I tend to avoid surreal plays and arts. I usually adhere to as much realism as I can, whether I am writing a story or play, or drawing a picture. I think that capturing a stylized representation of reality can enhance a play. However, while this play did not follow reality, I found it fascinating and really wanted to watch it. The surrealism fits with the story so well, and it's lack of reality is so consistent, that it could actually work (I felt a bit like this about Skin of Our Teeth also, which might be the only other truly surreal play I've seen). The use of the surreal in Eurydice made me think about the concepts surrounding it, especially death, music, and love. The surreal actions of the characters also showed their experiences of these emotions and events is such a new way, that parts might be more powerful than watching their realistic counterparts. An example is Orpheus trying to send Eurydice the Complete Works of Shakespeare by tying a string around it and sending it through the ground. It shows his desperation, love, uncertainty all at once, in an image that is certainly not conventional.
One of the moments that struck me the most was Orpheus's second attempt at his first letter for Eurydice. The entire scene stands thus:
ORPHEUS: Dear Eurydice,I could just feel that. The thought of sending all of the emotion he must have been experiencing in a letter, through music, is a brilliant idea for the stage. If performed right, I could see this being a favorite scene.
I miss you. No--that's not nearly enough.
he crumples up the letter. He writes a new letter. He thinks. He writes:
ORPHEUS: Dear Eurydice,
a pause. Music. He conducts.
Love, Orpheus
he drops the letter as though through a mail slot
Beyond the surrealism, I was also struck by the amount of time allotted to action without any dialogue. I could see how this could make the audience uncomfortable at first (silence on stage often does). However, I think that the play between silence, words, and music could be what would make the performance strong. I was wondering if they have an score or recording of the music for those who stage the play. I'd love to hear the intended music for some of these parts. However, the interpretation could change so much with what music and sounds are used. It's such an interesting concept to think about.
Ruhl's Eurydice as an adaptation shows many neat points as well. The idea of looking into the "other" in a story has always been a great idea to me. Seeing what the side character, the villain, or even another main character, is really thinking or doing when they are no accounted for by the scrip or story can show so many facets of the same story in a revealing way. Even if it is not exactly aligned with the original, the ideas presented can spark new ideas for both versions. Using what portions fit with her new interpretation, Ruhl can keep whichever parts of the original idea best say what she wants to say. An adaptation can create a new meaning that can compliment or contradict the first work, but will always ad another depth to it.
Melissa, you should absolutely be playing with music on stage in your plays -- and especially with using it as she does here: thematically, in place of dialogue, to communicate plot, to give character development, and not just as a gimmick. Music fills the silences here or makes them more loud, but it does much else too. Playing with music and with silences is a good project for one of your plays.
ReplyDeleteAnother is playing with the unreality. That lack-of-real is very very different here than in Skin of Our Teeth, and you might find that some play in that world works for you better than others. What is it that you prefer about realism? What does adding that word "stylized" in front buy you? You're entirely welcome to stick with the real, but it's worth nailing down exactly what you mean by that, what realism buys you, and also what it costs.
I think one of the the things that is the most interesting about this show is the sound. You talk about the music and the moments of silence (or lack of sound), but I think the whole show is very sparse in its language. If we examine simply the text, there is not a lot of it, but when performed the play takes exceedingly longer to perform because of the addition of music, playing with sound effects, and scene where time simply passes. This allows for moments of reflection, or it can convey deep emotion that one simply cannot express with words, like the scene you mentioned above.
ReplyDeleteYou talked about surrealism as a tool to express different themes or character's emotions, but at the same time, you tend to avoid surrealism. I mentioned this in Meghan's blog as well, but I feel like we, as new playwright's, all tend towards trying to make our plays as "real" as possible because we think that's the right way or the best way to do something. But perhaps we would all benefit from attempting to write from a surrealist perspective in order to really communicate some sort of message. The question is, what type of story benefits from surrealism, what does not, and how to do find that?
Well m’ lettuce (I love that by the way), I completely relate to your musings about the whole adhering to realism thing. I do that myself. But you’re right. This play does break those norms in a way that works. Ruhl explores such common themes (love, etc.), but portrays them in refreshingly new ways.
ReplyDeleteSomething I would like to experiment with in my plays, but haven’t yet, is the use of music. The more art forms combined, the stronger the effect, right?? I’m also curious to know if there is any specific music written for this show and what that would sound like. I know that in one of the pictures we looked at there was a guitar and in another a saxophone so Orpheus’ musical style could really vary depending on what the director envisions (classical, jazz, blues, folk). So interesting to think about!
I also really enjoy adaptations exploring peripheral characters in known stories/ myths. Such a feat, however, is risky because it has to be done well, which Sarah Ruhl has undoubtedly done with Eurydice.
I also have a huge appreciation for realism, but for some reason i absolutely love the surreal. I think it is just as difficult to make something that is surreal seem realistic than it is to make something that is supposed to be realistic seem realistic. (if that makes any sense) I would also like to experiment with music in my plays... i'm pretty surprised that i haven't yet considering i am a sound designer. I also like the idea that Orpheus' music could be a variation of genres.
ReplyDeleteI dont think that comparing this to Skin of Our Teeth is fair. Each of the worlds work for these separate plays, but for completely different reasons. I feel like the reason that Skin works is because of its originality and different surrealism from anything else i've experienced. I feel like the reason that Eurydice works is because we KNOW what happens, so no matter how weird or surreal it is, we accept it because we know it happens. Even though skin of our teeth has biblical references, and even references to events in history and stories that everyone knows. But i do agree that the world does work for the play.