Сегодня открывается студенческая программа фестиваля «Балтийский дом»
Год назад во время XXI фестиваля «Балтийский дом» прошел 1-й фестиваль студенческих спектаклей «Театральный Фрэш». В этом году эксперимент будет продолжен. В программу включены показы лучших студенческих спектаклей европейских театральных академий. Главный критерий отбора постановок — их «характерность» для той или иной театральной школы, отражающая наиболее яркие тенденции театрального образования представленной страны. В программе представлены театральные академии Литвы, Польши, Германии, Франции и России.
Полную программу можно увидеть здесь.
О спектакле «Наваждение»/ Visitation
Based on works by Bruno Schulz developed by Anna Schweiger and Jutta Kriegsman and students from Ludwik Solski Academy of Dramatic Arts in Krakow and August Everding Bavarian Theatre Academy in Munich
Repetative breathing, a man made soundscape and dance like body movements performed of a group of about fifteen performers behind a semitransparent boby-nett curtain, interrupted by text fragments projected on the same boby-nett curtain of the Polish author and artist Bruno Schulz is what meets us at this production.
In this production we see both some very contemporary tendencies and some historical rooted means of expression. The production does not follow a linear dramaturgy or story, but are rather ritualistic in its approach or maybe even resonating a kind of number structure, where seemingly unattached dance choreographies, sound, light and projection is put together. It is not apparent whether we are to see the three elements as connected in any way or that they are all just singular responses put together to a ritual resembling structure. This withdrawal from narrative resonates a contemporary trend of creating atmospheric events rather than understandable stories. It is a piece that asks to be understood out of the atmospheres it creates, rather than its storytelling or spectacular effect.
In this regards I would say the performance is partly successful. The concept of having everything happening behind a curtain, like in an icon, also works against a total experience of the atmosphere in the production, putting me in a more analytical mood. But also from a critical position does this show contain some interesting elements of the history of expressive body movements used in theatre and dance. However it is difficult to say how conscious these citations are. Some of the movements makes one think of the choreographies of Foresythe, others the iconographic body intended by Jerzy Grotowsky, but also a lot resembling Laban work – with roots back to Isadora Duncan. This mix of influences makes an understanding of the will behind this production, and its view on Bruno Schultz difficult, however it helps creating an atmospheric environment, an atmosphere of desperately trying to re-create a self-expression and make meaning in a dark and ritualistic world.
The visitation, could be looked upon as either a naive student production inspired by the Polish poet Bruno Schulz, but also shows an sincere approach to develop a theatre based on moods and atmosphere. However its somewhat inconsequent approach is also this productions biggest challenge.
«Наваждение» Анна Швайгер и Ютта Кригсман.
Пластическая история в нескольких главах отнюдь не является иллюстративным сопровождением к тексту Бруно Шульца. Напротив, определить связь между действием на сцене и проецирующимся текстом весьма сложно. Всего два героя в небольшой инсценировке, сделанной студентами « Отец и я», и более десятка молодых юношей и девушек на сцене. Полуобнаженные тела, сплетающиеся в клубок, и рассыпающиеся по всему полу представляют собой тайный, болезненный мир отца. Обнаженные ноги, ломающиеся конечности- начало болезни. Болезнь отца в инсценировке выражена в форме постепенного превращения отца в таракана. Но ее проявление в постановке лишь косвенно напоминает нам о повадках насекомых. Единое» тело, масса тел в едином стремлении выполняет синхронно резкие движения. Выбившийся из коллектива исполнитель, подобно замкнувшему суставу, не поддается рефлексам единого организма. Звуковая партитура наполняет пространство криками чаек, дыханием, писком, шорохом шагов. Местами действие напоминает тренинги по сценической речи, или сценическому движению, что отводит зрителя от истории, позволяя воспринимать только эстетическую сторону постановки.
Через некоторое время болезнь отца начинает эволюционировать, а вместе с ней учащается ритм дыхания, движения тел. Множество голых спин, как кишащие мысли в полумраке. Резко перемещающиеся, и уже существующие по отдельности тела не сплетаются воедино. История изменения сознания, изменения физического ощущения. Размышления о материи и ее пределах в тексте, реализуются в спектакле при помощи постоянного телесного контакта на практике. Молодые тела застыли античными скульптурами. Сила и воля, сошедших с экрана фильма « Олимпия» Лени Рифеншталь в финале преломляются. Агония и безнадежность выражена через судороги- отрывистые движения, изнемогающее тело бьется об пол. И только финальная проекция, где зритель читает об отречении от отца, дает нам понять чрезвычайную субъективность взгляда повествователя. Ведь отец уже вовсе не отец, а насекомое, которое подобно Грегору из «Превращения» Кафки можно « обнаружить лежавшим брюшком кверху, с ощетинившимися ногами, с отвращением смести на совок и выбросить?» Треск, неприятное поскабливание раздается из глубины сцены, где люди, подобно множеству мелких насекомых стыдливо пытаются спрятаться, забиться в угол от ненасытного зрительского взгляда..
