Talk:J.B. (play)

Having created this article, I recognize that the plot summary may be a bit POV. Since it's hard for me to identify myself I'd like an outside opinion: by all means, change the summary and interpretation if they're too biased. Reediewes 07:33, May 15, 2005 (UTC)

It looks like a pretty straightforward presentation to me. As long as God, Satan, History, Science, and Religion are the standard interpretations, I don't see anything that could be biased. Isomorphic 08:17, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm uncertain about the expansion of the play to a 3-act version. I have a version published 1986 (isbn: 0395079497) and it is still a 1-act play with 11 scenes. This seems to have been the Pulitzer-winning version. I'd be grateful for more info on this... --JECompton 00:04, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on J.B. (play). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121011224143/http://www.lortel.org/LLA_archive/index.cfm?search_by=show&title=J.B.%20 to http://www.lortel.org/LLA_archive/index.cfm?search_by=show&title=J.B.%20

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:15, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

'...zuss is also German for "sweet"'[edit]

I know of no such word in German. It might be accurate to say "zuss is also an English phonetic approximation of the German süss 'sweet'," if the writer can document that this was what MacLeish intended. Billfalls (talk) 05:44, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]