I went to see a play last night at the Rude Guerrilla Theatre. It is right up the road in the historic arts district of Santa Ana, and in my mind, this is my town's answer to the much missed and irreplaceable Shoe Box Theatre at 135 Pearl in Btown.
I have only been to one other play since I've been here. (I know, I'm rapping my knuckles with a switch as I write.) It was Hamlet, at the South Coast Repertory. And that was amazing! Big money, big acting, big architecture it was very very big. We drank champagne out of flutes in the reception area and everyone was fabulous.
But this was different. This was subversive, offensive, and made no apologies for any of it. The play is called "San Diego". The actors were invested, some more than others, but all enough that I was IN it. That is one of the best things about small theatre. You are within feet of the action. You are a part of it. The subtle nuances of expression that are lost in a large theatre, they are right there for you.
A quick review: The play begins with a sort of acting exercise; a physical and emotional run-through with no dialogue for about three minutes. Then begins the author's tale of a traveler in San Diego and some of the people he comes into contact with. There are many themes that are touched upon: small comforts, coincidence and synchronicity, the way people treat strangers and loved ones, what family means, what crazy means, and over all what it means to reach for god/love/a sense of wholeness. The rhythm of the play has a soap opera feel in the timing of the scenes and how quickly you are moved back and forth between them. This worked well for me, mostly because I am unaccustomed to that style, and the play was long, 2.5 hrs. It would have dragged without that speed. There were some characters that seemed extraneous, and the play would benefit from their removal. Namely, the scene and characters from the airline company. The concept was interesting, but didn't have enough to do with the rest of the play, and only seemed to serve the purpose of drawing obvious lines for the observer. But this was a beautiful play, executed with love and fervour. I thoroughly enjoyed it all.
At the end, the applause was enthusiastic, but there was no ovation. I thought that the actors deserved an ovation. I think that most performances do. But the thing about ovations is that they are a lemming-like action. Someone has to start it, and then the fire catches and slowly others stand. Granted, an ovation is an expression of movement, how the experience affected you and compels you to stand and shout "BRAVO!" But actors work so hard, directors, lighting people, sound. They slave for peanuts, mostly, and give so much of themselves, that's why I think we should stand for every performance. And in this day and age, there is so little real spirit in entertainment. More reason to ovate.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment