Test

overrideBackgroundColorOrImage= overrideTextColor= overrideTextAlignment= overrideCardHideSection= overrideCardHideByline= overrideCardHideDescription= overridebuttonBgColor= overrideButtonText= overrideTextAlignment=

data-content-type="article"

[caption id="" align="aligncenter" width="376"] Margaret Roper[/caption] Margaret More Roper: Scholar and Daughter by Adam White, dramaturg Thomas More was a family man; he was married twice and had four children with his first wife, Jane Colt. After being married for six years, Jane Colt More died, leaving More with four children: Margaret, Elizabeth, Cecily and John. However, More quickly remarried to the widow Dame Alice Middleton, marrying her within a month of his wife’s death. While many of his friends resisted the rapid nature of the arrangement, More went through with it. Thomas and Alice More would raise the four children Thomas More had with Jane, as well as Alice’s daughter from her previous marriage and a foster daughter. Certainly, More valued his family and the welfare of his children. More also valued the power of education. He insisted that his daughters be educated through rigorous schooling, and this was unusual in 16th-century England, as society at large believed women unfit for scholarly pursuits. Despite cultural and institutional norms, Margaret More, the eldest of the More children (and More’s favorite, some would argue), would grow to become one of the most educated people in all of England, a woman of great scholarly knowledge. Margaret More Roper was tutored at home and became well-known for her studies, particularly for her adeptness in Greek and Latin. Her skill in writing and speaking Latin would impress the clergy of England. This specialty is reflected in a scene in Bolt’s A Man for All Seasons where Margaret and King Henry VIII engage in a bit of Latin language sparring. She would also become the first woman who was not of royal birth to publish a translated book. In October 1524, Roper published an English translation of a book called ‘Precatio dominica’ written by Thomas More’s good friend Erasmus. This book was based on the Lord’s Prayer. Instead of translating the book directly from Latin to English, Roper would use her extensive knowledge of both languages to construct the themes and the meanings Erasmus had written in to the treatise with her own words. [caption id="" align="aligncenter" width="291"] Erasmus, Dutch humanist and good friend to Thomas More[/caption] It was Margaret who would visit the imprisoned Thomas More the most often. They were very close, writing letters to one another regularly the duration of their relationship. It was in a letter to Margaret that Thomas More confided, “I do nobody harm, I say none harm, I thinke none harm, but wish everybody good. And if this be not enough to keep a man alive, in good faith I long not to live.” We have good reason to believe that Margaret More Roper very well understood what would be her father’s fate. After Thomas More’s execution, Margaret More Roper and her husband William Roper would continue to carry on his legacy in their own ways. William Roper would write the first biography of Thomas More, a glowing and gracious document that would influence our understanding of More’s personality for hundreds of years to come. Margaret More Roper actually kept her father’s head after his beheading, pickling it to preserve it from decay. While many of us may find that historical tidbit a tad macabre, I would like to believe that Margaret More Roper had deep admiration for her father; perhaps it was out of this feeling she kept his head. Please stay tuned to the 4th Wall Dramaturgy Blog to catch clips of my interview with Mallory Gee, the actress who will portray Margaret More Roper in BYU’s A Man for All Seasons. Bibliography: Abernathy, Susan. "Margaret Roper, Daughter of Sir Thomas More." Early Modern England. N.p., n.d. Web. 04 Feb. 2014. Duerden, Richard. "A Man for All Seasons." Telephone interview. 31 Jan. 2014. "Margaret Roper." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 28 Sept. 2013. Web. 02 Oct. 2013. "Sir Thomas More Quotes and Quotations." Sir Thomas More Quotes and Quotations. Luminarium. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Nov. 2013.

overrideBackgroundColorOrImage= overrideTextColor= overrideTextAlignment= overrideCardHideSection= overrideCardHideByline= overrideCardHideDescription= overridebuttonBgColor= overrideButtonText= overrideTextAlignment=

data-content-type="article"

