Theatre Development Fund – TDF: Back in 2011 while attending a theatre festival in Rwanda, performer and playwright Sean Christopher Lewis spotted a man in a pink jumpsuit walking through a village market. Intrigued, Lewis asked his local companions about the unusual sartorial choice and was shocked by their answer: It meant the man had participated in the Rwandan genocide when at least 500,000 citizens were massacred by their fellow countrymen over a 100-day period in 1994. The reconciliation process required the now-reformed murderers to wear the striking suits as a visible sign of penance.
4 comments:
This is one of the things that is so great about theatre and especially compared to film. In theatre, an experience can be relayed or be the focus of a piece. In film, it becomes a documentary which has a weight to it or becomes fiction which leads the audience to believe in a story. What this playwright did was take his experience and turn it into a piece. It isn’t heavy like a documentary and carries more weight than fiction. It can lead the audience to feel and to learn. This is one reason why I love theatre and this piece is what makes these experiences possible. Sean Lewis went to Rwanda and experienced something, he then created his experience in the form of writing to be performed. I love this because it will allow me to understand where Rwanda is right now in terms of emotions and feeling the vibes of such a place while at the same time learning about the place weather I realize it or not. In all, it is an experience and it can do so much more than anyone ever realizes.
When I learned about the Rwandan Genocide in history class in high school, it seemed so far removed from my own life that I easily forget about it. But it really only happened just over twenty years ago. Like apartheid, like the fall of the Berlin Wall, many things that happened really only a couple of years before I was born sometimes seem like ancient history. The idea that this event is so present in the lives of so many, that so much violence and death happened really very recently, and I have none of that experience nor does that really affect my life in any way is humbling. I rarely feel my age except in moments such as this. I think it is a great idea to bring that history to American audiences, many of which I am sure aren't super knowledgeable about the Rwandan Genocide I think is a great idea. I also think that the playwright's concern that he is telling a story that is not his own may be troubling. But I think that his approach, writing in the voice of a white missionary, then giving some creative control to someone who has experienced this event in a much more personal way to tell and correct the story is the right way to go.
This is a heavy topic for anyone to talk about, much less perform as live entertainment, and then stack on top of that the facts that the writer of this play is a white male, who is also American, and is also the lead in the show he wrote. The Rwandan genocide was a horrific event that oftentimes is glazed over because it happened in Africa. A play is a good way to remind or inform the public about this event. I appreciate that the author acknowledges his difficult situation: "Dogs of Rwanda focuses on a former teen missionary named Dave (played by Dan Hodge) who published a memoir about the genocide. When he receives a letter from a Rwandan he knew challenging his account, Dave returns to the country to try to reconcile what happened in their shared past. Many of Dave's stories about contemporary Rwanda -- such as visiting a museum in the town of Nyamata that exhibits the bloody clothes and bones of genocide victims -- come directly from Lewis' own life. Yet the playwright admits he still felt some trepidation about being a white guy writing about such a momentous African event." Self awareness will help with racial sensitivity of this show.
In particular, I think the idea of a one man show is interesting because it creates a personal narrative, rather than trying to represent a whole event. In particular, when writing about an event that affected so many, I appreciate that that the playwright seemed to considers how the event affected people, in a situation like this intent is everything. Like others have said, I am also happy that he is conscious of the fact that he has not lived these events. I like the idea that the story starts because the memoir is challenged by a Rwandan citizen, and then it is a story about dealing with the past and not just how horrific the event was. However, I would also be interested in what a Rwandan creative team would do with the material and what story they would tell.While I could not judge whether or not the show accurately represents the event, I would be interested to see what people who are informed on the topic would think.
Post a Comment