Week #14 : 'EndGame' by Samuel Beckett

HAMM:  I wonder.  (Pause.)  

Imagine if a rational being came back to earth, wouldn't he be liable to get ideas into his head if he observed us long enough.

(Voice of rational being)  Ah, good, now I see what it is, yes, now I understand what they're at!

( Normal voice)  And without going so far as that, we ourselves...

(with emotion)  ...we ourselves... at certain moments...

(Vehemently)  To think perhaps it won't all have been for nothing!

Samuel Beckett, the God of Absurdism, brings us a disastrously tragicomedy in one long act.  EndGame, the tale of four misfits living their rudimentary lives in a post apocalyptic world, not in any hope of gaining a better one, but just - to be.

Living in a cyclical stasis, Hamm and Clov discuss the world, it's complexities and the nature of beginnings and endings, whilst being completely alone and devoid of happiness.

Clov and Hamm

Hamm is the Protagonist of EndGame.  All though his obnoxious and disagreeable behaviour at times makes him the Antagonist to his man-servant, Clov. Blind and completely imprisoned (we assume, by old age) in his wheeled chair, Hamm continuously comments that no one suffers more in life than he. For Hamm, there is no reason for being on this Earth, particularly not in the damp and chilly hole where he also polices over his parents - Nagg and Nell.

HAMM:   In my house. (Pause)

(With prophetic relish) One day you'll be blind like me. You'll be sitting here, a speck in the void, in the dark, forever, like me. (Pause.)

One day you'll say to yourself, I'm tired, I'll sit down, and you'll go and sit down. Then you'll say, I'm hungry, I'll get up and get something to eat. But you won't get up. You'll say, I shouldn't have sat down, but since I have I'll sit on a little longer, then I'll get up and get something to eat. But you won't get up and you won't get anything to eat. (Pause.)

You'll look at the wall a while, then you'll say, I'll close my eyes, perhaps have a little sleep, after that I'll feel better, and you'll close them. And when you open them again there'll be no wall any more.  (Pause.)

Infinite emptiness will be all around you, all the resurrected dead of all the ages wouldn't fill it, and there you'll be like a little bit of grit in the middle of the steppe.  (Pause.)

Yes, one day you'll know what it is, you'll be like me, except that you won't have anyone with you, because you won't have had pity on anyone and because there won't be anyone left to have pity on you.  (Pause.)

Clov is the Antagonist of EndGame (and as his character is more downtrodden and worn out – He is the more likable character and therefore assumes the role of Protagonist in our minds).  He is the servant to Hamm despite his own disability – Clov cannot ever sit, he is forever walking – often pacing from one side of the room to another and looking out the windows for something.

Adopted into his household by Hamm as a young boy, the play's tension centres around Clov's yearning to leave against his feelings of responsibility to stay with Hamm (an obligation he constantly questions throughout Endgame). Clov constantly attends to Hamm and his relentless commands, such as wheeling him around the dank hole, relaying the landscape outside the windows, giving Hamm his medicine and covering him up at night.  Clov has inexorable juxtaposing emotions of hatred and bonds to Hamm.

CLOV (as before):  I say to myself— sometimes, Clov, you must learn to suffer better than that if you want them to weary of punishing you— one day. I say to myself—sometimes, Clov, you must be better than that if you want them to let you go—one day. But I feel too old, and too far, to form new habits. Good, it'll never end, I'll never go.  (Pause.)

Then one day, suddenly, it ends, it changes, I don't understand, it dies, or it's me, I don't understand that either. I ask the words that remain— sleeping, waking, morning, evening. They have nothing to say.  (Pause.)

I open the door of the cell and go. I am so bowed I only see my feet, if I open my eyes, and between my legs a little trail of black dust. I say to myself that the earth is extinguished, though I never saw it lit.  (Pause.)

It's easy going.  (Pause.)

When I fall I'll weep for happiness.  (Pause. He goes towards door.)

