Proof -- by David Auburn (2001)

Description

Playbill.com succinctly summarizes the play by saying this: "The daughter of a recently deceased mathematician must fight to prove the authorship of a landmark proof that is discovered among her father's papers, while also dealing with her father's legacy of genius and mental illness." The play has only four characters. The protagonist is Catherine. Catherine's sister, Claire, pushes her to leave their childhood home after their father, Robert, dies. Catherine's emotional attachment to the house conflicts this suggestion. She had taken care of her mathematical-genius father in his difficult final four years of life. While she was taking care of him, she was privately working on a mathematical proof her father had encouraged her to start. She finished it without his awareness. Eventually, one of Robert's previous students, Hal, befriends Catherine. Their friendship accelerates after Robert's funeral. Catherine entrusts Hal with a key to a drawer in the attic-- a drawer he hadn't been able to access while trying to make sense of Robert's 103 math composition books. The drawer contains the proof. For some reason, neither Hal nor Claire believe that Catherine wrote the proof. Their lack of belief frustrates Catherine, understandably. Catherine clarifies her relationship with Hal at the end of the play; she also decides whether she will move to New York with her sister. All the while, Catherine fears turning into her father-- a brilliant individual who fights against psychological neuroses and physical ailments.  

Candid Reaction

• I wonder how much psychological distance David Auburn had to this piece. 
• In the first scene, Auburn does an impeccable job developing character through having the mathematicians evaluate the wine. 
• Catherine reasons her social life like a proof-- good move, David!
• Some of the interaction between Robert and Catherine is too sweetsy, but I suppose it makes sense if we are seeing Robert through Catherine's grieving mind. 
• The scenes are so short. Any time there is parallelism, it seems almost like the record is skipping. 
• So Catherine is supposed to have wet hair at the beginning of a scene and then dry hair in the next scene? I know I'm looking into this too far, probably, but how do the actors achieve this practically? 
• I don't like Claire. 
• Themes of privacy and ownership are nicely interwoven throughout the play. 
• I knew something had to happen near the end of Act One -- the act was quite tame on plot. The final few lines revealed Auburn's methodical plotting. 
• Flashbacks are tricky to insert into the middle of plays. 
• I wonder how playwrights view monologues economically. 
• The "proof" theme gets meta for a while . . . 
• This play could only take place pre-cell phones. Imagine how much Hal would just take pics of all the material if he had a phone. 
• Act Two Scene Four was confusing. 
• The start of the final scene reminded me of "Barcelona" from Company.
• How strong was Catherine's statement that nothing could prove her authorship except for trust! 
• The return to the radiators motif in the final moments of the play was clever. 
• I applaud Auburn for achieving so much character development with one word at the end of the show.  

Top Two Aspects/Reasons for Winning
1. Subjectivity vs. Objectivity

To mix the subjectivity of authorship with the objectivity of mathematics is smart. In a way, the play almost foreshadows the ridiculousness of the Fake News era.

2. American Dream

Indirectly, Auburn contrasts the difference between individuals achieving the American Dream and individualizing achieving self-actualization. That's a conversation worth having as an American!


Classroom Implications
I don't think I would like to use this text in class because it's honestly quite boring . . . I could envision nice discussions on theme and parallel structure. Symbolism could be investigated, but there are better texts for that.

I do think it would be fascinating to compare this text with Doubt. I could see Proof being a companion text for Doubt. 

Personal Takeaway
I love a sneaky author who can tie everything together in just a few sentences. It's like a crescendo. 

Ranking

	Dialogue	Characters	Plot/Conflict	Symbol/Literary Devices	Overall Enjoyment	TOTAL SCORE 7.0
0	Unfollowable; unrealistic; diction does not match character	Undeveloped; does not reflect humanity	Not engaging; predictable; reader can step away from text because it isn’t gripping	Devices are apparent for cleverness and do not enhance the story	Reader has no interest in re-reading play
1	Not consistently realistic	Well-developed; most depictions reflect humanity	Semi-engaging; some unnecessary plot-points (1.5)	Devices somewhat enhance story  (1)	Reader would re-read with pleasure and reminded of work (1)
2	Realistic; connotative; diction matches characters (1.75)	Fully-developed; depictions reflect humanity  (1.75)	Engaging; unique; reader finds it impossible to put down text because the conflict is so gripping!	Devices seamlessly enhance the story and provide rich interpretation	Reader would re-read the play on own volition, enthusiastically