Mike Leigh
Interview here. Leigh has managed to straddle film and theatre, very successfully. In the interview, it describes his very particular process:
“For the uninitiated, though, it’s important to know that when he begins auditioning actors, he has only vague ideas about the nature of what lies ahead; the material is conceived and honed by Leigh and his cast over months of improvisation. Even in projects where the territory is predetermined – such as Four Days in July, set in Belfast, or Topsy-Turvy, which drew for the first time in Leigh’s career on factual material – nothing is fixed until just before the cameras roll. “We had shot four-fifths of Secrets and Lies before we did the massive improvisation that yielded up the barbecue scene at the end. Similarly, I couldn’t have told you the ending of Naked until two or three days before we shot it because I couldn’t work out what it was going to be. Then I was driving to the location one morning and I thought: ‘Fuck!’ Or, put another way, ‘Eureka!’”
Any actor chosen to work with Leigh will have a fair idea of the process, which is one sign of how things have changed since the early days. “I remember sitting on the phone to agents and saying endlessly: ‘No, there’s no script, you see, what we do is …’ Eventually they’d say, ‘My client is not getting involved with this.’ Now it takes me months to get through a tiny slice of the people who want to audition.”
I’d love to be able to try working that way at least once. But, given that the powers that be are still hesitant to give money to Leigh for films, I think it would take quite an intrepid set of people (and time and money) to try it out.
“The whole thing about making films in an organic film on location is that it’s not all about characters, relationships and themes, it’s also about place and the poetry of place. It’s about the spirit of what you find, the accidents of what you stumble across.”
Mike Leigh
Exquisite Pain
Forced Entertainment’s Exquisite Pain and I got off on the wrong foot. The Riverside suffered a change of policy, so I couldn’t take my full plastic cup of wine in (they really should tell you this at the bar or the ticket desk) and then the first scenes I catch sight of are; other people with drinks, and the performers with drinks. OK, so maybe the performers should be allowed drinks. Then so should I. Slightly irrational rant over.
Over a red telephone, in a hotel room in India:
“I wanted to come and tell you”
“Have you met another woman?”
“Yes.”
“Is it serious?”
“I hope so.”
“Poor me.”
Sophie Calle’s break up, when she was about 30 and caused partly by her decision to go to Japan for 3 months, is told and retold (with the variations memory and time give) about 90 times.
5 days ago, I broke up with the man I love
8 days ago, I broke up with the man I love
10 days ago, I broke up with the man I love…
90 days ago, I broke up with the man I love…
98 days ago, the man I used to love…
Interspersed, alternatively, with the echoes of her story, are the stories of friends and acquaintances of the most traumatic event in their lives, most often involving death, suicide or break up.
I liked the piece but I do wonder if it could have been staged more effectively. Note, I have a bias in that a piece I created called Confessions that uses very similar devices to Forced Entertainment (but based on confessions), so I made several decision in my work which are different to FET’s but which address the same problems.
[Not to suffer from hubris, FET have been creating this type of work for longer and much more successfully than me, but not using some one else’s (Sophie Calle’s) text.]
Performatively, the two actors sit at desks with the text. High above them a small screen with images. The woman actor speaks Sophie’s story first. The man speaks a friend’s story. Then the woman tells Sophie’s. Then the man… They start, purposefully I believe, with very little emotion in their readings but also at very even, fairly slow pace.
This even rendition and slow pace may have been a good choice. It allows the text simply “to be”. However it also takes the tonal range and emotion out of the stories. It’s of note that late on the man seems to slip into emotion but, in my view, in a haphazard way. My conjecture is that some stories would be more engaging at a musical pace and emotional range, but that other stories may not. Those choices of how to tell the stories could be made in the moment, but would need to be made clearly.
My other thought, was that the piece was funnier than it came across on the night I saw it. [A few people left half way through, which probably didn’t help]. The even handed narration killed some of that. Lastly, the images could have had a larger presence as they provided an important counterpoint to many of the stories.
Criticism of the performance aside, the work itself is a thought provoking, fully realised piece of live art. It takes you through the pain, humour, boredom of trauma and break up. It examines an event through the lens of time and memory and through the stories it touches on many stories and emotions the listener empathises with. I think that qualifies as good art in most people’s books.
There’s not that much work out there like it, and although I’d like to have seen different renditions or staging of it, I fully recommend it.
