Showing posts with label 1990s. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1990s. Show all posts

Tuesday, 7 February 2012

Play Review: Gasping by Ben Elton



This review will be focusing on the book version of the play and not on a performance of the play.

Ben Elton is one of my favourite comedy writers, I love 'The Young Ones' and grew up watching 'Blackadder' and in more recent years have become more aware of his work as a satirist and author. Elton was arguably the number one stand up of the 1980s here in the UK famous for his swipes at the Tory government and Baroness Thatcher whilst she was Prime Minister.

(Ben Elton sends himself up on Harry Enfield and Chums)

'Gasping' is Ben Elton's first play and was first performed in 1990 at the Theatre Royal Haymarket. It is a satire based around big business in London. The dominant chairman of a multi million pound company is bored with making money from his current business and wants to find a 'Pot Noodle' which is described as a product that creates its own market and makes money without fighting for money from other markets. His idiotic toffy nosed subordinate Philip is asked to develop a new product that is a 'Pot Noodle'. Philip goes away with his own subordinate and finds this technology that is designed to help sufferers with hay fever by sucking in oxygen and cleaning it to make it pure and free of pollen. Philip surmises that instead of using it for its medical applications you could use it to create designer air, creating a market for branded air just like the market for designer water. There is one slight issue with the item, when it sucks in oxygen it outputs carbon dioxide to make sure the pressure in the atmosphere doesn't get ruined of course this also means that there is less oxygen available to breath. There is a side plot of Philip trying to pop his cherry with the executive ad woman that he hires to promote the 'Pot Noodle' which is branded the 'Suck and Blow'. Eventually a global situation of the rich being the only ones able to afford to breath leads to Philip suffering a breakdown before coming back in a tense dramatic final scene filled with black comedy.

I have read this play probably upwards of 20 times and each time I notice new things I never took stock of before. It is a very good read however I do have a few issues with the piece.

1. It has not aged well. Whilst the themes are still current the fact that it is set in the late 80s very early 90s means you really have to have lived or worked at that time to get all the references to yuppiness and fax machines.

2. The side story is distracting and not fully formed, whilst it does round out the play and add another dimension to the story I feel that in the end it does not entirely work.

3. The central character Philip. Philip is a fool who was born with a silver spoon in his mouth and has risen through the ranks for no apparent reason. He is a yuppie prat and when you look at the original casting for the play, he was originally played by Hugh Laurie, it looks like the part was written for only one actor. It also seems as if the character is a descendant of George from Blackadder, also played by Laurie, which makes it hard to read the script objectively.

Although I have these problems with this piece I have enjoyed it immensely and it did lead me to read more Ben Elton work in his novel 'Blind Faith' which is another piece of satire but set in a dystopian future England. I recommend it as a piece of business satire and as a starting point for anyone interested in seeing where the writer of 'We Will Rock You' began his stage writing career. I give it all in all a 3 out of 5 stars rating and would love to see it performed.

Friday, 5 February 2010

'In-Yer-Face Theatre' a Review of Aleks Sierz excellent Website



It was with great interest that on Thursday night I started reading a website found by LibraryGirl. Now this website is called http://www.inyerface-theatre.com/ and is dedicated to a type of theatre that ‘grabs the audience by the scruff of the neck and shakes it until it gets the message’ a type of theatre that the author of this website Aleks Sierz obviously believes to be the best form of theatre. Now whilst I have some real reservations over this ‘genre’ of theatre I have to praise the website for its abundance of interesting information. The website has a lengthy and detailed description of inyerface theatre and its characteristics, an A-Z of inyerface terms and practitioners, a chronology of inyerface pieces from 1990-2010 and much much more. Its well laid out and very well written and is a brilliant reference tool for anyone studying the works of renowned playwrights such as Sarah Kane and Mark Ravenhill.

However…

I still cannot get my head around this idea that theatre has to be inyerface to be relevant or to get your point across to an audience. There are so many things to consider when we come across the types of sweeping statements such as:


I am sorry but that situation of the 1990s… its still here and to a certain extent more rife than ever. Yes there is now the New Writing schemes that produce a lot of new works in our country but I would argue that the physical theatre trend was never swept away and as for ‘baggy state-of-the-nation plays’ what do you call the work of David Hare? I would say that physical theatre and inyerface has moulded into something together in many ways at a smaller level.

I have seen this inyerface idea manifest itself in a lot of young actors who seem to think it’s a way of showing your artistic intellect. This aggressive form of performance seems to be a way for them to show off how ‘with it’ they are and how they can confront people with ‘issues’. I remember watching a piece during my University days where a performer performed a physical piece that involved a mirror and her stripping off her top slowly in a very disturbed and painful way to reveal her mass of bruises as she was obviously an abuse victim. Was it powerful? Not really as I think that television shows such as Eastenders have portrayed these storylines in a much more powerful way. Then there was a colleague of mine who played Caliban in our adaptation of ‘The Tempest’ who insisted on being topless and really trying to raise the bar on the story of her character. In the end Caliban being topless didn’t add anything; the whole inyerface attitude was stunted by our usage of the traditional Shakespeare text. Would it have enhanced the piece if we had all used an inyerface attitude towards the original text? Perhaps but then again it could have fallen completely flat. So do I see the point of these extremes to further a theatrical message? No I do not really.

inyerface-theatre.com goes on to talk about how the language in it is filthy, there is nudity and sex, violence, taboos being broken, abuse is dished out, theatrical conventions are smashed and all other sorts of weird and dark things happen. Big deal! I am sorry but I generally hear the foulest uses of the English language on a daily basis just walking from a-b, the internet is full of nudity and live sex shows I can watch to my hearts content, abuse is shown frequently on tv as a storyline in every drama and soap opera and everyone is smashing theatrical convention even in massive establishment successes such as The 39 Steps. However my favourite one is that taboos are being broken, pardon? Excuse me? Taboos get broken? When did the theatre ever have any taboos, I mean the true honest theatre, you go back to the origins during the Grecian period the playwright Aeschylus wrote a trilogy of plays about Oedipus the man who killed his father so he could marry his mother. Yes not one but three plays about a man who commits incest, written at the beginning of theatre. To be completely blunt I think that its passé now for anyone to suggest that they can truly shock a live audience with their piece. After all everything has to be checked two or three times, the health and safety measures within theatrical venues require it to be so. I guess the only thing that would truly move people would be if you killed somebody on the stage, not that it would ever happen, you couldn’t even shock them by doing an autopsy because its already been seen on Channel 4. This is where inyerface fanatics have to realise that television and film along with their own works have burned out their chance to shock, in 1991 The Pitchfork Disney by Philip Ridley outraged and sickened the audience with its vomiting and cockroach eating, now 3 weeks before Christmas we all tune in to watch minor celebrities do just that in Australia.

Inyerface has had its day, its still relevant in that it did help usher in a new era of British playwrights whose success means that today the new writers schemes at theatres like The Bush and Royal Court are better than ever. Without these pioneers there would be less new material but nowadays inyerface it doesn’t really exist except in the pages of books and essays by people who think it was the bees knees.

I would like to thank Aleks Sierz for his wonderful website http://www.inyerface-theatre.com/ which has provided me with a lot of thoughts and interesting discussion points. Sierz is currently the runner of another theatre website called http://www.theatrevoice.com/ and his book on inyerface theatre is available from amazon: here

UPDATE: The Society for Theatre Research is holding a lecture on the 16th of February at the Art Workers Guild in London with Aleks Sierz talking about his book and inyerface. More information can be found: here

Xtofer