NYTimes.com: Whether plain or fancy, all words are destined to fail on occasion. That’s why so many of us freeze up when we try to write a condolence letter to someone who has just lost a partner or family member. Whatever phrases spill out look so vain, so entirely not up to the occasion. Death, with its conferral of permanent emptiness, swallows up and spits back anything we might say to put it in its place.
Saturday, September 24, 2011
Richard Nelson and Jonas Hassen Khemiri’s Takes on 9/11
NYTimes.com: Whether plain or fancy, all words are destined to fail on occasion. That’s why so many of us freeze up when we try to write a condolence letter to someone who has just lost a partner or family member. Whatever phrases spill out look so vain, so entirely not up to the occasion. Death, with its conferral of permanent emptiness, swallows up and spits back anything we might say to put it in its place.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
The idea that both of these plays are centered around – “not knowing what to say when the impulse is still to keep talking” – is a very important one. It seems that it is often the job of theatre to make us think about subjects that no one wants to bring up, to confront the elephant in the room. Hopefully making theatre about an event as traumatic as 9/11 will help people reassess their feelings and thoughts on the subject and continue the healing process. Hopefully these shows can give people the words to have an open, cathartic conversation about something so difficult to discuss.
I'm intrigued that these playwrights chose to write about such a large and tragic event in American history. I, personally, feel that America makes a huge deal out of the event. I understand that it was a tragic event and that it is a turning point in American History, but some of the ways in which people address it prevent everyone else from moving on. It seems to have turned into a political tool rather than the tragedy that it truly was. The governor of New York banned firefighters and police from entering the memorial service this month, a huge political move that only angered the already upset FDNY. I am intrigued to see how audiences react to these shows.
I liked this article because it talks about what I see as one of theatre's main points: to be an outlet for something that couldn't be expressed any other way. 9/11 is something that is no longer a topic of daily conversation like it was 10 and even 9 or 8 years ago, but it is still something that always exists in the back of many Americans' minds. In fact, I think it's almost harder to talk about now than it was a decade ago, because it's hard to pinpoint the effects or the results of the American reaction. I like that these two plays are taking such different approaches, since people deal with events very differently. Some may be quieter and shy about it, and some may be angry and loud. EIther way, the fact that theatre can start the dialogue is important.
It would be interesting to see if these theatrical responses were politically or emotionally based. While I applaud the willingness of these theater artists to begin telling the story of 9/11 and the emotions that surround it, I don't feel that there is much to share. Maybe it is because I was so young, but the event seems so all-encompassing that there is very little to say about it. To me, it is much more interesting to examine the consequences and results of the attacks then the actual attacks themselves. I also suppose that the effectiveness of the story telling depends on the scale at which it is told. If, for instance the story is of an individual it would be more resonant than a play about the attacks in general.
Post a Comment