Gladiator Games & Prison
Went to see Gladiator Games dramatised by Tanika Gupta at Stratford Royal East. It’s a superb piece of verbatim theatre. See earlier post. It’s about Zahid Mubarek, who was an Asian teenager sentenced to 90 days in Feltham Young Offenders’ Institute for stealing £6’s worth of razor blades and interfering with a car. On 20 March 2000, the day he was due for release, he was attacked and killed by his violently racist cell-mate, with a chair leg in his sleep. Lyn Gardner review here.
Verbatim theatre can lapse into dullness very easily, but this play doesn’t. Not only is the story very compelling but the unpicking of the problems with the prison system and the situation which led to the death of Zahid.
The short description reveals some of the problems.
1. Ziad was sent down for stealing razors and interfering with a car. To be fair, he also had a drug problem and had missed two meetings with a probation officer. However, I believe, this to any reasonable person is an extreme over reaction. The problem is, the system demands prison. As Ben Bowling, Crimonologist at the panel discussion after, argues prison is not the answer for the vast majority of youths. Neil Gerrard, MP, believes sentencing needs to be changed.
2. Mental health. Zahid’s violent and racist cell mate, was mentally ill. This was not only obvious with hind sight but should have been picked up many times through the system. However, many people in jail suffer from mental health problems. One panel member suggested is was about 75% of prisoners.
3. It costs about £35,000 a year to maintain an adult prisoner in jail. £50,000 or more for a youth. Yet, what are the gaining in prison? Nothing except an education in crime and hate. Bowling believes, money has to be spent in rehabilitation and not in sending youths down. The arguments don’t stack up either economically or for society.
However, politicians are aiming for more sentencing and less freedoms (eg ASBOs, new terror laws) seemingly as this wins votes from society. I would conjecture, however, that society at large doesn’t realise the economic and social harm being done by this new sentencing regime. Certainly, I didn’t.
It is almost universally acknowledged that there’s too much overcrowding in prisons and that it is not the best way. However, as Suresh Grover of Monitoring Group said, we have to believe we can make a difference. Unfortunately on such a large problem, I don’t know if I believe I can. I can keep writing. Make some people aware. But actual change? I understand why so many young people no longer vote.
Bird flu [Avian, H5N1], what risk a pandemic?
When not pontificating on theatre, I happen to know quite a lot about drugs and pharmaceuticals. All these media articles on bird flu and comparing it to 1918 are beginning to get me a bit antsy.
It is possible that the virus could mutate and leap to humans (maybe via pigs) and cause a pandemic, but the actual risk is very low, in my opinion. I’m not going to go into detail about the stats involved in getting the virus to a pig or human, then getting a mutation, and then getting it to sprea to a pandemic. Expect to say there have been less than 200 documented [exact number I think is closer to 120 but let’s add some more on for undocumented cases] cases of bird flu in humans since 1997 when the virus first appeared. There’s nothing that different this year from last. Furthermore, that’s not a very large population of people for the virus to make a mutation and jump easily 9especially with the whole world looking out for it).
It is possible. It’s just not very likely. You are more likely to get hit by a car.
But, let’s say, we do get a “pandemic” – will it be like 1918?
A few points, one mixed and the others positive.
1. The world, particularly the developed world but also the less developed counties, is in a much much better state of health and nutrition. Access to reasonable healthcare or even just being looked after properly will be a huge protection from dying from ‘flu.
2. Very few people actually die from ‘flu. People die from pneumonia after ‘flu. [And in fact pneumonia and pneumonia waves remains big killer today]. In 1918, we struggled to do much about pneumonia, but today we have antibiotics ie a cure, and a way of looking after people. Far fewer people will die from the secondary infections. True, the young and elderly will still be at more risk, but the adult population (so decimated in 1918) will likely resist.
Remember penicillin wasn’t developed until past 1929 much too late to help in 1918.
3. 1918 was the end of world war I. Soldiers and many of the general population were not in good shape and constantly exposed to any airborne disease. I believe many in 1918 did not die from the war but from ‘flu exacerbated by conditions of war. Soldiers also helped spread the disease fairly effectively. These are not conditions in 2005.
4. The possible negative and what has caught the imagination of the media, is that no one knows how virulent the virus (currently H5N1) would be in a human pandemic. It may be very strong, or quite possibly it may not be. We simply do not know. There is no reason to believe it won’t be very virulent but then we could equally well guess that it will not be so.
