Conflict In Oleanna

1. When analyzing a drama, it’s often best practice to break down the play into units. For each act, identify a few key moments that are essential to the story.

Oleanna, written by David Mamet, is a play that looks at a conflict between a university professor, John, and his student, Carol, who makes accusations against him. The only two characters in the play – Carol and John – are both very dynamic as they differentiate more and more from their initial character between the three acts.

In Act 1, Carol appears as an innocent college student, who is looking for help from her professor, John. She does not understand many of the things in his class and is looking for guidance to improve her mark. In response, John comes off as insensitive towards

As a university professor, John should have an obligation to supply education to his students in the best way possible, while keeping the student-teacher boundary that exists. Carol tells John that she has trouble understanding his book in which he questions the purpose of education. In an attempt to help Carol, he tells her that people thought that he was stupid as a child. John believes that he can reach Carol on a more personal level by sharing his views and experiences. He hopes that he can create a better relationship with her; in turn, he believes this will further her education. However, this only creates issues for him as she takes it the wrong way. Ultimately, John blatantly states that education is a joke. He thinks of the Tenure Committee as garbage and believes that those who create and take tests are idiots. He clearly states that “[tests] are [one’s] ability to retain and spout back misinformation”. Ultimately, John believes that the systematic build of education is a joke that is no longer valued. However, through his interaction with Carol, it seems that he still holds on to the idea that knowledge is important. He still believes good education is possible; however, he only felt he could do this by reaching a more personal level with his

After Act II, it is easier to sympathize with John. This is because it seems that he genuinely wanted to share his beliefs with his student – to create a more personal relationship; however, he did not expect the repercussions that unravelled in Act II and III. For example, when he stated that education is a “joke”, he wanted Carol to have a better understanding of how he looks at the education system. He wanted Carol to understand that education should not be something that an individual worries so much about because it is simply seeing and regurgitating – a concept that Carol was unable to understand. After Act II, it seems that Carol completely misinterpreted John’s intentions, resulting in him possibly losing his tenure because of the fact that she is an incomprehensive student that is not able to grasp certain ideals. Carol is at an advantage of being a woman, and alongside her accusations, she is easily able to take John down. John’s immediate disadvantage of being an educator and saying a few personal and unprofessional things to a student, results in his life – which he worked 20 years for – crashing down around him. Thus, it is easier to sympathize with