|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2018 7:29:35 GMT
Everyone seems to think the first scene is the best, but I must be missing something because I thought it was terrible to the point that I was actually thinking about leaving. It just seemed to be a bunch of cliches and half-baked Guardian op-eds thrown in a blender. As a minority I'm not even sure why I can't stand this kind of discussion but I guess it makes me feel conspicuous and awkward. But the thing that bothered me most about it is that I didn't even recognise what they were discussing - admittedly I've only been going to the theatre regularly for the past 2 years or so (obviously I'm no expert but I try!)but it seemed more like they were talking about new wave French cinema than contemporary London theatre. It got a lot better after that thankfully, loved the playing with form and structure and the meta-theatrical aspects. The 2nd act was clever and unsettling, the 3rd I think was subversive and surreal and the finale about the inevitability of power and artistic tunnel vision was an interesting way to close and mirrored the 3rd. I didn't actually find the gender politics or even the commentary on creativity and the artist's place in the world that profound of provocative - deep down I'm not even sure I even found it that experimental after just seeing 4.48 psychosis but it holds your attention and parts of it work brilliantly. This is exactly what I felt about this play but found it very difficult to articulate - or rather have become a bit cautious about posting my views on this forum. A lot of the time you post your thoughts and you get jumped on, often by posters who have misconstrued what you are trying to say. So, thank you!
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on May 17, 2018 8:51:14 GMT
I saw this yesterday afternoon and found it exasperating, fascinating, challenging and sometimes downright stupid. I thought the first scene was as infuriating as Oleanna but then I liked the "meta" aspect of the talkback and the cassuolet scene I thought was terrific but then the forest scene I thought was over the top pretentious but then... well as you can tell I went back ands forth throughout the play. She raises some valid points about the needless exploitation of women's bodies in scene one but by the end of the play she was undercutting them by her own exploitation of women's bodies and sex . If that last scene had been written by a man it would be condemned as wildly sexist. But maybe that's part of her point. Ultimately though I found myself asking if a playwright's internal and creative struggle is of interest to anyone but another playwright?
|
|
356 posts
|
Post by lichtie on May 17, 2018 10:48:30 GMT
I saw it in the matinee yesterday as well. My main feeling was neither particularly for or against (the two older men next to me were definitely against as they sat there glowering at the end with nary a clap of a hand, but two old ladies at the bus stop afterwards were enthusing wildly). I think Oleanna was mostly right about the first act (however well it was acted), which was definitely like a ping-pong diatribe below the line on CiF - the play may wear its heart on its sleve in approved Brechtian fashion, but it still needs to engage at a level worth listening to. Part two ended up in similarly unbelievable narrative territory regarding the money angle (the whole artists do it for the creative love and not the money is both ahistorical and wildy overstated,so ends up appearing like a naive high school drama), but was at least livened up by the surreal intrusion of the real baby (which is otherwise a recurring symbolic theme). Act 3 I confess I dozed off when they turned the lights down so perhaps best I don't comment... Act 4 I agree with dlevi about the playing with sex as a means to question the validity of the dramatical choices just makes you question the validity of the drama (not the only place such questioning perhaps doesn't get the response Hickson was looking for)... But overall the reason I rate it OK-ish was actually none of these - it was the fact that I saw absolutely nothing new here that hasn't been trotted out in endless dingy Edinburgh venues come August every year... I was hoping it might actually move beyond such things in its playing about with structure and form.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on May 17, 2018 12:17:24 GMT
|
|
356 posts
|
Post by lichtie on May 18, 2018 10:39:55 GMT
Really good piece by Dan Rebellato on this (warning - spoilery, obviously) Interesting read - I think the problem I have is that, unlike the author, I felt none of those emotions he talked about in his last paragraph. Hence my ho-hum reaction.
|
|
3,478 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by showgirl on May 19, 2018 21:15:36 GMT
I saw today's matinee and found that after a promising start with the first couple of scenes, this went steadily downhill and well outstayed its welcome - I was so tempted to check my watch and by the time I managed to do so discreetly, was relieved to find there were only 20 minutes left. The normal, spiky, sparring dialogue was enjoyable and engaging but what was described by a character as the "tribal sh*t" was certainly ordure imo and as for all those tedious sex scenes, what on earth was the point? Cutting some of those would have reduced the running time to something more bearable.
In fairness I knew it was a marmite play and I was interested in seeing if for myself but having done so, I'm glad I only risked a £10 seat and unlike Ella Road the week before (The Phlebotomist), Ella Hickson isn't joining my list of writers to look out for.
|
|
2,536 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by n1david on May 22, 2018 14:03:24 GMT
Anyone heading to 'The Writer' this evening should note that Upper Street is closed (even to pedestrians) north of the Almeida Theatre and there are no buses running on Upper Street due to a stabbing last night. Police are saying closures will probably stay in place overnight. Best way to approach will be from Angel and walk up Upper St.
|
|
1,316 posts
|
Post by tmesis on May 26, 2018 16:22:39 GMT
Well I came to The Almeida today with great trepidation thinking from the reviews that this would be a play so up itself that it would prove to be the longest two hours of my life. But I loved it - the first scene, brilliantly played by West and Rossi, engages immediately, subsequently gets subverted and succeeding scenes continue to surprise and wrong-foot expectations. It's thought-provoking and entertaining; it has some breathtakingly elegant scenic transformations and was, for me, one of the best things I've seen all year.
|
|