rhinoceros

Photo: timeout.com

This experience at the theatre highlighted to me the increasing popularity of adaptations on our stage, and our increasing desire to produce theatre that speaks directly to our time in a clear way to an audience. This becomes the case even more so when we look specifically at adaptations of absurdist theatre on our stages in the last two years. This production was an excellent example of how this genre speaks so well to our time, simply by virtue of being able to adapt it so easily. However, I do sometimes wonder whether there is even a need to adapt these plays. More on this later.

I appreciated Omar Elerian's somewhat 'Brecht-ian' direction of his new version as I felt that it matched the need of absurdist theatre to speak to the state of the world, and was encouraging the audience to be critical. We were engaged by a prologue that drew us into the concept of the production, while also simply being entertaining, and several moments of audience interaction made us part of the performance which signalled to me a need to examine my own role in the issues being explored by the show. There was an excellent balance of comedy to 'drama' and serious examination of the issue of the play which alleviates any discomfort you might feel about the action on stage, but not enough that you can ignore the seriousness of what you are watching. I did feel, however, that the first and second halves could have been slightly more equal in terms of seriousness and comedy, as the last act felt slightly lacklustre and disjointed compared to the rest of the production. The conversation between Berenjer and Daisy when they are the last two 'humans' left seemed to suggest a lack of understanding or decision on Daisy's character and what she represents in the issue of societal conformity. The conversation suggested a lack of understanding or ability to communicate between the two characters, which may have been a signal to the ending of the play, but why build a relationship between these two characters which seems unusual and then break them apart in the end anyway? I felt like I should have been affected by this turn in Daisy's character but it wasn't an emotional reaction, more an intellectual one.

By far the most striking part of this performance was Sope Dirisu's. It's incredibly impressive to give such a powerful performance as the quietest character, especially compared to the highly stylised performances of the other characters. It felt easy to relate to Berenjer simply because I was captivated by Dirisu's performance that stood out from the others, but we all want to believe that we wouldn't conform, right? It is rare to see a performance that feels actually brave, and to admire that the actor can even perform the scene, made even more powerful by the rest of the cast performing their bows in front of Dirisu's cries of resistance, as the audience performed their duties in clapping for the cast. This was an excellent employment of Brecht's principles that I hoped would make the audience think critically about their reaction to the production, but I was disappointed by the apparent cognitive dissonance that the audience were allowing themselves because this production feels like the first one I've seen that really encourages a critical examination of your role in the issue once you've left the theatre. Although it's great to show your appreciation for a company's performance, a curtain call and clapping really can stop you from thinking about the performance after the lights come up.

Which leads me on to my main issue with adaptations in general, particularly of plays that are explicitly political or socially conscious. I often wonder whether there is a need to adapt these plays, to modernise them or include specific cultural references for our time and location. I had the same thought watching Tom Basden's adaptation of Dario Fo's 'Accidental Death of an Anarchist', which was littered with ultra-specific references to political and social moments in the zeitgeist. My personal love of absurdist theatre is because of its ability to speak to us even decades after it was first written and performed, meaning that it doesn't need to be adapted for audiences today to be able to understand why the company are producing the play now. Of course, adaptations can make productions much more accessible to a wider audience, which is not something to turn my nose up at, but there is something to be said for asking your audience to think a little more about your show rather than being spoon fed the point you are making.

Despite my personal bias against modernising absurdist theatre, I think this production was incredibly brave, and a wonderful move towards what I think theatre can be. I admire Dirisu's courage to carry such a powerful message through to the very last moment of the play and I hope that more productions of this nature can disrupt the way we understand a react to theatre in London.