«Потеря равновесия»
The ship sinks while laughing
Review of the performance Loss Balance
I do not speak a word Russian, but this performance captured me and dragged me into the water of the submarine.
We sit in a very claustrophobic raw room, filled with the smell of the crowed of the people, with no way out. The submarine is sinking and one by one dies the submarine soldiers, drowning or dying in other grotesque ways. All of them under the command of an officer / a master clown of death. Their bodies is cut into pieces to fit in a small coffin, and sent home to their lovers, who have been waiting for the soldiers to come home alive. It all begins with an unknown man in a diving suit, arriving through the water – starting to disturb the balance. Throughout the performance is his role undefined; is he an officer, is he a soldier, is he Russian or is he from Japan? But somehow is it all connected.
The stage is a mix of the Japanize Noh-theatre stage and the inside of a submarine, shown by a big water pool. . Water is the central element of the performance creating a resistance for the performers. They are all caught by the water like a prison; the water is only way in and out. And the element is used to create both beautiful and ugly pictures. The staging combines the ritual, japanize theatre form with the world of the submariners, and representational theatre form, in a balance of a tragic story and an ongoing comic commenting. Not to forget is the soundscape of the water, folklore singing, and the traditional Noh-theatre music. The performance is driven by unpredictable actions and everything is in constant transformation, letting me join the performance without understanding the spoken language.
О спектакле «Грань»
Deadline
By Julius Paskevicius, directed by Tadas Montrimas (A student production from Academy of Music and Theatre in Vilnius, Lithuania)
With the piece Deadline, the Lithuanian director Tadas Montrimas brings reality and fiction into play and hence bringing the question of representation of authenticity forward in a politically loaded thriller about the misunderstood young man and the powers, in this play represented by a character playing the role of a police man, the other a psychiatrist.
Even though I could not understand any other words than “police”, “neo- Nazi” and “white man” – the situation was clearly an interrogation. Where the point of the interrogation seemed to be to sort out the mental health of the suspected boy. A conflict established by three different interests. The interest of the policeman was clearly to get the boy punished and put to jail, while the psychiatrist showed more of an interest in the boy and solving the question about his mental situation, while the boy his self seemed uninterested in the whole question about his crime and the fact that his mental situation was being investigated. Instead his main focus seemed to be telling stories about himself.
It is the storytelling of the boy, and his search to explain himself through different tools, confronted with the police mans unwillingness to let him do so, than makes up the conflict of the play, and present us, the audience, with the puzzle to solve. The result of this confession inspired session is highly dramatic, but also seems quite absurd.
As the show starts, the lights are still on in the audience section, as a Brechtian reminder that we, the audience, are not here to lean back and relax. The show encourages to reflect upon the theme and story unfolding on the stage. The simplicity of the stage consisting of a naked room, a table and three chairs is also a reminder that it is the words and the actors who are the important transmitter of meaning in this production. It is a “naked” or pure reality.
However as the show unfolds and the boy is aloud to tell his stories this is done in with parallel video projection on the back screen, red coloured light and a stylistic and playful acting style. The videos contains fragmented moving still images that are stylized through negative filtering, sepia corrections and multiplications – giving them a feel of youth culture and early grunge music videos as those of Nirvana. Hence opening up for that the boy has another and more youthful worldview and logic that drives him. The conflict is a conflict between two different ways of interpreting and communicating reality.
How the director and his group succeeds in this attempt is difficult to for me who did not understand the language to judge. Such presenting of two realities potentially brings up the question of authenticity on stage, however it also risks being potentially dogmatic and biased – and I do think, out of what I saw, that in this piece right and wrong in politics was not a question. The boy represented a younger and more inventive view of live, even though it was troublesome and misunderstood.
«Грань»
Rightful rightness
Review of the performance Deadline(ribos)
Director Tadas Montrimas
Scenographer Laura Luisaityté
Actors:
Valerijus Jevsejevas
Julius Paskevicius
Dainius Jankaauskas
One old table three chairs and a big white background canvas. There is not much to say about scenography. The story shown is easily told as well. It is about a young man caught because of a crime his made, caught in his own will to change society, and throughout the play caught between two of societies watchdogs — both very stereotype characters. The authoritarian and angry policeman making sure that he is in power and that the young man will get the hardest punishment for his crime. The Psychiatrist, who on one hand wants to understand why and help the young man as much as he can, and who on the other hand is suppressed by the policeman (/ society) and forced to punish the rightful mind.
The young man argues for his case and how he wants to change the world, in flashback supported by bad video/motion-picture projections with an old fashion finish. But nothing really changes. There is no suspense to carry us through the talking. They have tried to use composed movements to accompany some of the talking, but in the play it only makes me ask why – why does a knock of a fist turn into a chain dans. I get a sense that he talks and talks about rightness. And that the idea of rightness is put into a binary position right/wrong, but also a clear privilege of what kind of values within rightness that is right. This becomes the main problem for this performance. It has closed itself around its one sense of rightness that it forgets to involve its audience. We get choked in their values of rightful rightness and the reflection upon how rightness is in our society fails to happen within the play.
О спектакле «Грань»
Review of Deadline at the Baltic Theatre House
The play Deadline by Theatre Fresh offers the audience a story about a young idealistic man, who ends up killing his mother because she deceives and lies to him. Throughout the story he fights a struggle with the people around him, trying to find justice and like-minded people. The story raises questions like, “How can we trust our loved ones?”, “How do we know what is good or bad and right or wrong?”, and “What kind of society do we want to live in?”.
The play is build as a retrospective montage between scenes in an interrogation room, where the young man is being questioned by a police officer and a psychiatrist, and scenes from the boy’s memory of how he came to be in this mess.
The scenography is simply decorated with a table and some chairs in the middle. Behind the scene is a white sheet, which is used for projection of different images, setting the space and its location throughout the play.
In the second scene, the young man tells the story of the skinheads. On the sheet behind the scene, there is a montage of different images of a bear-like dog, at first barking viciously and then wagging its tail sweetly – Showing the double side of a dogs instincts and at the same time commenting the skinheads. While this projection is showing, the two skinheads are standing in a pose of muscular masculinity, and standing rigidly, talking with deep and angry voices. The boy is obviously trying to reason with them, however not succeeding.
This scene is an example of the very exaggerated acting style, which to me was a sign of the very strong intention of moralizing the theme of the play. The exaggerated style could have had a comic impact, however in my point of view, this was not the case. Instead I am annoyed with annoyed with the excessive yelling, the overly clear divisions between the good and the bad people.
Changing the scene from the skinheads to the interrogation room, is once again done with very little aesthetic sensibility, being abrupt and awkward.
The play is very clearly intended to be didactic, while addressing the younger audience, to whom these existentialistic questions are expected to matter. My question is: How do you teach someone a lesson, without being instructive?
О спектакле «Грань»
Review of Visitation
Moving the body
Concept Anna Schweiger, Jutta Kriegsman
Behind the text, behind the body, a big black veil divides us from the world of the stage creating an isolation of the performed. It is a physical performance starting by creating images of legs in a small stripe of spotlight on the floor across the stages – the light stripe is gradually filled with more and more legs, moving slowly beautifully growing together, but where legs no longer comes in pair. The veil is used to project text of the polish writer Bruno Schulz. Within the performance it is connected through associations of a word in the text express in movements and sound, like bird and cockroaches. The aesthetic of the performance associate the German expressionistic dance theatre, many of the images they create reminds me of Piña Bausch. They are mostly working with the formation; group minus one. Some sequences unfortunately have a tendency to look like a gymnast show. No doubt that the performers have control of their bodies, but the solo movements often because the cliché of modern dance. The strength is their group images here I feel a strong energy, and when we get to see the movement of bones and muscle underneath the skin – disgusting, but yet very beautiful in the blackness of the space lighted up by spotlight.
I never get behind the text, the ritual is performed but I stay unchanged. It seems as if the creating of the performance have been missing the eye from outside, the momentarily beautiful ugliness never really touches me. It is as if the formations and overaestheticizing have detained them from seeing the potential that lies within. I live the space not with reflections of formations, but of the poetics of the text and one lust to come behind — underneath the skin.
Documentary theatre
The performance starts with a distant-taking from the actors, where they annonce who they play in this dokumentary performance.
