Courtney:
Midterm time at Chatham can get a little crazy. For a first year, having already survived one semester worth of midterms and finals seems like an advantage. You know how to study, how to prepare, some things to expect. So no big deal. Having gone through it once, you should be able to do it easily this time, right? That is, of course, until you started to realize how much work you have to do again. And then the panic starts setting in.
So this is the advantage of being a Chatham Scholar. You get to have the chance to blow off all that pent up midterm steam. Take a break, relax, and act kinda dumb with some of your fellow scholars while Dr. Lenz totes you around Pittsburgh in his car. And the perfect outlet?
Camelot: it brings to mind images of round tables, fearless and just knights, Kind Arthur and his wife Guenevere, and Lancelot. Or maybe it even brings to mind Monty Python and the Holy Grail and the movie’s hilarious antics and British humor. Either way, it seems like the perfect way to get out of the dorm, take a break for the evening, and even keep your mind working some while you watch the play, aptly titled “Camelot.”
Like any good play, “Camelot” by Lerner and Loewe kept the minds of the viewer’s active throughout the scenes. Often humorous, at times sentimental or serious, viewers were continually engaged. In the theater, everything else seems to fall out of existence. Your mind is only aware of the actions of the actors, their dialogue, the storyline. When the lights in the theater come back on, you blink, look around, and applaud the bowing actors onstage. You’ve got all these thoughts kicking around in your head about what you saw, about Lancelot’s good looks and ridiculous French accent, or the amazing singing voices of the performers. And when Dr. Lenz asks you to write a summary for the scholar’s blog, you’ve got to sit down, think, and finally get all those thoughts jumping around in your head about “Camelot” to coalesce. So here’s what has been bouncing around in my head ever since I saw the play.
“Lerner and Loewe’s play “Camelot” combines traditional views of the tale of King Arthur with humor that gave viewers a new perspective on the traditional story. Lancelot’s initially ridiculous French accent provides wonderfully executed juxtaposition to the grave situation that his character faces later in the play when trying to decide whether to pursue his love for Guenevere or to stay true to his loyalty for Arthur. The character of Mordred is also developed and used in such a way, with his ridiculous boasting and the groaning of the other characters towards his person acquiring a more serious tone when he brings about the events that lead to Arthur’s discovery of Lancelot and Guenevere’s love. “Camelot” was constructed to allow viewers to become engaged in the first act with the humorous aspects of the characters and storyline so that the more serious nature of the second act takes on even more vivid hues. The play’s structure unfolds for the viewer the delightful early years of Camelot and how like a scarf it began to unravel in the wind.”
That’s a little much to swallow, isn’t it? So here’s what I actually decided:
The opportunity to go see “Camelot” with my fellow scholars not only provided some relief from midterms, it made me feel more cultured and part of a group. We all got to relax, take some needed time off from schoolwork, and venture out into the city with a group of people with whom we had a good time (and who probably needed a break as well.) We got (semi) dressed up and braved the snow. We squashed ourselves into cars and got a look at the lights of Pittsburg at night. Some of us got drenched in snow, some were a bit more lucky. We got to watch Guenevere prance around in joy at love and springtime in Camelot, Arthur get the jitters over a new wife, and see Lancelot (some of us strategically placed enough to see him come clunking along in his armor before he entered the audience) perform miracles. Overall, I’d argue that we got to have some fun.