by Janine Sobeck, dramaturg Tech week is one of the most exciting moments in any show. It's the time when we get to leave our rehearsal room, move onto stage, and add all of the production elements. To help the actors adapt to all the changes we usually make a gradual transition. Pre-tech: While still in the rehearsal room, actors are given certain rehearsal props and costumes to help them in the creation of their characters. In the case of Princess Academy, all the girls were given rehearsal skirts and all the characters were given rehearsal books and and other items (such as the miri flower). We also added all of the instruments used in the show. Tech day 1: The first day of tech included adding the set and sound. One of the biggest changes for our actors is the ramps on our stage. They finally had the opportunity to climb the mountain! Tech day 2: It's time to add the props! In order to support Director Megan Sanborn Jones' vision of the show, prop designer Scott Jackson made all of the props out of paper, letters, and books. Tech days 3-4: This is what we call an "All Tech." The final elements of the show (lights, costumes, and make-up) are added into the mix. Day 3 is spent working through all the cues in act 1 and day 4 is spent working through act 2. Tech days 5-7: The time has come to run the show! These are our dress rehearsals, where the goal is to do the show exactly as if it was a real performance. This means starting at our normal curtain time and trying to never stop. The director, playwright, dramaturgs, and designers sit in the audience making notes about what is working and what still needs to change. At the end of the nights, the actors and designers are given feedback and we rehearse any moments that need some extra attention. Tech day 8: Which is today! Tonight is the time when we finally get to add the final element of the show: the audience! Our final day of tech is known as the "preview performance." Friends, families, and students are invited to see the show before we officially open. While we always reserve the right to stop the show if necessary (it is, after all, still a rehearsal), we hope that everything will go smoothly!

overrideBackgroundColorOrImage= overrideTextColor= overrideTextAlignment= overrideCardHideSection= overrideCardHideByline= overrideCardHideDescription= overridebuttonBgColor= overrideButtonText= overrideTextAlignment=

data-content-type="article"

by Darci Ramirez, dramaturg Dear Audience Members and Fellow Stars, Luna is able to take cosmic themes and tell them in a single, simple story for people who are looking for a reason to believe in their dreams and find friendship. But that doesn’t mean that the heavier themes are missed by younger audiences.. Need, loss, loneliness and sacrifice are all shown throughout this play. It’s important to recognize that the ending isn’t perfect; Mama and Papa are separated from Soledad and Luna’s relationship with Soledad is still tender and hurt. We don’t know what the future holds for Mama and Papa, who are still continuing to work in an industry that is hard and, sometimes, unfair. But what makes Luna shine is the hope for tomorrow because of the big steps we’re willing to make today. Soledad takes risks to find friendship and believe in her dreams, even if it complicates her life. And taking risks doesn’t always mean success, because Soledad didn’t always succeed - but taking risks does mean that you’ll grow to be the sort of person that can succeed, can find your friends, and can reach the moon. This production is informed by where we are, as a community, and who we are as a creative team. Because a strong majority of migrant workers in Utah are Mexican, Mexican-American, or of Mexican descent, that has informed the world in which Soledad finds herself. You might even recognize the Utah mountains in the backdrop of the set! But, at the same time, Soledad is an outsider in this world. In order to show this, Soledad and her family carry with them Costa Rican traditions and designs - informed by the cultural background of our director, Kris Peterson. This production has also been touched by many other Latinx backgrounds and identities - my own included. These design and story choices are expressions of our stories and experiences, but it doesn’t encompass all experiences. Luna isn’t just Mexican, Costa Rican, Guatemalan or Brazilian - but it holds the hearts of people who are. Because of that, we’ve chosen to give parts of our cultures to a story that can apply to anyone who’s ever felt alone. That doesn't mean that we’re limiting who we are, or who our audience is, either! In the end, Soledad doesn’t have to sacrifice who she is in order to make connections - she loves her books and astronomy, but learns to love fashion and food, too! In the same way, we can relate to the experiences of other people and celebrate what makes us unique.

overrideBackgroundColorOrImage= overrideTextColor= overrideTextAlignment= overrideCardHideSection= overrideCardHideByline= overrideCardHideDescription= overridebuttonBgColor= overrideButtonText= overrideTextAlignment=

data-content-type="article"

