Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

We'll talk about name changes on Thursday.

So, the bulk of our discussion consisted of whether to have these characters in one segment or to take one of them and use the character as the through-line of the entire piece. Both characters have basic characteristics, but no developed plot line other than the existence of their relationship together.

Wilson: Very much the artist persona, he sees beauty very literally most of the time. Of course he thinks about the deeper meanings of his artwork and the abstract beauty of his love and the world, but beauty in science and math befuddles him. He's not sure what to make of numbers and logic, and tends to dismiss them as organizational tools rather than being of any consequence in their own right.

Belinda (Sophie?): She appreciates artisitic beauty, but doesn't really understand colors and normal beauty. She was raised in a household of professors (English Literature and Statistics) and never had much exposure to the visual arts. She can hear beauty in expanding patterns and repetitions and appreciates this kind of beauty on a much deeper level. She is also very intune with the beauty of love and the world as a whole.

Anna, Lauren and Mattie decided in the group discussion that they would much prefer one of these characters to be a literal "traveler" through the piece - appearing or at least being referenced in the majority of the segments. The changing nature of their relationship with beauty and the multitude of people around them providing a sort of back-support-story to the other segments, and allowing those segments to more freely take their course. That's not to say the "traveler" is telling stories about the other segments, but merely having his/her foot in them somehow to connect them.

Depending on how structure of the play turns out (wandering or zooming in) one of the last scenes in the show could be just the two of them silently finding beauty together, in each other (the stone or the marriage proposal.)