Week #18 : 'Falling Petals' by Ben Ellis

I have very much delayed in putting up this post because I am not sure how to start with this play.

Written by Ben Ellis, an (Melbourne – Gippsland) Australian born playwright who has written a few plays, most notably for ‘Falling Petals’ (2002) and ‘Post Felicity’ (2001).  His plays seem to centre on home-life in regional areas in Melbourne and dealing with the locality and small township relationships.
His play ‘Blindingly Obvious Facts’ about American peace activist Rachel Corrie was highly noted in the Melbourne ‘Short and Sweet’ play competition in 2007, featuring in the top 30.

‘Falling Petals’ was first performed at Playbox Theatre (now the Malthouse Theatre) opening on 2nd July, 2003 in Melbourne Victoria.  It won the Wal Cherry Play of the Year in 2002.

The premise of the play is in a town called Hollow in regional Victoria which is in rapid decline socially and economically.  Three teenagers are looking forward to their end of year VCE exams and planning their escape to University in Melbourne.  

The play starts with the death of a young boy from a mysterious disease.  Dubbed the ‘Hollow Syndrome’, the town soon becomes over run with the disease eradicating all the children and teenagers. 

Most of the action takes place near a cherry blossom tree on the outskirts of town.  As Phil, Tania and Sally study under the tree, they watch the petals fall and designate each petal to the other children who slowly die in the town.

Phil Moss is the most dedicated to gaining an entrance score to study in Melbourne; Sally Woods is not as intelligent, but loves hanging around Phil; and Tania, Phil’s love interest is of near intelligence to Phil, but not as dedicated to study as he is.

Another female and male actor play multiple roles as other adults in the town. 

MALE	FEMALE
Dr Franz	Ms Golden – a reporter
Mr Syme – Careers teacher at the local high school	Mrs Woods – Sally’s mum
Mr Mulvaney – the president of the Chamber of Commerce	Gayle Moss – Phil’s dad
John Moss – Phil’s dad	Ms Lawrence – Vice Principal
Mr Worboys – Teacher at high school	Marg Bennett – a psychologist
Jonsey – Border Patrol

 

As ‘Hollow Syndrome’ takes hold over the children in the town, the adults take severe measures to not let the disease spread, they shut down the school taking away the opportunity for Phil, Sally and Tania to complete their VCE.  Sally’s mum takes her own steps and kicks her out of the home.

As you can tell, tragedy ensues and Sally (living outside near the cherry blossom tree) contracts ‘Hollow Syndrome’, Phil becomes blindly incensed in breaking the containment lines around the town and to complete his VCE.  Tania follows Phil along like a blind little puppy and tried to make his wish come true by sexually controlling him to help her study.

Unfortunately this play is hardly produced since its creation. 

The Production Company, a cross-cultural relationship company between the US and Australia (produced in America) performed this as part of their season on The Australia Project.

5 Pound Repertoire Company in Richmond performed this play as part of their repertory season in November/Decemberof 2012.

Apart from these two productions, there is little else about this play to be located on the internet.

I will leave this here, as this post  is 3 weeks late and I have a lot to catch up on!

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

Week #11 : 'The Laramie Project' by Moises Kaufman and the Tectonic Theatre Project

“If you would have asked me before, I would have told you, Laramie is a beautiful town, secluded enough that you can have your own identity … A own with a strong sense of community – everyone knows everyone … A town with a personality that most larger cities are stripped of.  Now, after Matthew, I would say that Laramie is a town defined by an accident, a crime.  We’ve become Waco, we’ve become Jasper.  We’re a noun, a definition, a sign.  We may be able to get rid of that … but it will sure take a while.”  - JEBADIAH SCHULTZ

Matthew Shepard was kidnapped, beaten within an inch of his life, tied to a pole in the middle of a field and left to die by two boys – Russell Henderson and Aaron McKinney. 

The reasoning for this crime – Matthew was gay. 

The Laramie Project was written by Moises Kaufman and the Members of the ‘Tectonic Theatre Project’.  It explores the hate/homosexual crime of Matthew Shepard in Laramie, Wyoming in 1998.  8 Actors portray 67 Characters in this ruthless re-telling of the true crime that shocked not only a small town, but the entirety of the USA. 

Over a year and a half and six visits in 1998 and 1999, the members of the ‘Tectonic Theatre Project’ conducted over 200 interviews with people closely related to the crime and those who were living in Laramie at the time – whether they were long term residents or students at the University of Wyoming who knew Shepard. 