Nagg and Nell

Nagg is Nell's husband and Hamm's father. Living (or should I say – Not living, as Nagg and Nell are in all aspects of the word – dead) in a rubbish bin next to his equally ‘binned’ wife.   He arises every now and then to yell out for food or to try, and always in vain, to kiss Nell and retell the identical story he always tells (we assume on a daily basis). Often, especially when demanding food, he is childish, barely verbose, but sometimes he can be quite profound and articulate.

Nell is Nagg's husband and Hamm's mother. She is resigned to the routine and sameness of their existence, professing the frequent attempt and persistence of Nagg to kiss her a "farce." Nell, as a character, is minimal and not important to the plot, she appears to be the only reason Nagg keeps ‘living’ and is the the sole example of a normal relationship in the play.

NELL (without lowering her voice):  Nothing is funnier than unhappiness, I grant you that. …  ... ...  Yes, yes, it's the most comical thing in the world. And we laugh, we laugh, with a will, in the beginning. But it's always the same thing. Yes, it's like the funny story we have heard too often, we still find it funny, but we don't laugh any more. 

Hardly a verbose play, the dialogue is frequently one to three words in response from Hamm's musings and barking orders and Clov's responses.  Some of the longest sections are the stage directions for Clov.  They are long, detailed and highly important to the characterisation of EndGame.  The first entry to the play is Clov walking from one window, getting up on a chair, getting down and walking to the other side of the stage, only to repeat the same movement.  this is a long and laborious task, but gives the audience a clear depiction of the characters and the world that they are living in.

It is extremely  difficult to describe this play.  I suggest, if you have a week spare:

Read it.

Muse over it.  

Put it down.

Pick it up again and sigh.

Put it back down.

Stare at it wondering if the next time you attempt to read it, it will make a little more sense.

Pick it back up.

Read it.

Put it back down.

Sigh.

Pick up a pen.

Pick up the script again.

Read it and scribble notes all throughout the script.

Put it back down.

Sigh in realisation that you will NEVER fully grasp the complexity of Beckett's writings.

CLOV (straightening up): I'm doing my best to create a little order.

 (Don't ask why there is a red background to the text........ Grrrrrr... I have no idea why it is there and how to get rid of it......  Blogger is getting worse and worse to use.)

Next Week: 'Love, Loss and What I Wore' by Nora Ephron

Week #9 : 'The Prodigal Son' by Jack Hibberd

The Prodigal Son - A wayward son who squanders his inheritance, however he returns home to find that his father forgives him.  Luke 15:11-32

The parable of The Prodigal Son is reflected in the tale of Luke, Chapter 15, from the Bible. The characters in the parable are The Father, The Prodigal Son and The Elder Son.

The Father is a wealthy man with two sons - He is the reflection of divine love. Some say that the father is the representation of God, some prefer the suggestion that he is actually the symbol of Christ.

The Elder Son is a materialistic man whom desires no familial relationships. He is suggested to be the representation of The Pharisees who had religion and and righteousness in their heads, but not in their hearts. They did not believe in Christ nor forgiveness of sins.

The Prodigal Son is a young, wasteful and unmarried boy who is undisciplined in the ways of life. He is said to be the representation of a person living in rebellion without Christ in their life. The fable tells us that we sometimes need to hit rock-bottom before we can repent for our sins.

The basis of this parable from the Bible tells us that we, as the general human race, are wasteful and are too absorbed in our own wants, needs and desires to realise that we are living in sin. In this sinful life we hurt others around us, especially our fathers, and we need to repent and ask for forgiveness. In this, our fathers will always love us and grant us with patience, generosity and grace. All we need to do is awaken our hearts to the love of Christ and redeem ourselves in his eyes.

The premise of Hibberd's The Prodigal Son is in a similar vein of this Bible story, however modernised for a 90s post modern audience with the inclusion of a homosexual son, unforgiving parents and disconnected language. In Hibberd's version, we are witnessing the return of The Son to The Father and Mother (known only as Mr and Mrs in the playscript)

"The Son returns home 30 years after being rejected by his family on the suggestion that he is a homosexual. He returns home in the hope that he will be granted a reconciliation with his parents, only to be rejected again, specifically by a ruthless and monstrous mother." (Derived from Jack Hibberd's website)

In replacement of The Elder Son, Hibberd inserts the Mother character with all be same representations of this character - self righteous, pitiless and unforgiving.  The Father character is per the parable. He is loving and devoted parent. He cannot understand why his son has left nor why he has returned, he is only glad that he has come back and doesn't care for the why.