Dramaturg's note by Sammy Daynes Utah women of the 19th century believed in many of the same doctrines that members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints believe in today. They also believed in and practiced the doctrine of polygamy, which was accepted as not only revelation from God but also an unremarkable way of life. Many women found happiness in plural marriages, formed close relationships with their sister wives and helped each other in raising children. One woman, after being proposed to, asked that the man marry both she and her sister. Hundreds of women accepted plural marriage- “some because they believed plural marriage was a glorious doctrine, others out of a hope for future exaltation or because conforming seemed a lesser idea than abandoning their homes and faith.”* To be a Mormon at this time meant to fight to practice your religion. The people were full of faith, because the very choice to be a Mormon was in effect equal to outcasting yourself from the rest of America. The rest of the country saw polygamy as a great evil, and as a result, Congress rescinded women’s right to vote, something that had already been permitted in the territory for 17 years. Utah was unique in the sheer number of women who campaigned for suffrage. Utah had a higher proportion of its population affiliated with the national women's suffrage unit than any other state or territory in the nation. Elizabeth Cady Stanton and other famous suffragettes came often to Utah and found the women there to be some of the most incessant campaigners for women’s votes in the country. A gathering of Utah suffragettes was called “one of the most remarkable, perhaps, that has ever congregated on the Continent. To see a mass of between 3,000 and 4,000 women…meeting together to advocate the claims of polygamy and defend the men who practice it.”* [caption id="attachment_7360" align="alignleft" width="300"] (Courtesy of National Women’s Party) Local leaders in Utah encouraging rights of Women’s Suffrage[/caption] These women were full of faith and would not back down. In a New York Times editorial, a writer supposed that if women received the vote, they would use it to eliminate polygamy. No one suspected that the women would fight to defend it. Phebe Woodruff said that if Congress chose to imprison Mormon men they would have to “make their prisons large enough to hold their wives, for where they go we will go also.”* When Wilford Woodruff finally issued the manifesto advising the saints to desist in practicing polygamy, the reaction was mixed- some joyous, some sorrowful, most simply confused. If anything, it further spurred women in the fight for suffrage, and they were rewarded when Utah received statehood in 1896 and its constitution gave women the right not only to vote but also to hold office. Suffrage brings us right into the lives of two sister-wives who valued not only the vote but also their polygamous marriages. The struggle of Ruth and Frances to balance their faith, their freedom, and their responsibilities is one the play tackles with heartbreaking grace. Hearing their story reminds us that despite their wildly different circumstances, the women of the 19th century were very similar to Utah women today: fiercely loyal to their families, devoted to their faith, and avid supporters who lifted each other. **All quotes taken from A House Full of Females: Plural Marriage and Women’s Rights in Early Mormonism, 1835-1870 by Laurel Thatcher Ulrich

overrideBackgroundColorOrImage= overrideTextColor= overrideTextAlignment= overrideCardHideSection= overrideCardHideByline= overrideCardHideDescription= overridebuttonBgColor= overrideButtonText= overrideTextAlignment=

data-content-type="article"

by Cameron Cox, Dramaturg As director of BYU’s production of Little Shop of Horrors, George Nelson wanted to provide a sense of foreboding, encouraging the audience to recognize the “flaxen cord” that Audrey II is in Seymore’s life without him knowing. The ominous ticking clock towering above the set creates this atmosphere and comes from science fiction tropes almost as old as the genre itself. The idea of the clock ticking away to destruction originated in 1947 by the Chicago Atomic Scientists (a group of researchers who worked on the creation of the first nuclear bomb used in World War II). “The Doomsday Clock” represented the time until the actions of mankind would end the world. The clock views a hypothetical man-made global catastrophe as midnight, and the minutes till midnight are measured by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, which still exists to this day. When the clock was first invented, 13 years before the original Little Shop of Horrors film was written and directed by Roger Corman, changes in time directly correlated to the nuclear developments and concerns that the Bulletin had at the time. These concerns are evident in the development of western science fiction and traces of them can be found in both the original Little Shop of Horrors as well as the musical adaptation Menken and Ashman wrote 20 years later. But Little Shop’s relationship to the clock has become more poignant in the past decade in ways that Corman, Menken, Ashman, or even Frank Oz (who adapted the musical to a second filmed version in 1986) could have anticipated. In 2015 the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists expanded the criteria of what contributed to the clock moving closer to midnight to include concerns regarding climate change. In the past five years, the clock has moved from three minutes to midnight steadily closer, with the Bulletin announcing earlier this year that the clock was the closest it’s ever been to midnight, 100 seconds. Audrey II represents a trend in fiction of the natural world fighting back against mankind's mistreatment of it. From Audrey II in Little Shop, to the Whomping Willow in the Harry Potter series, to the Batman villain Poison Ivy, to Annihilation written and directed by Alex Garner in 2018, the concept of plants/nature beginning to fight back against mankind's mistreatment of them has been a trend that Little Shop of Horrors did not intend to start but has become one of the most classic examples of.

overrideBackgroundColorOrImage= overrideTextColor= overrideTextAlignment= overrideCardHideSection= overrideCardHideByline= overrideCardHideDescription= overridebuttonBgColor= overrideButtonText= overrideTextAlignment=

data-content-type="article"

by Ting Chun Chang, dramaturg Some of you are probably already very familiar with the movie Mary Poppins, but have not watched the musical. Others may have watched the movie and the musical, but not yet read the novel. Last time, we have explored some comparisons between the three different forms of the story and talked a little bit about the characters. This week, I would like to share with you more about the character Mary Poppins in the novel and in the musical. In 2013, the Disney movie Saving Mr, Banks was released. It depicts the relationship between P.L. Travers and Walt Disney. It also gives the audience some background understanding of Travers' childhood experience. It is said that her childhood experiences influenced her work on Mary Poppins, the novel, especially in how she portrays Mary Poppins. If you've read the book, you'll know that the character in the book is quite different from the movie and the musical. You may even understand why Travers was unhappy with how Mary Poppins was presented in the movie. In the novel, Mary Poppins, is portrayed as a grim, ugly old woman who denies she is magical but, at the same time, does not try to hide it. She is known by other magical creatures as “The Great Exception” because she maintained the magical abilities all children have. For example, she is capable of communicating with animals. When the children mention her magical powers, Mary Poppins denies them sternly and punishes the children when they acknowledge them. In the movie and the musical, Mary Poppins is an elegant lady. Portrayed in a much more delightful way, Mary Poppins is always trying to uplift people and find fun in doing work. For example, she always tell the children "anything could happen if you let it." She uses magic to clean the nursery and kitchen. She uses "a spoonful of sugar" to help the medicine go down. She sings happily with Bert. Her personality is well described in "Jolly Holiday" sang by Bert. Ain’t it a glorious day? Right as a morning in May… I feel like I could fly. Have you ever seen the grass so green or a bluer sky? Oh it’s a jolly holiday with Mary. Mary makes your heart so light. When the day is grey and ordinary, Mary makes the sun shine bright. Oh happiness is blooming all around her. The daffodils are smiling at the dove. When Mary holds your hand, you feel so grand. Your heart starts beating like a big brass band. Oh it’s a Jolly Holiday with Mary. No wonder that it’s Mary that we like. Many people believe that P.L. Travers’ great aunt Ellie, whose real name was Morehead, inspired the character of Mary Poppins. Valerie Lawson, the author of Mary Poppins, She Wrote: The Life of P. L. Travers wrote that: Ellie was a martinet, carried a carpetbag and when children came to stay, she gave them lessons in etiquette, suffered no nonsense and instructed them to “Spit spot into bed!” Mary Poppins carried a carpetbag just like Aunt Ellie’s but the nanny’s bag became a magical carry-all that contained an apron, a packet of hairpins, a bottle of scent, a small folding armchair, a packet of throat lozenges, a large bottle of dark red medicine, seven flannel nightgowns, one pair of boots, a set of dominoes, two bathing caps, one postcard album, one folding camp bedstead, blankets and an eiderdown. I do too believe Mary Poppins is the expanding imagination based on Travers' interaction with her aunt Ellie. In fact, the whole story is based on her childhood experiences. Would it be better if we were true to her memory when producing Mary Poppins or is it more interesting to create the Mary Poppins of our own imagination? For me, there is no certain answer. But it is an important question for us to navigate as we read about and watch this magical character.

overrideBackgroundColorOrImage= overrideTextColor= overrideTextAlignment= overrideCardHideSection= overrideCardHideByline= overrideCardHideDescription= overridebuttonBgColor= overrideButtonText= overrideTextAlignment=

data-content-type="article"

