Sunday, December 13, 2009

Steph's thoughts

Sorry for the late post, I realised how incoherent I was so I made a mindmap in an attempt to organise the messy thoughts. Although you might not want to rely on the mindmap so much because I could not put everything I wanted to say in one pic. Update: After doing the mindmap, I spent another 2h editing. I still think there may be a missing link. Anyhoo we need to present the links more clearly for a better resolution.

Okay to me the unifying theme is hunger and escapism. (duh, but more specifically the hunger for certainty/success and the fear of failure as a result) The issues are in what the characters are hungry/searching for.

Hungry shows typical Singaporeans hungry for different things. However, it is because they hunger for certainty and success that ultimately lead to their downfall because they kill themselves/go crazy when they don't achieve it because they are scared of hurt or failure. (with the exception of death and baby) However, Death and Baby shows that all these hunger do not matter and that we (DV)should be grateful for life and to just live life for what it is, if not (sub-DV) we will regret sacrificing the things we sacrificed for that hunger.

Sarah shows a typical person in search of the meaning of life. From a really long time ago, people have been in search of this, in the form of Wisdom. However, nowadays, it has been degraded into knowledge and mugging because people want quick, certain, black and white knowledge that other people thought of instead of thinking for themselves. Now this brings 2 implications. First, Sarah killing herself cus she can never find the answer through studying books about life or examining dead bodies. Secondly, the god of wisdom's loss of purpose in the world because not many people look for wisdom anymore. So he goes crazy with that loss. These implications give the sub-issue of how people may be intelligent muggers but not actually intellectual thinkers.

Gek shows an artist in Singapore searching for success in life(perfection) and recognition in her art. Putting the hint of the arts scene not being well supported aside, the 2 things Gek searched for are actually what Singaporeans want. A perfect life and recognition. However, most of us, after eating whatever is in the world, produce shit and so she dies. (Everything we produced is shit after consuming someone else's product whether intellectual or physical so why make a big hooha of everything? Why not just live life the way it is? regurgitating knowledge or other people's works is shit )

Mui Choo shows a person hungry for 2 things - Love and Escape. In the story, when she was scared, she forgot about love and just wanted to escape by dying. She hungered for certainty, beauty and scared of pain and ageing. So she escaped by dying in fear. Then she hungered for love because she did not have a chance to love her own baby. This links the theme and sub-DV together - how in the hunger for certainty/success or the fear of hurt/failure we actually sacrifice the most important things and later regret and hunger for those things.

Baby shows the simple perspective. It is ironic that people can take knowledge, books for what it is but cannot take the purpose of eating something or living life for what it is. Baby cannot get how people get the concepts of things taught by Sarah but can get the simple purpose of why anything exists. Baby shows how one can simply live because the sole purpose of being alive was to live.Baby also show no fear of hurt or failure. And I guess without the hunger the rest has, she does not have fear. and because she has not lived, she just wants to live.

Death supports the content of every single character. his last line "die in pain" and baby's last line "they hoped, they would return to the garden", show fear of hurt and hunger for certainty and idealism respectively.

The image of the garden of Eden shows us how people from the beginning of time are greedy/hungry. And because of that greed/hunger we lose things. And only when we lose things do we hunger for them. Adam and Eve hungered for the certainty and ideal state of Eden. So instead of being greedy, one should just be contented and live life before we lose anything else.

One more issue is the finality of death/exams. "5,4,3,2,1,pens down" This finality causes the characters to feel even more regretful and hungry for the things they have lost. Also, it causes us to live life in mugging, in working hard for the "exam" so that we do as much as we can before death.

P.S.
To search for answers to the questions:
1. list issues
The issues are in what the characters are hungry/searching for. (e.g. issue of hunger for knowledge/recognition/success/certainty/escapism/perfection or hunger to just live + One sub-issue presented in paragraph 4)
2. main issue my character deals with
Para 7 : hunger to simply live because the sole purpose of being alive was to live.
3. Link other characters to that issue.
Para 7 and the issue is linked to DV which is linked to theme which is linked to the characters.
4. Unifying theme: Para 2
5. reasons why it is that theme:
justified by the paragraphs after.