Mr:  I missed you, son. Dreadfully. Your absence has been like a hole in my -

Mrs:  Head

Mr:  Heart

On the other side The Mother is persistent in her unrelenting belligerent manner, trying to get her son to blame himself for leaving, forcing him to explain his return. She constantly berates The Prodigal Son and blames him for her ruined uterus, vagina and sagging breasts. She refuses his questions and his insistence on moving home again.

Mrs:  The room is frozen in time. And will remain unthawed.

Son:  Like your heart.

Mrs:  I never wanted you.

Son:  I gathered that. It is unusual for a mother to hang her son on a meat hook when he has been naughty.

                           

The play starts with only the sound of a metronome. A heart beat. It is suddenly stopped by The Father. The family continue to act as a normal family - the pouring and offering of coffee, the offering of cake - but in complete silence with frequent and highly specific pauses to create different tableaux.

In the finality of the situation, after The Prodigal Son is asked to leave the house, The Father begins the metronome again. The heartbeat continues.

The language in this play has a post-modern vibe to it. It is broken up into small tableaux with frequent silences and sometimes incomprehensible, and sometimes philosophical, dialogue and conversations.

Mrs:  Children. They suck you dry. They sup upon your very marrow. To them your blood is raspberry pop. They gnaw at your liver. Guzzle goblets of fluid, cerebrospinal and lymph. They eat your placenta. Buttocks subside and gravitate. Breasts become old knapsacks. Your navel fills up with gunk. Receptacles pucker. You feel like tripe.

(Pause)

Mr:  I could do with a snack.

The Prodigal Son was first produced for the Queensland Theatre Company in 1997 and Directed by Jennifer Flowers, as part of their short season.  It was first produced in script form alongside Barry Dickins play 'Insouciance' published by Playbox in 2001. Directed by Daniel Schussler (I think....) for Playbox (now The Malthouse) it opened in the Beckett Theatre in July 2001 for a short double bill season.

Unfortunately there are so little productions of this play that I cannot even search for reviews of productions or images from any shows apart from the Playbox season. (And even then, all I can find is reference to reviews written...  http://www.ausstage.edu.au/pages/event/11567) 

[FYI - I am on my iPad and it won't let me do anything fancy like imbed links and make the images all pretty 

and properly centred.]

This is a real shame as it is a brilliant play that deals with some meaty issues that are especially prevalent today with the debates on gay marriage. 

I for one would love any chance to see this play in action as Hibberd's plays always carry a sense of the public and private lives of dysfunctional families and the detachment and disillusionment of such in these familial structures.

Hibberd is such an Australian institution, being one of the founders of of the Melbourne Writers Theatre, which is still running today. He is noted for his playwriting, especially with his play 'Dimboola', which has been noted as one of the most produced Australian plays, even to this day (albeit in Amateur Theatre circles).

Next Week: 'A Comedy of Errors' by William Shakespeare

Week #8 : 'The Dumb Waiter' by Harold Pinter

Gus:  Have you noticed the time that tank takes to fill?
Ben:  What tank?
Gus:  In the Lavatory.
Ben:  No.  Does it?
Gus:  Terrible.
Ben:  Well, what about it?
Gus:  What do you think is the matter with it?
Ben:  Nothing.
Gus:  Nothing?
Ben:  It's got a deficient ballcock, that's all.
Gus:  No?  Really?
Ben:  That's what I should say.
Gus:  Go on!  That didn't occur to me.

In the vein of Beckett's 'Waiting for Godot' and McDonagh's 'In Bruge' is a hilariously absurdist tale about two killers for hire waiting for the call from 'Wilson' for their next assignment.  

