the observatorytag:www.nationalartservice.org.uk,2008-05-21:/observatory//42009-08-17T10:22:39Zviews reviews & interviews of the national art serviceMovable Type Open Source 4.1The Tartuffe - Belt Up - C Socotag:www.nationalartservice.org.uk,2009:/observatory//4.782009-08-17T10:17:55Z2009-08-17T10:22:39ZAfter what I found as an infuriating version of The...James Grogan The story follows Orgon who wants to put on a play (see what they're doing?) of his life. His life's story pivots on his being fooled by The Tartuffe, a faux spiritual man who is basically after sex and money. We meet Orgon's wife, daughter, son and of course The Tartuffe as they go over what happened. There is, hidden behind the quick-fire wit, a serious point here about needed to act out events in order to understand them. This is not looked at in detail and with good reason: it wouldn't be funny. Still, it might be interesting.
The script is riddled with puns - my personal favourite, a mime who says, "I'll make you a Le Coq-tail" (it works better off the page) - and in many instances you feel that some people get some of them and others get some of them but none of us get them all. The play engages its audience to varying degrees - from just holding an object to complement a scene to performing alongside them in a key scene here or there. It is all well intentioned and while it is less generous a show than some that involve interaction, no one is unclear about what they are getting into.
I did feel that in many instances, but particularly in the main role of Orgon, the actors were not listening to one another in a way that would have helped. Of course you want to move through the material with more energy and it's about setting up the joke rather than emotional reality, but it would have helped if there wasn't a feeling of just waiting for cues a lot of the time. Indeed, because the set up asked us to believe that they actually were rehearsing a play of Orgon's life that emotional reality was important and it was a shame to lose it.
The work is unapologetically unempathetic to its characters. Orgon, as the obsessive patriarch of the family and the production, can dismiss the characters around him, mocking them often viciously. What some newspapers would call a "non-PC performance", this is all in the fun of it and feels appropriate to the form. There were one or two moments when this passed a boundary and became both distasteful and not funny at all. At one point Orgon's wife, Elmire, is raped by Tartuffe. She then stands as says something about how much she enjoyed it. It was neither witty nor necessary and clunked onto the floor like the unwieldy piece of performance it was. No one laughed. The worst thing was that it didn't even feel like a wry comment on the sexual relations in that era, or in ours. It was just a bit nasty.
This play has been getting a lot of attention - there were cameras present during this performance - and it is well deserved (even if it has not yet reached the level of performance sophistication that it could, and the script could do with a little editing). I wonder if the decision to take two productions was the best, though. The Trial feels laboured and less imaginative, but still with some nice ideas. Perhaps if the creative drive was more focused on one production it would have really created a great show. As for The Tartuffe, it was certainly a good show, but there were heights it never reached. As for the company, you hope they will continue making work and you suspect they will have some time in the spotlight off the back of this. They certainly deserve it.
8.5 out of 10.
At S Soco (Studio 1a) at 8.55pm.
- James Grogan.
P.S. This is the last review I will make during this year's Fringe. It is a real shame to leave when there is so much unseen and so many shows not even up yet. I'm missing the Forest Fringe and the British Council showcase, both worth seeing if you're up. The great thing about Edinburgh is that even if you ignored all comedy shows and only wanted to see theatre and a bit of dance you would still have to see 10 shows a day everyday in order to see everything. Alas, such is not the case. In the past 10 days or so we have reviewed 30 shows; we have given 1 out of 10 (A Grave Situation) and 10 out of 10 (Trilogy) and everything in between. We have seen wonderful performances that will have a life far beyond Edinburgh 2009 and we have seen shows that were instantly forgettable. Such is the way with this wonderful festival. Still, we have not seen enough shows. If you want to review any show we have not featured yet, please email your review to James.Grogan@nationalartservice.org.uk and we'll post it online.
Enjoy the rest of the Fringe!
]]>
A Clockwork Orange - Eat the Baby Productions - C Venuestag:www.nationalartservice.org.uk,2009:/observatory//4.772009-08-17T10:15:38Z2009-08-17T10:17:15ZDespite this company's slightly disturbing name, one suspects that they...James Grogan The fact is that A Clockwork Orange needs to pervade a vicious and menacing poison throughout. If we don't feel in immediate danger, there's a pretty good chance that we'll feel it's all a bit over the top and cartoonish. Walking in a few minutes late (very rude, I know, but the previous show had overrun) I did have a slight expectation that I might be abused by the cast. Alas, no, I took my seat under the very distracting overhead fan that is a favourite of all Fringe venues and realised that actually, I wasn't going to enjoy this very much at all.