My Thoughts on Hungry as a Play

Issues that the play deals with(non-exhaustive)
  1. Suggests that many people inhabits the space between life and death
  2. Advocates death as the capacity to face up to the truth of limitations of life
  3. Appreciate life only after having experienced death
  4. Enjoy pleasure only after suffering the pain of a fall
  5. Until one comes to apprehend the true meaning of life and death, one experiences a perpetual hunger
  6. Hunger for knowledge & wisdom, truth & certainty, questioning instead of complacency and literal physical hunger
  7. Predatory instincts behind the quest for success represented via cannibalism
  8. Death brings about new life
  9. Farce on Singapore's clean image and censorship guidelines
  10. Pays tribute to cultural ritual of offering food to the deceased during the Hungry Ghost's Festival
Main issue for the character Death
  • Until one can come to terms with what they want, one will never stop questioning.
This links to all the other characters as I will be the one that they come to after they have decided on what they want. While they are still questioning, I will not interfere. But once they have come to a decision, I will give them the repercussions of their choice, and if they are still sure, I will give them what they want.

Unifying Theme
  • All of us will occupy this state of between-ness until we have figured out what exactly we want to know or have achieved what we aspire to have.
Reasons why :
  1. The play takes place in this state. Death governs this state.
  2. All the characters occupying this state are repeatedly questioning themselves and people around them in order to get answers.
  3. At the end of the play, they finally comes to a consensus and reconcile themselves in being led away to where they want to go by Death.
- Melvyn

Thursday, December 10, 2009

Interview with Tze Chien

So anyway, we managed to interview the playwright and director of POOP, Chong Tze Chien, and have asked him some questions regarding our piece as well as regarding POOP. Below is the interview with him.

1) What are some of your guiding principles whenever you direct a play?

TC: I think it goes back to the story itself. How do I best bring out this story? I could easily stage POOP in a very different way, with a big set in a big theatre. So if you analyse the play, it is about a little girl's perception of death, and so naturally, things have to be simple. You have to imagine that it is an eight year old girl looking at the world, how does she look at it? It is very different from an adult. So that became the guiding principle. From the start, I wanted to make it very simple and that was the guiding principle for every decision that I made. From the choice of music to the way I would stage the show. So I went through many drafts, many possibilities of staging. At first, it was something very puppet theatre style, with different levels. (He goes on to demonstrate the original set.) The actors would then dress up as puppets. So we began drafting, drawing up storyboards, but it became too complicated and techinical. It diverted away from the guiding principle of simplicity. There were too many things to construct and training was needed for the actors.

And then me and my producer went to see a Chinese Opera performance by Hong theatre group. But they stripped it down. There wasnt any set or make up. (He goes on to demonstrate their use of light to define space.) All they used to define the space was a narration. It showed that in theatre, you don't really need anything. In theatre, what make things theatrical is essentially an actor in a space. That is the most basic principle. An actor is the one who defines where he or she is. It gave me the idea of selecting one object that will best symbolise that particular scene. It would then be very simple.

Then the challenge was to control the lighting design. Because the it was very controlled lighting, and the light will hit the actor at an angle, and so the actors had to tilt in such a way that they will catch the light. Another challenge was the size and dimension of a little girl's world.

2) What were some of your influences in the production of POOP?

TC: Its simply going back to the magic of theatre. I mean even if it was a very big production, with big sets, you also have to be very selective of what you want to show the audience. If you show everything, it almosts unimaginative. How do you define something that is theatrical? It is something that evokes imagination. So sometimes you can get excited by seeing something and think to yourself, "Oh. I would never see it that way." And of course, the more things you have, the more choices you have, and so it can be very agonizing as well. And then a minimalist set design means that you have to be very clear of what you choose. That choice should represent the scene very clearly.

3) In all of your productions, what are some of the central issues that you address. For example, in POOP, it was death.

TC: For me, POOP was a culmination of everything that I've been doing for the past 10 years. Somehow or another, the issue of death was recurring. So even if death was not one of the main themes, it would still be a sub theme of sorts. So with POOP, you could say I got it out of my system. I think as an artist, you would be obsessed with a particular subject. Until you have fully articulated it, you would always be driven by it. For me, death is not a dark subject. To me, death is not the end, it is very optimistic. I find that death has something very calming about it. There's a sort of peace to it. That's why I'm always gravitating towards the theme of death inevitably. So for me, POOP was a very perfect fit in that way.

4) Can you name any practioners that you have studied or admire, and have applied to your work?

TC: As a theatre student, I think what I was most intrigued about was Brecht and Richard Schechner. What I loved about Brecht was the way he deconstructs things. While studying theatre as a theory, you learned specific styles to stage theatre. However, when studying Brecht, it showed me new and radical way to stage things. I still remember there was once where Brecht had all the stage managers and lighting crew calling the show, right in front of the audience. So the audience were constantly being reminded that they're watching a show. Then you see the actors break out of character, have a tea break, then go back into the performance. So it was literally breaking down walls and that was an eye opener for me.