The main caracter, the killed anti-anarcist is constally present on stage, but as a skelleton,
Placed in the middel of the actions.
The other caracters, the mother of the victim, the girlfriend, the killer, and his mother tells their story, both from the day of the tragic action, and from life before and after the day i question. The actions comes in a uncronological order, but is thoroughly explained to us, and I have no problems in following the story.
The performance mix traditional storytelling, with livecam on stages, where all the caracters are filming each other, and by that underlining the emotions, and some authentic video-material. Both the two last mentioned are projekted on different canvas on stage, and in the room as a whole. I experience the cameras and projektions as telling, not just showing, in its focus. At one point the image of the two mothers are projekted in layers, with both the faces showing. In the girlfriends story about on specific metro trip, the camera creates an metro-atmosfeare, to mention a few.
The elements on stage, the scenography and the props are all reused in differente images and contexst, in a rather elegant way.
There are, all in all, many things that function in this performance. At the same time I find the performance somewhat problematic in its one-sided emotional focus. The emotionally charged camera, the emotionally charged projektions, and the emotionally charged text bringes eac other down, rather than function together. Not to mention the authentic testemonies at the performance ending. We see some breaking with this in the Stylized shooting-scene, but its just not enough. I wish the performance would create a more dynamic universe, with other means than the emotional charging.
О спектакле «Грань»
Deadline
I Will start by describing the stage, and my assosiations arond it,
Then say something about the positions and relations between the three caracters, where I see three differente projekts or discurses. Then I will adress the accuseds story, as some sort of intermezzo, between the very clearly defined positions at the begining and the sorti of the performance.
I Will more or less follow the storys cronological order.
The stage is minimalistic decorated, just a simple table and tree chairs. In the small stage, the teatrical mecanismens are visible for us. The ropes and wires, togheter with the minimalism makes the room appeare somewhat temporally, and one may assosiate it with an wartime arbitrary room. No one of the caracters seems to belonge there, any more than the others.
At first, when we meet the tree differente caracters, the «criminal», the policeman and the psychiatrist, the fictional universe seems realistic, and the positions clearly defined. Almost to clear.The accused claimes his innocent, the psychiatrist seeks to decide wether or not the accused is mentally ill, and therefore cant be jailed, and the policeman doesnt belive in other types of criminal treatment besides jailtime. All the three caracters are resived as stereotypes, in both their costymes and theire gestic language.
The tree differente projects seems inpossible to combine, and the three characters doesnt speak the same language. The stage becomes a battlesone between psychologi and the militaristic, while the accused takes some sort of underdog position. This stabiliti changes as the actions unfoldes, but only temporally.
After a verbal battle between the two, the accused tells his story. And from this point he is no longer just the subject of two others project, but controlls the stage, and his story is projektioned, and illuminates the stage.
Its rather unclear wether the actions in this secvense are real or not, or if its some sort of inner world of the accused we are witnessing. The projektions and the story has a more or less clear narrative and cronologi, but at the same time the rules of the fictional universe changes, and I therefore describe it as some sort of intermezzo.
After this «intermezzo», the positions are back to normal, and the performance side-taking are still very clear, and leaves little up to the spectators to consider.
After the verdict, the policeman and the psychiatrist is engaded in a fight, and as an testemoni of the discurse barriere, the psychiatrist turns to the only ways of making a point understandeble for the policeman.
О спектакле «Мамочки»
Примитивный и пошлый; грустный и несмешной. Таков, на мой взгляд, студенческий спектакль под названием «Мамочки» («Мommies»). Уже приторностью отдает. Играть на материнских чувствах может каждый, здесь много ума и умения не надо. А вот сделать это тонко и изыскано – дар. Дара этого я не обнаружила, как не обнаружила и хорошей актерской игры. Здесь каждый пытается выделиться, показать себя, но толку от этого мало.
Спектакль идет на небольшой сцене, поэтому зрители сидят очень близко, почти вплотную к происходящему. Им видны мельчайшие детали спектакля, его погрешности. Еще лучше ощущаются откровенные недоработки и пустые пространства, возникающие на протяжении действия. Вот на авансцене стоят два ящика, похожих на перевернутые большие школьные парты. В них как бы живут четыре женщины, но это больше похоже на бездомное существование. Матери потеряли на войне своих сыновей и теперь пытаются найти их тела, чтобы захоронить. Это – первый, земной план спектакля. Второй, как несложно догадаться, небесный, куда переместились погибшие солдаты. Их форма и ботинки белые, только волосы не перекрашены. И обитают они на крыше тех домиков, где живут их матери. Планы попеременно меняются, и зритель видит земное и небесное существование героев.
На этом режиссерские находки заканчиваются. Дальше – игра на материнском сознании, у кого оно уже имеется, и на солдатских лирических отступлениях под акустическую гитару. Бессмысленные и необоснованные женские истерики, визги, крики, которыми наполнено действие, лишают желания думать о спектакле. Претендуя на психологизм, режиссер не доводит до конца ни одну линию, бросая на половине. Вставляя скупую неживую музыку, состоящую из электронных вариаций на советский мотив, он вызывает к ней только отвращение. Кажется, что логична в постановке исключительно последовательность, с которой персонажи умирают. Смерть вообще сложно как-то остановить или предвидеть. Остальная композиция — полная режиссерская произвольность.
Хочется надеяться, что это еще не завершенный спектакль (хотя в программке написано, что дипломный). И ему предстоит большой творческий рост. И с той темой, которую он затрагивает, будет проделана кропотливая и аккуратная работа.
О спектакле “Грань”
In the performance we have a conflict between a young man and some of the authorities of his society; the police, the church and a psychiatrist.
The young man obviously has different ideals than what seems to be the norm in his society and has therefore fallen in to trouble.
The performance is from the Academy of Music and Theatre in Vilnius and the language spoken on stage is Lithuanian. The Russian spectators are equipped with earphones for Russian translation and for people from other countries there is a summary written in English.
Through the summary we are being told what to feel about the treatment of the young man. And the performance clearly chooses side in this conflict that possibly is a real conflict for young people in Lithuania.
So before entering the theater room you already have a lot of information about the story and therefore one would have expected maybe a stronger visual layer to the performance maybe the style of performing could have broken with some old theater traditions just to follow the theme of the young braking with authorities.
In the performance we weren’t presented with much extra additions to text, there were some projections and “jumping” in time, but the function of this didn’t really come to it’s right.
О спектакле “Наваждение”/ Visitation
This physical performance is a collaboration between German and Polish theatre students, based on the stories of Polish-jewish writer Bruno Schulz who was killed by Nazi’s during Second World War.
In front of the stage is a see-through curtain, though it is distorting the view depending if the light comes from behind or front.
With this curtain the performance is able to control the spectators view. Most of the time it wants to show us things from this magical world and a few times we have projections on the curtain with the text of Bruno Schulz commenting on the world behind the curtain or in this “box” full of cockroaches.
The tempo and rhythm is highly in focus and most often the music seems to lead the performers’ actions. The music or sounds are a kind of Dadaistic or futuristic playing with voice, like the vocal works of Duchamps or scratching and rattling with materiels.
With repeating movements, different use of breathing and voice, the bodies, there is 12 of them on stage, also constructs a rhythm.
Sometimes we see an individual breaking free from the big organism, it can be in doing a longer or new sequence of movements, being slightly behind or ahead of the others.
In this way the performance builds up a flow.
The flow is going pretty much in the same tempo and towards the end the performance tries to add something more, high pitch sounds and talking from the performers but we are kind of disconnected with it.
Sometimes the formation of the bodies on stage are abstract, when we in the beginning only see feet move and dance in a line of dim light and it’s difficult to tell the apart, other times we see clear images of for example birds flying in “V” formation and also these images appeals to our aesthetic sense.
The performance deals with theme of control or loss of control.
The performers control their bodies and it is obvious that they have clear instructions in how to move, the body is not strange to them it doesn’t do unpredictable moves.
Also concerning the relation to the audience the performance is in control, the performance is safe behind it’s curtain, maybe too safe.
The part were it seems to deal with loss of control is only in connection to the Schulz texts were the father could be seen as somebody who isn’t in control of his mind.
At the very end more text from Schulz is fragmentarily presented to us and the words “strange ritual” and “Cockroach ceremony” shows on the curtain, but it is unclear what the performance wanted us to do with this closed ceremony.
О спектакле «Потеря равновесия»
A lot of people stuffed in to a little room, the ceiling is hanging very low, the audience sitting on two sides (in a 90 degree angle) of a pool of water.
The room is overcrowded of spectators and the air is warm.
A mini version of a classical japaneese stage is raised 1,5 meter from the ground on opposite sites of the spectators.
