|
|
|
|
The
Edinburgh Fringe
|
|
|
|
Fringe 2004 Reviews (47)The Turn of the Screw Having read and enjoyed James' short story a number of times and been stunned some thirty or so years ago by the film version, The Innocents, I was interested to see how The Turn of the Screw would translate to the stage. To be perfectly honest, I thought it wouldn't work. In fact it did. It's a two-hander, with an actress playing the Governess and an actor the the employer, the housekeeper, Miles and numerous sound effects. (There is no programme or press release available, so regrettably I can't name them.) Quint, Jessel and little Flora are left to our imagination, and this is as it should be, for it preserves the ambiguity of the original. Were the sightings of Quint and Jessel the product of the Governess' overheated imagination, or were they real ghosts? Film can show them - that terrifying scene when Miles changes into Quint still sends a shudder down my spine, even in memory - but onstage the flesh is too, too solid. So, a good version, very competently performed with nothing more than a chair, a small rostrum and some basic but atmospheric lighting. Peter Lathan XXX XXX has been described as the most shocking show ever to be seen in this country, at least outside of those private clubs which gained such notoriety around the time of the Profumo affair. Full-frontal male and female nudity (onstage and in the audience), all kinds of sex acts onstage, simulated and otherwise - in fact, all the ingredients of your average porn movie. If you find sex shocking, then you will definitely be shocked by XXX. But these days the portrayal of public sexual activity as being only found in Soho peepshows or on videos from sleazy backstreet sex shops frequented by men in dirty raincoats are long gone. Anyone with a computer can easily find any sex act, hetero or homosexual, in still photographs or video on the Net, and anyone over the age of 18 can buy The Lovers' Guide videos which show almost every conceivable sexual act between men and women (or on their own), so XXX's "shock" selling point is rather less shocking, being reduced to the fact that it is happening onstage rather than on a screen. It is based on de Sade's Philosophy of the Bedroom which more or less says that you should do what you want: nothing is forbidden - total sexual freedom is the rule. An 18 year old girl, Eugenia, comes for an audition for a film, not realising it is to be sexually explicit. She is taken through a series of "lessons", which encompass almost all forms of sexual activity, including experiencing and inflicting pain, following de Sade's dictum that pain opens the door to pleasure. She is at first horrified, but becomes increasingly fascinated and, after first leaving in horror, returns for more. Every act is videoed in long-shot and close-up , and projected onto the huge screen at the back of the stage, so the audience does not miss a single detail. When her lessons are finished, the two male members (intentional pun!) of the cast, naked, talk to the audience, both onstage and right among them, and encourage them to shed their inhibitions. Some, of course, do take off their clothes, both onstage and in their seats. Then we return to the play and Eugenia persuades the others to "initiate" her mother as revenge for the way she has been brought up. This initiation takes the form a rape which happens behind a gauze but which is also videoed and projected. The play ends with the video of all that has happened being sold as a sure-fire hit to a porn distributor. And here is the moral ambiguity which lies at the centre of the whole piece. The proposed sale of the video of what is supposed to be a form of education in freedom to a market which demeans the very thing the video is supposed to represent, is mirrored by the rape of the mother in which Eugenia uses the very process by which she achieves her "freedom" to carry out revenge on her mother. The massive 700-seat Pleasance Grand was almost full on the last night of the run. No one seemed to be shocked, but I was - not by the explicit sex but by the perversion of the message of freedom from inhibition into a means of violence and revenge. That's what is shocking about it, but all too typical of humanity. A bleak message indeed. Peter Lathan Sketching Lucien I was told that Sketching Lucien is a piece of physical theatre. It is not. It is a fairly traditional, if elliptical, word-bound narrative with some movement moments tacked on. With the exception of the competent actor playing Lucien Freud himself, I would be surprised to find that the rest of the cast had so much as licked a stamp for an envelope containing an application to drama school. The title is somewhat apt as the play is definitely sketchy. Lucien Freud, Francis Bacon and Leigh Bowery can be ranked among the most innovative artists and fascinating personalities working in the arts in Britain during the second half of the 20th century, but the play has little interesting to say about their relationships, their friendship or their work. In fact, it trivialises. Having given my own professional opinion, in fairness I must say that two or three members of the audience seemed to genuinely enjoy the show and applauded vigorously. So, there you go! Jackie Fletcher |
|
|