"i trust that you will say it correct. "
The last three years have been spotted with the realisation of ideas and projects that were very long in the making ... No, that's misleading. Most of these were well nestled ideas without a plan or any of the making. Several of them were abandoned in utero and only pulled out of the trunk in the attic much, much later.
I'd wanted to direct Ariel Dorfman's play Reader in college. Then I forgot about it until someone else wanted a play to do and asked me for suggestions. He directed it. I had a part. It was made and sent around. Less than two months later I was patching together Charles Marowitz's tossed salad edit of WS's Julius Caesar for The Shakespeare Society, who are undeservedly mentioned here*. Anyway, performing this version had been another one of those grand college ideas except, I wanted a circus in the play (without being able to say why exactly) and wasn't in a position to demand it. Somehow my fellow thesps felt that the 18th century Viennese court splendour of Amadeus was more within their grasp and budget. Four years later, I got my circus, and Caesar was painted red. I can't remember when I read Margaret Atwood's story 'Happy Endings', but it was some time around then (and even if it wasn't I'm going to say it was because otherwise it would smudge the point). I thought it might make for a good writing exercise but instead I wasted all my ink writing fuckwit poems about rain. But we did make a play called Positions from that source, because something held that idea till I was in a hole and feeling around in my pockets. And finally, well, there is the case of reviving Israel Horovitz's Line, my Moby Dick - an obsessive project that swallowed me like Jonah and eventually spat me out.
The Laramie Project follows suit. I first read the play almost five years ago and auditioned for it, despite having prickly reservations about the director ... [Lengthy digression: This guy had decided to direct The Blue Room at 18, and as it happens in Bangalore, someone wrote a flattering article on this "risque teenager". I dragged an actress-friend to that audition and we were cast. Now, for those of you unfamiliar with The Blue Room, it's David Hare's adaptation of Arthur Schnitzler's Reigen, a play about sexual trysts. Hare's most striking innovation to Schnitzler's carousel narrative is in making it a two actor piece. The enfant at the helm turned out to be not so terrible but rather annoying instead. He insisted that it was ok to split the five male parts between two actors because he had "double-checked" this with "Sam" (as in Mendes, who directed the Broadway version starring Nicole Kidman). I should have quit right then but insisted instead that he choose between the two actors. He chose the other guy (surprise!). A year later I ran into him after watching a particularly awful production he'd directed.** Amidst my sighs of relief ("I almost worked with this guy?!") he told me about The Laramie Project. The next day he had a script sent over with my name on it and a list of characters I should "have a think over". I read it, tossed around in my bed all night, and then, against my better judgment, agreed to do it the next morning.
I think a lot of us have to suffer this dilemma every now and then with English theatre in India; you're always compromising on one side. When the people involved are interesting the material is very often rubbish, unchallenging, pulled out of a hat because this group of people wanted to work together. When the material grabs you it's likely that the people are uninspiring, a bunch of pretenders and interlopers that have coalesced around a great script. We've been surrounded by or involved with work that is insufficient, plays that make do, plays that are rummaged together, and hand-me-down plays, like old coats that smell foul and don't fit at all. When the material fits and is well worn, you are witness to what theatre should be.
But this isn't very often, and it certainly wasn't going to be the case with that production of The Laramie Project. The tarradiddles continued - apparently "Steven" (Soderbergh) had mailed to say he was coming down to see our production ... This kid (he was clearly still a kid) was tying his shoelaces together. The only two rehearsals I ever went for were a farcical mess of bad accents. I think everyone had misinterpreted Father Roger Schmidt's line in the play that read: "I trust you people ... that you say it right, say it correct. I think you have a responsibility to do that." A week later I moved to Delhi.
We read The Laramie Project at The Attic two days ago, almost four years after I was invited to be part of that production. The room was full but it was always going to be in spite of us. We'd had a small debate the night before, prompted by everyone's fears that a reading lasting almost two hours wouldn't hold an audience. After the show, a friend came up to Momo, hugged him and cried on his shoulder without reserve. I haven't seen someone this moved by a performance in a long time. And somehow, I think it's more a credit to him than it is to us. If I had to perform one of my plays in a theatre for this man alone, I would.
*Expect a tongue-lashing post regarding the ethics and practice of this theatre group in the near future.