As for Richard Schechner, he was very much about performance in space. His argument is that there is no such thing as a performance space. As long as you have a performer in any space, it immediately becomes a performance, and you have that relationship with the audience. For example, there was a show about mental patients. The audience would then be sitting on hospital bunk beds, and the actors are actually all around them. So the audience would actually be in the acting space itself. So that is the magic of theatre. Something so exciting need not be brought about by extravagent sets or lighting. Simplicity is the most complex. Because when you are doing something in its purest form, you will realise that a lot of things are not needed.

5) Are there certain elements that is present in all your productions (eg. puppetry) ? And why?

TC: Puppetry was mainly because I joined this company! (laughs) Before this, I was more of just a playwright, not so much of directing. When I joined this company, it was something very tangible. Before I joined, finger plays were mainly children's theatre. They wanted me to make it more of for adult's theatre. So basically, we would use puppetry as a device to best showcase the performance. Puppetry is something very visual and also something that is very theatrical. Puppetry is about design and objects and how you move them in space and time. If you watch POOP or Cats, puppetry is used to serve the story and is not the main focus.

6) So when conceptualizing the piece, do you actually plan where and when the puppets will come in?

TC: The usual process would be that once the script is written, we will pass it to the designers. The designers will then propose places in the script where puppets will be most effective. Sometimes they will even say, "Actually, this show doesn't need puppets." So for POOP, there wasn't any real puppetry, at least not in a very complex and big way. Its basically because I felt that this show really doesn't need that much of puppetry to bring out the story.

7) Did you have any specifications for the lighting designers when choosing the lighting?

TC: I actually marked the stage after the basic blocking was done. I drew a chart with very specific measurements on how big the spotlight would be, where the light ends, spillage and things like that. In terms of colour scheme of the lights, the lighting designer came up with different colours for the "reality" scenes and different colours for the "surreal" scenes.

8) On that note, what sort of theatre style/genre did POOP follow?

TC: I think that expressionism(omg look at this people) is one of them as well as selective naturalism.

9) So for expressionism, were you inspired by any director or production?

TC: Not particularly, but if you look at european productions, especially western european ones, you will see that they are all very dark and very stark. It's always something very austere. So I tend to gravitate towards that in terms of colours.

10) In terms of expressionistic set design?

TC: Not really as well. Because if you consider expressionistic sets, there's no real set. The objects are always from everyday life, its all very rooted to reality. So in a way, I think we adapted expressionism.

11) So what aspects of expressionism did you use in POOP?

TC: I think it is more of visual composition. Like the way the father was presented. Sometimes I would only focus on his facial expression, like in certain scenes where you only see his head. And sometimes when he is talking to his wife, and you see a pair of legs walking past. So these are the aspects that are very clean and very stark.

12) In terms of your creative process, after having an idea of the piece, how is the conceptualization of the ideas carried out? For example, through improvisation and such?

TC: Actually there's a lot of thinking involved where I rewrite the script until I'm happy with it. And yet also still be open to changes. I realise that as a director, I execute things very fast. While some directors will try and process it the script in rehearsal, for me, during rehearsals, I already have a clear picture of what I want. Basically I will tell the actors to do what I want and then we're done with the blocking. In my head, I would have gone through the production many times in many different styles, and so I would have a very clear idea of what I want.

13) When directing a play that has been staged before, what aspects do you keep or throw? Do you believe in keeping true to what the original playwright wanted to express or search for something new?

TC: I usually adopt the same attitude for all my productions; which is that I'm always open to making changes or improvements. For me, the script is the foundation for the entire project, and even before I can decontruct or play, I need to see in the script; what doesn't help? The primary goal is to best showcase the written words, but I'm not purist in that way in the sense that I can't delete stuff as well. I look at a script and ask myself,"Does the original text work? If not, what changes can I make?"

14)What do you think of the script for Hungry?

TC: The script is very very clear. And its one of those plays that is very eloquent and is one of those character pieces that is a very good short play. It is one of those plays that can provide the director a lot to play with. I guess the challenge for directors and actors would be to really dig deep at exactly what the piece is saying. Because it is not a superficial play. The original set design was simply four toilet bowls and the characters just moved around them. So it was a very simple production in that sense. And each of these characters are hungry for various reasons. How then do you show that and best bring out the intention of the script?

15) We don't know what kind of style we're following exactly...

