A Hoax

2 Aug

There are two types of play – the ones journalists like, and the good ones.

Journalists like the unusual, the uncommon, the bizarre, the perverse.

The other type of play – the good play (or while I’m being facetious, the type of play liked by good people) – the other type of play is about everyday struggles and the magic found in the mundane. It is about the audience.

Journalists like the angle. The aberration they call a story. Let me give an example; “Journalist finds angle” is not a story because it’s what always happens. “Journalist displays depth” would be a story.

By ‘journalists’ I don’t mean career journalists. There are many eking out a living in the media who aren’t journalists by habit. And there are many of that habit who aren’t paid at all, except in the ever decreasing wages of titillation and cynicism.

Rick Verde’s play A Hoax is funny and engaging. Director Lee Lewis elicits wonderful performances from her entire cast.

But is it just a ‘journalist’s’ play? It tells the story of a fabricated memoir. And the story of those who turn a blind eye to that fabrication in order to profit from it.

These are journalistic concerns. They titillate the audience, feed its cynicism and then can be dismissed. “Nothing to touch me here.”

Or is there?

Telling a fabricated version of a life is not so uncommon. We all do it – as we build our sense of who we are. [Reading this post didn’t you consider whether you’re a ‘journalist’ or not?]

And in regards to profiting from stories, everyone can ask themselves “Why do I bother communicating?” Why do I write? Why do I speak?

“I’m only being honest,” says the bully, with that little “only” the clue that honesty is hardly her purpose.

It is naïve to think we communicate primarily to tell the truth. “Pass the salt” is far more typical, and meaningful, than “That is the salt”. Truth maybe crucial but it is always secondary. We speak, we write, to impact on the world. Sometimes we simply want more of its money. Sadder still, sometimes all we want is the approval of others.

But we can speak to make the world better. And play that reminds us of this is a good play.

Veronica Kaye

A Hoax

at Griffin til Sept 1

http://www.griffintheatre.com.au/

But what’s it about?

22 Jul

Why is there so little discussion of the meaning of plays?

Is it a defense? Is it like the way we speak of people we find attractive? ‘Oh, he’s an 8’ – and by that glib reduction deny their power over us?

Or is it because we don’t expect to find any valuable meaning [any power] in a play? Do we expect to find it anywhere? And if not in art, where? Where do we think we get our ways of seeing from?

Or do we simply not realize – or refuse to acknowledge – that we see the world in a particular way? Or, as a Marxist critic might suggest, do we have a vested interested in believing that our particular vision is the unadorned Truth? 

To be honest, I find it difficult to be overly interested in judging the technical details of a production.  Maybe I lack something. But I want a play to give me more than the satisfaction that I am superior to it and its creators.

No-one survives this life, but I intend to go down fighting. I want a play to arm me for that fight. I want to leave the theatre with more than I entered. And that “more” is not disdain – or even admiration – for the artists.

The plays I need are fuel for life; logs to feed our open fire. They give warmth. They give light.  So we’ll gather, in silent fascination, and watch. And as one flickers out, we’ll throw on another, and no two will burn the same. And so we’ll pass this night, the dark and the cold all around us, and know that no dawn comes, except of our own making.

Veronica Kaye

Theatre Red

Conservatism in Theatre 2

17 Jul

A post in which I use a capital T when I write the word Truth, and so prove I’m a serious Thinker.

I recently discussed the effect of conservatism on theatre criticism. Now I’d like to focus on its effect on performance.

We still work in the shadow of a great reaction – the reaction to nineteenth century melodrama.

In this reaction, Truth became the new standard.

It is still the watchword of most artists’ theatre practice.

But there’s a worm in its heart.

How do you judge if something is the Truth? [I’m going to deliberately ignore the issue of how do you then represent it.]

Something is True if it corresponds with what you already know. Perhaps you can see where I’m going?

Something is True in the theatre if it corresponds with what has already happened.

In other words, nothing that happens in the theatre actually matters.

Conservatism is the belief that all the important things have already happened and all the big decisions have already been made.* It’s the belief that they can’t happen in the theatre.

But they do.

Theatre makers don’t just reflect the Truth. We make it. Or, at least, we make something just as important.