Written by Harold Pinter in 1959, 'The Dumb Waiter' cemented his career as one of the great  British comedy/absurdist playwrights.  Pinter acknowledges that Samuel Beckett had great influence particularly in his earlier work, later becoming friends whom shared and commented on their writings before publication. (Martin McDonagh also acknowledges Pinter as one of his influences in writing also!)

Waiting in a stifling, prison-like basement room with two uncomfortable beds, no window, a gas stove - with no gas, a faulty toilet off stage and a Dumb Waiter in the middle of one wall.  Ben and Gus, friends or possibly just accomplices wait for their next step.  Ben waits whilst mundanely reading the newspaper and reading out random stories to Gus.  Gus nervously walks the room and unties his shoelaces and removes a flattened matchbox case from one and an empty flattened cigarette box from the other. An envelope is pushed under the door containing 12 matches.  Gus questions the point of the matches whilst Ben points out that the matches will be always be helpful, especially when in need of a cup of tea.  They argue about the correct terminology of how to light a kettle... 

Ben:  Go and light it.
Gus:  Light what?
Ben:  The kettle.
Gus:  You mean the gas.
Ben:  Who does?
Gus:  You do.
Ben:  (His eyes narrowing)  What do you mean, I mean the gas?
Gus:  Well, that's what you mean, don't you?  The gas.
Ben:  (powerfully)  If I say go and light the kettle I mean go and light the gas.
Gus:  How can you light the kettle?
Ben:  It's a figure of speech!  Light the kettle.  It's a figure of speech!...


All of a sudden there is a loud bang and clattering noise and the dumb waiter in the centre back wall springs to life.  Shocked they silently move around the room in unison gathering their guns and point them at the dumb waiter.  Inside is a note asking for 'Two braised steaks and chips, two sago puddings and two teas without sugar". The men scramble though their belongings, gather all the food they have (all which belong to Gus) and send it up.  
This continues on for the remainder of the play - the dumb waiter lowers, a note with a food order, which gets more and more elaborate each time, and the men yell up the shaft stating that they have no food.  They finally figure out that there is a speaking tube beside the contraption so they can communicate with the upper levels of the house they are trapped in.
The audience only hears one side of the conversation, and are left guessing as to whom is on the other end...  Is it 'Wilson' sending cryptic messages?  Is it a waiter whom doesn't know that there is no kitchen in the basement?  Sorry to ruin part of the ending, but you never do find out where these orders are coming from!
Whilst Gus is in the toilet (again), Ben finally gets the call from upstairs with his orders for their next assignment.

There are many silences used within 'The Dumb Waiter'.  We find out more about these two male characters in their silences than we do in the dialogue.  Although the dialogue is quite limited at the best of times. There is no complexity within Pinters dialogue, it is the lower-class British vernacular that makes the characters jump off the stage with complex absurdist questioning notions of life and the point of it all.

Below is a set design from Vespertine Productions in the US and their take on 'The Dumb Waiter'.  The successfully funded their production via Kickstarter in 2010.  I really love how the design of this really brings the audience into the claustrophobic nature of the text and forces them to become part of the existential discussions that these two men have whilst they are waiting for contact from the outside world.
Sets like these are becoming more common as small fringe and underground theatres are opening up and becoming popular with artists to share their work.  

I for one know the perfect venue in Richmond Victoria (Australia) where this could be produced with brilliant results!!  (The only thing left to do would be to find the perfect cast....  Easy!)  
Who knows.... you may just see a version of this coming to an underground Australian theatre soon!!

Anyway, I am going to cut this blog post short as I am full of the flu and I am in great need of getting away from this computer screen.

Next Week: 'The Prodigal Son' by Jack Hibbert

Week #5 : 'Crave' by Sarah Kane

M - I don't want to die alone and not be found till my bones are clean 

and the rent is overdue.

A - I am not what I am, I am what I do.

C - No one can hate me more than I hate myself.

B - The fags aren't killing me fast enough.

These are the characters of Sarah Kane's 'Crave'. Four disturbed and self-destructive characters of interweaving dialogues where there is no clear ending or beginning for any of them.

