but if you read the introduction Guare explains the significance so don't worry. "Chaucer" is set in 2000, the Holy Year, but that's also explained. In this sense, Guare does an excellent job in making this high art at least somewhat accessible to the uninitiated, and he deserves a gold star for that. The characters are hilarious and a little seamy, but most important they are desperate, and desperation is fun to watch. That's what I liked most about these plays; they are fun. And yes, there's more in there that we can pick apart and can speak to you on some angsty, existential level. We can justify all the hilarity because of the wry observations, the clever self examination and disquieting introspection they can bring if we want to pay attention to that kind of thing. But these are also fun, and don't you dare tell me I'm not allowed to enjoy art.
I don't want to be anything like any of the characters in either of these plays. They are tragic, they are nuts, they are all screaming inside for something they need but can't have. I wish I could help them, but the only way I can do that is to listen to their sad, cautionary tale and move on. Time well spent, I say.
January 21, 2018
House of Blue Leaves - Artie is an aging, aspiring songwriter trying to escape Queens with his girlfriend by committing his wife to an institution and leveraging a friendship with a Hollywood producer at the same time his Vietnam bound soldier son decides to blow up the Pope.
This play is crazy. There are nuns, bombs, and craziness all punctuated by sprightly short songs the protagonist bangs out on the piano. Tactically, the nuns are very funny. After being asked to leave a room a nun says: "Don't bother about us. We're nothing. We've just given our lives up praying for you. I'm going to start picking who I pray for. " Lines like this keep rolling through the play. That said, its another play about wanting to be a star in Hollywood with all that entails which is a tad wearisome. I liked it given its drawbacks.
Recommend.
This play is crazy. There are nuns, bombs, and craziness all punctuated by sprightly short songs the protagonist bangs out on the piano. Tactically, the nuns are very funny. After being asked to leave a room a nun says: "Don't bother about us. We're nothing. We've just given our lives up praying for you. I'm going to start picking who I pray for. " Lines like this keep rolling through the play. That said, its another play about wanting to be a star in Hollywood with all that entails which is a tad wearisome. I liked it given its drawbacks.
Recommend.
January 6, 2017
I saw John Guare's name on a list of the greatest contemporary playwrights recently. I've only seen two of his plays, "A Free Man of Color" (boring) and "Six Degrees of Separation" (very good but hugely overrated). I thought I would try "The House of Blue Leaves," one of his most successful plays.There is a lot about this play that is good. Sharp dialogue, some well written characters, never
boring plot.
There is a lot about this play that is bad. It has not aged well. AT ALL. So dated, and not in a nostalgia inducing way.
Some of the characters (the ones that are not well written) are types, not people.
Guare's way of dealing with mental illness in this play is awful. One of the main characters, who is suffering from mental illness, is actually named Bananas. Get it. Her name is Bananas because, well, shes bananas. Yeah, its that bad. Her mental illness is played for laughs throughout. Offensive, and left me with a terrible taste in my mouth.
boring plot.
There is a lot about this play that is bad. It has not aged well. AT ALL. So dated, and not in a nostalgia inducing way.
Some of the characters (the ones that are not well written) are types, not people.
Guare's way of dealing with mental illness in this play is awful. One of the main characters, who is suffering from mental illness, is actually named Bananas. Get it. Her name is Bananas because, well, shes bananas. Yeah, its that bad. Her mental illness is played for laughs throughout. Offensive, and left me with a terrible taste in my mouth.
July 22, 2009
House of Blue Leaves is a freaking awesome play by John Guare. Seriously.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews