The Muckraking Mudroom of My Place in Wien

a total of nine psychological "explanations" for the situation at hand

mise en scene:  two chairs are placed facing each other approximately six feet apart, their placement is such that (if the chairs are so designed) the right hand arm rest on the chair at stage left is in perfect alignment with the right hand armrest of the chair on stage right.  In other words, the chairs--which are both viewed from the side by the audience--are slightly offsides from each other:  the illusion of being face to face is more or less preserved but it is apparent from the gradual rake of the stage that the chairs and by association the actors that will occupy the chairs are not focused on the other.  They are not aligned face and face and thus are not facilitating engagement or dialogue.  The type of chairs and the backdrop behind them is easily adapted.  Two metal chairs backlit in a low blue light might achieve a stark minimalism that leaves a large space for the enlargement of the play's ideas.  Two Lazy Boy recliners would have their own cliche' charm, a setting that might engage concepts of masculinity and friendship.  Lawn chairs, park bench's, rococo wonderland's of gilt and carving would all resonate differently on the stage.  Simple backdrops would favorably focus the chairs in the immediate environs and not suggest that the time and place is anywhere other than here and now.  Unless of course one wanted to play a bit of origins and history and replicate the consulting room of Freud or Jung replete with fainting couch and smoldering cigar.  Ideally, should the constrictions of time and space and directorial invention permit, each of the scenes would be played in a different pair of chairs.  Again, the actors can also adapt but costumes should be simple and generic when not playing with the godfathers of the "science" of psychology.  Nowhere, except in Sigmund's own intent and focused few hours alone with a client or employee (or scholar) would something so elaborate be found.  In all cases, the simpler settings for the play afford us better focus on the words with their essential knot of problems., their failings, their pretenses to understanding.

Tit:  an authority figure embodying gravity and seriousness and faith in process over desire.  S/he conceptualizes her relationships to others in various terms but spends more time daydreaming than understanding.  Preoccupations--often about the future and mostly in relationship to her children, her husband, her ailing parent--haunt him/her.  S/he is the "soul of compassion".  His current occupation, her place in the world, the philosophy that s/he allows into the parlor is always making room for someone/something of the expansive life of the individual.  S/he is here  on the planet to learn and "to grow."  S/he is a seeker, a true believer, half hippie and half intellectual.  The work s/he lets define himself/herself is about sustenance, for self and others. Tit: think momma's dear sweet and abundant mammary (before the cancer came and lopped it off).  Tit can be either male or female but, regardless of any and all other chategories, s/he cannot be or appear to be less than thirty-five years old. Furthermore,  while their is a certain ease to his/her being, this is-self admittedly--rooted in the tenets of his/her own personal religion cobbled together from the writings of a variety of psychoanalytic demigods.