Showing posts with label comedy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label comedy. Show all posts

Friday, 15 November 2013

Week #16 : 'The Frogs' by Aristophanes

Aristophanes, the only playwright whose comedic plays are the only left surviving from the Greek period to this day.  His play 'The Frogs' written 405BC and presented at the Lenaia Summer Festival where it won first prize.  Since then this play is not often performed in modern day, being overlooked by the classic Tragedies of the genre.  Yet, he was one of the most clever of al the Greek playwrights.  Incorporating philosophers, including Euripides, Sophocles and Aeschylus – not to mention Dionysus himself, he created the Old Comedies which encompass topics that the other great playwrights did (the Peloponnesian War, Family relationships, sex and death) he wrote in a comedic style that was more for the educated and intelligent than the general public.  Although he also wrote with an astonishing ability for comedy (now called Old Comedy) that was adopted into a Vaudevillian/Absurdist style of  comedy that is still used today.  Take for instance the first few lines of the play:

XANTHIAS: Shall I crack any of those old jokes, master, 
At which the audience never fail to laugh?

DIONYSUS: Aye, what you will, except "I'm getting crushed": 
Fight shy of that: I'm sick of that already.

XANTHIAS: Nothing else smart?

DIONYSUS: Aye, save "my shoulder's aching."

XANTHIAS: Come now, that comical joke?

DIONYSUS:With all my heart.
Only be careful not to shift your pole, 
And-

XANTHIAS:What?

DIONYSUS: And vow that you've a belly-ache.

XANTHIAS: May I not say I'm overburdened so 
That if none ease me, I must ease myself?

DIONYSUS: For mercy's sake, not till I'm going to vomit.

I believe that this showed a great forbearance to how we now perceive the comedy stylings of a duo: Abbot and Costello,  Dean Martin and Jerry Lewis, Laurel and Hardy and even Walter Mattau and  Jack Lemon.


Aristophanes' play ‘The Birds’ was turned into a popular Opera, yet ‘The Frogs’ is much lesser known despite the list of characters he uses to unravel the processes of travelling to the underword to bring back to Earth one of the great dramatists of the age – Euripides.

The basis of the play is simple – Dionysus travels to the underworld with his servant to bring back Euripides from the dead.  Yet he does not bet on the journey being so difficult and fraught with decisions.
We are introduced to Dionysis as a theatre-goer.  He bemoans to the audience the sever lack of good dramatists in the world.  As the God of Wine, Theatre and Merry Making, he feels that this reflects upon him personally.  He resolves to go with his servant Xanthias and return with Euripides, the Prince of Dramatists.
With a lion-skin in tow, he disguises himself as Heracles (the Gatekeeper of Olympus) to herald his strength and ward against the possible dangers of the journey to the underworld.
Ferried across to the Underword by the boatman Charon, we are introduced to a huge croaking chorus of frogs – who seem to be the vocal link between the Earth and the Underworld.  In the meantime, servant Xanthias was denied a boat trip, he has had to walk across the lake to the entrance to the Underworld.

Taking the opportunity to get even with Heracles for misdeeds committed in the underworld, Dionysus forces his servant to change clothing/costumes with him (which alludes to a great banter between the two as a modern musical Vaudevillian style comedy).  The change is barely complete when a handmaiden of Proserpine to bid Xanthias (thinking he is Heracles) to a great banquet.  Dionysus insists that he changes back into the lion skin – that is until two housekeepers of Pluto (the God of the Underworld – in classical Greek mythology) attack Dionysus thinking that he is Heracles and wanting revenge for the damages he had done on his last visit to the Underworld. In a rush to prove his identity the chorus of frogs help to substantiate his true form.
The news soon spreads throughout the Underword that Dionysus has arrived to herald one of the great dramatists back to Earth.  There is a great disturbance and we hear quarreling from Aeschylus and Euripides, each trying to prove his worth to gain the position of the King of Tragedy and to take the high honour alongside Pluto for the great banquet.  It is soon decided that as both their plays were written and performed for the Dionysus Festival, that he should make the decision and decide who is to be the King of Tragedy.


A trial is set where Aeschylus and Euripides both need to prove their worth by presenting the first lines and verses from their plays.  Dionysus is torn between the two and originally takes the side of Euripides as he was the original intent of his visit to the Underworld.  Finally Aeschylus is declared with winner, yet it has also change the mind of Dionysus as to whom he wants to bring back to Earth.  Dionysus and Xanthias leave the Underworld, bringing back Aeschylus to write on Earth again, thus leaving Sophocles in the place of honour of King of Tragedy.

Like most classical Greek plays, the chorus is used as an intermediary between the main actors and the audience, both in representing what happens off stage to the audience and sometimes to the main actors, re-delivering imperative information to the audience and becoming the main conductors of movement on stage.  This play is no different, however there is a comedic prescense, not only used by the vaudevillian style comedy between Dionysus and Xanthias, but also with the information that the frogs deliver to the audience - always beginning with the requisite croaks and brekekex's of a typical frog call.

Brekekekex, ko-ax, ko-ax, 

Brekekekex, ko-ax, ko-ax! 
We children of the fountain and the lake 
Let us wake 
Our full choir-shout, as the flutes are ringing out, 
Our symphony of clear-voiced song. 
The song we used to love in the Marshland up above, 
In praise of Dionysus to produce, 
Of Nysaean Dionysus, son of Zeus, 
When the revel-tipsy throng, all crapulous and gay, 
To our precinct reeled along on the holy Pitcher day, 
Brekekekex, ko-ax, ko-ax.



It's nice to enjoy the lighter side of Classical Antiquity!



Next Week: 'The Room' by Harold Pinter


Sunday, 22 September 2013

Week #10 : 'The Comedy of Errors' by William Shakespeare


"Am I in earth, in Heaven, or in Hell?
Sleeping or waking, mad or well-advised?
Known unto these, and to myself disguised?
I'll say as they say, and persever so,
And in this mist at all adventure go."                    (Antipholus of Syracuse, Act 2: Scene 2)



24 Hours....
+   TWO sets of identical twins.....
+   Separation at birth from a shipwreck....
+   A port-side town of Ephesus.....
+   Mistaken identity....
+   A collision of family and friends.....
+   Far-fetched coincidences.....

= Chaotic hilarity unfolding!


Egeon, a merchant shipper of Syracuse has just been condemned to death in the town of Epheus for violating a serious ban against travelling between two rival cities.  As he is being lead to his execution Egeon tells the Duke Solinus that he was travelling to Syracuse to search for his long lost wife and twin son, who were lost in a shipwreak 25 years ago.  Egeon has one of the twins, Antipholus... of Syracuse (this will seem quite necessary in a minute, believe you me!) and a slave named Dromio... of Syracuse - whom is also a twin and has also lost his other half.  The Duke is so moved by this tale that he grants Egeon 24 hours to raise 1000 marks to save his life. 

In the meantime, and unknown to Egeon, Antipholus of Syracuse is also in the town Ephesus, with his slave, Dromio of Syracuse.
Unknown to both Egeon and Antipholus of Syracuse, the town has a prosperous citizen, known as...... Antipholus.... of Ephesus and his slave Dromio..... of Ephesus...... 

Confused yet???  Well, try to keep up for a sec...

Adriana, Antipholus of Ephesus' wife mistakes Antipholus of Syracuse for her husband and forces him home for dinner, whilst leaving Dromio of Syracuse at the door to stand guard.
Shortly following, Antipholus of Ephesus, along with his slave Dromio of Ephesus returns home and is refused entry.

In the meantime, Antipholus of Syracuse has fallen in love with Luciana, Adriana's sister, who in turn thinks that her brother-in-law is trying to seduce her.

Ok.... are you keeping up??

The hilarity and total confusion continues when a gold chain, that has been ordered by Antipholus of Ephesus is given to Antipholus of Syracuse.  Antipholus of Ephesus refuses to pay for the chain (and rightly so, it was never given to him) and is arrested for this debt.  Adriana decides that her husband has gone mad and orderes him to be bound in their cellar room.
At this point, Antipholus of Syracuse and Dromio of Syracuse try to escape the city immediately, yet only to be caught by the debt officer and Adriana......

Take a deep breath!!


Bell Shakespeare alongside the State Theatre Company of South Australia is currently producing this wonderfully absurd and highly physical comedy.  If you haven't had a chance to see it, you only have a few more chances to see it in Canberra (29 Oct - 9 Nov) and Sydney (12 Nov - 7 Dec).  There are a few regional dates upcoming in Tas (on RIGHT NOW!), Vic and NSW - Check the website for these dates and venues.

Director Imara Savage departs from her darker and torturous theatrical roots to direct a comedy for one of the first times.  She comments in an article to 'The Age' newspaper that "I didn't feel that I had to drag it kicking and screaming into the modern day.  It feels like it sits there quite comfortable.  That's a testament to Shakespeare, because comedy is something that can date quickly."

Savage takes the reigns of this hilarious Shakespearean comedy, updates the setting to a contemporary location with gaudy costumes and settings.  If the sold out season in Melbourne is anything to go by, this revisioning of this play has been a tremendous success.  The 'Hearld Sun' reviewer Byron Bache had nothing bad to say about the production at all, discussing that "Modern dress Shakespeare is so often over-inflated, confused, or downright pointless.  Here, director imama Savage has performed magic.  Her 'The Comedy of Errors' takes place is a twisted, hysterical King Street-cum-Carrum Downs hyper-reality.  Every line reading, every joke and every piece of physical comedy sings.
This is Shakespeare for the populace.  The text is intact and Savage's clever staging, full of tweaks and subversions, is redoubtable proof that the 'burn everything to the ground, throw away the text' school of adaptation that's currently in vogue brings far less to a work than the guiding hand of a capable and imaginative director with a little bit of trust in their playwright."

 


If Imara Savage likes the dark and disastrous plays then I can't wait to see her tackle another Shakespeare in this vein.... Titus Andronicus, for example??  or maybe a bloody Macbeth or Julius Caesar??  My vote is for Titus! (My favourite Shakespeare play!!)
Any production of hers will be a success if this production is anything to be counted upon.


The final, final word comes from Dromio of Ephesus:

"Nay, then thus,
We came into the world like brother and brother,
And now let's go hand in hand, not one before another."



Next Week: 'The Laramie Project' by Moises Kaufman and the Tectonic Theatre Project



Friday, 2 August 2013

Week #3 : 'Six Characters in Search of an Author' by Luigi Pirandello

"We have this illusion of being one person for all, of having a personality that is unique to all our acts. But it isn't true. We perceive this when, tragically perhaps, in something we do, we are as it were, suspended, caught up in the air on a kind of hook. Then we perceive that all of us was not in tha act, and that it would be an atrocious injustice to judge us by that action alone, as if all our existence were summed up in that one deed." (The Father)



'Six Characters in Search of an Author' is an absurdist play based on metatheatrical ideas. Six characters walk into a rehearsal in progress asking for an author to complete their story. The characters know what is to happen to them, but they need to play it out in order or it to be complete. The director/producer becomes enamoured with their story and is determined to replay their scenes with the actors of his company.

A paradox in the making? Complete nonsense? Prophetic and life destroying? 

Let us ask the character of the FATHER:
"...if we have no other reality beyond the illusion, you too must not count overmuch on your reality as you feel it today, since, like that of yesterday, it may prove an illusion for you tomorrow."

Confused yet? You're not far off the context of this play. As you start to read, Pirandello lulls you into a false sense of security: The characters story seems to be quite straight forward, the comedy of the actors watching this tragic (and in parts tragically awful) story that embodies traits of Mills and Boons formulaic writing.  Yet it is far from that as we delve deeper into the characters narrative, it becomes more of a 'game' for the Director and acting troupe, but so much more of a life for the Characters. 
The prose is beautifully written in two differing forms - Naturalistic and often comedically colloquial for the troupe of actors and poetical and prophetic for the characters. This alludes to the starkly different natures that Pirandello has specifically created for the audience to disassociate the two halves of diametrically opposed 'reality and make believe'.



Pericles Lewis at Yale University discusses that 'Pirandello’s work plays with the central tension in the modern theater between the desire to create a perfect illusion of extra-theatrical reality on the stage and the contrary impulse to celebrate the very illusoriness of all theater. Modern drama calls attention to the fact that theater is both a representational art, like painting or writing, and a performing art, like dance or music.  The actors on stage are at the same time real people and representatives of fictional characters. One of the startling elements of Pirandello’s play is the separation (which he emphasized in his stage directions) between the “characters” and the “actors.” As the theorist Bert States has written,

"we tend generally to undervalue the elementary fact that theater—unlike fiction, painting, sculpture and film—is really a language whose words consist to an unusual degree of things that are what they seem to be…. Or, as [the playwright] Peter Handke puts it, in the theater light is brightness pretending to be other brightness, a chair is a chair pretending to be another chair,”

and, of course, a person is a person pretending to be another person.'


FATHER (jumping up suddenly): Illusion? I would ask you not to speak of illusion! I would beg you not to use that word. For us it has a particularly cruel ring!
PRODUCER (astonished): For heaven’s sake, why?
FATHER: Oh, yes, cruel, cruel! You really ought to understand.
PRODUCER: What are we supposed to say? Illusion is our stock-in-trade [...]
FATHER: I entirely understand [...] As artists [...], you have to create a perfect illusion of reality.
PRODUCER: That’s right.
FATHER: But what if you stop to consider that we, the six of us (he gestures briefly to indicate the six characters) have no other reality; that we don’t exist outside this illusion!




In 1921 it was greeted with great hostility (and inciting riots in the theatre) in Italy when it was first produced, but soon became heralded as a great piece of Modernist theatre when it was performed in 1923 in Paris, helping to forge the way ahead for Beckett and Ionesco's Theatre of the Absurd.

This play, being in the public domain, has been adapted for the stage many a time. The most recent in Australia or the 2010 Sydney Festival. The team at 'Headlong Theatre' used a docu-drama premise for the very beginning of the play and coupled it with the use of video and white noise to disrupt the flow of the character and actor interaction to establish a sense of authenticity of the falsehood of the situation but also fragmentation of the plot devices.

This play would certainly be a challenging script to adapt for any producer/director/actor, but it would also bring great joy in the triumph of gaining the right mix of contemporary and ancient theatre practices.



Next Week: Hamletmachine by Heiner Muller