I greatly enjoyed the James B. Douglas performance. What was most interesting to me was uncovering the symbolism behind Douglas titling his peformance "Sunshine and Shadows" instead of "Sunshine Sketches". As I learned, Leacock suffered dramatic hardships throughout his life- a cancer stricken wife and a 4'10'', unhealthy and eventually alcoholic son- which greatly affected both his writing and critique on humanity. However, Leacock was able to make light of these tragedies through humor. While Leacock's wife was suffering from cancer and he sought medical treatment to regain her health, each doctor simply referred him to another specialist. Leacock made light of the situation and displayed the ridiculousness of specialization through the tale of a young man who, in the end, could not even have have both of his shoes shined because the young boy only specialized in left feet. I also was struck by the way in which Douglas transformed himself into the character of Leacock. From engaging in the question-answer section at the end, I learned how much time Douglas put into studying the littlest featues of Leacock's essense- his maneurisms, voice, expressions. When Douglas removed his costume at the end I was totally shocked because he appeared completely different from his stage character. I enjoyed the performance greatly because I think Douglas did a great job bringing Leacock to life.

The James Douglas performance definitely changed the way I look at Leacock. I really knew nothing about Leacock with the exception of what I have learned in class. That being said, I think that James Douglas personified Leacock very well. From the way he spoke, to his facial expressions, to his general tone as he told short stories about his life, I think James Douglas allowed me to picture Leacock’s behavior. From what I can remember, I had never seen James Douglas before Tuesday’s performance. When reading sunshine sketches I pictured Leacock as a kind of old and grumpy man with a great sense of humor. I actually pictured him in my head as being very similar to my grandfather. It was funny to me that James Douglas looked remarkably similar to my grandfather. Although I’m sure Leacock looked nothing like James Douglas, it was my initial reaction when he walked on stage. I was also very impressed with his ability to capture my attention. Anyone who really knows me would agree that this can be a difficult task. Overall, although I had to leave early for work, I was very impressed with the James Douglas performance and his ability to capture my attention.

I thought that James Douglas did a great job getting himself into the character of Steven Leacock. Although all I knew of Leacock was from reading Sunshine Sketches, I felt that I got a good idea of what he would be like just from his writing style and humour which seemed like it would translate back to him and wasn't just a part of his writing. That said, I think Douglas adopted his style of humour and my precieved personality of Leacock well throughout his performace. A few things took away from the performance that I thought left a little to be desired. First, the fact that It was a one person performance with little visual change left me a little bored at times. I'm not sure how this could have been improved, since I'm not sure a performance on Leacock would draw a crowd required for a big and elaborate performance. Overall, I think Douglas did a good job given the monetary and subject confinements he faced, that said I'm not sure it would be something I would see again.

I enjoyed James Douglas' impersonation of Leacock. Having never met Leacock I do not really know what he was like, but the performance fit the image that i have in my mind of Leacock. This made it difficult for me to make a separation between the performer and the fact that he was not Leacock. He never broke character, even when he seemed a little lost he played the part of the old senile man to his advantage.

I enjoyed hearing about all the different parts of Leacock's life that I did not know about. Mr. Douglas did a wonderful job incorporating different texts that Leacock has written into the act.

Although a bit slow at times, I really did enjoy James Douglas' take of Stephen Leacock. It was apparent that he had done a lot of research prior to writing the play and taking on Leacock as a character. He truly was the embodiment of the Leacock that I had created in my mind. It was also interesting to see the contrast between Leacock's more public and well-known self, the tireless and witty comedian, versus the dark side of what he had to endure throughout his life (the "shadows"). I had no idea that his father was an alcoholic, his wife died of cancer and his much adored (dwarf?) son ended up drinking himself to death at a young age.

People cope with tragedy in their own ways and clearly Leacock's comedy was in it's prime when he, the author, was in the midst of great personal tumult. Learning more about the man behind the writing has definitely made me view "Sunshine Sketches of a Little Town" differently. Suddenly there is an added meaning behind the initial impression and even the secondary meaning the reader gets. Now there is this third interpretation or understanding of the text; one that reveals a certain context within Leacock's personal life.

Crazy Ricky Martin aerobics class and spontaneous cell phone calls aside, I thought that it was a pretty positive evening/performance and for me it reinforced the importance and value of getting little bits of education outside of the typical classroom experience.

After seeing James Douglas' performance of "Sunshine and Shadows" I felt that I not only had a better sense of who Leacock was as an author, but alss an individual. I thought it was interesting how Douglas emphasized certain achievements of Leacock’s more than others, specifically earning his Ph.D. Not only did he explain what a Ph.D. was he also went as far as to include the humorous boat scene when he was asked for medicial advice.

Douglas' performance definitely changed the way I think about Leacock because I now have a better understanding of Leackock's sense of humor, and why he portrayed the characters in "Sunshine Sketches" the way he did.

I thought that James Douglas did a great job of portraying Leacock. It defiantly changed that way I think of Leacock. I did not know much about him except what we have learned in class. I feel that I have a much better understanding of his sense of humor. However sometimes I felt that he expected us to laugh and apparently we did not understand the joke.

I learned many knew things about Leacock that I was unaware of before. Most of what I knew only involved he personally has accomplished so far in live, for example his time at McGill and he had a Ph.D. I was not aware that he had a wife who died of cancer, a father who was an alcoholic, and a son who died at young age from drinking. Knowing these personal aspects of Leacock's life changes the way I feel about him as an author. I feel that these things may have caused him to write the way he does. I see that Douglas has put a considerable amount of effort into studying Leacock to make this play as accurate as possible.

Watching this play did in fact change the way I read Leacock works. I feel know having listen to the way he speaks will help me to better understand his sense of humor, this to me will completely change the way I read his stories because humor seems to be such a large part of his style. Well in Sunshine Sketches anyway.

I really ejoyed the James Douglas performance of Stephen Leacock. Although reading a lot of the information in the beginning of "Sunshine Sketches" it was interesting to see them portrayed on the stage. He really gave life to Leacock and made him a real person for me, rather than just an author.

While learning more about Leacock, the performance also change the way that I view Leacocks work. While I was reading "Sunshine Sketches" I really loved the way that sarcasim was used. I thought it really brought the reader in and it made me feel like I was a part of the book. This performance made me realize how much Leacock uses humor to get through pain, leading a life that had its fair share of tragedies. I thought for that reason that the title "Sunshine and Shadows" was perfect.

At first I did not know what to expect from Douglas' performance. Although as a reader we are fairly standardly introduced to the author's background as well as their literature, Douglas brought knowing the author of a book to a new level for me. Douglas shared with us probably more information than just meeting the real Leacock, because I imagine he would have been more candid about his troubles in his own life. It is interesting to get more than just a description of Leacock, which helps greatly understanding his motives and techniques in Sunshine Sketches. Douglas was able to present to us an anecdotal view into Leacock's life, which is not something you get about every author you read.

I found Mr. Douglas's impersonation, and yes, channeling of Stephen Leacock to be very intriguing and overall, quite worthwhile. The Leacock on stage was exactly as I imagined the author while reading "Sunshine...", almost exactly to a T. The wit and the sly slight-of-hand and of word were all there. My favorite lines where the anecdotes about the man who would be "open and close his pores at will" and the exalted bliss of catching fish with a shirt button. With Leacock's story fresh in my mind, I found the speed and fluidity of Douglas's performance to be a perfect emulation of the Leacock in print. At some points poignantly touching, and others ludicrously absurd, a true presentation of the Leacockian point of view for literature. Unfortunately, I had a seminar at 5:00 and my experience with Douglas/Leacock was cut short, not to mention I missed out on the seemingly wonderful escapades of Professor Martin bounding about on an aerobics floor.

The performance really opened my eyes to some darker sides of Stephen Leacock's life. Specifically the parts relating to the death of his wife, and his relationship with his alcoholic father. Mr. Douglas did a really good job of portraying Leacock's deepest emotions. It helped me to understand there was more to Leacock then just a dry, sarcastic personality. These events in his life also shaped his writing. The more humorous parts of the performance left me laughing, and I enjoyed Douglas's style of ad libbing then reading directly from Leacock's work. The piece flowed nicely with the exception of the jazzercise.

I really enjoyed Douglas' performance, not just in terms of how well he pulled off Leacock's sharp wit and style of humor, but also in how engrossing the performance was. The changes in lighting to reflect the mood of the scene, and the fading in and out and changing of the sound effects and music helped to draw me into the story.

I loved all the bone-dry humor, all of which reminded me very much of another one-man show I saw, the subject of that one being Mark Twain, unsurprisingly. The style of humor was similar and equally cutting, but unlike in "Sunshine and Shadows" I was given no insight into Twain as a person. The performer there mostly just leaned on his reputation for dry, witty jokes. In Douglas' performance I got a good look at what Leacock was like as a person, not only all the "sunny" parts of his life, but also the tragic episodes that were surely as much a part of his personality as anything. Overall, I was not only entertained, but was left with a more complete picture of Leacock, a picture that would not be complete without its darker portions.

I was surprised to see how James Douglas' interpretation of Stephan Leacock was so similar to the voice in Sunshine Sketches of a Little Town. Douglas mentioned that he was no expert on Sunshine Sketches, which to me proved how well he researched and adapted to his character, since one could identify him by reading just one of his books. The same humor that we read also extended into other pieces by Leacock as presented by Douglas. One of my favorites was the story about Mother's Day, in which the kids and father came up with elaborate plans for their wife and mother but instead just ended up doing what they liked as if it were any other day. The kids were still so proud even though they had done nothing spectacular, and it reflected the ignorance of the townspeople of Mariposa during their campaign to raise money.
While the performance was humorous, at times it was also dark and I feel that Douglas did a good job capturing the mood, especially in the end scene where his wife is in the hospitals. All in all it was a great show.

