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 #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

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 #7 : 'Equus' by Peter Shaffer

The 1973 play Equus by Peter Shaffer deals with the tragic tale about a teenage boy, Alan Strang, who blinds six horses in a quest for sexual freedom from his families constraints on his sexuality.


As the play develops, the other main character, psychiatrist Martin Dysart, tries to unfold what has happened that could forge an irreversible terrible decision in a young boy. As Dysart delves further into Strang's imaginary world, his own life is gradually exposed as stagnant and passionless. As the audience continues to travel further into Equus, we hear the disturbing and terrifying tale of Alan Strang, who, because his religious mother and his hypocrite father, makes his own religion based on horses, the bible and sexual deviation. 
Dysart, is not able to imagine anything like Strange has lived through in his young life as has completely lost his passion for his wife and who walks around carrying an unfulfilled dream about love and devotion.  Despite the horrific cruelty the Strang has delivered to the horses in blinding them, Dysart has an epiphany that this megalomaniac behaviour might just lead to a fulfilling life for some. 

Dysart - "A child is born into a world of phenomena all equal in their power to enslave.  it sniffs - it sucks - it strokes its eyes over the whole uncomfortable range.  Suddenly one strikes.  Why? Moments snap together like magnets, forging a chain of shackles.  Why?  I can trace them.  I can even, with time, pull them apart again.  But why at the start they were ever magnetised at all - just those particular moments of experience and no others - I don't know.  And nor does anyone else.  Yet if I don't know - if I can never know that - then what am I doing here?  I don't mean clinically doing or socially doing - I mean fundamentally!  These questions, these Whys, are fundamental - yet they have no place in a consulting room.  So then, do I?...  This is the feeling more and more with me.  No Place.  Displacement....."

 However Dysart's views have changed in the course of trying to treat Strang, he ends up envying this ability to create and believe in a religion with so much passion and devotion.  But all of this is to no avail as Dysart must confirm to the expectatins of his position as psychiatrist and treat Strang and reintroduce him into the community and an acceptable path that confirms to societal structures. 

Usually performed in a minimalist way, four benches are utilised in varying ways in the stage - As the pens for the hoses and seats for Dysart's office. However mainly in a square configuration within a round stage. This allows the audience to create their own opinions based on the script and performances, rather than the ideas represented though religion and the horses.  The cast sit on the stage and enter the stage area within the square when they are required or when the lines diverge and respond with the flashbacks being observed within the plot - Thus creating a philosophical idea within the themes of societal constraints (trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.)
As per the minimalist set, the horses are always stylised and not to be depicted as real animals.  They are used to represent the god-like symbolic meaning for Strang, his religion and the only way that he can express his sexual desires.  Peter Shaffer clearly explains in the notes at the start of the script explaining how the staging and the representation of the horses.  He explains that at no times should the horses be seen as a literal animal.  never should they crouch on all fours.  They must always stand upright and the effect of the horse needs to be mimetic thorugh the use of the actors head, arms, legs, knees and neck.  Pride should be taken by the actors to carefully place the stylised headpiece in front of the audience with precise timing.

Daniel Radcliffe (oh, dear young - or should I now say 'old' Harry Potter) performed in Equus for London............. To shocking reviews.... I mean, how dare Radcliffe get his kit off on stage (yup, 'Strang' gets COMPLETELY naked on stage to show his devotion to his horses), when he still is contracted with the Harry Potter films..... I applaud him for this decision. As an adult playing a teenage role in the films he chose the perfect moment to extend his repertoire and force his name into the spotlight within theatre.  Opening in early 2007 at the Gielguld Theatre in London, and then making a move to the American Broadway stage in 2008, the director Thea Sharrock chose well.  Her minimalist design captivated audiences along with Radcliffe's portrayal of Alan Strang.  The New York Times reported "Mr. Radcliffe has an air of heightened ordinariness, of the everyday lad who snags your attention with an extra, possibly dangerous gleam of intensity. That extra dimension has always been concentrated in Mr. Radcliffe’s Alsatian-blue gaze, very handy for glaring down otherworldly ghouls if you’re Harry Potter. Or if you’re Alan Strang, for blocking and enticing frightened grown-ups who both do and do not want to understand why you act as you do."

But I digress...

Shaffer has used four key elements within the play script of Equus.  The key elements to bring together this tale of brutality and religion are:

Forms of Greek Tragedy as used in the symbolic nature of the horses and the tragic-hero of Alan Strang... Or is is Martin Dysart?  They both gain epiphanies into their lives (although Dysart more than Strang.)  The horses are described as creating a chorus of noises and distortion that Strang furthers his religion and god-like facination on 'Nugget', the main horse at the stables - His Equus - his God, his Dyonisus.

Using horses as a central image and as a metaphor of crisis.  The horses move in unison and create choral sounds that worsen and relinquish as Strang's emotions fluctuate throughout the course of the plot.

The central ideas of religion and ritual to forge a meaning in ones life.  Strang uses the horses to further his ideas of religion that have been taught by his mother and grown distain with his father.  When Strang cannot perform sexually for Jill, he takes his anger out on the horses and blinds them because he has shamed himself in front of his god and religion.

And finally that the ideas of society and societal norms are the determiners of 'normal and abnormal behaviour'.  Both Strang and Dysart have set determiners on how and why society determine normal behaviour.  Strang knos he doesn't conform to society, so he doesn't even bother trying (I'm not sure he ever tried) and Dysart knows that to hold onto his position as a psychiatrist he must conform to society and turn out patients to what society has determined they should be after treatment - But does he agree with this??


Mockingbird Theatre in Melbourne, Australia just finished a sell out season of Equus at The Brunswick Mechanics Institute Performing Arts Centre.  Aparently it was a brilliant production for a company that is speedily emerging into the Australian arts scene.  I wish I had been able to see it.

Next Week: 'The Dumb Waiter' by Harold Pinter

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 #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