I would totally take Neil Simon’s Rumors and put it in an actual fancy
house in New York. Essentially, I would
have each couple be sort of a leader for a track, so there would be 4 tracks
one per couple and depending on the ticket you have you follow that couple you
picked. The audience would only be able
to see the folding of events from that couple’s perspective, because the other
couples’ side conversations would be told to a completely different group of
people. The farcical chaos would ensue
even more because I would also have some local focus utilized. For example, I would have Claire pull someone
aside in another room when Mailee the maid calls and have that actor get the
audience member to help her make up an excuse for Myra and Charlie being gone
and so forth. It would be pretty funny
and in the end I would like that when the officers do come in for questioning
that all the groups meet up and actually concluded the show in the living room.
I think that this framework can
definitely serve this script and be successful, if it’s not directed by
me. I think that fact that it’s farcical
and already is meant to confuse the audience and have them jolted out of being
able to keep track of everything as is could work really well. The play sort of center’s around each
different couple’s drama and rumors and they all come to the party at different
intervals so I think that following any particular couple’s story could be kind
of fun and exciting. At the same time
though, I think that it could also be a dis-service to the script. The holistic piece is fast paced and
dependent on the comedic rhythm for it to be successful, the show could be
clocked at an exact time every night because of it’s flow and I think that
messing with that could very much tarnish the energetic spark it requires for
audiences to be able to enjoy it.
Personally, I would love to see an experimental theatre version of it,
but only because I love and know that play.
I would honestly be upset if some one saw an experimental version of it
without having ever seen it how it was originally written. That would be a travesty. The audience would miss out on all the
funnies.
As for Kantor’s quote, I
disagree. Maybe I’m taking his quote to
literally, but “anything” is always happening, it’s constant and undefined so
regardless if your believing in something happening or not, it’s happening and
it can’t be stopped or controlled. It
just does. So if something happens, of
course you would unquestionably believe in it.
If someone randomly pulls out a taco in front of me and eats it, that
just happened. I didn’t prompt that and
of course I unquestionably believe in that because I’m a stable human being
with sensory abilities. In addition, if
I’m an audience member, often if I really want to go see a show that looks
interesting to me, the chances are that I have read the script and I full
expect to know what will happen in front of me and if something is going on
stage in front of me and in my mind I consider it “good” and accept it (which Is
what I’m expecting if I know I like the show) then my neurons of connection to
the piece are firing and that drama is being materialized within and before
me. I see where Kantor is coming from,
but I think that it’s a very limiting view, though I would assume that he may
think that my view is limiting as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment