Under+Construction

Talley Cook 3/31/13 THEA2100H A Review of //Under Construction// I went into the play //Under Construction// very optimistic because I had heard so many good things and that it was going to sell out. However, to my dismay, I wanted to leave the theater in the middle of the performance. It seemed as though the playwright’s goal was to shock and offend the audience with the play’s transparency but I didn’t feel shocked, just annoyed that my time was being wasted. There were some good aspects, I wasn’t bored the entire time. But after leaving the performance I felt robbed of my time. I enjoyed the versatility of the set; the actors were able to accomplish a lot with such a small plain space. The casting was well done, each of the characters fulfilled a variety of different roles in each segment. I thought this showcased the actors’ talents very well. The writing was well done as well, all of the monologues were very real and genuine. However, there were parts of the play I felt could have been omitted. As the title suggests this is an incomplete work, so maybe the imperfections were intentional.

I think what didn’t come together for me was the lack of cohesiveness in the entire work. I understand that the playwright was attempting to juxtapose many different aspects of American life, but throughout the play I didn’t connect any of the segments to America. The only theme that seemed apparent was the disillusionment with the American Dream, but I didn’t feel like this theme came across very strong. Overall it was engaging as an experimental performance piece, but I prefer works that are more complete. Works that are more complete are able to introduce a topic and have it conclude as a theme or message rather than just having the audience infer from a mismatch of ideas.

For such a versatile play, a versatile set was needed. The actors made excellent use of all the props. It was easy as an audience member to imagine the scenarios they were creating with nothing but boxes and a few other items. It was great that some of the props, such as the sawhorse, were from a construction zone. The prop’s connection to the title is one aspect of cohesiveness that can be found in the play. The design also set the proper mood for the play. All the black paint and hanging plastic created a dismal environment. Even during the happy or funny segments, I felt as though there was something disenchanting about the whole thing. Like the actors were being sarcastic about their character’s happiness and life is all a cruel joke. I thought this came across particularly when the black actor narrates the sequence of a new couple going on a date. A typically happy encounter seemed somehow sad because of the drab scenery. I thought the set might have been a way for the play to get across the message about the disillusionment with the American Dream, but this theme didn’t feel as strong to me as it should have.

The casting for this play was well done. The breadth of characters in this work must have made it hard to select the proper actors, but I felt as though they did an excellent job. I was very impressed by the actors’ ability to transform into so many different people. The play really showcased their ability. At one point I was reminded of the Anna Duvere Smith video we saw in class because the actress was able to transition between different impersonations so well. In //Must Go Oo//, the characters seemed typecasted. Their off-stage roles were too similar to their onstage roles. However in this play, I have no idea what the actors are like offstage because they were able to transform into their roles so well. That is exactly what actors should be able to do. The actor who played the confident transvestite was also able to fulfill the role of an emotional artist. The actress who played a temptress with a lollipop was also able to act like a geek. I really enjoyed seeing some of the actor’s dancing abilities, even though it was in the context of a rape scene. In my opinion, the actors and casting were the strongest aspect of the performance.

The writing of this play was excellent at times and horrible during others. There were many segments that I just didn’t understand. I guess the goal of the play was to represent many different types of people so they had to be diverse but frankly I was offended during parts of the play. I can’t imagine what would happen if a woman with PTSD from a rape saw the performance. The scene with the man in the mask spinning the spotlight was terrifying. Although it was “real”, it was insensitive. Many people shudder even at the word “rape”. To represent it in a play is a very risky move. I was the most upset during the segment in which the man masturbates. I just didn’t appreciate 2 hours of my Wednesday night being taken up to watch a guy masturbate. I have better things to do with my time. For many of the monologues I would just zone out because they were so long, I had trouble focusing on what the actors were talking about. It didn’t really matter if I lost focus though, because 3 minutes later something else was going on and I couldn’t even remember what I had just seen. I probably only retained about 40% of the performance. Some of the monologues were good and I’m sure some audience members connected with the words, but I had a very hard time interpreting and understanding all the information that was thrown at me.

Maybe I missed something with this work because a lot of people really enjoyed this play. Experimental performance is a totally different world and although I’m glad I experienced some of it, I can safely say it is not my favorite type of theater. It is interesting to see something break the conventions of a play, but I think sometimes the conventions are necessary because they simply work. What would a story be without a beginning, a middle, and an end? I thought this play relied on the vulgarity and raciness of its content too much. It's easy to mix a bunch of random elements of life together and call it a profound performance, but it is much harder to develop a plot and characters that a wide variety of audience members can connect with. The play seemed to use vulgarity as a crutch. Without all the sexual elements of rape, masturbation, transgender, etc. there was nothing that profound. Overall, I was disappointed with the content.