I was very impressed with Douglas' one man play. I was in theatre in high school so I understand how hard it is to act out a one man play and still keep the audience focused on the stage. His voice reminded me much of Stephen Leacocks' in Sunshine Sketches. It was interesting to learn about his life outside of writing and I was able to make many connections from his person life to the stories in Sunshine Sketches. His voice spoke just like the narration in Sunshine Sketches with his dry humor and almost arrogant stance. His stories of living in small towns and dealing with tragic episodes in his life opened up the reasonings for his book that we read. It was also interesting to see how he felt about alcohol and how it had effected his life and the lives of the ones he cared about. He did not live a boring, normal life like those citizens of Manitoba, but it is easy to see where the sarcasim and dry humor that is prevelant throughout the short stories came from. I also like how he was an older fellow rather than a young man. I always pictured Leacock being an older man ever though he was probably young when he was writing as well.
Overall it was a great show and very informing. It was especially special since we had already read his book beforehand and were able to make many connections that would have just slipped over our heads if we had not previously been exposed to his work.

Honestly, the idea of a "one-man-show" made me a little skeptical and I was unsure of what to expect. After seeing the performance, however, I was really impressed with Mr. Douglas' ability to keep the audience captivated and the depth of his character. Obviously having done a ton of research into the life of Leacock, Mr. Douglas was able to deftly flush out the details of Leacock's life that were touched upon in some of his works (I recognized a few Sunshine Sketches stories on which Douglas elaborated), doing so in a manner very similar to the writing style of Leacock himself, such as the frequent "you already know about...." introduction to a story that Leacock employed so frequently in Sunshine Sketches. As Mary said, Douglas kept a good balance between the dark and the humorous, ending some more depressing tales with a joke or a bit of irony. In past experiences with Canadian Lit, it's been really interesting to meet authors such as Eden Robinson and George Elliot Clarke, and while this is not the same as meeting the actual author, I found it to be a worthwhile experience that definitely did enhance my view of the book.

Seeing Douglas performing his one-man show (even the abbreviated version that we saw) reaffirmed my hunch that Leacock's influence goes farther than I might have expected. Coming into any English class I expect a certain amount of "stuff-itude", which is the measurement of how stuffy an assigned text is. I know we've all been there, when you hear your professor say that a certain author has had a huge influence on their culture's writing only to find that the culture is so obscure that there would be no way of knowing who the author or who the people they have influenced are is if it weren't for the class. Well, that's the feeling I had when I heard the name Stephan Leacock. However, after reading his writing and seeing James Douglas perform as the man himself there is no doubt in my mind that we are not only very close neighbors of the culture he's influenced, but we are part of it. Douglas has certainly done his research on Leacock in order to better portray the man, this was evident from hearing him speak after the performance. Having a man who has delved so much into the life of his character only drives the point home all the more. The point I'm alluding to is that Leacock has had a tremendous influence on comedic writing, not only in Canada, but in the States as well.

I spoke in my first reaction post to "Sunshine Sketches" about how the stories contained within could have been performed by any one of the Kids in the Hall (maybe not ANY one... Bruce McColloch ideally). I still hold to that belief, although I've refined it a bit. There are several stand-up comics in the States that would be able to deliver the stories as part of their act and it would seem to fit.

Another thing that struck me was how often a story that Leacock wrote would be born out of tragedy. A lot of people have mentioned the story of the specialists that he wrote after his wife's passing so I won't go in to it too much. But that is just the way that some people deal with tragedy. I think we've all experienced this with the aftermath of 9/11 when Rudy Giuliani went on Saturday Night Live to tell us that we could all laugh again.

I felt that James B. Douglass's performance did very much change the way that I read Stephen Leacock. The performance was very interesting and significantly different than I expected it to be. To be honest I barely knew what to expect, however I was surprised with how in touch with the character of Leacock Douglas was, and how immersed in the personality of Leacock he was. His technique of talking about several things and then backing them up with a specific story by Leacock was a very useful way to present us with this character, but also to incorporate the actual writings of Leacock as well. I think that anytime you come face to face with an author of a book it changes the way you read them, especially if you know a little bit about them, because you are constantly thinking of how the author is putting their own experiences and ideas and turning them into the ideas of characters within their stories, and how certain ideals show up. While we did not meet Leacock himself, to have a face to face experience with someone so knowledgable about Leacock, acting as Leacock, gave us a similar experience.