Ruby Moon (1 Viewer)

[H. Caulfield]

i just finished reading this but i don't get it. From the back cover it sounds fabulous, although i can't make sense of these 'layers'
My teacher's already introduced to me the concept of Ruby not existing at all. but i stil not getting it... HELP

 

[risole91]

i just finished reading this but i don't get it. From the back cover it sounds fabulous, although i can't make sense of these 'layers'
My teacher's already introduced to me the concept of Ruby not existing at all. but i stil not getting it... HELP

I dont think 08rs did this..

 

[jennieTalia]

I did Ruby Moon
Ok...
you mean like the different characters, how only two actors played it etc?

I need specifics if you need help

 

[jennieTalia]

Questions-
Is everything made up inside their minds? At the end they parody all the neighbours, even though they all played them, which makes it seem sort of screwed up :S
What is real? (Think about the repetition of 'tell me what we know')
If Ruby is real... what sort of a character is she? She is presented in many ways... often sinister for a child of her age (blaspheming, the way she walks down the road in a 'little red dress')

All the characters appear to me missing something. Are they actually all representatives of the little parts that make up Ray and Sylvie. Is it a coping mechanism?

 

[jennieTalia]

If you get the chance, watch it in performance. One of the most AMAZING things I have ever seen!
So basically, it surrounds the idea of a little girl missing.
Ordinary enough.
However it deals with Ray and Sylvies grief,
we may feel like we are solving the mystery but so much of it is convoluted, she is kept medicated, hears fake calls etc.
Each of the characters they go to could essentially be guilty.
Are any of them?
Sid Craven-plays on our paranoias. idea of 'played with her' becomes molested
Social issues present. What really happens behind closed doors?
Creepy parts- Ray attempts to take advantage of Veronica, the passionate kissing of Sylvie dressed as Ruby (creeped me out in theatre)

Ray- character is picked apart, originally stands as the typical breadwinner male... but the layers fall away until Sylvie accuses him of Rubys death, an affair with Veronica is revealed and he is even aggressive towards his wife.
Each of the characters appears as a stereotype and then takes it to the extreme and then refutes it
IDENTITY is a major part. (many HSC questions around this)
Many represent atypical Australians e.g. war veteran, suburbanites, aspiriring teenager etc
Think about how it fits into the Australian Contemporary Theatre bracket.
The fairytale thing is really prominent- obviously based on red riding hood, and many sort of allusions to story books and tunes and the 'wizard' pied piper etc
Childrens innocence questioned.
Structure- each character has a routine, points to another one and sends them door knocking down the street. the importance of the 'dead end' cul de sac street is a HUGE metaphor
Will they ever find Ruby?
Stranger Danger
Can anyone get over something like that?
Use of voice over- we only have a disembodied version of ruby, no actual visage other than a mannequine.
Nightmarish, surrealistic. "Heightened naturalism".
Dont worry too much, it will come to you

 

[Kiim2507]

I did Ruby Moon too
I'm dying to see it in a production

 

[jennieTalia]

I saw it before I studied it. So last year?
It will probably be on stage again next year as they do it every second.

Fabulous
I seriously got the chills so many times.

 

[Kiim2507]

I'll have to look out for it next year
I'm sure it'd be amazing

 

[AmyleaG]

Everybody's analysis will be different which is why you need evidence to back it up. But this is what I think: Ray and Sylvie are all of the characters. In the play, one female and one male actor is used to portray all of the characters which I think is a metaphor for the characters being all inside Ray and Sylvies heads. They are incredibly distraught, and they constantly play different situations in their heads trying to find answers. So therefore, I think Sylvie is used to depict all the female characters and Ray all the male ones.

It is very layered in terms of the symbols and metaphors. It is basically an extended metaphor for little red riding hood; flame tree grove being the woods, she goes to her grandmothers...just doesn't return, "Ruby" - red. It has many symbols such as the rocking chair in the background - it is rocking although there is nobody there, to show Ruby is still consuming their lives.

The themes also make it very layered - these include suburban paranioa, loss of a child, grieving, etc.