4 samurai prisoner mimers are sitting on their knees on the side, a black and white backdrop portraying a simple version of a rose tree and in front of it a general or captain is sitting with a drum.
Because it takes some time to get all the spectators in to the room there is time to sit and construct all kind of stories and relations to the themes of asian or japaneese culture, the military, prison and weightlessness.
A diver in full divers equipment appears from under the water, exhausted and fighting to get out of the heavy diver suit. Feel the claustrophobia inside the diver suit.
What is apparently an officer finally comes out of the diver and just after that the general commands the 4 soldiers and the officer in the water to march on the spot.
March rhythm eagerly directed by the general.
There is being build up more heat and energy in the room.
A private samurai falls to his death. Water splashes on the audience.
We new it would and was looking forward to it but also feared to get too wet.
Several stories are being told on the narrative level and when not speaking Russian it’s difficult to understand if there is a main story on the narrative or text level, but because the performance is adressing the audience on a sensoric level; all the people in the room using all the oxigen, the increadible heat in the room, I believe the performance transfers some of the themes and intentions through this sensoric relation with the performance.
From the director of the play, we learn, by the papers handed over to the audience, that this is a play about ”a hero of infantile openess” who crosses forbidden boundaries, and that it is designed for a young segment with ”a truth seeker temperature”.
The play consist of a very transparent form of real-time scenes set in an investigators office where the set design is very minimalistic, and flashback scenes where chapters of the commited crime is told, and where the audience is invited to cross these intended ”forbidden boundaries” in to the heroes mind. It is constructed out of the same formular with no surprises or perceptible development what so ever: first a scene from the office, where the power constellation is more than clear — the policeman is controlling the room in an agressive manor, while the clumpsy shrink tries to understand the young man and then; the light turns red, the acting style changes with the policeman and shrink transforming into opponents of the hero. Either shrill as the ladies on the bus, dum like the skinheads or manic as the priest, accompanied by videoart underlining the theme of the collision. This is a hero whose infantile openess only gets resistance from two-dimensional caricatures which I cannot imagine could trick the truth seeker temperature of the (attempted young) audience craving for justice. It is set to be a play where ethics and moral is questioned, but instead it becomes a juvenile attempt to moralize with stereotype characters.
О спектакле “Грань”
With the piece Deadline, the Lithuanian director Tadas Montrimas brings reality and fiction into play and hence bringing the question of representation of authenticity forward in a politically loaded thriller about the misunderstood young man and the powers, in this play represented by a character playing the role of a police man, the other a psychiatrist.
Even though I could not understand any other words than “police”, “neo- Nazi” and “white man” – the situation was clearly an interrogation. Where the point of the interrogation seemed to be to sort out the mental health of the suspected boy. A conflict established by three different interests. The interest of the policeman was clearly to get the boy punished and put to jail, while the psychiatrist showed more of an interest in the boy and solving the question about his mental situation, while the boy his self seemed uninterested in the whole question about his crime and the fact that his mental situation was being investigated. Instead his main focus seemed to be telling stories about himself.
It is the storytelling of the boy, and his search to explain himself through different tools, confronted with the police mans unwillingness to let him do so, than makes up the conflict of the play, and present us, the audience, with the puzzle to solve. The result of this confession inspired session is highly dramatic, but also seems quite absurd.
As the show starts, the lights are still on in the audience section, as a Brechtian reminder that we, the audience, are not here to lean back and relax. The show encourages to reflect upon the theme and story unfolding on the stage. The simplicity of the stage consisting of a naked room, a table and three chairs is also a reminder that it is the words and the actors who are the important transmitter of meaning in this production. It is a “naked” or pure reality.
However as the show unfolds and the boy is aloud to tell his stories this is done in with parallel video projection on the back screen, red coloured light and a stylistic and playful acting style. The videos contains fragmented moving still images that are stylized through negative filtering, sepia corrections and multiplications – giving them a feel of youth culture and early grunge music videos as those of Nirvana. Hence opening up for that the boy has another and more youthful worldview and logic that drives him. The conflict is a conflict between two different ways of interpreting and communicating reality.
How the director and his group succeeds in this attempt is difficult to for me who did not understand the language to judge. Such presenting of two realities potentially brings up the question of authenticity on stage, however it also risks being potentially dogmatic and biased – and I do think, out of what I saw, that in this piece right and wrong in politics was not a question. The boy represented a younger and more inventive view of live, even though it was troublesome and misunderstood.
Был 11 октября на спектакле «Мамочки» ТИ им. Бориса Щукина, показанного в рамках 10 фестиваля «Балтийский Дом».
Автор В. Зуев, режиссёр В. Терещенко.
Если сказать, что понравился- то ничего не сказать…
Спектакль потясает! Пронзительный, светлый, попадающий в самую душу…Честно и просто, от самого сердца к сердцу актёры проживают историю о любви матери к сыну…
Полное единение актёров на сцене и зрительного зала. Над сценой и зрителем создана была удивительнейшая атмосфера любви, щемящая сердце атмосфера мечты по любимым! Актёрский ансамбль существует тонко по существованию и мощно по воздействию. Не возможно выделить отдельно игру актёров, тон, музыкальную и световую партитуры. Всё спаяно композиционно в «действенный сплав». Редкий для Москвы спектакль, поднимающий тему о самом главном в жизни каждого человека- о всепоглощающей любви матерей и их детей. Спектакль — «крик ангела», призывающий к возврату к себе настоящему, сдирающий с души «налёт» чёрствости и грубости, «налипающей» в нашей жизни очень! Такие спектакли не смотрят, они воздействуют и создают душу…Спасибо создателям этого целостного художественного произведения!
И мне немного жаль, что устроители фестиваля показывали этот спектакль на малой сцене. Для некоторых сомнительных анти- художественных действ (спектаклями которые не возможно назвать) были предоставлены прекрасные залы Балтийского Дома, а для действительно художественного высказывания была орг. комитетом дана столь малая площадка малого зала. У таких спектаклей много друзей и много врагов. Дай Бог всем создателям спектакля мужества, здоровья и мудрости в этой войне с делитантами от театра! Приезжайте ещё в Питер!
Кто хочет править бал???
Сон сознания порождает демонов…
Сразу оговорюсь, эта статья (письмо) – ответ, на с позволения сказать «рецензию» Лилии Шафранской, опубликованную в электронной версии «Петербуржского театрального журнала» о проходившем в городе на Неве в рамках фестиваля «Балтийский дом», в программе студенческих спектаклей ТЕАТРАЛЬНЫЙ ФРЭШ 2012. Точнее на спектакль «Мамочки» по пьесе В.Зуева в постановке В.Терещенко. Работа выпускников режиссерского факультета Театрального института им.Б.Щукина. (http://ptj.spb.ru/blog/teatralnyj-fresh-2012/ — ссылочка на этот опус)
Не буду говорить о художественных достоинствах спектакля-лауреата фестивалей, конкурсов и смотров. Есть статьи, рецензии, да мнения простых зрителей. Есть благодарности тех самых «мамочек» и их, к счастью, вернувших «деток». В общем, не о том хочу говорить.
Смотрите что пишет, юное (как мне кажется вообще студентка) дарование критической мысли Шафранская:
«…Примитивный и пошлый; грустный и несмешно. … Уже приторностью отдает. Играть на материнских чувствах может каждый, здесь много ума и умения не надо»…
Чувствуете экспрессию… а точнее агрессию… а точнее ненависть?
Продолжим следить за мыслью автора:
«…на авансцене стоят два ящика, похожих на перевернутые большие школьные парты. В них как бы живут четыре женщины, но это больше похоже на бездомное существование…
… погибшие солдаты. Их форма и ботинки белые, только волосы не перекрашены…
… Дальше – игра на материнском сознании, у кого оно уже имеется, и на солдатских лирических отступлениях под акустическую гитару…
…Вставляя скупую неживую музыку, состоящую из электронных вариаций на советский мотив, он вызывает к ней только отвращение…»
Заметьте, отвращение!!!
И только в финале, о, чудо, мы видим слово – ТЕМА…
«…Хочется надеяться, что это еще не завершенный спектакль …И ему предстоит большой творческий рост. И с той темой, которую он затрагивает, будет проделана кропотливая и аккуратная работа…»
Так что ж так взбесило Шафранскую, в чем же тема ее критического наблюдения, какова природа конфликта с увиденным на сцене…
<...>
Я не зря выделил слова «тема» и «конфликт». Список терминов и понятий театроведа, да и любого журналиста пишущего о театре или спектакле намного больше, но даже эти, как явление, в словарном запасе Шафранской отсутствуют. А стало быть, нет владения методом критического разбора, с позиций которого следует подходить к произведению сценического искусства, а значить – и речи не идет о профессиональной подготовке.
<...>
С профпригодностью разобрались (интересно кто учил или учит это «чудо»), теперь о человеческой поразмышляем, конечно же по отношению к театру (искусству).
Итак, конфликт.
Внимательно прочитав даже те небольшие выдержки из текста Шафранской, приведенные мною выше, становится понятно – вся острота «критического пера» (читайте – лепета) направлена против одного – темы спектакля. Да страшной, да не простой, но мощной, обличающей. Против попытки разобраться как подобное могло произойти в стране братских народов, в цивилизованном обществе на рубеже тысячелетий. Найти человеческое в нас самих, разбудить лучшие чувства и дать надежду. Вот такие немудреные тревоги мысли драматурга и авторов спектакля покоробили Шафранскую.
Странно? Ни капельки.
Это не первая и думаю не последняя оголтелая нападка на попытки вернуть в театр идейное содержание. Тронь тему Беслана, Цхинвала или Чечни и тут же<...>орут про «пиар на крови». Этим с позволения сказать специалистам по этике и в голову не приходит, что кто-то может чувствовать свою личную сопричастность, ответственность, не может остаться в стороне. Для кого-то это – болевая точка, или иначе говоря – тема. Которой зал состоящий кстати, и к счастью, не из «переформатированных» элементов, а нормальных людей сочувствует и сопереживает.
И вот здесь, как мне кажется и находится причина конфликта: ну, неспособны некоторые существа на простые чувства, нет того дара, таланта или способностей, называйте как хотите, что бы создавать художественные образы, а потому и творцы, и те кто нуждается в истинных произведениях искусства становятся ненавистны. Любая попытка доказать, что я не хуже – становится провалом. Остается одно – эпатаж и провокация. Ну, и конечно, уничтожить, растоптать, «переформатировать» все, что может выявить разницу между истинным и поделкой. Вот откуда такая агрессивность.
А самое страшное, что теперь эти «недохудожники» называют себя и свою деятельность – современным искусством. По сути же являясь больными, искореженными завистью, с одной стороны к талантливым, а с другой к успешным (куда ж без «бабла» в современной потребительской идеологии) представителям, в нашем случае, театрального мира.
<...>
P.S. И, кстати, «Мамочки» — это не придуманное автором или постановочной группой, «приторное», с точки зрения Шафранской, определение отчаявшихся женщин. Именно так называли матерей, разыскивающих своих пропавших сыновей-срочников и свои — «федералы», и чеченские сепаратисты, отдававшие дань уважения силе и мужеству материнской любви!
Алексей Козлов
Актер, режиссер, редактор журнала «Театральный Вестник»
Многоуважаемый Алексей Козлов!
Обратите, пожалуйста, внимание, что у Лилии Шафранской не статья, а КОММЕНТАРИЙ к посту об открытии фестиваля.
Мы проверяем комментарии только на предмет ненормативной лексики, троллинга и откровенного хамства, с которыми боремся.
Мы приветствуем всячески театроведческий анализ в комментариях, но он не обязателен.
Ответственности за этот КОММЕНТАРИЙ, еще раз обращаю Ваше внимание, мы не несем.
С уважением,
редакция
Уважаемая редакция, полностью понимаю и разделяю Вашу позицию… Ни слова в Ваш адрес мною не написано.
С Уважением, Алексей Козлов
К сожалению, здесь текст статьи промодерирован (цензурирован)… полный текст — на моей странице в Фейсбуке…
Уважаемая редакция, прошу оставить ссылку на страницу, т.к. читатель имеет право ознакомится с текстом полностью, и составить свое мнение…
с Уважением, Алексей Козлов
Редакция не оставляет ссылку, т.к. правила едины для всех.
Повторяем: троллинг и откровенное хамство вырезаются.
Браво Анализу Козлова! Шафранская — полный дилетант. Видел «Мамочек» Щукинцев в Екатеринбурге и в театре на Таганке, где они играли этот спектакль 2 года. Потрясающий спектакль, стоящий в одном ряду лучших спектаклей в мире по воплощению стиля автора и по эмоцианальному воздействию на нас, зрителей. Спектакль, прославляющий русский театр! Как говорят в Щукинском институте: за 2 года «Мамочки» стали лауреатами около 10 международных театральных фестивалей — этим гордятся Щукинцы. А мы зрители, рады, что появляются такие спектакли, которые «не по зубам» дилетантам от театроведения, так называемым шафранским, которые не только не читают пьес, но и просто малограмотны и необразованы. Браво, Щукинцы!