A Clockwork Orange follows Alex and his droogs as they rampage around a dystopian city seeking cheap and violent thrills. Well, the why of the rampaging will always be open to argument - not one I wish to start now - and that's very much the job of any given production. In the course of the rampaging Alex is arrested and imprisoned and eventually subjected to a treatment for his violence that is worse than the affliction itself. It is a complex tale with no straightforward moralising and both Anthony Burgess and Stanley Kubrick have rendered the story with such unforgiving cruelty that it is hard to top their efforts.
The acting was solid enough and watchable for much of it, but it did lack both nuance and menace. The fear that characters were supposedly feeling did not make it past the first row and the stakes were never really raised. It's funny, but looking at men in bowler hats and canes inflicting stage violence on people is really a bit pantomimeish. It's such an oft repeated image that it has just come to stand in for ultraviolence, rather than actually evoking it. As someone pointed out to me later, it is the hooded teen who invokes such fear for many people these days. While I'm not sure that interpretation would have quite cut it either, it at least would have been a clear statement and could have inspired some fear.
The staging and the lighting are both simple and understated but in many ways the most clear elements present. The spot pointing directly down centre stage is a common devise, but effective nonetheless. The costume design was also clear, but as discussed before, a little unimaginative.
It was often difficult to hear the actors, especially over the incessant whirl of the fan, and that did add to the lack of intensity. It's a shame. This - relatively - large cast could, I feel, have produced something much more unleashed and terrifying. Alas, it has become just one more Fringe show that leaves its potential unfulfilled and its audience largely unmoved.
3 out of 10.
At C Venues (C +1) at 10pm.
- James Grogan.
]]>
Hugh Hughes in 360 - Hoipolloi - Pleasance Courtyardtag:www.nationalartservice.org.uk,2009:/observatory//4.762009-08-17T10:03:58Z2009-08-17T10:17:50ZHugh Hughes is charming as disarming and as his audience...James Grogan In truth, Hughes has re-evaluated the theatrical experience. Not set or props or scene changes or lighting cues. Just him and a microphone he occasionally uses. He melted into the start of the show, taking a strange joy in the fact that the show officially starts when the door closes. It's hard to know when it did start - there was no sense of ritual about it. Generally you felt he was stripping back narrative and theatre formalities and just being himself.
The show, we are told, is about friendship. Hugh narrates the story of his eventful friendship with his friend Garreth, their childhood "adventures" and their more recent difficulties in communicating effectively. The undertext of the show is about fantasies, realities and how you can shift and adjust one reality based on perception. It also considers how feelings and atmospheres of spaces affect one's own emotional landscape. By playfully exploring narrative structures and layers Hughes holds a mirror to our own lives and asks if we can't shift our perspective too.
Hughes believes in fantasy as a reality that stands next to our own. He believes that you can choose how you see and what you see - about yourself, about others, about situations. He reaffirms the power of not performing a role that is not yourself for the benefit of others - their prejudices and their worthiness. I fear I am making the show sound more serious than it feels, but that's because the beauty of this performance (it feels wrong to call it a play, somehow) is that it has a deadly serious undercurrent.
Parts of the narrative could be given more time and possibly a better sense of the theatrical event would give the performance more shape - but both of those are part of the performance, so it's hard to criticise them. In one or two moments there was a sense that there is a sharpness underlying Hughes and it might have been nice to see just a little bit more of that - is there a greater complexity to the on-stage persona. I think many of us would have wanted to track what Hughes did and said in the bar that night, just to see if he was for real.
A good story, well told without the pretensions of being more than it is, Hugh Hughes in 360 would endear itself, along with Hughes himself, to any audience member. Recommended.
8 out of 10.
At the Pleasance Courtyard (Pleasance Two) at 7.05pm.
- James Gogan
]]>
Oh, My Green Soap Box - Jumbled - Pleasance Courtyardtag:www.nationalartservice.org.uk,2009:/observatory//4.752009-08-14T23:00:51Z2009-08-17T10:19:55ZOnce again, a good show, better than most, with only...James Grogan Foster is both funny and charming and a compelling performer. She is incredibly real with us - greeting us as we enter, looking at each of us directly throughout (mind you, that is easier with such an empty house). She asked for our input and participation, but never in a way that feels exploitative or cheap. She is clearly passionate about what she is doing and why.
The reason the play is more than just a playful polemic about the environment is that the real story - or perhaps the more compelling one - is actually about how becoming passionate about an issue can give you the confidence and hope to be more passionate about your dysfunctional love life and more welcoming to life's possibilities without the necessity to be full of beer. In some strange ways, this is a love story - love for polar bears, for nature and the environment, love of affection and intimacy, love of love.
There are moments when Foster undermines her own political statements - by self-deprecating you imagine she is trying to be more endearing, but it comes across as weak and somewhat of a cop-out. It is possible to make deadly serious political points while being witty and charming, and with some subtle reworkings this show could be just that. A simple and effective staging and lighting, the whole show does work well and is a very enjoyable hour in the company of a very honest and compelling performer.
One hopes that in time Lucy will not just pretend to be confident about her ability to affect the course of environmental degradation, but will, in fact, believe in her ability to realise that world she describes to us.
7.5 out of 10.
At Pleasance Courtyard (Above) at 3.40pm.
]]>
First Class - Half Wit Theatre - Pleasance Courtyardtag:www.nationalartservice.org.uk,2009:/observatory//4.742009-08-14T22:59:48Z2009-08-14T23:00:37ZWhile well performed, with a great deal of energy and...James Grogan The performances were strong. The clear characterisation, strong accent work, good physicality and occasionally strong physical theatre set pieces. Why it is under dance I do not know, but there are moments of solid choreography. There are one or two good one liners - such as when the man says, referring to a bottle of wine, "But we don't have any glasses" and the woman says "Glasses? We don't need glasses. [Long pause] We can see perfectly fine." It's hardly going to become a classic, but worth a titter.
Ultimately, though, it was all-round quite insubstantial. There was little or no sense of dramaturgy - why were people behaving like they were, on what basis were things changing and scenes developing? It completely evaded me. At the end we were told this was Half Wits's first Fringe appearance. I do hope they take this experience and make something more meaty, more gripping and more substantial.
4 out of 10.
At Pleasance Courtyard (Attic) at 2.30pm.
- James Grogan.
]]>
The Chronicles of Long Kesh - Green Shoot Theatre - Assemblytag:www.nationalartservice.org.uk,2009:/observatory//4.732009-08-14T22:57:06Z2009-08-14T22:59:29ZThis fine production, featuring many passionate performances, is a great...James Grogan The cast - Billy Clarke, Jo Donnelly, Chris Corrigan, Marty Maguire, Marc O'Shea and Andy Moore - are clearly passionate about their work and what they are attempting. They give the performances great energy and soul. Béal Feirsteans themselves, they resonate with the characters. I do not know, and it is not important, what any of their political or religious backgrounds are - they empathise with everyone featured in that situation and realise that the most important thing is often not the wider political implications but rather the personal priorities that each individual has.
Replacing rebel songs and Loyalist marching songs with Smokey Robinson hits, Bob Dylan poetry and Beatles melodies, the music of the play is paramount. The songs, not always sung with virtuoso skill but always with gusto and drive, punctuate the action and give motifs to be returned to time and again. Each character's theme song has a special resonance for them and evokes within them the struggle, tragedy or joy they are experiencing.
The play, especially under the direction of Lynch and Lisa May, elaborates on the Northern Irish sense of humour - bitingly harsh one-liners are exchanged back and forth and there is a constant sense of keneticism. The confident and clear movement is only betrayed when they return to their marching movements that begin and end the play. There is a certain tentativeness about it that doesn't really work, and that is a great pity.
There are also moments in the script when you feel Lynch is too carefully making a political point and not dealing with the personal stories. While it is useful for one character to indirectly link the Republican movement to socialism and for the narrator - Freddy, the prison guard - to punctuate the narrative with contextualising comments, it did, at times, feel unnecessary - an attempt at edification, even.
While the play has no evident political bias and the stories of the Loyalist and Republican prisoners are afforded equal or very similar time, the story of the IRA prisoners is much more compelling. One suspects that this is due to the events of those days and the extraordinary situation the Republican prisoners were placed in (during the days of internment) and placed themselves in (or were forced to place themselves in) later during the Blanket, Dirty and Hunger protests. Either way it did give the play a sense of being imbalanced and it might have been more effective to focus it down more particularly or raise the stakes on the Loyalist side.
Anyway, this is a fine play by an exciting and passionate company. In the end the crowd raised to their feet to give thanks to the wonderful performers, and well deserved it was too.
9 out of 10.
At Assembly (Rainy Hall) at 12noon.
- James Grogan.
]]>
The Honeymoon - RashDash Productions - Bedlam Theatretag:www.nationalartservice.org.uk,2009:/observatory//4.722009-08-14T02:06:31Z2009-08-14T02:07:22ZI applaud this joyful, lively musical play that asks some...James Grogan The story follows two women Charlotte - soon renamed Charlie - and Sophie - soon renamed Saphy - who have run away from their respective weddings at the last minute. They are on honeymoon, but not with the person they were expecting. While the names of the characters - an androgynous name and a name that reminds on of the 7th century BCE woman poet, who is often used as short hand for lesbianism (Google "Sapphic" as you'll see what I mean) - might be a little heavy handed, it fits with the generally playful and enjoyable reflection of inter-sexual relationships, violence and freedom.
