NPR: Monologist Mike Daisey has a new story to tell, and if you want to hear it, then you'd better settle in. It's going to take a month to get through it.
In one sense, All the Faces of the Moon, starting Sept. 5 at the Public Theater in New York, is a collection of 29 different monologues, which Daisey will perform consecutively and for one night only. Each piece has its own narrative, so even if they see just one installment, audiences can have a complete experience.
Pull back, though, and the project becomes a single massive opus — one that runs about 44 hours.
11 comments:
There has been a huge trend into smaller space and more intimate theatre. I know a lot of shows going up nowadays, outside of commercial theatre, take place in different (non-traditional) environments that allow the show to be both more visually interesting and much more intimate. There's something to be said for shows that literally puts the audience practically in the show. You can obtain a much more complete and visceral reaction from the audience. And while a proscenium show is a great tool for a good story, you are much more likely to really engage with an audience and make them emote if at they fear that at any time an actor might jump up on them or they might get caught in the crossfire. Also having a smaller space usually means a smaller audience, and less people watching the show can allow you to act on a more personal level with each of the audience members.
I think this article said a lot of truth. Theatre is a constantly evolving organism. I feel that it's our obligation as artists to constantly be growing and challenging these artistic normatives, that we have created for ourselves, and keep working towards the future. If we look back at theatre throughout history and seen how it's evolved to reflect the world around us and challenge our beliefs.
But also looking at this from a business standpoint is it in the best interest financially for a theatre to move away from what their typical season consists of? Audience members expect certain experiences from theatres, and doing something new and experimental although it might be more artistically fulfilling may end up costing you ticket sales. Is that a risk people would be willing to make?
THIS IS INSANE. I wish that I could attend all of the performances in this series. This has got to be one of the coolest things I have read about in Pittsburgh at the moment. I love that this is something that can be seen as a whole, or seen in parts and still make sense as an art form to the viewer.
I think that this is also something that can be looked at from a fiscal standpoint to be a good and a bad thing. Although this is an incredibly cool concept, it might be difficult to get older theatre-going audiences to attend a show like this. But then again, that seems to be the most commonly used excuse for the reason an experimental show doesn't sell tickets. Whether or not it is successful in a monetary sense, I am excited to see how successful this project is artistically. Art's success should not be measured in monetary success, but rather, by how well it conveys the ideas it is attempting to convey.
I enjoy seeing certain types of shows in smaller spaces, as it definitely makes you feel closer to what's going on. However, from another standpoint, a smaller venue is also equal to less chairs to fill with paying audience members. Many of the companies utilizing these venues are just starting up. I suppose that's a kinder way of hinting toward the fact that they probably have very little money. There are only so many ladder rungs to climb if your company falls into this category AND you are always performing in thirty seat houses. While there is definitely a time and place for these shows, the desire to create avant garde, highly artistic theatre among the younger generations is leading to a level of financial failure.
I really like this concept of doing multiple plays or performances that can stand alone and yet link together. It allows the audience to enter as deeply as they wish into the play, but without pressure to see all of them if it is not possible. However, the one problem I see with this is the time and monetary commitment it demands of the audience. Seeing one play is generally affordable. It doesn't take too long, and even though tickets are expensive they are generally pretty reasonable. However, seeing multiple performances in a short space of time would be expensive and demands a lot of an audience member's schedule. I would be cautious of alienating people who could only afford one show or one night, and so would think "oh what's the point of going to one of these if I'm going to miss all the rest?"
This is not an inevitable result, but it is possible. Overall I think the concept is great, just that it should continue to be stand-alone performances that can be linked together if desired, but don't demand multiple nights and multiple tickets of audience members.
Maybe it's because I've only begun to hear about them on this blog, but it seems like theater is expanding its boundaries more and more every day. I love this idea of of the series of plays, which can be watched as complete story or as several individual ones. Although theater is SUCH and ancient art, it's really cool to see how people think to keep things fresh and interesting.
These series-performance plays sound amazing! What an extremely cool idea. One of the performers, Mike Daisey explains that this is exceeding the "parameters of storytelling" and that is so exciting and really what art should be about. This seems like such an interesting way to see a play and I would love to see them! It was interesting that they adress the possibility of television receiving some credit for this type of performance. It definitely appeals to a similar kind of story telling.
This reminds me a little bit of Alan Ayckbourn's two plays "House and Garden." The regional theatre near me, Trinity Repertory Company did a production of these this year where they did both plays simultaneously, but if you want to see the whole story, audiences need to commit to two nights. That's less of a commitment than something like 29 performances though, which Daisey was even surprised that some people have already committed to.
Wow. A monologue each night is an aspect of theater I've never contemplated doing. Something we talked about in Foundations of Drama as steps to a successful play was that it had to take place over a reasonable period of time (Aristotle). This plays to that convention in a way I've never seen before. It has the possibility to morph into something more, something like the Shakespeare collection mentioned as well. I'm glad that ticket sales are steady. This is definitely something I, as a theater student, would invest my time in.
I do have to add, I completely nerded out over this. THIS IS SO COOL.
Theatre is certainly trending towards smaller more intimate spaces. What I find interesting about this concept is that its true for most theatre until you get into the big leagues such as broadway and touring shows. Broadway seems to be moving in the complete opposite direction with more and more shows being HUGE productions with loads of spectacle. In fact the 2013 Tony Awards opening was center around the concept of theatre getting "bigger." I find it fascinating how there is such a difference between broadway and regional theater in the way in which theatre is presented.
This is a great idea that will rely heavily on whether audience members enjoy the first couple shows that they see or not. Similar to a new television series; if we don't like the first two episodes, we move on. This might be the only downfall here. However, moving into a smaller venue would cut down on costs and having a series of shows like this will hopefully increase potential revenue.
I am such a fan of epic theater because it is very easy as an audience member to get into. With this kind of piece audience can easily become in grossed, and pulled into the world of the show. However, it is also really easy for an epic play to go wrong because every single action is important. This is because it allows the "epicness" to grow.
Post a Comment