Water by the Spoonful wins the 2012 Pulitzer for Drama

[bjh2114]

Posted: 4/16/12 at 3:06pm

I really wish Sons of the Prophet or Peter and the Starcatcher had won. Wow, the Pulitzer committee really loves Quiara Alegría Hudes. She's been a finalist so many times in the past few years, and now she finally won. Has anyone seen/read the play?

[bjh2114]

Posted: 4/16/12 at 3:12pm

Just to add, she was a finalist in 2009 for In the Heights and in 2007 for Elliot, a Soldier's Fugue.

[breathyfemalevocal]

Posted: 4/16/12 at 3:15pm

https://forum.broadwayworld.com/readmessage.php?thread=1044182&dt=1&boardid=1

[rjm516]

Posted: 4/16/12 at 3:16pm

These threads just lead back to each other! It's a wicked thing.

[bjh2114]

Posted: 4/16/12 at 3:16pm

Right, I figured we didn't need two threads about it. And since this one was first, I figured I would guide people to this one.

[broadwaydevil]

Posted: 4/16/12 at 3:18pm

https://forum.broadwayworld.com/Icanpostthreadlinkstoo


I'm a bit surprised Other Desert Cities didn't win. I literally know nothing about this play.

[bjh2114]

Posted: 4/16/12 at 3:23pm

I'm not surprised that Other Desert Cities didn't win, but I am surprised at what it lost to. Every year we fall into the same trap of thinking that New York theatre is the be all, end all of the theatre. Yet every year the winner or some of the finalists have been from regional theatre. That being said, I don't remember ANY buzz about this play when it was in Hartford. That seems unusual that it didn't seem to be on anyone's radar.

[broadwaydevil]

Posted: 4/16/12 at 3:27pm

^Agreed. I'll readily admit I don't follow the Pulitzer scene very closely and I had to look up the name of the play before I even remembered anything about it. I think you're definitely right about New York theatre. For new, thought-provoking and interesting plays, I think, more often than not, one can find better original works elsewhere.

[MadonnaMusical]

Posted: 4/16/12 at 7:38pm

Amazing! A latina woman winning the Pulitzer is amazing! Nobody paid any attention to this play.... but the Pulitzer committee must have decided years ago that they were waiting to see the sequel to Elliot's fugue... and they must have made a date to catch it....

CONGRATS!!!! Glad we'll probably get to see it now in NYC...

[RippedMan]

Posted: 4/16/12 at 7:42pm

So glad "Other Desert Cities" didn't win. It does nothing new for the theater world. It says nothing new and doesn't provide any new form for the theater. And you wanted Peter and the Starcatcher to win? It's a play based on a book. It's a kids show basically.

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 4/16/12 at 9:38pm

Sooooo....I'm guessing this will be coming to Broadway next season?

I'd honestly never even heard of it until today.

[GlindatheGood22]

Posted: 4/16/12 at 9:44pm

Should have been Sons of the Prophet. I'm 100% convinced Karam is one America's great new playwrights, so I'm sure there's a Pultizer in his future anyway.

[RippedMan]

Posted: 4/16/12 at 10:18pm

For those of you saying "It should have been..." Have you even read this play? That's what I thought.

And I'd be surprised if it didn't get picked up by one of the non-profits off Bway.

[Dollypop]

Posted: 4/16/12 at 10:38pm

"Just a Spoonful of Water helps the Pulitzer get won. The Pulitzer gets won, oh the Pulitzer get won..."

[Mandi Moo]

Posted: 4/16/12 at 11:56pm

I actually worked on/saw this production. It's an excellent show, but it really struggled finding an audience up here. Though the critics and the audience that it did find really loved it!

The description on the Pulitzer website makes it sound dreadfully boring though...yes, it focuses a lot on Elliot struggling with being home from Iraq and demons that followed him, but it's also about his relationship with his mother. She is a recovering addict who moderates a chatroom for other recovering addicts. There are whole scenes that take place in this chatroom and characters we only know by screenname.

I hope it gets a New York run so that more people can see it!

[bjh2114]

Posted: 4/17/12 at 12:39am

Woah RippedMan, chill out.

For those of you saying "It should have been..." Have you even read this play? That's what I thought.

I never said it SHOULD have been anything. I said I WANTED it to be something. I will read this play once it's published (if it isn't already) and I might absolutely love it. I never claimed otherwise.

And you wanted Peter and the Starcatcher to win? It's a play based on a book. It's a kids show basically.

Yes because I think it's an incredibly inventive take on the material. The fact that it's based on a book (children's or otherwise) has nothing to do with anything. The interpretation is, in my opinion, brilliant.

[RippedMan]

Posted: 4/17/12 at 1:05am

I think if you read "Peter and the Starcatchers" without seeing the visual you'd feel different, but maybe not.

And you chill out. I wasn't calling you out since you didn't say it. Don't throw yourself under the bus.

[bjh2114]

Posted: 4/17/12 at 1:08am

Ah, ok. It seemed as though you were responding to me. Guess not. And for the record, I do think that about the writing of Peter. Having seen it twice, the second time I really went in focusing on the play itself. I think it's incredibly clever regardless of the staging.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 4/17/12 at 9:57am

But Peter and the Starcatcher doesn't really fit the criteria for the Pulitzer. I doubt it even qualified.

[AC126748]

Posted: 4/17/12 at 10:15am

Pulitzer criteria: "a distinguished play by an American author, preferably original in its source and dealing with American life." PREFERABLY being the operative word here. Ruined, I Am My Own Life, Sunday in the Park With George, and The Diary of Anne Frank technically don't fit the criteria either, and it didn't hurt them. Nor did it hurt the NUMEROUS works that are based on pre-existing sources, like HOW TO SUCCEED IN BUSINESS, ALL THE WAY HOME, THE OLD MAID, SOUTH PACIFIC, and TEAHOUSE FOR THE AUGUST MOON.

Updated On: 4/17/12 at 10:15 AM

[bjh2114]

Posted: 4/17/12 at 11:08am

Word.

[newintown]

Posted: 4/17/12 at 11:29am

It might be good to remember that an award from a small committee doesn't actually bestow inherent quality upon any work of art.

The Pulitzer is just another random award, presented by a small group of people with their own specific preferences and tastes. Aside from the cash and (illusory) prestige, it means nothing.

Updated On: 4/17/12 at 11:29 AM

[PalJoey]

Posted: 4/17/12 at 12:48pm

The Old Maid won the Pulitzer?

[RippedMan]

Posted: 4/17/12 at 12:48pm

It means nothing in a sense, but to me it means a lot. If you look at the long list of past winners, those are all great plays (except for Anna in the Tropics which is just awful).

[newintown]

Posted: 4/17/12 at 12:57pm

Perhaps, but no greater than hundreds, maybe thousands of other plays that didn't win or weren't even shortlisted.

The award doesn't make these plays "the best" or even "better than" bushels full of other work. That's the mistake most people make about any award - assuming that a random award automatically makes a work superlative.