The songs did exactly what musical theatre songs should do - they advanced the plot, while being witty and funny; they were sung clearly so that each word was audible and they played some fun games in making lines rhyme, which is always a pleasure. The whole set up was blissfully simple - one keyboard and a laptop, both operated from on stage, was all the technology needed to create a whole musical existence. Two singers with two mics on stands did the rest. The set was non-existent and the props and costumes simple, yet well thought-through and well used. So often theatre productions, and not just on the Fringe, confuse themselves with over-complicated sets and props, and it was great to just see the raw performance, without any need, ultimately, for more.
The movement was very well rehearsed and always captured something truthful and visually stimulating. Complementing the narrational activity of each moment, the choreography flowed flawlessly into the action and did provide a good over-layer on the work. It is great to see two performers (in total there are three performers and, despite my best efforts, I have been unable to find their names, if you know, please leave a comment below and I'll make sure to credit them properly) who can sing well, dance well and act well - rare to have such a combination.
Now, it is not a perfect piece of theatre. The ending, which is decidedly tragic, struck me a little naive. While there was no need for it to be life affirming and positive, the unsupported tragic twist - go see the show for specifics - felt immature and unnecessary. Although it may not have made sense, I also felt that there could have been a much more exciting dynamic to have a male performer on stage too. Perhaps this is my new eyes from Trilogy last night, but I do believe it is too easy to create a faceless, nameless enemy and push the responsibility on to them - it must be about dialogue, surely.
Still, this was a brave, well-made and very enjoyable piece of theatre. It is such a joy to see people take great pleasure in making work they are passionate about. I truly do believe that we will see these performers again, either in this production in a bigger, sold out space or in some other capacity - singing, dancing, acting. Let's hope so.
8 out of 10.
At Bedlam Theatre at 10.30pm.
- James Grogan.
]]>
Ophelia (Drowning) - 3BUGS Fringe Theatre - Sweet Swimming Pooltag:www.nationalartservice.org.uk,2009:/observatory//4.712009-08-14T02:04:31Z2009-08-14T02:06:20ZHere's one for the archives. The big, dark, never-to-be-ventured-into-because-you-will-be-lost-in-aimless-mediocrity archive...James Grogan Right. So this is a rendition of Ophelia's attempt, ultimately successful at killing herself. She considers pills - taking paracetemol from the audience, who, in an act of gracious mercy were only too happy to hand them over, she gave that a go but was stopped by Gertrude - that big spoil sport - who insisted we sit through another 30 minutes of it. She then threw a hair dryer into the pool and proceeded to dunk her head into the water and electrocute herself. But that didn't do the trick either. Turns out she had also tried to slit her wrists, but we only saw the unsuccessful results of that, I'm afraid. Eventually, she gets in the water and it's all over and done with.
The text is a combination of pop songs - such as Prince's When Doves Cry, Hero by Enrique Iglesias and Video Tape by Radiohead - and Shakespearean text, some of which is repeated several times, to no great effect. The pop songs really do take any semblance of considered dramaturgy away from this piece and reveal it for what it really is - a lazy, sensationalist piece of nonsense, which is not nearly as clever or profound than it thinks it is. This is a student production, but I know students who could come up with something subtler, more interesting and more imaginative in 30 minutes. If you took away the pool and the pretty flowers in the water this would be a nothing show and no one would care.
What it also does is give the artistic cornerstones of deconstructionism and post-modernism a very bad name. Non-linear narratives, self-aware theatricality and non-traditional staging are not innovative and you cannot just make lazy attempts at realising them. Re-interpreting old texts implies, necessitates actually, that you do give them an interpretation and not just put them in the same space as pop songs. The best works that are post-modern maintain an honesty and a humility to them. They try to move away from pretension and fakery because that's the very thing post-modern theatre was created to counter (well, that's an argument worth having, but perhaps not just at this moment).
In terms of performances, they were all pretty woeful. The performers were Helen Morton (Ophelia), Rose Walker (Gertrude), Pete Wheller ("The Prince") and Serafina Kiszko ("The Lover"). I feel it would be cruel to start singling out individual performances. What I would say, though, is that one particular moment in which the Prince and the Lover are, supposedly, having sex in the swimming pool was the least sexually charged passage of movement I think I've ever seen. I've been served tea in a more erotic way.
