Showing posts with label Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Show all posts

Saturday, May 9, 2009

The Strangest Mechanic in Ireland

During the last nine months of working various stage crew positions at the Northlight Theatre, I've been exposed to a lot of different ideas about logistical aesthetics, for lack of a better term.  The most customary "negative" clothes - clothes that indicate aesthetic irrelevance - are just simple black pants, shoes, and long-sleeved shirt.  The origin of this must be blending in when the lights are out, and so being more or less actually invisible, but the custom has grown so familiar that we can accept the invisibility of the crew even in bright light.  I imagine there could be relatively little outcry, for example, even if in the middle of a period piece someone in black with a wireless headset walked onstage and set a letter on a desk.  

Alternatively, sometimes the decision is made that the crew would "stand out less" if they were dressed to match the setting of the play.  To that end, in Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, for instance, the crew was all dressed in Victorian British outfits and I think there is an evident logic behind this.

In The Lieutenant of Inishmore, however, the crew has a lot of blood to clean up and so we've all been issued black coveralls that we wear to keep from getting our bodies or clothes drenched in stage blood.  The problem this presents is that only at one point during the play is there a crew person seen onstage (this happens to be me) and this person's task is to enter and strike a woman's bike.  I bring this up because unlike blending in with period costume or acknowledging a customary, if clichéd, practice of black pants and shirt, it is unclear if what I'm wearing reads as attention negative clothing or if it, in fact, draws attention.  If several of us entered at once or if we consistently were visible carrying out logistical business we would quickly recede into negative space.  But with only one entrance, what is an audience to think?  There does, after all, seem to be a strange mechanic with a handlebar mustache walking along an Irish country road stealing women's bicycles.

My friends who have seen the play assure me that it is not at all distracting, but I like that it has drawn my attention again to the aesthetics of logistics in the theater, an area too much overlooked and that I think may be expressed in a few cliché watch columns I have brewing. More to come.


Wednesday, October 1, 2008

CP

I forgot to mention the most important review of all.  Last week I went through a big stack of the Audience Responses from the preview performances.  My part in this play is largely providing extra bodies in "crowd scenes" that really just mean that the other intern and I walk out and form a little couple on the catwalk upstage.  Well, the majority of the responses were very positive but no less than TWO remarked that the couple upstage was "Confusing and Pointless!"  So I've earned the nickname CP...and secretly hope it sticks.    

...And a few more

TimeOut Chicago,  Tribune, Chicago Stage Review.  I'm unlikely to keep up with them from now on, and 10 is more than enough.  This would be a really appropriate time for me to give a real review myself, but I think I'll excuse myself out of a conflict of interest.   

Sunday, September 28, 2008

A Return to the Theater of My Mind

So I've been a bit busy at the Northlight Theatre where I am working on their current production of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde adapted by Jeffrey Hatcher. Here are some reviews: Sun-TimesPioneer Local, and BroadwayWorld.com.  The reviews are sort of all over the place, which is interesting.  It took me so long to believe in aesthetic absolutism (which is obviously remarkably unpopular) it is surprising how quickly I'm reminded of the subjectivity of art's impression on individuals.  

By aesthetic absolutism what I guess I mean is the belief in an objective gauge of excellence in aesthetic matters.  I do truly believe that this exists.  I believe a person can say, unapologetically, that Life as a House is a bad movie.  Or that King Lear is a great play.  This matters.  

Often people ask in dressing rooms or on barstools what gives a critic the right to judge art.  The answer is simple, the critic has seen the show.  Everyone who sees the show is the critic and everyone has a right to an opinion.  But in the same way that a person's opinion on cats doesn't change whether or not cats exist, or one's opinion of a single cat doesn't change whether it is male or female, calico or black, one's opinion of a production will be influenced but not necessarily defined by the production's excellence.  Down Periscope is a film I enjoy, but it is not a great film.  The Homecoming is a good play, but I don't really care for it.  The ability to distinguish these makes a good critic, the harmony of them, perhaps, makes an excellent one.

At any rate, enjoy these reviews if you can.  I'll post more as they crop up.  Also here's a link to buy tickets to the show to see if these clowns are right.