Event Paper One – Theater

ARTS 1301.001

Geoffrey Bolton

February 22, 2013

 “Picasso at the Lapin Agile”, which I attended on February 14, 2013 at the UTD

University Theatre, is a self-described comedy play by Steven Martin. The play blends comedy

together with commentary on the nature of creativity to produce a light-hearted exploration on

the differences between science and art, particularly through costume, diction, and directing.

The play begins with some light banter. Mentions of bodily functions and the

stereotypical commentary regarding women that seems to abound when male characters are on

screen. Suddenly, we are introduced to our first character, Einstein. In comparison to the other

characters, he is more soberly dressed. Suit and tie as opposed to scarves and berets. The

moment he begins to speak however, we are immediately made aware of the fact that he is far

from one of the more sobering characters. His scientific jargon coupled with odd humor, the

opening ramble about if his date will arrive or not comes to mind, and belated “ice box

moments” make him seem disjointed and strange, often spouting off comments that make no

sense or feel like they should have been present moments prior. Shortly after a small interlude in

which we are introduced to a lover who “isn’t sure she’ll be meeting him [Picasso]” we are

introduced to the namesake of the play himself, Picasso. His method of dress clashes entirely

with Einstein’s, looking more like Picasso simply wore whatever was present when he awoke.

The robe and slippers (which don’t look entirely clean), to Einstein’s well-tailored suit. Strangely

despite the clashing appearances, they are remarkably similar. Ignoring the dialect differences,

Picasso too seems to go off on tangents that make little to no sense and confuse those around

him. He replaces Einstein’s belated humor with seemingly random changes of volume, often

going from a pleasant speaking voice to loud yelling at very small provocations. As the play

progresses and Einstein and Picasso clash, Picasso thinks Einstein’s work has no beauty and

Einstein thinks Picasso’s work is simplistic, we are introduced to yet another oddity. Charles
Dabernow Schemendiman bursts on to the scene with little to no warning, exclaiming that he

will be a man who changes the world with his inventions (most of which are useless). Strangely,

both the scientific types (Schemendiman and Einstein) seem to be Germanic. After

Schemendiman excuses himself, interjecting a small note on the virtue of confidence in the path

you have chosen, Einstein and Picasso begin to draw closer together as they begin to agree on

how creativity occurs to them with quips like “But it [creativity] never flows…. Well,

sometimes.” The play begins to wrap up with a small commentary on Picasso’s womanizing

ways, and the introduction of “The Visitor”. The Visitor helps the play along by helping create

similarities between the characters (primarily their desire to write love songs), and the play ends

with the epiphany of Picasso and Einstein as they “have that moment of perfection” and ring in

the 20th century with a toast to all the things they wish to do different.

Steven Martin sets up a variety of differences (mostly superficial) between the two

embodiments of two very different worlds. Einstein with his suit and tie, technical jargon and

quick mathematical thinking create a character very heavily based on logic and professionalism.

Picasso by contrast, has an air of irresponsibility with his womanizing ways, disheveled

appearance and lecherous behavior. The grand scheme of their ideas and desires (Picasso wants

to unify thought and creation, while Einstein wants to describe the cosmos) set up a point of

connection for the characters that is further enhanced by the similarities between their slightly

eccentric behavior and unusual view of the world around them. Schemendiman creates a

character that, while his ideas and desires are mostly useless, helps create a focal point for the

emotions of the characters by endeavoring to bolster their courage, and to give Picasso and

Einstein another point of similarity, primarily their amusement with Schemendiman’s antics.

Finally, The Visitor sets up the final moment of connection between Picasso and Einstein by
stirring a similar creative desire between them and provides comfort to them by illustrating the

future will be good for science and art alike. The net effect of all of these events is the union,

primarily in mentality and creative process, between the two dissimilar worlds of art and science.

The differing characters are both segregated and united by costume, interestingly enough.

Einstein and Picasso, while differing greatly in attire, if taken in the scheme of the other

characters can actually be seen as similarly different. Compared to the more utilitarian clothing

worn by the bar owner, his wife, and the French bar patron Gaston, the costume differences of

Einstein and Picasso are both equally absurd comparatively. The directing of the characters from

Einstein’s belated “ice box” humor to Picasso’s crude attempts with women and volume shifts

give the characters slightly more unique identities that play in to the stereotypes of their

individual worlds. Their diction pulls double duty and both unifies and divides Picasso and

Einstein. They’re both prone to rambling off on tangents, often lapsing in to technical jargon for

paintings or science without much thought. However, they’re also somewhat divided by this,

primarily seen through Picasso’s (attempted) accent and Einstein’s germanic method of speech.

Truthfully, I feel that these particular elements help distinguish Picasso from Einstein, which is

necessary to impress upon the viewer the differences in the ideas they represent (science and art),

while at the same time keeping them similar enough that their bonding (representing the

similarity of the creative process) is still believable.

In conclusion, I stand by the statement that the play, while comedic in nature, illustrates

the differences and similarities between scientists and artist, or science and art, while also

showing the bridge between them, namely the creative process. From Picasso’s womanizing and

disheveled looks to Einstein’s professional suit and logical mathematically based mind, the
differences are highlighted. While the eccentric nature and grasping for some greater ideal brings

them together.