It remains unclear whom is talking to whom, if at all.  Multiple conversations, multiple plot lines, multiple phrases of repetition, yet you get this unyielding feeling that no one is really talking to anyone and that no one truly understand what the others are saying.  Yet you get the feeling that each character really does understand the others.

The four characters, known only by singular letters, have distinct personalities and tones within the script:

A is an older man whom has lost his partner.  We are not given specifics to the facts behind her departure... He admits that he is a pedophile (we can take a pretty clear guess and to why she left).

B, a younger man is intent on killing himself with booze and cigarettes, but without it looking like a suicide.

C is a younger woman whom, we assume, was abused by her father with only her mother as solitude.  She is a sufferer of anorexia and bulimia.

M, an older woman, who is desperate to have a baby before she dies.

The premise of 'Crave' is.... well..... I'm not really sure how to describe it....  
The play really has no plot per say, it is a non conventional, non physical indication about four different characters journeys towards love, truth, lies, and self destruction... yet there is something about the script that draws you in, wanting to know more, wanting the characters to give up more information about themselves.  There is no location, no time setting, no tangible information to allow you to grasp onto anything.  All you have is this wanting to find out more - Who are A, B, C & M? Where are they? Why are they here? How are they connected? Is there even a connection to be made?
It is a fascinating and riveting play that allows you into the psyche of these four characters.

Sarah Kane, a inherently private person who wrote experimentally and with an uncompromising vision for In-Yer-Face theatre and it's forms.  She was heralded as one of the most talented playwrights of the 1990s.  Unfortunately, the world lost this prolific writer in 1999 when she committed suicide.  Mark Ravenhill (a fellow playwright who wrote 'Shopping and Fucking') labelled her "a contemporary writer with a classical sensibility who created a theatre of great moments of beauty and cruelty, a theatre to which it was only possible to respond with a sense of awe."

'4.48 Psychosis' (which was posthumously directed at the Royal Court Theatre in 2000) is often stated as her suicide note, but I personally think we need to be careful not to read into all of her plays as a layered version of her life and depression as we can often do with other poets whom have suffered from debilitating illnesses.

This short documentary (4 minutes) gives a fantastic snapshot of her and her works and their importance within the post-modern theatrical society.

Her dialogue in 'Crave' is less of a dramatic script but more of a tonal poem that is fractured and lacking direction of any linear form.  For instance, over 2 pages we are surrounded by the words 'Yes' and 'No' repearted over and over by all of the characters in no repetitive format.  Sometimes the characters respond to each other, mostly it seems they talk to themselves, infrequently you can follow a characters lines (disregarding the lines in-between) to follow a plot angle of a particular character. Each character also has their prophetic moments in this seemingly ramble of random dialogue. 

C - Depression's inadequate.  A full scale emotional collapse is the minimum required to justify letting everyone down.

A - Death is my lover and he wants to move in.

B - There's a difference between articulacy and intelligence.  I can't articulate the difference but there is one.

M - There's something very unflattering about being desired when the other person is so drunk they can't see.

Kane deliberately uses no stage directions in her poetry driven plays (she does use them in her more linear scripts - 'Cleansed' and 'Blasted', and sparingly in 'Phaedra's Love' - however they do not interfere with the dialogue and are more used in moments of silence and to frame a particular emotive premise).

Is this really true?
It takes an imaginative mind to work
towards a truly inspiring art form that has
been created by another imaginative person.

All of her five plays (and one 10 minute screen play) do not conform to the rules of grammar, but use punctuation to indicate delivery of the lines instead.  Kane had a clear idea on how she wanted her works to be heard, not staged.  

Her plays are tough, terse and troubled yet deal with a tremendous amount of compassion and drive.  (yes, I see what I have done there with the alliteration... I didn't mean it!)

Due to the difficult language and inherently difficult staging, so little Kane productions are directed that it was difficult to find a recent review of 'Crave'.  

The most recent production that I can find was in 2012 (the previous one was 2008) in York at the Theatre Royal.  It was played as a double bill with a Russian play - 'Illusions' by Ivan Viripaev.  Reviewer Lyn Gardner writes "... there is noting remotely cosy about this evening, which turns despair into an art form and constantly asks what it is that makes us human: our capacity to love, or our capacity to lie to others - and most of all to ourselves?

