by Haven Tso
Call me old fashioned, but when I go to a play I prefer to see something that looks remotely like a play, with structure and story…
Last time I discussed about the modernisation of classic plays and in that blog I touched on the topic of overly stylised productions.
Over the course of the last few years, I had attended productions that were so stylised that it became a personal showcase of the director instead of the play itself. There were times that they were so stylised that I did not understand why they even bother with having a script because the scripts and the stories no longer mattered. This happened all across the board from small independent productions to major companies’ productions.
I once turned down a small production because of scheduling issues but then I decided to support it by attending the production itself. However, when I was in the audience I was shocked by how strangely styled the piece was. The play became a pink jazz production (yes pink in colour with jazz music in the background) with the two characters doing a yelling match at each other for things that didn’t even need to be yelled out. Yes it is about negotiation, but does negotiation equal to yelling? For me, “to yell or not yell, that is the question”. The style of the production had pushed it to a point that it completely de-railed the story.
Another production that still stuck in my head after all this time was Sydney Theatre Company’s production of Orestes (Oresteia). The production started off promising but then quickly spiralled into some splashing fest. And the actors, they started to look like they had no idea what they were doing or understood what the original Greek tragedy text is about. The fact is Orestes is a Greek tragedy; you don’t need the splashing of fake blood or milk to tell people that it is a tragedy. I might be wrong about the actors, but if as one of the audience members who knew what the play was about felt like so, as a dramaturg I personally think that style might have gone over substance. And the proof? In my session, half of the audience left the theatre after the intermission, and the whole row in front of me went empty.
Call me old fashioned, but when I go to a play I prefer to see something that looks remotely like a play, with structure and story. Style can come into play at all times, but not in a way that it interferes with story telling, which is exactly what plays are about. Take the Sydney Theatre Company War of the Roses production as an example. Yes it was extremely stylised but the text was kept intact most of the time. A different take was employed for different periods of the historical plays but they served to compliment what were on stage. So they did bring new visuals to the production.
Style is a personal thing, I know, but when it comes to something that you are charging your audience a substantial amount to go and see, I personally do not think it is very responsible to put your personal finger prints all over the place without considering what materials you were dealing with. I can understand that some directors want people to “know” these are their productions, so they have to put their “signatures” to tell people “you are coming to see a so-and-so production”. However, when it is all about you but the play, then I don’t think I will want to see another production by the same person again because I exactly know what kind of twisted dish I will be served.
Art is very subjective. So certain audience might like to just look at style over substance. But for me, when it comes to theatre, I certainly seek production values in how the script was delivered instead of some flashing visuals that make no sense to me at all.
What do you think? Do I have a point? Or am I just being a purist?
Haven Tso is an actor, writer, graphic designer and blogger.
Follow Us!