Therefore, I conclude the circumstances today are very different from 1918. Not only is a pandemic unlikely, although admittedly possible, but if one were to occur, in all likelihood the death rate would be much much lower than in 1918. Furthermore, I would conjecture it would not be as bad as those suffering from malnutrition in Malawi at the moment, those suffering from HIV in Africa and those living in malaria zones.
Antsiness over. I feel a bit better.
Some stats
Supposedly The Department of Health’s contingency plan says that between 21,000 and 700,000 deaths could be expected in Britain from a flu pandemic. It does also point out that quite a few people die from ‘flu (or ‘flu related disease) in a non-pandemic year.
DoH is using about 48,000 only as their base case scenario.
More than 1,000,000 die annually from malaria [Who stats].
“Black”
I’ve been drawn in, like light into a black hole, in to the “black” or as now termed BME – black minority ethnic – theatre debate.
The Arts Council are holding consultation meetings at the moment, see here. If you feel you might have something to contribute, make a written submission or turn up to a meeting.
I met some interesting people, I didn’t fully realise the cross over concerns into circus arts or opera. I was glad to hear that one composer, Dominique Legendre, has been commissioned by the Royal Opera house on the back of work shown through NITRO.
One of the first questions raised, wasn’t on the list, and that is why is there a need to be labelled and pigeon-holed as “black”, why can’t it just be British? There are so many shades and culture with in the term ”black” that it’s offensive for some to be all lumped together.
I’m not sure, I have robust answer but one which was given was the idea of having to work with/against the system and that for now that is the label the system is going to produce, so as starting point for debate let’s keep using it, as ill-fitting as it is.
I think there’s some merit to this argument. It reminds me of one that Wittgenstein (presumably amongst others) gives and I paraphrase
It is no good simply pointing out that a theory is wrong, unless one has some thing better or at least alternative to replace it with.
Ie something is better than nothing.
The problem with this being, what happens if the something is more harmful than the nothing?
Paul Miller is back
Paul Miller is back in the blog world. I, for one, say “hurrah”.
If theatre is to remain vital, we need good critical thinking about theatre, which is aired in a thoughtful way. Paul provides that and as some are arguing there’s a lack of sophisticated critical voices out there.
Paul has his own take on Ravenhill’s “fewer new plays” assumption, which I have also had a comment on.
Also, his point on the two versions of Coveney’s article on criticism dying, and my thought on the matter.
Welcome back, Paul.
National Theatre of Scotland
NToS is launched today. Vicky Featherstone, ex-Paines Plough, writes about it here.
She says:
“I have spent many hours debating the notion of a “national theatre” and the responsibility that entails. It is not, and should not be, a jingoistic, patriotic stab at defining a nation’s identity through theatre. In fact, it should not be an opportunity to try to define anything. Instead, it is the chance to throw open the doors of possibility, to encourage boldness. I hope our programme goes some way to realising these ambitions. I hope we will make Scotland proud.”
in the debate of a “black theatre” I think one could replace Scotland with Black or minority or non-mainstream and have an equally valid statement. However, where does it stop? Does everyone deserve a theatre? I think everyone probably does deserve one of some kind. [In fact, maybe we all do have a theatre of some kind...]
Interestingly NToS doesn’t have a building:
“The National Theatre of Scotland has no building; there has been no great capital project involving architects or contractors. Instead, the idea is to take theatre all over Scotland, working with the existing venues, touring and creating work within the theatre community. We have no bricks-and-mortar institutionalism to counter, nor the security of a permanent home in which to develop. All our money and energy can be spent on creating new work. Our theatre will take place in the great buildings – Edinburgh’s Royal Lyceum and Glasgow’s Citizens – but it will also take place in the Tramway, in site-specific locations, community halls and sports halls, car parks and forests”
Vicky is helped by her experience of Paines Plough, but in the debate for other companies to follow, perhaps a “building” is not only unnecessary but maybe a hindrance?
-
About me
I'm a playwright and investment analyst. I have a broad range of interests: food, gardening, innovation & intellectual property, sustainability, architecture & design, writing and the arts. I sit on the board of Talawa Theatre Company and advise a CIS investment trust on socially responsible investments.
-
Recent Work
Recent plays include, for theatre: Nakamitsu, Yellow Gentlemen, Lost in Peru, Lemon Love. For radio: Places in Between (R4), Patent Breaking Life Saving (WS).
-
Nakamitsu
-
-
Yellow Gentlemen
-