** That evening I told a friend that I thought mediocre theatre was more unwatchable and dangerous than bad theatre. He sniggered and said, "Make your own plays and then we'll have a chat." I'm terrified of mediocrity. There are nights when I wake up sweating.
I'd wanted to direct Ariel Dorfman's play Reader in college. Then I forgot about it until someone else wanted a play to do and asked me for suggestions. He directed it. I had a part. It was made and sent around. Less than two months later I was patching together Charles Marowitz's tossed salad edit of WS's Julius Caesar for The Shakespeare Society, who are undeservedly mentioned here*. Anyway, performing this version had been another one of those grand college ideas except, I wanted a circus in the play (without being able to say why exactly) and wasn't in a position to demand it. Somehow my fellow thesps felt that the 18th century Viennese court splendour of Amadeus was more within their grasp and budget. Four years later, I got my circus, and Caesar was painted red. I can't remember when I read Margaret Atwood's story 'Happy Endings', but it was some time around then (and even if it wasn't I'm going to say it was because otherwise it would smudge the point). I thought it might make for a good writing exercise but instead I wasted all my ink writing fuckwit poems about rain. But we did make a play called Positions from that source, because something held that idea till I was in a hole and feeling around in my pockets. And finally, well, there is the case of reviving Israel Horovitz's Line, my Moby Dick - an obsessive project that swallowed me like Jonah and eventually spat me out.
The Laramie Project follows suit. I first read the play almost five years ago and auditioned for it, despite having prickly reservations about the director ... [Lengthy digression: This guy had decided to direct The Blue Room at 18, and as it happens in Bangalore, someone wrote a flattering article on this "risque teenager". I dragged an actress-friend to that audition and we were cast. Now, for those of you unfamiliar with The Blue Room, it's David Hare's adaptation of Arthur Schnitzler's Reigen, a play about sexual trysts. Hare's most striking innovation to Schnitzler's carousel narrative is in making it a two actor piece. The enfant at the helm turned out to be not so terrible but rather annoying instead. He insisted that it was ok to split the five male parts between two actors because he had "double-checked" this with "Sam" (as in Mendes, who directed the Broadway version starring Nicole Kidman). I should have quit right then but insisted instead that he choose between the two actors. He chose the other guy (surprise!). A year later I ran into him after watching a particularly awful production he'd directed.** Amidst my sighs of relief ("I almost worked with this guy?!") he told me about The Laramie Project. The next day he had a script sent over with my name on it and a list of characters I should "have a think over". I read it, tossed around in my bed all night, and then, against my better judgment, agreed to do it the next morning.
I think a lot of us have to suffer this dilemma every now and then with English theatre in India; you're always compromising on one side. When the people involved are interesting the material is very often rubbish, unchallenging, pulled out of a hat because this group of people wanted to work together. When the material grabs you it's likely that the people are uninspiring, a bunch of pretenders and interlopers that have coalesced around a great script. We've been surrounded by or involved with work that is insufficient, plays that make do, plays that are rummaged together, and hand-me-down plays, like old coats that smell foul and don't fit at all. When the material fits and is well worn, you are witness to what theatre should be.
But this isn't very often, and it certainly wasn't going to be the case with that production of The Laramie Project. The tarradiddles continued - apparently "Steven" (Soderbergh) had mailed to say he was coming down to see our production ... This kid (he was clearly still a kid) was tying his shoelaces together. The only two rehearsals I ever went for were a farcical mess of bad accents. I think everyone had misinterpreted Father Roger Schmidt's line in the play that read: "I trust you people ... that you say it right, say it correct. I think you have a responsibility to do that." A week later I moved to Delhi.
We read The Laramie Project at The Attic two days ago, almost four years after I was invited to be part of that production. The room was full but it was always going to be in spite of us. We'd had a small debate the night before, prompted by everyone's fears that a reading lasting almost two hours wouldn't hold an audience. After the show, a friend came up to Momo, hugged him and cried on his shoulder without reserve. I haven't seen someone this moved by a performance in a long time. And somehow, I think it's more a credit to him than it is to us. If I had to perform one of my plays in a theatre for this man alone, I would.
*Expect a tongue-lashing post regarding the ethics and practice of this theatre group in the near future.
** That evening I told a friend that I thought mediocre theatre was more unwatchable and dangerous than bad theatre. He sniggered and said, "Make your own plays and then we'll have a chat." I'm terrified of mediocrity. There are nights when I wake up sweating.
Comments