During Crave, the audience experiences a universe seen though a cracked mirror; Illusions begin with the expectation of a punchline, but as it continues it starts to feel as if we, huddled on the stage and staring out at the empty auditorium, are the joke.  it's like a bedtime story gone awry.  The threat is our inability to make sense of a shifting universe, to really know another human being and keep love constant." 

Sarah Kane's plays will never date.  They will endure though time and space.

Next Week: 'Electra' by Euripides

Week #4 : 'Die Hamletmaschine' by Heiner Muller

For a 9 page script, Die HamletMaschine (or in English - Hamletmachine) certainly packs a massive punch.  A visual feast as well as a thought provoking experience.

Written by German Heiner Muller in 1977, Die Hamletmaschine is a short 5 scene play script that is loosely based on the lengthy text  - Shakespeare's Hamlet, but more on the bare components that make up the tragic tale.  The images are striking and are a great hook for the audience.  For instance:

"Grief gave way to joy, joy into munching, on the empty coffin the murder mounted the widow SHOULD I HELP YOU UP UNCLE OPEN THE LEGS OF MAMA."

"One should sew the wenches shut, a world without mothers."

It is a post-modern script that is open to varying different interpretations.  Some versions focus on the consumerism and the references to such (Coca Cola, "I go though the street malls faces, with the scars of the shopping blitz").  Some performances have focuses entirely on the images and neglected the script.  Some the entire focus is the references to East Germany Communism and and the influential role of intellectuals during that time.  In 1992 a university recreated the text set in meat factory setting with Ophelia hanging on meat hooks...  
There is no right or wrong way to perform this script.  You devise your performance from how the script speaks to you and your actors.  
It has been performed as a radio drama which included a soundtrack by Einstürzende Neubauten.  
Listen to it!  And listen to it LOUD!! I dare you!!!!!


From the opening scene (FAMILY ALBUM) we are introduced to the character Hamlet and are instantly aware of his internal monologue and the links and allusions to the original Shakespearean text.
However, the audience are also immediately aware that the actor playing Hamlet is looking onto himself as a character.  The very first line - "I was Hamlet"  to where he describes himself as an actor "Horatio Polonius.  I knew that you're an actor.  I'm one too, I play Hamlet."

In Scene 4 - PEST IN BUDA BATTLE OF GREENLAND, again we see Hamlet refer to himself as an actor playing a role "I am not Hamlet.  I play no role anymore.  My words have nothing more to say to me.... My drama is cancelled.  Behind me the scenery is being taken down."

In opposition is Ophelia's first line in the second scene (THE EUROPE OF THE WOMAN)- "I am Ophelia".  Muller describes her as having a clock as a heart.  Immediately the audience connects with Ophelia and knows that her time is coming to an end.  The contrast is that 'Hamlet' can look from the inside out and in again, whereas 'Ophelia' looks from the outside in.  She describes her end "I dig the clock which was my heart out of my breast."

In the 5th and final scene - WILDSTRAINING/IN THE FEARSOME ARMAMENTS/MILLENIA Ophelia is onstage alone in the deep sea strapped into a wheelchair with body parts floating past (again a direct link to the original text), she laments that she is not Elektra with her heart of darkness and under a sun of torture.  In this she speaks about burying the revolution and that all will know the truth soon.


Muller has also used capital letters and spacing that doesn't form to the rules of grammar in order to create these visual images.  For instance Scene 3 is nearly entirely all imagery where 'Hamlet' is dresses up as a woman by 'Ophelia' and voices are heard from the coffin. However Scene 1 and 4 are very aural based where 'Hamlet' is speaking directly to the audience as to the dealings within the script and his interpretation of his life and what he believes to be true - or not.

If you haven't had the chance to read the script, I highly recommend that you do.  You can download it here.  I really have only just scrapped the surface of the text in this post. Remember it's only 9 pages long..... but you will be engrossed with it for hours!

Next Week : 'Crave' by Sarah Kane