play

I can see why Hal can be viewed as selfish because there hasnt been much time to mourn the death. However I can also see how it can be seen as a tribute to a man who was clearly very intelligent. He was convinced that no one else would be able to produce any type of mathematics like what was in those notebooks and he wanted others to be able to see and learn from them. I think that this argument really can go both ways depending on which way you looked at it. His daughter of course thought that it was completely self- absorbed to want to get money from her deceased fathers work and while I can see why she thought that- I dont really think that those were his true intenetions. I really do think that he wanted others to be able to admire the brillance that was portrayed on the pages.
I thought it was interesting how in the opening lines of the play, you have no idea that she is talking to her dead father. At first I thought that she was talking to her friend/boyfriend whom she lived with. After we learn that he is dead, it seems a bit more intriguing. The entire length of the play, she is trying to convince herself that she is not crazy but all the while talking to her dead fathers ghost. How sane is this? I do agree with her father that "you can not inherit" insanity but I dont agree with her own personal claim that she is not crazy.
But then that raises the question that was posed in the play itself which is- if you can consciously say that you are crazy, does the fact that you can recognize it negate the fact that you actually are? I think that sometimes everyone feels a bit crazy, and we are aware of it and voice this outloud but how many of us are actually really crazy?
I dont think that you can inherit insanity from someone. I have seen many instances where one or both of the parents were crazy and the child was not. If you are living with two crazy people, I can see how you could be strange- but theres a fine line between craziness and just being a little bit odd. I do think though that if she continues to segregate herself from society that she could possibly end up like her father- she could drive herself mad , but as far as her being "destined" to be just like him , I think is a far fetched idea.
I think that being able to portray a full situation simply by dialouge is talent and I as well would enjoy the opportunity to read the entire play. I would be curious to see how the entire thing plays out.
I think that the title of the play symbolizes what is Catherines internal conflict throughout the entire play. She is trying to proof/disprove that she is crazy. Is she crazy? Does the fact that she is talking to her dead father prove this? She is convinced that Hal is trying to steal things from her, seems to become paranoid, is this proof that she is crazy even though she turns out to be right? And i guess the most important question is.... what does being "crazy" actually entail?