The subject is dancing. Movement and rhythm,
choreography, suggestion, in other words all the elements that Western theatre
rarely takes into account in its relentless quest for realism.
First, a few words about Noir. Months later, I am
still surprised that people understood the purpose of all the dancing in Noir’s
preshow only at the end of the play. The preshow, completely devoid of audible
dialogue, established relationships between the characters through
choreography. The people in Night’s head – his imaginary sound guy and charwoman
and, later, the girls from the audience – formed relationships through dance,
came close and separated, changed partners often, invaded Night’s space, teased
him with their presence, disturbed the objects on his desk, exposed his
vulnerability, made him suffer. By the time the play began 30 minutes later, the
characters (and the actors) felt connected, the audience understood it was part
of a continuous show, a show that had begun before they entered the space of
the performance and was to go on long after, the world of Noir was already
established.
At the end of the play Angelica, the Angel of Death, danced slowly
on her way out, taking her victim by the hand, making the girl move with the
melody, leaving Night behind to contemplate his perfect solitude in the company
of an exquisite soundtrack. Described like this, the end of Noir sounds cold.
It wasn’t. Having experienced human contact (conversation, company) for the
first time in years, Night’s perfect isolation at the end is a life sentence.
He lives it because it is his life, because he has no other choice, because it
is his duty to stay alive.
This is the connection between Noir and Glissando,
between Night and Chehov (yes: I'm still spelling it my way), between the world of
the Steppenwolf and that of the playwright forced to work alone in the middle
of a crowd consisting of his cast, his crew, his family, his friends, his fans –
all clamoring to hear the new play, to see it produced, to watch it unfold and
take over their lives like a deadly and beautiful disease.
Because of this connection, dancing plays a huge
part in Glissando. I need it there, I need to show that the most intimate
connections are not established through dialogue but through movement, through
the distance or the proximity between the actors’ bodies, through gestures that
reinvent the language of passion, indifference or hatred, particularly when
these emotions (is indifference an emotion?) are suppressed, as things of an
internal nature often are in Chehov’s plays where unspeakable things unspoken scream
louder than any words.
At the end of Noir the public made a connection between
the dance in the preshow and Death’s seductive, rhythmic movements at the end. Relations
formed, and then were broken, only to form again “on the other side.” And the
spectators thought, this is how it all ends, all the hopes and efforts, and ambitious
dreams, and small misunderstandings, and grand love affairs: all it takes is a
wrong turn, an unpredictable gesture, and Death comes calling, and takes your
hand, and forces you into a rhythm from which there is no escape and no return.
So dance. Let go. Close your eyes and move with the music. Let go.
That’s what Chehov’s people do: they let go. It isn’t
freedom but abandon, a kind of quiet desperation (“this is your life; you have to
live it now”) which dance captures perfectly. Think, for instance, of the
deliberate, passionate rhythm of the tango; the mellifluous, continuous
movement of the waltz, the intimate tension of the slow dance. I want it all,
and I want it to signify, and I want the playwright to dance with the three
sisters as if they were one body, and I want all the complex, impossible
relationships that develop between him and his characters, between him and his
actresses to be captured in those movements. I love choreography. I love the
absence of dialogue. I love that it gives me the power to turn something
ordinary (an argument between husband and wife; a sexual encounter between
strangers) into a surprising interlude. A new language for the stage emerges
out of the movement of bodies in a particular space. It is that simple: the
space of the stage, a few silhouettes, and the distance or the closeness
between them. How difficult it is to let go. How nerve-wracking.
For the first time, we have a choreographer. Young,
kind, patient (in other words, the opposite of me). She works like me, though, in
narrower and narrower circles, sketching the movements, the entire scene, then
working on details, more and more focused. Where I frown and worry, she
compliments. In a little over an hour, the cast is dancing – four bodies working
as two – letting go, having fun. Will I ever learn to be this relaxed? Probably
not. But it feels great to work with someone who is…
There is much work to be done and months go by like
days, and I say, we have a year before the show, but that’s no longer true, and
I know that I’ll blink one day, and it will be May, and we’ve met only three
times so far. I panic. But then I remember Chehov and his female characters
moving with deliberate precision in the quiet of the room; I remember how
amazed I was at the ease with which the actors (my actors) took to choreographed
movement; I remember how much I love the process, and Chehov, and his unhappy,
resigned, and delicate people. And that’s when I close my eyes and let go.
No comments:
Post a Comment