This allows an overall breakdown of the events leading up to the kidnapping and subsequent murder, the crime itself and the aftermath that was bought down onto the town and its inhabitants.

Broken down into ‘moments’ not scenes, Kaufman explains the reasoning behind this:

“When writing this play, we used a technique I developed called ‘moment work’.  It is a method to create and analyse theatre from a structuralist (or tectonic) perspective.  For that reason, there are no ‘scenes’ in this play only ‘moments’.  A ‘moment’ does not mean a change of locale, or an entrance or exit of actors or characters.  It is simply a unit of theatrical time, which is then juxtaposed with other units to convey meaning.”

All of the moments in the script allude to the content that will be delivered on the stage.  Moments such as:

·        Journal Entries (of the Tectonic Theatre Project)

·        Alison and Marge

·        The Word

·        The Essential Facts

·        E-mail

·        Medical Update

Allow the audience to easily grasp the situation and the types of ‘characters’ that are going to be on stage.  (I use ‘characters’ in this form as they are all real life people, recalling real life events) 

You could break down the events in the script even further and give sections ‘Chapters’ of meanings.  (I learnt this from Director Leticia Caceres as a good way to conduct rehearsals – You and the cast section out the script into these chapters and give them a simple title so everyone is on the same page when you are rehearsing a specific section and not have to use archaic phrases eg: “Today were going to work on pages 20-34.”  Instead you can create much more meaning into the phrase “Today we are going to be working on the Vigils.”)

The chapters that I have created for this play are as follows (This will give you a good breakdown of the structure of the play, which is very important to the flow of the production):

1.      Laramie

2.     Personality

3.     Religion

4.     Crime

5.     Realisation

6.     Deposition

7.     News reports

8.     Definitive Recognition and Repercussion

9.     Vigils

10.    Contrast

11.    Death

12.    Funeral

13.    Court (Henderson)

14.   After

15.   Court (McKinney)

16.   Statement

17.   Epilogue

Since each actor has to portray 6 to 12 ‘characters’ (and in the original staged production, portraying themselves in some instances) each character has to change on stage.  It is therefore specified in the script that the characters need only define themselves by a hat, shirt, a pair of glasses.  All costume items can either be left onstage so actors can remain onstage for the entirety of the production.

In a similar vein, the set needs only be quite minimal.  A couple of chairs, a table or two and the use of technology; is all you need to carry on a successful production.  It is one of those strong liturgical plays where the actors and dialogue completely speak for themselves.

“So how could it not be a town where this kind of thing happens?  Like, that’s just totally – like, it’s just totally like circular logic, like how can you even say that?  And we have to mourn this and we have to be sad that we live in a town, a state, a country where shit like this happens.  I mean, these are people trying to distance themselves from this crime.  And we need to own this crime.  I feel.  Everyone needs to own it.  We are like this.  We ARE like this.  WE are LIKE this.” – ZUBAIDA ULA

You can find out more about the show from the following websites:

http://www.laramieproject.org/

http://www.tectonictheaterproject.org/The_Laramie_Project.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1qiTmF0p4A

http://www.matthewshepard.org/our-works/lp-support

Next Week: 'Philadelphia, Here I Come!' by Brian Friel

Week #6 : 'Electra' by Euripides (and Sophocles... and Aeschylus...)

"And if death in justice demands death, why, then, I and your son Orestes must kill you to avenge our father's death; For if the one revenge is just, so is the other."  

(Peter Vellacott's translation of Euripides Electra.)

Electra, with accounts written by the three most powerful Greek playwrights - Euripides, Sophocles and Aeschylus, each wrote plays surrounding her and her tragic tale of murder, revenge and redemption.  
Each playwright wrote differing accounts of her tale, and depending on which Greek Tragedian you prefer, you are bound to find a version to suit your tastes (Me... I will always have a soft spot in my heart for Euripides).  


She is one of the great female characters in Greek Tragedy.  Set aside from her counterparts of the defective and rejected muse 'Cassandra' (again, this depends entirely on who's version of Cassandra you're reading) and the revengeful and tortured soul 'Medea'; Electra is terrifyingly brutal in her attack on her own mother and (step) father.

Stamford University 2009 Electra Festival

In Euripides version the audience first hears the story of Agamemnon and his conquests in Troy retold by a Peasant.  We soon hear that he has been murdered by Aegisthus who has also returned to Argos and married Agamemnon's widow Clytemnestra.  With the thoughts that Clytemnestra's children Electra (and her future children) and Orestes will revenge their fathers death - Aegisthus then removes Orestes to Phocis to be bought up by strangers and waits until Electra is of childbearing age, he marries her off to a Peasant (who is retelling this story now) so her children will grow up poor and lowly, and therefore less likely to have the ability to avenge the death of Agamemnon. 
Electra, whom is still a virgin (as the Peasant will not touch her as he believes that he is not of noble enough birth to bed her) laments her situation and the loss of her mother and father.  One day she is visited by a man who delivers her information about her brother.  After receiving some cryptic information from an Old Man (who used to be her fathers servant), she realises that this man is her brother.  Soon they conspire to avenge Agamemnon's death and discuss how they are to kill Aegisthus and realise that they must also take vengeance on their mother Clytemnestra.  Electra takes this challenge for herself:

"The killing of my mother I shall claim myself."

Orestes attends the sacrificing ritual to honour the Nymphs that Aegisthus is presiding over.  Aegistus is killed and bought to the hut that Electra lives in.  During this time Clytemnestra is told that Electra has given birth and she is to come and witness her grandson for the customary 10th day sacrifice.  Just before she arrives, Orestes tried to convince Electra that she does not have to kill her mother, that killing Aegisthus was enough to avenge their fathers death.  Yet Electra, convinced that it is the only thing to do, is resolved to kill Clytemnestra.
The time comes for vengeance and Electra is steely in her resolve.  Clytemnestra enters the house and as an aside to the audience we see Electra's vengeance is cold and hard.

"All is prepared.  The sword of sacrifice which felled the bull, by whose side you shall fall, is sharpened for you.  In the house of death you shall be still his bride whose bed you shared in life.  This 'favour' is all I grant you.  In return I take justice, your life in payment for my father's life."

Clytemnestra is slaughtered and bought next to Aegisthus' body.  
As a final act of retribution to the slaying of these two bodies, the Gods send The Dioscori to demand that Electra and Orestes come to Olympus to be trialed for their crimes. 

The Sophocles version, written in about 410BC directly addresses the character of Electra which focuses on the reasoning of why a daughter would want to so vehemently murder her mother.  In this version Electra prevails and triumphs, which turns his version into more of a case study of female desires as a revenge drama and as a psychological account of Electra herself.

Aeschylus' account of Electra is interwoven into the Oresteia Trilogy.  This version focusses more on the ethical issues of the murders within the frame of a family blood feud.

Euripides, similarly to Sophocles, focuses somewhat on the character traits of Electra, but also brings Orestes into the plot further.  His version is less of a case study on the blinding revenge that Electra has - Euripides also facilitates the cost of the blood revenge and makes Electra account for her vengeance. 


According to  Ruth Hazel in her article 'Electra: A Fragmented Woman' Sophocles Electra is one of the most performed, stating that this is because of a more realistic style of performance which offers a more complex and challenging role for the actress portraying Electra. She has less of an urge to force her brother Orestes into the revenge on their mother and father and has no qualms about committing matricide.  Hazel describes Euripides version as 'the most unappealing, the least heroic, the most mentally disturbed and disturbing.'  Whereas Aeschylus' version of Electra as stylised, more likely to be performed by a man and and with traditional primitive masks.

It is not possible to count how many performances and adaptations of Electra there have been.  Besides Euripides' 'Women of Troy' and 'Medea' , it amounts to being one of the most performed and re-envisioned Greek plays of the modern Greek theatrical experiences.
 

                      

Some of the most recent adaptations bought to the   stage have been: set in America in John Deere Country with modern singers and dancers and Washburn University (Topeka, Kansas, USA) hosted British playwright, Nick Payne, adaptation based on Neo-Freudian psychology to revision Sophocles text.  
Last year at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival, Tadashi Suzuki bought his adaptation of Euripides text which was described as 'Euripides, meets Beckett, meets The Exorcist'...

Each and every director has their own take on how Electra needs to be portrayed, especially with the choice of playwright.  
Had I enough time, I would have read the other three versions.  I may be remiss in doing so, and it may have given me further abilities in discussing this text at length.




Next Week: 'Equus' by Peter Shaffer

Week #1 : 'Miss Julie' by August Strindberg

Miss Julie..... Mistress Julie...... Mademoiselle Julie....... Oh, how your prestigious birthright belies you...

August Strindberg wrote a gripping tale of a society woman bent on seducing her fathers porter into a sexual experience to prove that she still has power over men of any status after her disastrous engagement that has just ended. The events that follow allow herself to be wrapped in his tangling web of seductions all to be humiliated, belittled and ultimately manipulated into sacrificing herself in the end.

Written in 1888, 'Miss Julie' was so controversial, it was not produced in Swedish theatres for over 14 years. This seminal text of the Naturalism period, that Strindberg himself described as a "modern psychological drama", has been depicted as volatile, psychologically turbulent and captivating. 

Strindberg influenced such writers as Tennessee Williams, Edward Albee and Ingmar Bergman (to name just a few) with his intellectual thoughts on morals and class structures all wrapped up in characters that were multidimensional and contained within a plot that was not fabricated. 

'Miss Julie' is all this and so much more!

                    

The action happens across the span of a single night where societal status is challenged and crumbled beneath the weight of seductions from both Julie and John. Both try to best each other with desperate actions that would shake the morals of any human being, yet John takes it in his stride and cuttingly overhands the dangerously enticing situation to manipulate and ruin Julie for his own gratifications.

The script allows a man and a woman to create a growing psychological tension on stage that not only covers sexual attraction and eventual domination, but the mechanisms of polarised upbringings of the upper and lower classes of society and their desperate layers of control.

          "Why do you go about in livery on a holiday evening? Take it off at once." (Julie to John when in the company of his fiancée - the kitchenmaid)

John, who will not be bested in any situation, seemingly plays right into Julie's flirtations and enables the situation to grown beyond her power. As the night spins beyond anyones control, the status of men and women, class distinction and the strong and the weak are put to the test.  John clearly sets the tone and in one fowl swoop, cheapens Julie's actions and a forces a flow of abuse onto her:

          "No one in my station of life could have made herself so cheap as the way you carried on tonight, my girl... Have you ever seen a girl in my position offer herself in the way you did?" 

Strindberg was quite specific about the way in which he wanted his play to be seen: a small stage, the single setting of a small working kitchen and fireplace, with a glass door leading to the garden. Other items on stage reveal a large bell and a horn for the residents of the upper house to contact their staff. (Later on also Julie's pet canary and large knife...)

The dialectic of class conflict is delivered through the only openings to other parts of the household: the staff quarters on one side of the stage and the opulent gardens on the other. The kitchen then becomes the intermediary between both worlds. The very personalised relationship display between Julie and John in this middle ground forces the tension out in the open where the themes of love, desire and control in a world with rigid class conventions override any visceral perceptions. 

Strindberg's stage directions are almost stifling in specificity in parts, but kept relatively open when the dialogue becomes overwrought with dramatics and emotions. Writing around the same time as Ibsen, whom also heavily focused on the specificity of the actors movements; Strindberg knew exactly how he wanted his writings to be imagined on stage and did so in these directions to whomever tackled his script. (Oh,and painted  backdrops were definitely not allowed on a Strindberg production!) 

In 2012, Yael Farber re-imagined Strindberg's play to post-apartheid era with tremendous success, winning the Carol Tambour Best of Edinburgh Award. Claire Simpson reviewed the performance for Fringe Reviews: "One of those rare exceptional productions where all the elements - writing, direction performance and technical direction - combine to become more than the sum of its parts, this powerful Mies Julie lets out a cry of anguish for today's South Africa that won't be easily forgotten." Rory Eddington also commented on the performance: "While individually giving exhilarating performances, the chemistry between Bongile Mantsai and Hilda Cronje is torrid, creating a perspiration drenched eroticism. Yet perhaps the most enduring image is that of John clutching both shovel and scythe at the play’s denouement as if to ask one simple question: is this the only way? Sexy, dangerous and riveting."

     

Not so successful was the French adaptation in 2011 staring Juliette Binoche, however more for the bold minimalist modern setting rather than the performances. The reviews for this show focus on the design rather than the acting, which is disappointing considering Juliette Binoche is renowned for creating deep and often beguiling female characters. One comment made by Michael Billington for 'The Guardian' concluded that "In the end, the production makes little sense. Strindberg dreamed of a 'small stage and a small auditorium' where the entire focus would be on the situation's emotional reality. Instead the play is presented as a pictorial spectacle with the emphasis on a mood of debauched glamour and where either the glass screens or the lighting render the actors' faces semi-visible."

     

I feel that I could easily write a thesis discussing the psychological complexities of this play, let alone the numerous adaptations of the text. However, I think I may have to stop here as I draw alarmingly close to the 1,000 word mark.....

I chose this play to be my first as it will be on at the Belvoir St Theatre in Sydney in August/Sept with aussie actor Brendan Cowell as John.  I had the chance to work with Letitia Cáceres at MTC and I am really interested to see how she will tackle this with Simon Stone's adaptation of the original text.

http://belvoir.com.au/productions/miss-julie/

Next week: 'The League of Youth' by Henrik Ibsen