TC: For me, I always tell people not to be obsessed on the definition of the style. Because at the end of the day, these definitions came about because they saw creations, and then they tried to coin a term that would best describe it. Its not the other way around. So it is about asking,"What do I see in the piece?" So if people try to place a style on my piece as ask whether its expressionistic or brechtian, I can say," I don't know. It's Chong Tze Chien style!"(gasp!) So for you guys, its about asking what do you see? In other words, what is your directorial vision?

16) So is there anything that you do not like about Hungry(Script)?

TC: For me, maybe it is that there was no real resolution. It was one of those pieces that went quite deep but there wasn't any real resolution among the characters. There's some revelations but those revelations wasn't translated to the audience. There wasn't a part of me that went,"Wow!" I didn't get excited by what they were trying to say.

17) Hungry is very episodic in nature. So how do you deal with such scripts?

TC: You have got to think about it in terms of performance text. A text is only a subset of a performance text. A good example of a performance text would be Cats: Lost and Found. If you would just read the script alone, it would seem normal. But the performance text was very rich. It added things onto the written text. Performance text consists of everything from non-verbal scenes, what's going on between the characters, character design and production design. For example the scene where the usher imagined that she was in the ocean, that wasn't part of the script. It was a non-verbal sequence that helped to contribute to her relationship with the cat. You realise that they are a very loving pair, which you may not get just by reading the script. So as a director, you have to look at a text and think," How do I jump off from it? How do I show things?"

-Melvyn (omg. this transcript was hell to type)

Wednesday, December 9, 2009

Character Analysis - Sarah

m Sarah, the 'science student' as Gwak puts it. But i have to agree with her, the label holds true. I love analysis and finding answers to things, thats what made me the brightest student in class, put also caused me to die. Asking questions is my forte! I always want to know why things are, how they came about, what will happen to them eventually. Soon i began asking questions about existence, mans purpose on earth, creation, purpose, fulfillement, love, emotion, feeling. But i never could find the answers to them. Not knowing all that made me feel uneasy. How would i know if i was doing the right thing with my life if i didnt know what i was suppose to be doing in the first place? I felt small, useless, insignificant, purposeless and just so tired after asking all those questions. My life slowly detereorated. First my gade, then my parents, freinds, everything was gone because i just couldnt BE because i didnt know what i was supposed to BE. It was such a burden that i decided that i would do myself a favour and just kill myself. What came after life was always a mystery to me, so i decided that i would go find out.

But damn that man up there (if there is one) just could NOT let me die in peace! First i had to confront myslef ONCE again with those questions that had never gotten anwered because without knowing them how was i suppose to choose what came next? Why cant they just choose people to send to either heaven and hell! Talk about democracy and 'choices that are now available to modern society'! Well i have found what the human races's existance is all about and that we end up being insignificant in the end and there is nothing we can do about it. We have no set purpose, we just are... until one day were not anymore. Ill never be able to find the answers, and even if i do how can i varify them? Its an endless circle, so i guess ill stop it all now. Spare myself the hurt and the pain and distress. Goodbye you all!

Gwak- She is interesting as all art students are. I always found them weird, but she showed me an all new level! The energy, the talk, the bubbly personality! ARGH!! But well i guess i do feel for her. She cant really analysde stuff like me, so her approach to the pain is just ignoring it and creating a sort of protective bubble that will keep her happy and amused. When she finally admitted that she was aware of reality it shocked me a bit but im glad that she has decided to take control of the 'situation' and finally make a decision. She's strong, she'll be alright. Don't change to much Gwak!

Baby- I love that kid, I do. But teaching her is sometimes sop difficult because she asks the questions that i used to when i was little. I hate myslef for not being able to give her better answers, insetad i have to trepeat the ones that i got then. All i can do is pass on knowledge, things that i have read and learnt. But the wisdom stil hasnt come to me and i hope that baby will grow up and answer the questions i never could. I wish you all the best Baby.

Mui Choo- She's kind and loving and very motherly. I can see the pain that she has gone through in the past, and i do hope that she will find what she is looking for. She may not know as much as i do or analyze and question things. But the one thing she has that i dont think i ever will is the ability to love unconditionally and to follow her heart, not her head. I admire you Mui Choo.

Mug- Well what can i say. I never knew there was a God like him but i guess he was the one i prayed to, the God of Wisdom. Or not... come to think of it, i had always prayed for knowledge, for the answers. I had never prayed for wisdom. This is the disease of my generation. The only way we know to solve our problems is to look for answers, not other ways to tackle the situation. I do feel sorry for the old guy it wasnt his fault that people forgot about him. He is strange in a way but then so is wisdom. If only people would wake up from the illusions of knowledge! I'm sorry mugg.

