By Amy Langdown
On the 29th of November, I attended the Year 13’s shocking and exhilarating performance of ‘Animal farm’- based on the George Orwell novel written (and published) in 1945.
The original novella ‘Animal Farm’ is an allegory for the politics of the Russian Revolution of 1917 and the Stalinist period of the Soviet Union. However, this performance adapted the story to make it an allegory for modern politics (mainly the UK) between 2016-17; referencing Brexit, Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn- along with brief mentions of Trump and his ‘wall’. I have to say, the fact that it was so easy to relate and translate the Stalinist period to modern day politics was shocking.
Charlotte Small shone as a convincingly jumper clad ‘Corbie’ (if you haven’t already worked out...a version of Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn), Lindsay Booth was hilarious as a progressively less sober ‘Dimble’ (based on BBC journalist David Dimbleby), Alex Faichen was intimidating as the oppressive ‘Nutter’ (based on UKIP Scouser Paul Nuttall) and Lauren Johnson was scarily realistic as ‘May’ (based on - can you guess who?). The Hub was transformed into an arena plastered with mock campaign posters, featuring Charlotte Small as Corbie and Lauren Johnson as May.
When asked to describe the performance in one word, the actors said the show was “‘Dark’, ‘immersive’ and ‘thought-provoking’” - and it was just that. The main influence behind their performance, said the year 13s, was Antonin Artaud. Artaud was a member of the ‘Theatre of Cruelty’ and his main belief was that people shouldn't enjoy going to the theatre - that they should instead leave “offended and uncomfortable” , as one of the actors Charlotte Small described it. As a cast, I think that they definitely pulled this off, as I was squirted with water, missed by a flying heart by centimetres, herded like cattle and pushed aside by one of the actors- and to top it all off: it stunk of horse manure throughout the performance.
The whole point behind ‘immersive theatre’, is that it “shows people what they don’t want to see” and makes sure that the audience doesn’t come to see a show and then forget it; they actually leave horrified and thus wanting to do something to change the situation that they were presented with- in this case : the ignorance of some of us in terms of politics. We as an audience were literally ‘herded’ into the performance space, which Mrs Dyer said posed the questions : “Do politicians see us as no more than another animal they are to herd and control?” and, “Are we being as ignorant in politics as bovine/swine?”
One very clever thing about the way that the performance was staged, was that it started and ended out on the street. This was “to show that even when [the audience leaves] at the ‘end’ of the performance, it continues there to show that you cannot escape politics no matter where you go.” On top of this, the audience were set up in a traverse staging, meaning that they were either side of the stage space; this was to “personify and reflect the house of commons with the Tories in blue on one side and Labour in red on the other”.
The most effective thing, in my opinion, in terms of creating the ‘Theatre of Cruelty’ and ‘immersive theatre’ atmosphere was the unavoidable surprise audience participation. “We use the audience as a prop [...] It wouldn’t work nearly as well without them [...] after all, without the audience who are representative of ‘the people’, politics couldn’t happen at all”. Throughout the performance, people were accosted by the cast and forced into involuntary participation where they were shouted at and made to say lines. One person even ended up carrying a ‘head’ in a bag!
As an audience member, I came away asking questions about our country’s politics. For example; the character of ‘Nutter’ was a criticism of Paul Nuttall and the UKIP party in general, as this character used violence throughout in order to gain power and support through inciting fear. This posed questions about how UKIP handle political matters in terms of how they not only treat people from other parties, but other ethnic, racial and gender groups too. I am also aware that although I didn’t enjoy it in the conventional way of going to see a show with a ‘smushy’ plot that ends with the two protagonists falling in love and all being ‘happy ever after', I enjoyed the fact that whilst being entertained, I was also educated and questioned by not only the actors - but myself too. “The aim is to take [the audience] away from the outside world, whilst also making them think about it”. I personally, am certain that the cast met their aim and I consider myself privileged to have been able to witness their hard-hitting and captivating performance; I am sure it will stay with me for a long time.
READ MORE LIKE THIS...
READ MORE BY...
コメント