The director/designers Daniel Marchese Robinson and Daniel Pitt really have some thinking to do. Yes, their show has sold out for the rest of the Fringe. Yes, it's been getting lots of great press and will be remembered as a "hit" Fringe show. But, no, this is not good enough. The art itself is hollow, unsupported by emotional honesty and an insult to the performance makers who bring a rigour and a passion to deconstruction and reinterpretation of old texts. If ever one needs a pretty swimming pool scene, they are the people to call. When it comes to creating a performance totality, this creative team has a long way to go.
1.5 out of 10.
At Sweet Swimming Pool at 9.30pm.
- James Grogan
]]>
Stefen Golaszewski is a Widower - Traverse Theatre.tag:www.nationalartservice.org.uk,2009:/observatory//4.702009-08-14T02:03:18Z2009-08-14T02:04:08ZThis one-man-play (that's two in the Traverse in one day,...James Grogan Stefan, a septuagenarian, looks back over the trials and joys of a long life. He speaks with unflinching detail about disease, death, grief, sex and pain. The plot is the narrative of a life, so it's hard to break it down into a clear description, but it covers the making and breaking of family life - love, sex and death (not always in that order).
The play is sprinkled with references to "future living", like paperless books, iChip (which seems to be a step towards androidism; exciting), the trends "in the '20s" to wear sunglasses everywhere. It is endearing and makes for some funny moments, but you do wonder what the point is. The essentials of human interactions are the same, it seems, and considering that that is the point, more or less, then why not set it today, looking back over the last 70 years? Well, an artistic choice is just that, and that's fine. What I will say is that Stefan Golaszewski does not look, or sound or act old. I don't think it would have been a good idea to do a pantomime act of an old man, but just referring to your oldness doesn't make you old. I saw a thirty something year old fantasising about being an old man. And, I suppose, that is what we saw. That's ok, but what level of reality were we meant to view it on? Maybe we don't need to be able to answer that question. Either way, he does not have an old spirit, and that is disconcerting.
Another disconcerting this is that the character - and I hope not the writer-performer - seemed to equate sex with love. He appeared to indicate that possessions are the same as happiness. His wife - Pudding - really is something he wished to consume and could not stand another consuming her. At some moments it did feel a bit more imagination therapy, which is fine and didn't feel indulgent, but did create a very curious dynamic. At the core of this piece is a reflection on (by the audience, not the character) male possessiveness and inability to contextualise actions from another's point of view - essentially pointing out the male tendency to lack empathy.
I feel I am sounding harsher than I feel towards this piece. It was performed with great skill, and true joy - something rare enough these days. There was a great sense of the emotional dynamics - bringing us through the character's feelings of happiness, despair and everything in between. We may not have always liked the character we saw, but I do believe we understood him. The performance used repetition of movement and words to great effect and while pushing the physical and vocal limits in certain moments, still managed to feel understated. For that credit must surely go to Philip Breen, who also designed the show. I really did feel as though the emotional highs and lows were well supported and wholly appropriate. Overall, a very strong piece of theatre.
7 out of 10.
At the Traverse (Traverse 2) at various times.
- James Grogan
]]>
The Overcoat - Gecko - Pleasance Courtyardtag:www.nationalartservice.org.uk,2009:/observatory//4.692009-08-14T02:02:00Z2009-08-14T02:03:08ZThis Faustian tale of desire is beautifully performed by an...James Grogan What holds the whole thing together is the fantastic set design. Ti Green has done a phenomenal job at creating an innovative, moveable, adaptable, beautiful and playful set. It changes height, it involves a lot of performers defying gravity, it allows scene changes and scenography in general to add an entirely new level to our understanding and appreciate of the work. It is a massive achievement. The music and sound design, created by Dave Price and Dan Steele respectively, offer another epic layer - punctuation the movement and narrative perfectly, they created an atmosphere that heightened everything that was happening. Without it, this would have been half the show it was.
We meet Akaky - a lower level worker in a busy and generally soul-destroying office. He dreams (fantasises, indeed) of being with the beautiful clerk in his office, who appears to like him but seems more interested in what type of coat he wears than anything else. As it is Akaky's coat is far from what it could be - with holes and generally cheap, he is rejected by his co-workers on social occasions as he would not be let into fancy restaurants and bars. Alone and rejected by a society he is desperate to be part of and willing to do anything to win the love of his dreams, he, essentially, sells his soul to the devil for a coat. Well, that was never going to work out too pleasantly, was it? While Gecko have made the link to Faust a bit more clear than it might necessarily appear, they seem to have been generally faithful, in spirit at least, to the source material. And I don't really care if they haven't been.