Death- What can i say. He's just always THERE. He neither helps us nor probes us for answers. He just stands and watches. I do understand that he cant help us but sometimes i just wish he would! BEcause he is the person with the most 'experience' in purgatory! He cant even answer the questions i have about what is beyond this place. Or maybe he just doenst want to. Well whatever it is, at least he can help me get to the place that i want to go. Thank you death.

-Priscilla

Monday, December 7, 2009

Baby

Function of Character

In relation to DV, I have never experienced life before so I appreciate and want it so badly because I have lost it due to circumstance. Towards logical answers, I ask questions. Towards questions people try to logically solve, I give the most simplest answer. And I guess the simplest answers are the correct ones. My logic goes in line with fairytales, not with books.

My take on each character

Sarah - found on P52. I sincerely want to learn from her, because she seems very knowledgeable. But a lot of things she says just does not make sense to me.

Mui Choo - She is my mum. I seek her for motherly love because I have never experienced it before. She takes care of me and answers my questions. I find it shocking how she killed herself and baby because I thought she loved baby. But she said she was really scared to the point where she forgot to love. I cannot understand but I accept it as it is.

Death - He took me to where I am now. He is quite kind. He is quite scary too. He just sits there and waits for us to make a decision on where to go so he can bring us.

Mug- He gets into nervous fits/ fits in general. Even though I do not know why he is like that, I know he is feeling bad and frustrated inside. So I comfort him sometimes.

Character Analysis - Death

Function/Role

I am the ferry for the souls of the departed. After someone dies, I will bring their soul to purgatory, a place that exists in between heaven and hell. There, I will be watching these souls from a very objective point of view, as they decide where they would like to go. I then have the power to bring them to these places namely heaven, hell, reincarnation or even to cease to exist. Until then, I will not influence their decision in any way whatsoever, but just act as an observer.

My take on each character

Sarah - Having seen many school girls commit suicide over the years, I was not surprised to meet Sarah. However, unlike many others, Sarah does not resign herself to her death after she dies, but rather continues to try to find answers. Also ironically, the very reason she killed herself. I am not surprised by her final decision to cease to exist because ultimately, it is the only solution to her problems.

Baby - A sad case I must say. But she has indeed broadened my perspectives. Like all children, she possesses this immense curiosity that sometimes can get on my nerves. (Imagine someone asking Why? continuously.) However, this very innocence of baby has allowed the situations of life to be painted quite clearly and simply. To me, Baby deconstructs complicated situations and provides an alternative perspective on a matter.

Gwakawakaweena - Her name is so long that I just call her Gwak. She talks too much. I mean seriously. Shut up. To me, her lack of success in becoming an artist, leading to her suicide, shows others the stamp that society places on the arts. She is the one that gets Sarah to open up and always try to get all the other souls together. To me, she is the one that values life the most, hence her decision to reincarnate.

Mui Choo - She plays the motherly role to all the other souls. I find it amusing how she always tries to answer Baby's questions but eventually fails to do so because of her own lack of knowledge of the world. I can tell that she craves for love and affection very much, and thus tries to show and get that from Baby. She is also trying to come to terms with the fact that she killed her own baby by commiting suicide. Something that I find mildly sad.

Mug - The old god of wisdom that speaks in a way that only those with real wisdom can understand. It is very apparent to me that he craves recognition for his worth as a god, and no matter how hard I try to tell him that times have changed, it doesn't get through to him. Personally, I feel that a bit of wisdom is still needed now and then, and its sad how society is now just relying on knowledge alone. Mug. Even if nobody wants you, you'll still have me.

Wednesday, December 2, 2009

Synopsis of Hungry by Ng Yi-Sheng

In Hungry, an assortment of departed souls, from a young student who has commited suicide (Sarah), an aborted baby (Baby), a wannabe artist (Gwakawakaweena), a singlish speaking auntie (Mui Choo), to a deposed god of wisdom from the ancient Sri Vijaya empire (Mug), endeavors to contront their new status as ghosts and reconcile themselves to being led away by Death (Death).

The play traces Sarah's journey to finding what she really wants as she is contronted and influenced by the life stories of others along the way. The whole play takes place in purgatory and all the characters are placed in a state of between-ness, betwixt that of Life and Death. Eventually, all the characters come to terms with what they want, and willing to be brought to a better place; a definition that differs for each character.

P.S. Hungry is essentially many different monologues/duologues stringed together, culminating in a scene where all the characters gather. This is something we have to note and change as the danger of a talking heads piece is still eminent.

-Melvyn