By Rick Curtiss, Dramaturg To sell a show like Travesties, you have have some big names, but what is a name anyway? A rose by any other name would smell as sweet— is a popular phrase muttered by one of Shakespeare’s star crossed lover’s. It is oft quoted but perhaps not perfected until The Simpsons added, Lisa: A rose by any other name would smell as sweet. Bart: Not if you called 'em Stenchblossoms. Homer: Or Crapweeds. Marge: I'd sure hate to get a dozen Crapweeds for Valentine's Day. I'd rather have candy. Homer: Not if they were called Scumdrops. Names are arbitrary—Names are essential. Names aren’t my strong point. Mindy Khalin rejects the idea of someone being bad at names in her memoir Is Everyone Hanging Out Without Me? She posits that being bad at names is just an excuse for laziness. While I don’t doubt that personal laziness is a factor in my inability to successfully recall names; I wonder if might there be some poorly understood, underlying, biological, and/or social factors that at least play some role in name recognition? Take Cats for instance. The T.S. Elliot penned Andrew Lloyd Webber musical has a song called “The Naming of Cats.” This song illustrates that cats have three names, one everyday name, one special unique name and one name that only the cat herself knows. All the cats in Cats use their second name—the one that is wholly unique to them; and I must say, that in this one aspect of social progress; I think cats have us beat. I can always associate one unique name with the one unique cat and no other. Ask me the name of my roommates, and I have about a fifty-fifty shot of naming all three within ten seconds. Ask me the name of the railway cat and I will answer Skimbleshanks, instantly, every time. There is a power in uniqueness, and power in creating a unique name. It is both a clean slate and an endless opportunity. When I tell people, my name is Rick, I am instantly compared, consciously or not, to all the other Ricks that person has known. If you name your child Adolf, it automatically comes with (hopefully unwarranted) baggage, but an original name is only defined by the originator. Which is part of the reason I think Madonna was so successful. Sure, she wasn’t the original, but it was original enough to set her distinctly apart. See also, Lenin— [caption id="" align="aligncenter" width="418"] Lenin[/caption] Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov, isn’t well known. The name seems exotic and unique, but in its original late nineteenth century Russian context, I’m sure it felt as arbitrary as John Smith. Vladimir had some crazy ideas as he got older, spent some time in exile, and eventually adopted the name Lenin—which has much wider circulation. Derived from a river he was living near during exile, Ulyanov used Lenin as a pen name to protect himself, but it became something more. Lenin became the voice of a revolution; a name that didn’t have to fight thousands of other arbitrary associations. Lenin became the blank canvas on which the Bolsheviks could build the Communist Party. Lenin became powerful in a way that Ulyanov never could. Lenin unintentionally guaranteed the number one spot in a google search. Similar things could be said about Stalin. Stalin; the name, is derived from steel. Stalin as a given name became popular after the Stalin became popular. Almost one-hundred years later Stalin is still permanently embedded in the minds of many as the one singular sensation Joseph Stalin. [caption id="" align="aligncenter" width="451"] Played by Chris Hults[/caption] Lenin and Stalin—they were the Mungojerrie and Rumpleteazer of communism. It’s no wonder that Lenin was included as a character in Travesties. What one name had as much power in 1917? Joyce—no. You might as well say Keats, or Fitzgerald, or Wilde. Tzara—even less so. Lenin—yes. Even those who don’t know any specifics about Lenin know that there is power in the name. Lenin was vital enough for the show that history itself had to be fudged to include him. Because who wouldn’t want to say I was there? That I was however briefly connected to Lenin. Not the physical man—whose image; however unique, has waned in meaning (I know I couldn’t pick him out of a line up until I started researching Travesties,) but the name on which hangs so many things. Travesties spends a good deal of time talking about Lenin. Lenin himself talks about Lenin, and I can’t help but wonder, in world where millions of unique names are created to say, play World of Warcraft, on which blank slate tomorrow’s revolution might be written.

overrideBackgroundColorOrImage= overrideTextColor= overrideTextAlignment= overrideCardHideSection= overrideCardHideByline= overrideCardHideDescription= overridebuttonBgColor= overrideButtonText= overrideTextAlignment=

data-content-type="article"