The performances, by Robert Luckay, Dave Price, Dai Tabuchi, Natalie Ayton, Amit Lahav, Sirena Tocco and Francois Testory, have a wonderful sense of physicality. Let's be clear, though, this is not dance theatre (why, I might ask, is it under dance in the Fringe broucher?) it is theatre with some dance-like elements. It is certainly not Tanztheater, seeking to find the elusive limits of what the human body can do and what that means. It has a frenetic pace and many very slick movement sequences, but what choreography there is, is unimaginative and generally pretty low key. In fairness, that is made up for in the other qualities of the performances - the vocal clarity (all characters speak different languages but at no time is it unclear what is being said, it is a great example of inter-lingual communication), the movement clarity and the character clarity all stand side by side to make a top notch performance.
The dramaturgy of the piece (we are told that David Farr provided dramaturgy advice, presumably mainly to able director Amit Lahav) was very clear and very useful for our understanding of what it is about. While the over-text is about sexual and emotional desire (an eroticism pervades the entire work) the sub-text makes clear that desire and damnation are both products of consumption - Akaky wants to have the female clerk, he wants to consume her, in order to do so he must possess the coat, when he does, it costs him his life. It's hardly Das Capital but it works all the same.
All in all this is a wonderful performance (though minus points for a company member who was giving out to some one who was flyering at the door as people were leaving; everyone's got to sell their show, no point in bickering about it) and it will no doubt go down very well during the festival. It will strike many as a refreshingly professional production. It should be popular, which is good as it needs to fill the Pleasance Grand, which, as the name suggests, is really rather big. With a show like this, it should be simple.
8 out of 10.
At the Pleasance Courtyard (Pleasance Grand) at 5.20pm.
- James Grogan
]]>
Icarus 2.0 - Camden People's Theatre - Pleasance Courtyardtag:www.nationalartservice.org.uk,2009:/observatory//4.682009-08-14T02:00:52Z2009-08-14T02:01:50ZA beautifully fragile play about fathers and sons, about loss...James Grogan Icarus and his father are locked in interminably preparations for the day Icarus will fly. The world outside is toxic and hateful, so only inside their laboratory-cum-home do they feel safe. Fantasy and fear pervade this post-industrial purgatory - which is, in fact, a council flat.
Reminisent of Beckett (two male characters filling time) and Walworth Farce by Enda Walsh (where two sons and their father are trapped in their London council flat and continuously act out passages from their lives), there is a certain Irish theatrical tradition underlying this piece - the conflict and necessity of relationships between fathers and sons, the crippling effect of expectation, the domestic hell that you choose out of need and habit.
The characters absent are as interesting as the characters present. Icarus's mother and sister are referred to and clearly important, but at not time actually there. The lack of female balance in the play means that the self-inflicted purgatory can continue and, indeed, it is the intervention of a female character that shifts the balance and brings the work to its conclusion.
At times, however, the play does explain itself too much. For example, defining "genius" as someone who has the power to influence another person seems a bit too obvious given the otherwise quite subtle script devised by the company. Perhaps a single playwright would have weeded out such looseness. That looseness does prevent the play from really taking off, but there is enough by way of visual metaphors - for example, the rope that Icarus uses to find his way home when he goes out scavenging for food - and unspoken tensions to pull it through.
Icarus's father creates a fantasy world and in many ways the play is about what happens what you life through a fantasy and then take it away. What is believed to be an act of protection turns into an act of cruelty. By living vicariously through his son, the father seeks to recapture his own masculinity, uncover success where he had none. If that sounds rather Freudian, that's because it is - there is a psychological subtext that pervades this play.
In terms of design, the set, by Susannah Henry is full of lots of interesting and visually curious bits. There are aspects that you don't notice until the exact moment you are supposed to, and that works extremely well. The sound design, by Claire Keating, perfectly augments the action and is well thought through.
It is not a perfect play. Some editing might help and possibly the climax lacks foundation in its build up. However, it is an inventive, curious and other touching piece of work.
7 out of 10.
At the Pleasance Courtyard (Below) at 3.25pm.
]]>
Success Story - Temple Theatre Company - Pleasance Courtyardtag:www.nationalartservice.org.uk,2009:/observatory//4.672009-08-14T01:59:21Z2009-08-14T02:00:33ZThis is a solid script and generally pretty good acting....James Grogan The play is set on a day in which Raymond (Brett Goldstein) a newly successful British writer/director in Hollywood, who just bagged an Oscar nomination. He's being minded by PR woman and finance Katie (Susanna Herbert) through a series of interviews in which he is being asked the same questions over and over. Tara (Felicity Wren), from Britain's own Observer, comes to interview him. But - surprise, surprise - all is not what it seems. A few turns one way or another punctuate the action from here on. Without giving too much away, it essentially has to do with the origin and factual accuracy of the film Raymond has made ("Walking with Therese", staring Susan Sarandon, apparently).
The play is about how a male artist will re-imagine, re-member, if you will, a personal history that paints him and other men in a better light than they may deserve (there is not definite conclusion on whether they do deserve it or not, it's not morally clear, which is good, but at times it does get a bit weak because it clearly doesn't want to be polemical. Understandable, but not necessarily good theatre). In some ways whatever strength the concept has it is lost in the performance of Tara. This Tara is somewhat cruel, somewhat hysterical, somewhat weak - for us to be truly compelled, I think, Tara needed to be the only character we understood completely. It's not a simple case of sympathy, but more one of respect. Still, with a male writer (Brett Goldstein again) and a male director (Chris Lince), that may never have been possible. The imbalanced dynamic makes for a play that lacks the conflicting drive to see it through. That's a shame.
It's not a bad play and will nicely fill an empty hour if you're around the Courtyard. It has faults that should have been ironed out, but still, worth a look.
5 out of 10.
At Pleasance Courtyard (Upstairs) at 2.20pm.
]]>
East 10th Street - Edgar Oliver - Traverse Theatretag:www.nationalartservice.org.uk,2009:/observatory//4.662009-08-14T01:57:52Z2009-08-14T01:59:07ZMagical realism and domestic autobiography pervades this fascinating and at...James Grogan Oliver has a style that does grate a little. Emphasising his As and Rs words like "Stared", "Apartment" and "Arbitrary" take on a bizarre importance to a sentence, skewing the sense of whatever is going on. His somewhat convoluted theatricality is largely unnecessary, as the story stands on its own feet, as does his magnetism. Still, I'm sure many would find his stylised delivery an advantage - each to their own. Also, he does use certain techniques, like repeating a particular phrase throughout a series of sentences to great effect - it really does evoke something important about that thing or place or person he is repeating, in a way that I don't think I have ever seen before quite in the same way.
It is the strange residents, with homicidal tendencies, who are most interesting. Alongside Oliver and his normal sounding sister, there are a midget cabalist (who stores his faeces in Maxwell House coffee jars), a suspected Nazi (who appears to make soup from his urine), a very old woman who spends most of the day in the bathroom washing rags (the Lady Macbeth of rags, we are told) and a man who likes to frighten the washing woman, for no discernible reason. The veracity of these characters is hard to say, but doesn't really matter - they form the landscape for Oliver's time in this house, a house that clearly shapes his very sense of identity and belonging.
The play is infused with ideas of ritual spiritualism - his sister bases her paintings on the I Ching, Mr Supter sees ghosts every night, and all of the other characters are caught in their own never ending struggle against ritualised obsession. These concepts do add a sense of the supernatural, almost, to proceedings and, I suppose, another layer to consider. It's not, though, particularly gripping.
The narrative at times did stay as Oliver necessarily jumps from one time period to the next. Characters come and go, some exits are explained, others just happen. The whole production does strip down to the story itself and one man's attempt at telling it. The lighting by David Zeffren is simple but effective, doing what it needs to to set the scene and create some atmosphere. The white light of different warmths worked well. The direction, by Randall Sharp, is inevitably hard to trace - in a one man show there is not a great deal of moving about, or at least in this one there wasn't, and so the studied understated movement felt natural, though one does suspect a director's influence there.
All-in-all it is an interesting story told in a very distinctive style. It won't be to everyone's liking, but it does open a small window on to what sounds like a very curious part of New York. Worth a look.
6 out of 10.
At Traverse (Traverse 2) at various times.
- James Grogan.
]]>
Trilogy - Nic Green - The Arches at St. Stephen'stag:www.nationalartservice.org.uk,2009:/observatory//4.652009-08-13T02:01:48Z2009-08-13T02:02:52ZA masterful exploration of the female body and women's place...James Grogan There is so much to say, so much to think; one could write about Trilogy, think about Trilogy for weeks, months. I feel, and this is something I have never written in a review, and may never again, that I have been changed by this piece. It did not try to convince me of anything, it simply affected how I use my eyes, how I see the world around me.
This is an incredibly honest and truthful piece of performance. It never pretended to do something or be something it was not. It found truth in poetry, in the unspeakable. It found beauty in the layered image, it playfully affected our perception of reality. In the near three hours we spent in that magnificent space at St. Stephen's (with possibly the best sight lines in all of Edinburgh) we engaged in an act of communion.