 

[jennieTalia]

Everybody's analysis will be different which is why you need evidence to back it up. But this is what I think: Ray and Sylvie are all of the characters. In the play, one female and one male actor is used to portray all of the characters which I think is a metaphor for the characters being all inside Ray and Sylvies heads. They are incredibly distraught, and they constantly play different situations in their heads trying to find answers. So therefore, I think Sylvie is used to depict all the female characters and Ray all the male ones.

It is very layered in terms of the symbols and metaphors. It is basically an extended metaphor for little red riding hood; flame tree grove being the woods, she goes to her grandmothers...just doesn't return, "Ruby" - red. It has many symbols such as the rocking chair in the background - it is rocking although there is nobody there, to show Ruby is still consuming their lives.

The themes also make it very layered - these include suburban paranioa, loss of a child, grieving, etc.

And if you read Matt Camerons introduction and the stage directions it says that the actors are not supposed to make 'wholesale changes' in costume etc to become each person, further highlighting that they are meant to, at least question, the existance of each.

 

[Corinne77]

Ruby Moon will be at Star of the Sea Theatre, Manly in May 2009!
Great actors and what i've seen of it already, it's going to be pretty amazing.

 

[demik91]

I was disappointed in the playing of Ruby Moon at Star of the Sea in Manly. One of the actors was not focused to the extent of ruining lines. Although there were some amazing conventions and symbolism used, the play was ruined by the attempt at sexual innuendo that just turned it into a shameless mess. There were some who thought it was brilliant but it was evident that they had not even studied the text.

 

[Petchy]

i completely agree, i saw the queensland theatre company's interpritation which blew me away and opened up the plays potential to it's fullest, but i walked out of the manly play after sitting through a painful hour and a half of out of place inuendo, dismal use of props and unconvinceing performances. but at least i now have a very good example of what to write about what makes the play acctually work in my HSC by comparing the brilliant with the plane crash it's obvious what the play needs to work and i feel although i had a horrid time watching this, it will help my result

 

[snooky91]

hey petch lol hows it going haha
this play absolutely ruined ruby moon for me.
the female perfomer did not fit the character at all. she looked like a tranny, and was too old and fat. sorry to put it plainly but thats how it is. The male performer did an alright job, which was ruined by this woman's constant sexual advances towards him.
It completely butchered the text, and I am currently trying to wipe the memory from my mind and keep with the 2008 Brisbane Theatre Company version.

 

[phiad]

Yeah i saw it too, the acting was horrible and the fact that they had to have a drink on stage where every one could see was fairly un professional and funny however, they put the play on to give students a good idea about it. The woman's acting skills were rather embarrassing but apparently she is an HSC marker so i wouldnt pay her out if you write an essay on it

 

[Natas]

I was disappointed in the playing of Ruby Moon at Star of the Sea in Manly. One of the actors was not focused to the extent of ruining lines. Although there were some amazing conventions and symbolism used, the play was ruined by the attempt at sexual innuendo that just turned it into a shameless mess. There were some who thought it was brilliant but it was evident that they had not even studied the text.

i agree it was one of the worst plays i have ever seen they totally missed all the subtleties that make ruby moon good, i couldnt believe how bad it was and she is a HSC marker which makes it even worse she should understand exactly what is going on with this play.

 

[alex.leon]

i agree it was one of the worst plays i have ever seen they totally missed all the subtleties that make ruby moon good, i couldnt believe how bad it was and she is a HSC marker which makes it even worse she should understand exactly what is going on with this play.

I fucking KNOW!
Every single person I know who went to see it thought it was the biggest piece of shit they'd ever seen. I mean, they made Veronica Vale a tranny. Wtf. And I stayed for the Q&A afterwards and got hammered for asking if they thought they'd warped Matt Cameron's intentions.

 

[posey-rose]

i went to the manly production... i thought it was pretty good.
okay so i was bummed that they didnt use any props (for example the way they did Dolcie's bird was just ridiculous). and i didnt like their adaptation of Veronica either.
but everything else i thought was pretty good about it... it was a different adaptation that you can easily slip into an essay to demonstrate the different perspectives that people have on the play.

 

[ezikazoo]

I also went to see the Manly star of the sea production not knowing anything about the story, and came away confused. After reading the play I am still confused as to some of their choices. Red converses? but they still provided a great deal of discussion in my class, also their idea to "declutter" the stage kind of worked - but not the drinks "hidden" behind the mannequin. Also for a transformational play the transformations left much to be desired.