by Jessa Cunningham, dramaturg Saturday was the last show of Earnest, and it was sad to see such a fun show go. These past months that I have been working on the show, I have learned so much. Not only have I learned about myself, but I have learned about the world. The world that Wilde lived in, the world his characters lived in, and also the world we live in now. It is always easy to watch a play and distance yourself from what is happening onstage from the real world. However, I find it more rewarding when I can apply it to the world around me. I found many instances of that with this play, and it made my work more interesting. I could have easily done the research on Victorian etiquette and thought of how silly these old English people were. But, instead I found connections between their culture back then to ours of today. Surprisingly, some things do not change, and if you've seen the show you can probably spot the similarities. As I worked on Earnest, I realized that my work did not just involve historical research: it also included research about people and human interactions. As a dramaturg, there is nothing more interesting to me than learning about human interactions through the ages. How did the Victorian men treat the Victorian woman? Is there any similarity to how men treat women today? What were the relations like between the upper and lower class back then? How is that relationship in modern times? It is easy to draw up a curtain on the past and say, "Oh, we'd never do that now!" But where's the interest in that? I find theatre far more intriguing when it is something I can relate to. These are some of the things I am thinking as I bring my work with this hilarious show to a close. It was a blast, and there never was a dull moment. I hope that when you saw the show you were able to see those moments and laugh-- whether that be at the actors or at yourself for relating so much to what they were doing. Allow yourself the trivial moments that Lady Bracknell criticizes. Life is too boring when everything is serious!

overrideBackgroundColorOrImage= overrideTextColor= overrideTextAlignment= overrideCardHideSection= overrideCardHideByline= overrideCardHideDescription= overridebuttonBgColor= overrideButtonText= overrideTextAlignment=

data-content-type="article"

By Rick Curtiss, Dramaturg “he asked me would I yes to say yes my mountain flower and first I put my arms around him yes and dream him down to me so he could feel my breasts all perfume yes and his heart was going like mad and yes I say yes I will Yes.” [caption id="" align="alignleft" width="234"] James Joyce, Zurich 1915[/caption] That is the last—I hesitate to call it line—phrase from James Joyce’s Ulysses. It finishes a thirty page, punctuation free, stream of consciousness section which consists of the thoughts of Molly Bloom as she lays next to her husband. The last thing she remembers before the novel ends is the moment her husband proposed to her. Which is, I guess, what one could call a spoiler— But a benign one I assure you. Not that all spoilers are benign. Most novels are better when experienced without any pre(conceived)peratory information about the end, but I could go through the entire plot of Ulysses in a couple of paragraphs, every major detail displayed, and I wouldn’t consider it an offense, or even an enhancement. It is just the facts. Joyce didn’t seem concerned with the “is,” the course of action that led from one event to the next, a rubegoldbergian set up of potential disaster triumphantly avoided or tragically brought to pass. Rather, the novels richness is found in the profound internal experiences of the everyday. The experience of reading is the reward, not knowing what happens. [caption id="attachment_4928" align="alignright" width="300"] In "Travesties", James Joyce is played by Sierra Docken (not a joke)[/caption] You could be told everything about going to Glacier National Park, but that doesn’t diminish going there. Tasting food isn’t spoiled by being told what it tastes like. It’s almost impossible to spoil Joyce’s novel by only describing its contents. But Ulysses is often spoiled. It’s been called among others things: difficult, confusing, nigh-impenetrable, not for high-schoolers, not for undergrads, hard to follow, obscene. I have little evidence to confront any of those qualifiers, but instead of being spoiled by giving away too much information, Ulysses is spoiled by not giving enough. When initially described, it becomes an esoteric icon to be read about but not to read. What is left unsaid is that Ulysses benefits from context, and preparation. Every moment in the novel doesn’t need to be understood to be enjoyed, and pausing to think, re-reading, and skipping around are not signs of incompetence in the writer or the reader. It’s difficult, yes, but a challenging read can be immensely rewarding. Ulysses is not unique in this regard. When someone asks me to sum up Travesties (full disclosure, no one has) I hesitate. I don’t want to spoil it. I want to say one hundred things, but not come across overwhelming. I want to warn of potential attitudes that could inhibit enjoyment, but don’t want create those attitudes in doing so. I don’t want to tell them the plot. Not because I want the twist to be a surprise (spoiler: there isn’t a twist), but because the plot doesn’t drive the show—not traditionally. I do want to point them to a couple of Wikipedia articles that could be helpful. And if forced to sum up Travesties in a one sentence it would be: Rarely has being completely lost been this delightful. If given two sentences, then the second would be: Rarely is a show so rewarding on each successive viewing. And If I had the luxury of a third, I would add: and hey, at least it ain’t Ulysses.

overrideBackgroundColorOrImage= overrideTextColor= overrideTextAlignment= overrideCardHideSection= overrideCardHideByline= overrideCardHideDescription= overridebuttonBgColor= overrideButtonText= overrideTextAlignment=