www.clydefitchreport.com: What is the nature of the relationship between human and firearm? No one would confuse a human arm with an assault rifle. A hand and a handgun have little in common. And yet, with each school shooting, the juncture point between person and weapon is, once again, the continuum along which we debate. Does fault lie with the trigger or the trigger finger? These are the questions being grappled with in Shooter, currently receiving its world premiere at Theaterlab where it runs through March 31.
3 comments:
This sounds to be a fascinating show. They are taking a new take on a pre-existing issue and one I have been waiting for. The gun debate is so relevant and hot right now and growing as more and more incidents happen. This take on that debate is trying to illuminate the underlying problem. Why are they killing people and who is doing it? They mentioned that they very quickly realized that it was men who were to the majority of the shootings but why is this happening? Exploring this is what leads to real answers, whether in the form of an answer or not, that are helpful to solving the problem. In the past the debate stems around whether keeping guns or getting rid of guns is the right idea and the answer so far has been restricting guns – a compromise. This is fine but if you don’t know who to restrict guns too then its pointless. What needs to be looked at is every detail for every shooting and find the correlations to determine that which is something this show seems to be doing and what we should have been doing to come up with an answer in this first place.
This is a really cool concept for a show. Whenever the national conversation about gun control shifts towards mass shootings, I end up feeling very uneasy about how ready we are to condemn gun usage when it is about victims who are palatable and situations that everyone acknowledges as criminal. I feel uncomfortable with the fact that theatre has come to this point where the only way it can acknowledge topics like gun violence is through a mainstream lens. State and police violence as well as intracommunity violence effect communities of color, specifically the black community, everyday. And yet white America is perfectly content to have guns everywhere until they experience the effects of this violence and then all of a sudden theatre about it is being made. Theatre isn't meant to be for mainstream people. It is for artists and forward thinkers. I hope one day that political theatre will address the people who need it and not just the mainstream.
This play is a hugely important step in using theater as a channel for communication and method of creating change and conversation about hugely important issues of our time that otherwise are highly volatile and partisan. However, something as controversial and visually striking to portray gun violence is especially difficult to do. Reading this article, it really sounded like they didn't only consider one side of the argument but all the actions and consequences, positive and negative, conservative and liberal, republican and democrat, that made up those decisions. And with the issue of gun control being so prominent and shootings happening and being reported more and more frequently, this show is incredibly timely and should be taken seriously and examined not as entertainment but as commentary. As theatrical professionals this is our job: to communicate aspects of an issue, connect the dots and advocate as well as inform, and give the audience questions to think about and concepts to chew on that could change their perspective on an issue or topic, whether mundane or controversial.
Post a Comment