Saturday, October 31, 2009
Playing with fire: UN turns Gaza shelling into theatre
The Guardian: "It is the start of a remarkable 20-minute, one-man play intended for Israeli audiences but so far unwelcome in Israeli theatres. It tells the story of the main UN warehouse in Gaza, a storage point for food and aid for a million Palestinians, and how it was hit repeatedly by Israeli artillery shells, some loaded with white phosphorous, during the Gaza war – how it was set ablaze and burnt to the ground."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
I think this is a fantastic example of how theater can be used for the dissemination of important information. This man has been able to garnish attention for his cause without violence, picket signs, or endless buracracy. He made a show with a powerful message that has created the exact contraversy and publicity he wanted. This is the epitome of theater with a purpose.
Even though this performance piece is having trouble getting its footing, the fact that it exists and is getting press like this is a testament to the art. Probably more people are aware about the show now that it has caused so much controversy than would have been if it was just being performed. I applaud the production team for having the courage to continue performing and it clearly speaks to the people if it incites audience response during performance.
Once again, it's good to hear of some theatre getting attention for actually making a meaningful political point. This discussion seems to me like one of the biggest undecided issues of today. It's sad to hear that the show is having trouble playing to the audience that most needs to see it, but it's good that it's selling as well as it has where it could play.
This is just one example of how theater can be used as a political tool and is quite possibly one of the more dangerous forms of communication for those who oppose its message. It is upsetting that the play is not getting much traction in Israel, hopefully its existence is sparking enough conversation that makes up for the fact the the play is difficult to get produced. In fact, one of the worst things the Israeli government could have done was to encourage a stop to the performances (I can only imagine that is what happened). This draws more attention to it that just simply ignoring the performances. It will be really interesting to see where this goes.
This is an absolutely perfect way that theatre can be used to convey a message. Everything that has been going on in the middle east to me, at least, has still been kept very hush hush, and to get first accounts of the atrocities that have been occurring is like a breath of fresh air. And to express this through one man, being the voice of many, is powerful beyond belief. I hope that this show comes over here so that even those that might not agree with the situation overseas could just hear the facts and decide for themselves what the situation has really become.
This is a really excellent idea. I always think it's a good idea to use theatre as a means to make a point about a world issue. From the description of the play, I think that this theatrical version of a real-life story would be very bold and evocative for the audience, and would definitely achieve it's purpose of telling a story from a war zone.
I think as a theatrical idea, this pice is brilliant, however, the decision to premiere it in the heart of Israel I think may have been somewhat damaging to its process. Not that I don't think the Israeli people need to see this piece, rather it may have benefited from some sort of "Out of Town Tryout" to perhaps flesh out the script a bit. The mere fact that 1/5 of the audience walked out of a performance means that this is a powerful piece of theatre and should be appreciated as such.
I don't think it's very possible to tell a story about the effects of a political event in an apolitical way. There is always going to be some sort of bias in the way the story is told. I think it is admirable that they are attempting to tell this story in a removed manner, so that people can judge the event for themselves, but to go as far to call it apolitical is not plausible.
Post a Comment