When Jesus of Nazareth told his parables, or Aesop his fables, the response “that’s never happened” somewhat missed the point.

Plays present not just Truths, but also Ways of Seeing.

Ok, it’s a half a glass of water. But it’s not Truth that makes us See that glass as either half full or half empty.

So, if a piece of theatre doesn’t appear truthful, maybe its not.

Maybe it’s original.

 Veronica Kaye

Theatre Red

* Once I again think I might have borrowed this line – but I don’t know where from!

Conservatism in Theatre

12 Jul

What is conservatism?

It is the belief that all the important things have already happened and all the big decisions have already been made.*

It is the belief that the world is old and we are insignificant, and all that’s left for us to do is follow the path and observe the rules.

In theatre, one effect of conservatism is lazy and uninspired criticism.

Go to a piece of theatre with certain criteria to be met and you’re ignoring that the work itself may have no interest in your criteria.

In response to this overt conservatism, you’ll sometimes hear that a work should be allowed to set its own criteria of success. “What were you trying to achieve?” says the critic to the artist.

But I’m not sure that’s so very different. It assumes that what you experienced in the theatre is not the actual thing, but rather an attempt at the actual thing.

So where is the actual thing?

Ways of seeing that diminish the importance of the present deserve our distrust.

For everything that can be done, can only be done now.

Veronica Kaye

Theatre Red

* I have a feeling I’ve borrowed this line from somewhere, but I don’t know where.

Why being a reviewer is tough

8 Jul

paul-and-croc (2)

The popular perception of reviewers is that we are superficial, lazy, pompous, careless and shallow.

Being a reviewer is tough.

It’s not all champagne and free tickets.

Firstly, you have so little time. The play may have taken years to write, had oodles of development and months of rehearsal. At most, you have a couple of days. So you seem superficial.

Secondly, you have so little space. A play can last two and a half hours. You can’t expect a reader’s attention for more than five minutes. So you look lazy.

Thirdly, the criteria by which you evaluate the play are hardly universal, are probably idiosyncratic, and are almost certainly not shared by the artists. But the review isn’t meant to be a discussion of you and your aesthetics, so you mention your criteria blandly or ignore them all together. So, you sound pompous.

Fourthly, you really can’t give much away. There’s the taboo against spoilers, but its pretty much true of all the best bits of the play. All your assertions seem unsubstantiated. So you’re careless.

Fifthly, a play has multiple voices. That’s their point, and their glory. You only have one. You’re shallow.

And when you publish the review, trying so very hard to believe honesty is possible, a whole bundle of serious artists read it and think ‘That superficial, lazy, pompous, careless, shallow bitch got free tickets. And champagne. Which we paid for.’

Being a reviewer ain’t easy.

Veronica Kaye

Theatre Red

Let the children keep their paint boxes

7 May

Poorly executed art does little harm. Its flaws are obvious, and its effect negligible. Let the children keep their paint boxes. The crayons need not be hid.

The danger lies in the slick and soul-less.

We should be wary when too many of our conversations about theatre sound like demarcation disputes, performance reviews, price negotiations, quality control panels, courts of petty session and magistrate’s verdicts. 

Only one conversation is vital. And it happens in the desert, when the artist battles with the devil – alone, naked and true – and in that battle forfeits her ego to win her soul.

And tired but free, she returns to the city, and scratched in the dirt if necessary, she offers a vision of the kingdom of heaven.

Veronica Kaye

Theatre Red

The Liar’s Bible

6 May

I had trouble knowing what to write about this play. I don’t evaluate productions. I discuss what they make me think about. But this production didn’t make me think about anything. Or not anything in particular. At first.

The Liar’s Bible by Fiona Samuel is a set of intriguing interconnected contemporary stories. It’s as though the writer, in casting a wide net, is hoping to catch as much of life as possible.

Or is the point the net itself?

Many of the characters are story makers; a poet, a filmmaker, a philosopher, a woman trying to discover her personal history. They are characters attempting to structure the unstructured perplexity of life.

So this is a story about stories? And so the great philosophic problem of the endless regression opens up before us like facing mirrors, in which we see a reflection of a reflection of a ……

For here am I telling a story about a story about telling a story. And now, dear reader, you are telling yourself a story about me telling a story about…

There are two solutions to this problem that I know; the sardonic or the ironic.

