Fuddy Meers Script Analysis The play has many characteristics very similar to a suspenseful who-dun-it, but we are

forced to ask more questions regarding the world represented and the morality of several major and minor characters: who is good and who is bad? Who attacked Claire? This is frequently alluded to in the description of the nature of psychogenic amnesia, the flashbacks, and other description and actions. Which characters should be trusted with Claire: the Limping Man, be he Zachary or Philip, Millet with his outrageous alter-ego puppet Hinky Binky, or husband Richard, condemned by the Limping Man and hyperbolic son Kenny? What about the knifewielding mom Gertie or the faux policewoman Heidi? Who should be considered more dysfunctional Claire in her amnesia or Gertie in her attempting to communicate with distorted language? Should we exonerate Millet who perhaps may be forgiven due to his childhood abuse at the hands of his mother and who may be innocent of a committed crime, involving rings? How will Heidis jealousy regarding Philips attempt to reconcile with Claire play out? Will any of the actions mean anything in light of Claires return to her initial state when she sleeps and begins a day/life anew? My sympathies went out to the family and even gave Richard a pass on his method of courting Claire in the hospital, in view of his having to deal with such a tough situation, not being recognized by his wife and having to start their married lives over daily. I concluded/assumed that there was a happy ending with Philip, Heidi, and Millet returning to prison, though the family was tainted by their usual burden. The author explains the play as a world of mirrors and memories, and a funhouse, where anything can happena world where mad fun and genuine danger are wrapped around each other.