I've got a degree in theater, and I think by most standards for the industry, I'm a bad theater student. Frankly, I don't like weird stuff. Most of the time, it's not because I don't get it. Very often, I get the point that is trying to be conveyed through unconventional means of presentation, but very seldom do I ever feel that the point is made more effectively than it could have been made in a more straightforward production. Being weird for the sake of weirdness has always annoyed me, because it seems selfish. It doesn't seem to me to be done for the benefit of the audience. It's done for the benefit of the performers or the artists who are putting the show together. And that's fine, but if that's the case... why are you making me pay to see it?
What I saw last night completely redefined what I thought of as theater. It's not something that will ever replace conventional theater, but I think it could do more for the idea of the theatrical experience than anything else I've ever seen.
It's called Sleep No More. It's been brought to Boston (Brookline, actually) by the American Repertory Theater in Cambridge, but the project belongs to Punchdrunk, a theater group out of London. They first performed the show in London in 2003, and the run in Brookline marks Punchdrunk's American debut. And they certainly have me interested.
Sleep No More is a reimagining of Macbeth as a Hitchcockian thriller. For this production, they've taken over the old Lincoln School on Boylston Street in Brookline, and transformed it into... something else. I want to be very careful how I phrase things, because the best way to walk into that building is knowing nothing at all. Their new setting is reminiscent of the '20s or '30s. You start your experience in a small but beautifully appointed speakeasy that was dropped in the middle of the building. From there, you don a mask (which I think is for the comfort of both the performers and the audience), and are let loose to explore the hallways and nearly fifty transformed rooms over four levels of the school.
Some of the rooms are appointed in a pretty standard theatrical fashion - sitting rooms, dining rooms, offices - while others are much more imaginative - on one floor, there's a dune of black sand that makes its way through three or four rooms. In some rooms, there's little done to hide the fact that this used to be a school, even if that room's design doesn't fit a school at all. Other rooms, especially in the basement, are fully transformed into something else... anything else.
As you wander through the rooms, you'll encounter characters who are at the very least reminiscent of the characters from Macbeth, if not the characters by name. They'll go about their days, usually completely unaware of you and your fellow audience members, interacting with each other as if you didn't exist. My girlfriend described the feeling as being ghosts, with free reign to travel wherever you see fit and observe anything (and I do mean anything) and everything these characters do. One really cool way to experience the show is to pick a character and follow them. Everywhere. At no point did anyone go where the audience couldn't follow, so you really get a complete, unbroken experience. And if you pass a room or another character that looks more interesting, just break off and explore that room, or follow that new character. The actors are on a cycle that repeats at least once over the course of the night, so if you think you missed something after you stopped following someone, you can always try to pick it back up again later.
There's very minimal dialogue in the show, and that's for the better, I think. The actions, movements and relationships might become a little too defined if the characters were allowed to speak out loud, and the show would lose a very surreal, ethereal quality that helps make it so fascinating. It also means that when characters do talk, it's that much more important, and you need to pay close attention.
The one thing that I was worried about for this format was how well I would be able to follow the plot. You really have no restrictions on where you can go - if you can open a door in the school, its part of the show and you're welcome to explore. It does make for a very disjointed connection with the plot, but in the end I found that really didn't matter. There's a quote from a review in the Guardian newspaper of the London production: "... although you will need more than a passing knowledge of the play to make the connections, I suspect that the experience is sufficiently novel that, even if you had never heard of the play, you would take a puzzled pleasure in the evening." The performers are strong enough that you'll feel the full intensity of emotion just by watching and, if you're lucky, interacting with them. And those emotions will run the full gamut of possibility. The venue and scenes are constructed in such a way that you will see and feel everything. You'll find humor, you'll find sadness and joy, you'll be attracted and repulsed, and you'll definitely feel every hair on the back of your neck stand at attention more than once.
It's really a surreal experience. Very shortly after it began, I found myself standing in a hallway, completely alone. It very easily could have been a scene from The Shining, but sustained for the nearly three hours we wandered through the place. My girlfriend and I got separated right at the beginning, and despite crossing paths a couple more times during the course of the evening, we always opted to part ways again and explore on our own. It's a compliment to the atmosphere that they have created in there that even if you came with someone (and you should, so you can talk about it after), you really want to experience this by yourself.
At the end, they reopen the speakeasy to you so you can have a drink (which you'll probably need) and swap stories with other spectators. After talking to my girlfriend and about half a dozen other people, it became very clear that despite technically attending the same show for nearly three hours, we all had wildly different experiences. My girlfriend saw a character I didn't know existed. I saw rooms she never came across. It's remarkable to build something like this and have it really allow for that much repeat attendance. I just went last night, and already I'm dying to go back and find other routes, other rooms and other experiences. I hope I've given you an idea of the show without giving much of anything away, because there's really no replacing going in completely blind and seeing where the show takes you.
Here's the warning - this is very much a show for adults, definitely an R rating. Only adults. Nudity abounds, and there's a number of things that happen that are unquestionably too intense and mature for kids. The Shining reference holds, but you need to add in a little Session 9 or Eyes Wide Shut - and of course some Hitchcock - to really get the idea. It's eerie, it's unnerving, and I'm sure it's a better experience when you don't have to worry about what sort of trauma you might be inflicting on your child.
