AHSU+LIFE+IS+A+DREAM


 * LIFE IS A DREAM**

The production was interesting enough. At least, during the entire play, my mind was certainly engaged, but for the wrong reasons. I entered the theatre not knowing anything about the play, just the name: __Life is a Dream.__ I also returned home from the theatre to use the Internet to figure out what the play actually entailed. I discovered that this production is based off a combination of two plays: __Life is a Dream__ by Pedro Calderon de la Barca, within the framework of another play: __The Marvelous Puppet Show__ by Miguel de Cervantes.

The director’s choice to use the two plays together was daring and unique, but overall, the production lacked real coherence and togetherness. The attempt to turn a serious play into a lighter comedy for the entertainment of the audience is commendable. After all, the majority of the audience is composed of college students, and comedy always adds to the entertainment of a piece, but the two works just did not mesh well together. The story was lacking clarity and rhythm. I spent most of my time just trying to figure out what had happened and who was who than concentrating on the play itself.

The characters and underlying situation were explained quickly in the first ten minutes of the beginning of Segismundo’s story within Strap’s and Boot’s story, and loosing me within those first ten minutes. In other words, I was overwhelmed by the overload of too much information. The four mothers quickly outlined the conflict of the story, arguing amongst each other, and then an attempt to comedy was made. They broke character to point out that it was impossible to actually participate in the story since they were dead, but they were going to anyways. This break in character disrupted my attempt to sort through the information I was just provided. The piece did not allow the audience to digest the situation before having more characters and plot shoved down our throats. There were so many characters introduced at one time that I didn’t figured out who was who or why there was conflict at all until near the end of the play.

The addition of the comedic parts did not add to the production, but caused unnecessary interruptions in the play, and breaking the rhythm of the play. Several times, the characters broke character in the story to make a side comment for a comedic effect. When Tara broke character to talk about Schrodinger’s cat, I found her comment to be an unnecessary and irritating pause to the play. The character added a paradoxical mystery for my already confused mind to think about.

Finally, the insertion of singing and dancing was extremely distracting and excessive. The production had no reason to add interpretive dances because they didn’t make sense within the context of the play. During the play I was left wondering why they were dancing instead of paying attention to what was being said. I eventually decided that the purpose of the dances was to serve as a transition between one story to the other. The businessmen and the one “audience member” were taught dance steps by Straps, Boots, Tara, and David, at the same time allowing them to transition to the pace of the story they were telling.

I did find the more minimalist approach to the set design interesting. This approach is a play on the trickery that Straps and Boots formulated: a machine that showed images only to people who became successful because of their own hard work. Since none of the other characters wanted to admit that they not all of their success was due to their hard work, they all played along to Strap’s and Boot’s ridiculous invention. They were literally “imagining” everything, just as the audience was left with the job of imagining the settings and props used. For example, when Tara and David are supposed to be playing background music, instead of an actual guitar and drums, the characters used an air guitar and a set of drum sticks, and played music that could not be heard, leaving the audience to imagine the situation.

This minimalist use of lighting and sound affects emphasized the use of “imagination” to trick everyone in the play. But, the decision of using a minimalistic approach to emphasize the “imagination” was an additional subtraction to the quality of the play simply because the actors did not do a good job of conveying the setting to the audience. It was hard to imagine the luxurious castle that Segismundo entered when it was only described with minimal emotions conveyed. The character’s amazement seemed fake and forced. There should have been sound affects like angels singing or a lighting affect such as allowing the character to enter from a darker part of the stage to help emphasize the magnificence of the castle to the audience.

The costume design also took on a minimalistic feel. Characters were represented by a simple dress or vest over their business clothes. Generally, during a play, I identify characters with a certain feature or clothing that they wear. Costumes help classify a character, and it separates that character from others. In this production, having costumes that were more defining would probably have been more beneficial because of the quantity of characters on stage at a time. At first glance, the costumes seemed very similar and plain, but after some thought after the play was over, I realized that the costumes were actually well planned. The gold linings on their vests defined royalty versus the joker’s vest, which was composed of rags sewn together. But, the fact that I did not notice this during the play did not help me since I realized the unique costume designs until after the play.

I found the approach to cross dressing fairly entertaining. In the production notes, the director mentioned using the moment of cross-dressing in the original work as an inspiration for her own production. I like how she casted the actual cross dresser, Rosaura from the original work, as her actual gender. In the original work, she becomes a man to disguise herself. In the production we watched, most of the males were females, and many of the females were males. For example, two of the mothers were actually male actors and Segismundo was casted by a female. But, the cross dressing did come with its awkward moments. When Segismundo supposedly rapes Rosaura, for example. For me, it was a weird situation to watch a girl “rape” another girl. I do question as to why there were so many extra characters in the play. I don’t think there was a need for all four mothers to be represented, or the servant that seemed to wish he were a main character in the play. He broke character many times to interrupt the story and monologue his own opinions about the story. These additions forfeited the overall quality of the play for a comedic effect.

The director’s approach to this production, adding flair and lightening the mood to an otherwise dramatic and serious production, is bold. But, the director seemed to sacrifice unity and coherence for entertainment and a minimalist approach. This sacrifice in turn affected the quality of the play as a whole. I spent the entire time sorting through my confusion and missing the rest of the play. I did not enjoy this play as much as I did for __The 39 Steps__ not because of the genre the original play was, but because of the attempt to force a dramatic production into a comedic mold.