Performed by Nic Green, Laura Bradshaw, Louise Brodie, Murray Wason, Jodie Wilkinson, Rachel Amey, Amy Cade, Anny Deery, Linda Douglas, Rasana Cade, Becki Gerrard, Jo Hutton, Rosie Marshall, Sarah Morrison, Kim Ward, Fiona Watt and Sophie Younger we witnessed a retaking of the image of the female body. We saw it for what it is, and what it should be - a wobbly, moving, imperfect and breathtakingly beautiful work of art. The joyous dance that ends the first section of Trilogy captured what actually constitutes a body - the natural and often uncontrolled complexity of humans, rather than the plasticised, commodified, simplified depiction of the female form in popular culture.
They identified a consumerist culture, working within a male hegemony, as a driving force behind the subjugation of women in contemporary society. The argument was hardly shoved at us, just opened out to us, over time and with generosity. They pointed out that much of their inspiration draws from a 1971 book (The Female Unich, my Germaine Greer), but that they still found a resonance with that work today. And, indeed, perhaps it is even more important today to remind ourselves of the earth quake within academic and critical circles of that second wave feminism - while those circles may have advanced their discourse, the dialogue happening within society is still one rooted in a misogynist context. And in this work, context is everything - it is the structures that propagate the belief systems that are anti-woman that are to blame, not individuals. That does not, however, remove responsibility from the individual, indeed, it heightens it: now that those structures are exposed, they can be fought.
In many ways and at many points the audience is asked to participate - whether through answering a question, getting up on stage to perform a simple (but achingly beautiful) piece of movement or in the grand finale, the singing of Jerusalem. At no point, unlike many other shows, is this exploitative, forced or uncomfortable for anyone. Non-participation is a choice, but one that I, personally, could not understand.
Some men might feel that a piece of performance explicitly and unapologetically about feminism is not for them. This is not a performance that just women should see. Nor it is a performance that just men should see. Or that just the old or just the young should see. Nor just the middle class nor just the working class. This is a performance everyone should see, witness, participate in, be moved by. It so humanly and carefully opens the space for dialogue between men and women. It asks us to speak together, not to shut one another out. The performance my Murray Wason, the only non-audience male performer, is so importance in its presence. Wason talks about seeing the dark man in him, the man who is capable of violence, of rape or objectifying. But he is not that man. And he is ready to talk, to open a dialogue. And that, ultimately, is this performance - one large, never ending discussion about these most important of things.
Throughout the whole performance, with all the naked bodies gracefully moving about the stage, I truly believe that not one man in that audience would have viewed any woman present as a sexual object. If for three hours of our lives we transcended those most ingrained of behaviours, then that is surely something unspeakably powerful.
You cannot help but be moved by the sheer goodness of the occasion. Everyone present wills the events to raise us, to transform us, for moments, single precious moments, into divine creatures. And as we raised our voices in that fine church and later as we left into the Edinburgh evening, we were more hopeful, more peaceful and more open to all the discussions to come. The intricate dynamics of gender politics do not sort themselves out in an evening. But at least, at last, we can all sing the same tune.
10 out of 10.
At The Arches at St. Stephen's at 7.30pm.
- James Grogan.
]]>
The Bone House - Underbellytag:www.nationalartservice.org.uk,2009:/observatory//4.642009-08-13T02:00:31Z2009-08-13T02:01:36ZSometimes cheap tricks really do work. The Bone House is...James Grogan Crowley talks about how serial killers need to control. He then proceeds to instruct the audience to move from their seats, to take a seat elsewhere. He gives very clear and distinct instructions about what we are to do and how. And you do get the feeling that not cooperating is not really on the cards. So, inevitably, we start thinking, maybe he too is a secret serial killer...But that would be too obvious.
Anyway, I'm not going to detail everything that happens as with these things half the fun (or all the fun) is not knowing what will happen or thinking you know and then being surprised. Against my better judgement, indeed, entirely despite myself, I was drawn in by this well designed and carefully pitched performance. And yes, I was scared.
The trick is to acknowledge people's cynicism about fear - we're just in a theatre performance, right? There's no actual danger. The late night slot definitely helps to create a sense that you really don't know what will happen. And there was something about the sparseness of the audience that made it feel a little isolating.
However, there was a level of theatricality that meant that really it was impossible to be completely sucked in. While the special guest appearance of a witness to a terrible murder was well performed, I couldn't stop thinking that it was performed. Perhaps what has been missed here is the idea that truth is captured, sometimes, better by clearly unreal performance rather than realist renditions. Still, I challenge anyone to go through the whole thing and not jump. Or, indeed, to not do as you are told.
Ultimately, while it is not a sophisticated show and the points about being and audience to the performance of a murder are a little heavy handed, it does exactly what it claims it will, and it does it well. There's not many shows that can say that.