The first is to close your eyes to it, by acknowledging it only blandly.

The second is to accept it fully – and the feeble inability of our thoughts to master existence – and laugh.

And the play encourages this with a heap of funny lines and heartfelt moments. Julie Baz’s production is engaging and she elicits some good performances from her cast, in particular Paul Armstrong and Mark Langham.

I did have trouble knowing what to write about this play. But I enjoyed watching it.

Veronica Kaye

The Liar’s Bible

Sydney Independent Theatre Company til 19 May

http://www.sitco.net.au/

The Great Lie of The Western World

19 Apr

Speak softly and carry a big stick. This could be the motto of Cathode Ray Tube and it is exemplified in their latest work The Great Lie of the Western World.

Despite the quiet naturalism, this is theatre going big game hunting.

Call a play The Great Lie and you raise the question ‘What is that lie?’

Is it ‘We are free’?

Is it ‘We are not free’?

I think the second of these – the denial of freedom – is the great lie. It’s a wonderful convenience, absolving us of responsibility and denying the enormous privilege of our lives.

Is this what the play suggests? Who cares? The strength of Alistair Powning and Michael Booth’s script is that audiences will leave asking questions not about the play but about themselves.

The performances are powerful because of their naturalism, which doesn’t always follow for me. I dislike the idea of truth in theatre, and think it’s one of the medium sized lies of the Western World. But this team is incredibly engaging, with Kate Skinner the standout.

See this for the script, the performances, but most of all, see it for the post show discussions. And ask yourself, ask your friends: what are the cultural myths that hold us back?

Veronica Kaye

The Great Lie of the Western World

TAP Gallery til April 29

http://www.tapgallery.org.au/category/shows/

Breaker Morant

17 Apr

Breaker Morant is a very rich myth. Gareth Boylan’s production of Kenneth G Ross’ play tells it simply and effectively. 

Breaker Morant is a myth about authority. During the Boer War, Harry Morant and Peter Handcock were charged with shooting prisoners of war. A surface reading is that Morant and Handcock were let down by those in power. This is a seductive reading. It makes life easier for anyone who chooses to see themselves as small.

Another reading is that we expect authority to absolve us of personal responsibility.  Morant and Handcock were real people and judgements on their decisions are way beyond my brief. But the play gets dreadfully close to offering the Nuremburg defence – “I was told to do it”. It’s a testament to the strength of this play and production that we can like the characters. Boylan has elicited strong performances from the entire cast, bringing to the fore the question that charges this piece: are the defendants heroes?  

Breaker Morant is a courtroom drama based on real events. I would argue all theatre is – but it’s the audience’s values that are in the dock.

Veronica Kaye

Breaker Morant

Seymour Centre til 21 April

http://sydney.edu.au/seymour/boxoffice/program_breakermorant.shtml

Lord of the Flies

13 Apr

Last night at New Theatre we were presented with a spectacle of brutality and barbarism, a savage world of tooth and claw, barely hidden behind the thinnest veneer of civilization. But then the champagne ran out, and we were all politely ushered out of the foyer and into the street, to continue our revels elsewhere.

Director Anthony Skuse’s production of Lord of the Flies – tight, disciplined, and inspired – puts the lie to William Golding’s myth of the savagery barely below the surface.

Written after the horrors of World War Two and during the Cold War threat of nuclear holocaust, Golding’s novel must have rang true for many people.

This stage adaptation by Nigel Williams doesn’t ask an audience to consider the truth of the myth. The powerful performances from the entire cast make it quite believable.

What is valuable about this play is that it reminds us that the question is not merely “Is this true?” (The only honest answer to which is “who knows, and who could know, humanity’s ‘true’ nature?”)

What a strong production like this does is remind us that the question is also “What is the impact of me believing this myth to be true?” What behaviour is encouraged, what choices are endorsed, by the myth encapsulated in the slogan “All men are born evil”?

As our revels continued elsewhere, this question was discussed, in depth and happily without heat. We were almost civilized.

Veronica Kaye

Lord of the Flies

New Theatre  until 12 May

http://www.newtheatre.org.au