Cafe Witness

Tuesday, August 26, 2008

Who Determines the Shelf Life of "Modern" Art?

I saw a very cool play last night at the Bricolage summer reading series: Neighborhood 3: Requisition of Doom, by Jennifer Haley. It's an ultra-modern parable about communication, expectation and the nature of reality, cloaked in the guise of a horror film spoof.

The story centers around a fictional MMORPG (the titular "Neighborhood 3"), in which disaffected teens lose themselves -- literally -- for days on end. The game is a complex quest to eradicate the zombies who threaten to overrun a picture-perfect suburb -- which, the players notice, is a mirror image of their own suburban housing plan...

I'll let you draw your own conclusions about the play's themes and politics (or you can read this review of a prior performance in Louisville, which unfortunately seems to have missed out on so much of the play's dark humor). As I consider my own feelings about the play -- which I very much liked but am still processing -- a few thoughts enter my mind, such as:

* How well will hypermodern works of art age in an era of ever-increasing nostalgia, when the millennium bug already seems like it happened a generation ago?

* Can a work of art be judged a success or failure by a critic whose frame of reference doesn't encompass the ability to appreciate / process / understand the work of art?

* What's the cutoff age for understanding irony? (In my experience, irony seems to have a self-contained 30 year "generation," give or take, which suggests that the basis of humor / irony 'shifts' every quarter century or so.)

* What are the artistic reasons to create something "in the now," vs. something of an indeterminate time? How does that choice affect the audience's experience today, or in 100 years?

* How do you assign merit for a collaborative work in which the author or creator is separated from the audience by a wall of actors, interpreters or players? In these cases, who determines where the success or failure of the idea's execution lies?

* What is an artist's proper recourse when an audience or a critic misses the point?

* Which of our current cultural touchstones will still be memorable -- or even recognizable -- in 20 or 50 years?

Thoughts?

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Saturday, September 22, 2007

Finally: A New Pittsburgh Play Worth Supporting!

Since my girlfriend is a theatre person, I see a lot more stage plays than I might otherwise. That's difficult, because Pittsburgh's theatre scene is regularly horrible.

Specifically, Pittsburgh fails to support new, envelope-pushing work. That's because 90% of its theatre-going audience are senior citizens, who prefer reimagined classics over anything that generates actual discussion or controversy. Thus, there's no audience for new works, so no one performs them, and therefore most under-40s in Pittsburgh believe that theatre is a medium that can't possibly speak to them.

Here's a play that will hopefully break that mold: David Turkel's "Key to the Field," being produced and performed by the Bricolage theatre group at 937 Liberty Ave. (Tickets $15 here -- don't worry, I make no commission.)

I saw it last night. It was wonderful, gripping, compelling and satisfying -- easily the best play I've seen in Pittsburgh in the past 2 years. Hopefully you'll agree.

I won't attempt to explain what the play is "about," because that's kind of the point -- this is a piece of art from which everyone will be able to draw their own conclusions. Double-casting, a non-linear narrative and a heavy dose of surreality create a story that's part modern allegory and part road trip nightmare. However, it's not so open-ended as to be aggravating for the more traditional theatregoers who require logic and closure.

Interesting side note: I originally saw "Key" during last year's Bricolage summer reading series, an annual (FREE) event in which 6 plays are read for an audience, one per month, to generate feedback for the authors. At the end of the reading series, the audience is asked to vote for the play they most enjoyed. The winner is staged by Bricolage the following year.

"Key" was last year's winner. It's almost entirely the same in most respects as it was during the reading, with a few structural changes that have tightened the plot and made the underlying themes more prevalent. IMHO, this is a great example of what can happen when a talented writer receives valuable feedback and applies his own common sense to the existing flaws in his story. With "Key to the Field," Turkel has produced a play he -- and Pittsburgh - can be proud of.

So, do yourself (and the city) a favor: go see "Key to the Field." Bricolage deserves our support, so they can be encouraged to continue creating new, relevant and engaging theatre. (And, if it works for them, maybe someone else will do it, too...)

Labels: , , , , ,