Right now, it's scheduled to run through the end of the year, but I wouldn't be shocked if it gets extended - it's not like the school will be used for anything else, and I really hope this becomes insanely popular. If you're interested, I've got three pieces of advice: 1) Abandon any preconceived notions you have about the play, the characters, or theater in general; 2) Be ready to go along with anything - the show and the experience will be better for it; and 3) GO.
A side note: I'm completely shocked that I ended up writing this. I've been consistently unimpressed with ART for years. For a long time, they've been the closest thing Boston had to professional avant garde theater, but I've always got the impression they were doing what I said I hate: being weird for the sake of being weird. It was almost like they were expected to do it, so they did it without a legitimate reason. That's not to deride anyone who has worked there in the past, I just... it always felt stuffy, and full of "importance" and "purpose," and none of that appeals to me. This show is full of "feeling" and "emotion," and it's incredible. In my mind, ART is back on the proper road. Their production of David Mamet's Marriage was fantastic, Sleep No More is hands down one of my favorite productions of anything ever, they've got a really cool-sounding version of The Great Gatsby coming next year... I can't remember the last time I was excited about ART. It's cool. Now let's just hope they don't screw it up with Red Sox Nation...
5 comments:
This does sound interesting. I'm very disappointed that it "R" rated. My son's Freshman High School English class is reading Macbeth this semester. Sigh... :-)
Kids should get the chance to see great theater. Too bad.
I certainly hear that... the thing with Shakespeare, though, is that the way his plays were performed and produced as he was writing them... a lot of them WERE R-rated. We hold some of his works as the highest examples of theater and literature in the English language, and yet a big portion of the intended audience were poor, badly-behaved, lecherous, bawdy groundlings.
There's a great book from the '40s called Shakespeare's Bawdy that really pulls apart all of the rude, crude and sexual humor that is pretty well rampant in all of Shakespeare's plays. It does the best job of kind of tearing down the plays as literary works of art and getting to why they were so popular and well-attended at the time they were first introduced.
I was just having this chat with my girlfriend - teaching Shakespeare in high school or below does a bit of a disservice to the plays, because there's so much in there that most high schools wouldn't want their teachers getting into. And then if kids run into the same material later in life, and someone tries to explain the blatant sexual references or jokes in something as revered as Hamlet, that job becomes that much harder.
With Sleep No More, I think it's removed far enough from Macbeth that I'm not sure it'd be worth seeing as an example, unless they were already looking at a wide variety of interpretations. Even though the story is all there, I think you'd find it difficult to track down the entire thing in one showing. It's much more about exploring the space, watching the interactions, and finding out what sort of emotions an exploration like this can evoke. In that respect, the nudity and disturbing images are very well justified. As a direct example of staging the text... not sure a high school class would do so well with it.
That's not to say that something like this couldn't be done with a more moderate hand or more inclusive target age range. This just isn't it. Sometimes, there are points that can best be made with "extreme" methods; you just need to make sure that everyone in the building is prepared for that.
What a lovely and insightful review! I've been desperately wanting to see Sleep No More, but this piqued my interest even more...if that's possible. I'm a theatre major at Suffolk, and am currently on a see-as-much-theatre-as-I-possibly-can kick. Sleep No More sounds like it's right up my alley: an interactive, ever-changing theatrical experience left up to the audience to explore. Complete with masks!
And I agree with you about weird theatre to a point. While I always love a good experimental piece, I do sometimes (lately, usually) feel that theatrical weirdness is done for its own sake, and not to better the piece in any way.
I recently started a theatre blog where I review current shows in Boston, and even though I saw it, I did not review it because the review would have been hurtfully scathing, and I didn't think that sort of thing would be good for my second review ever... I'm talking about the ART Institute's recent production of A Winter's Tale. It was very much like what you described, an orgy of disjointed, self-absorbed weirdness that nobody but the artists seemed to enjoy. If you want, I can chat with you more about it--though I'm not sure I want to do it in a forum where everyone can see! If you want to check out my blog, it's http://theatrigalboston.wordpress.com. Hit me up if you're interested; I always love to meet fellow theatre-enthusiasts in Boston.
I would love your feedback on just how scary this is. I am an incredible wimp about horror movies but am so intrigued and would love to experience it. To dumb it down do you feel like you are in a haunted house?
Um... sort of. The sets are extremely realistic in parts, and they do set a dark, brooding, foreboding atmosphere through the whole thing. There are certainly moments when I felt fear, but those moments are much more fear of the unknown than fear of anything else. No one's going to actively jump out at you, but that doesn't mean one of the actors won't walk right up behind you and push you out of the way if you're in front of them.
I wouldn't say the place is intended to scare. It's intended to elicit a pretty wide range of emotion, fear being one of them. It's much more intense than a haunted house.
Ultimately, though, it is designed for you to do exactly what you're comfortable with. If you find a room you like that you're comfortable in, and don't want to explore further, no one's ever going to make you. I do think you'll get a much deeper, richer experience if you push yourself beyond those boundaries and really make yourself do things that might get those butterflies in your stomach moving, though. But no one will push you into them. If you're ever uncomfortable somewhere, you're free to leave and not go there
I don't scare easily, but I like being scared in this sort of context, so I sought that out. If you don't want that, chances are you won't find it.
Post a Comment