The Tartan Online: The Good Person of Setzuan by Bertolt Brecht, directed by the internationally acclaimed Peter Kleinert, opened to a crowded room bursting with enthusiasm and anticipation. Energy radiated from the stage as the actors prepared themselves for the performance, deeply involved in their pre-show warm-ups. The public nature of this activity — which usually takes place somewhere backstage, safe from the audience’s view — made the audience question if in fact this was a part of the production, setting the tone for the rest of the play. Setzuan was not a typical play in any sense, and this unique production certainly made it more than unusual.
Thursday, October 13, 2011
Setzuan makes audience think
The Tartan Online: The Good Person of Setzuan by Bertolt Brecht, directed by the internationally acclaimed Peter Kleinert, opened to a crowded room bursting with enthusiasm and anticipation. Energy radiated from the stage as the actors prepared themselves for the performance, deeply involved in their pre-show warm-ups. The public nature of this activity — which usually takes place somewhere backstage, safe from the audience’s view — made the audience question if in fact this was a part of the production, setting the tone for the rest of the play. Setzuan was not a typical play in any sense, and this unique production certainly made it more than unusual.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I wonder if Brecht would like our production of Setzuan? We did break the forth wall and we also called on the audience as the proletariat to act. Did we really aesthetically distance the audience from the piece? I felt that about half the time we did. Sometimes the actors saying who they were or where they were, was not jolting and did not take me out the play, it was just distracting, or obvious. All in all the Brecht may have been done to an excess. I did like the plastic falling at the end, so that you could literally see the theater but I think that we potentially used Brecht too much, so that it became repetitious.
I agree with this article entirely. This show was quite refreshing in its unusual take on the Brecht piece. Zoe is very correct in saying that much of the breaking of the fourth wall was obvious and distracting. I felt as if I would have understood what was happening fine without it being explained to me by the actors themselves. The design work in the show was beautiful and truly did communicate what was wished to be achieved in our adaptation. The use of the kabuki drop was marvelous and a part of m wishes that that would have been the final action and image of the show, as I could have done without the epilogue. All in all, an amazing production! Congrats to all!!!!
I agree with the article for the most part. Working on this show has been completely different than any other show I have experienced. The multiple ways in which the actors broke the fourth wall was completely refreshing to me. I also enjoyed the amount of improvisation in the show, which I am not sure how much the audience was aware of. The show varied slightly (and sometimes greatly) enough between each show to keep things interesting. I do agree with Zoe though about how complete aesthetic distance wasn't always achieved, because one could tell that the actors on stage were intentionally trying to break character and speak directly to the audience. We discussed this in great depth in Foundations of Drama today. Overall, it's been a great show to work on so far.
i think it shows that the author of the article doesn't know a lot about Brecht. They make it seem that we broke the 4th wall as an added twist to the story... I'm also wondering why they had a design major comment on a production and not a drama student. I like that the other review was a little more objective and talked about what a Brecht play is.
I agree with Devrie. The writer of this article doesn't seem to know much about Brecht. Although I do appreciate the good review to the Drama department; I don't think they truly know what Brecht theater is like. Maybe if they researched it a bit they would have a better understanding of the show as a whole. I also think it would have been beneficial to have a brief history of Brecht theater in the review for people who have no idea who Bertolt Brecht is. His style is so different and rare to see that I don't think people will understand this article if they don't understand his take on theater.
I think this was one of the more successful shows we have done here at CMU (in my one and a quarter year at least). It was a great representation of Brecht in today's culture, keeping the same sort of traditions from the original productions but still adapting them to make it more interesting to modern audiences. It helped that the themes of the play are so resonant today, such as the oppression of the lower class and how difficult it is to maintain one's own integrity and still keep one's head above water, but what's more is that the constant addresses to the audience and "shoutouts," if you will, distanced the audience enough to make them actually contemplate these themes. Well done, I say, well done indeed!
Post a Comment