The Trailer for The Wedding
A Behind the Scenes Look at The Wedding
The main premise of The Wedding was a 'revolution' against the rulers - bosses at work - by using the metaphor of a wedding. It certainly reminded me of the bourgeoisie of the Russian Revolution rising up against the rich - in this case the businessmen who are at the top of the 'food chain'. The similarities between weddings and work are simple - both are binding contracts for life or at least the majority of life. There were a variety of languages within the piece which meant that many of the lines were lost to me. However, this meant that I focused on the physical element of the piece which was quite easy as the performers portrayed their emotions through their movement and tone what they were speaking - this meant that the language barrier didn't impact on how I understood the piece. The variety of languages symbolised that the things that occurred within the piece could happen anywhere and brought a sense of unison whereby everyone around the world has the same goals and have similar lives.At the beginning of the piece, it seemed as though birth or childhood were being represented by people coming through a slide and landing on a mass of stuffed animals. I think that this represented how fleeting childhood and innocence are before people are forced into 'marriage' (work) especially as children are forced to work in less developed countries. Even children in developed countries work in schools which reduces the amount of childhood that people can have. The loss of childhood was shown in The Wedding by the person who initially came out of the slide - they immediately were given a wedding dress (which symbolised throughout the piece people being married to their job) and celebrated for having one. It seemed initially that work was going to be fun as those in a wedding dress were greeted with enthusiasm by the other businessmen but it soon transpired that business was ruled by those who had the most money. When people were first in the wedding dress, they didn't really know what they were doing in work and so were much more hesitant with their physical movement showing that they were inexperienced.
All the people who worked seemed to work for the same cause - bringing those who had recently worn wedding dresses into their workplace. Each person seemed really focused on achieving high status within the company except for those who started and joined the revolution which I will discuss later. To show status within the piece, different coloured briefcases were used - grey briefcases were given to the everyday workers and those with brown briefcases seemed to be managers and higher up within the company. This made for an unhealthy working environment where the workers were simply working so that they could get the brown briefcase.
There were three main story lines within the piece and they each focused on a different member within society who were all forced under the capitalist workforce that had been presented. One story focused on a woman who started the revolution; another on the first person that came from the slide who seemed to have it all - the job, a wife, and a good life - who ended up wanting a divorce from his job and wife; and a homeless refugee who was literally living out of a suitcase.
The story of the revolutionary woman (shown opposite) is potentially as follows. She seemingly wanted to escape from the life of work that she had been thrust into and during the peak of her desperation towards the beginning of the play had tried to climb back up the slide but had failed. This could show the want that most people have to return to their childhood to no avail as they have to return to work. However, when she did try to return to childhood, she encountered a yellow flower (which is displayed on her shirt in the image opposite) and pinned it onto her shirt. This showed that she was trying to rebel against her colleagues and her boss by showing difference to other people within the piece. Soon, she had an accomplice, another woman whom she pinned a flower to her shirt. It seemed that the two of them were different and was slightly suggested that the two were in a relationship - when the other woman decided to take off the flower, the revolutionary woman seemed to crumple and have her heart destroyed (metaphorically at least). In order to show this, the revolutionary woman slowly fell to the floor in an outstanding display of physical prowess. This woman seemed to be the only person to step out from her work bubble and when she did so the overwhelming noises that accompanied the piece were removed and the audience was allowed a slight break from the noise. As the piece began to draw to a close, this woman began to shout a speech through a megaphone. The speeches were in another language and although I couldn't understand the words that she was saying, I certainly felt what she was trying to convey which left me feeling empowered by her. The one thing that frustrated me about her character was that as the other main characters got closure with their respective partners, the revolutionary woman did not - or at least I didn't see her closure. I think that Gecko could have highlighted her relationship with the other woman a bit more towards the end. However, I do understand why they may have left it out.
The story of the man (shown opposite) who wanted a divorce from his job may be potentially as follows. I understood this story line more than I did the revolutionary woman's story. This was because this man, named Robin (I think) was speaking in English which made what he was doing a saying a lot more accessible to me. Up until about a third of the way through the play I had forgotten about this character because he was introduced toward the beginning and we didn't come back to him until he was fully invested in his work. One of the images that was the most striking is when symbolic objects were floating around (as shown in the image opposite) to show how Robin spent his days - we went through this sequence a couple of times which signified how how similar each day is when stuck under an oppressive regime such as work. Robin seemed to rise up in the ranks of his job very quickly, acquiring his very own brown briefcase but we soon began to see that he hated his job. When he decided that he wanted to quit his job, we saw him ask for a divorce - something that is usually associated with weddings. This brought the audience back to how weddings and jobs were both a contract and very similar. Robin was shown being suffocated by his job as he did a movement sequence coming out of the box that he was having a meeting in and pulling on his tie. This was a very strong image and could also signify how some people feel constricted and suffocated by their marriage as well as by their jobs. After this, the aforementioned image (as shown in the picture) returned but instead Robin was refusing to give in to his work. His wife didn't want him when he moved away from these symbolic objects but when the objects moved in front of him, she was attracted to him once again. This suggests that his wife was married to his job rather than to Robin himself. This created a rift between the two which was solved at the end when they were seen coming together again in a sweet moment. Robin's character was much more complex than the revolutionary woman's and I felt more connection to him than to her. However, I was much more attached to the next character, the homeless refugee.
Initially, the homeless refugee (shown opposite) was seen to be a humorous character and was a welcome relief from the complexity of what I had previously seen (which I hadn't yet figured out) which allowed the audience to grow a strong attachment to his character and subsequently his family. This character first appeared when he waved from inside a suitcase which I had previously not noticed on stage - as I didn't notice it immediately, it created a new meaning whereby people usually don't notice the homeless. Before the image shown for Robin, Robin had told the homeless refugee to move along, showing that those with money have no regard to those who are struggling to survive. It also shows that those with money don't want to get to know those who have come from another country. As I felt I had gotten to know this character, when his and his family's story was shown, I felt a deep sadness and anger at myself that I had not taken the opportunity to read up on refugee's stories. It seemed as though the character felt as if he could trust us because he was the only character who interacted with the audience throughout the piece until the end and he wilfully showed us his story. In order for his family to survive, this character decided to get a job and wore a wedding dress which his wife disagreed with. When he did get a job he was tormented and made to hold a gun by those in power which shows how the media portrays refugees as terrorists, making another political statement, perhaps about Trump's Muslim ban during his early presidency. This character's wife made a strong bond with the revolutionary woman and the two began a small dance together at the front of the stage where the suitcase was and where previously the revolutionary woman had gone to, to get away from work. This seemed to be the place where those in charge didn't look and didn't care about. Thus began the revolution headed by the revolutionary woman, helped by the refugees and somewhat by Robin later.Aside from the three main story lines, there were other images before, during and after the revolution that made an impact on me. For example, throughout the piece there was the reoccurring image of the big boss sat at a high rise table with rich food (and Trump style hair) whilst those on the other side of the table were clinging on the table. This brings trying to get a seat at the table a physical meaning. When the revolution occurred the boss was removed from the table, found to be on stilts and toppled over. The chaos in this is what made me think of the connection between the piece and the Russian Revolution.
After the revolution, everybody seemed to get along perfectly well and the stage seemed peaceful for the first time since the beginning of the piece. There was a sense of togetherness at the end especially as the performers sat and clapped a simple rhythm that I think they expected the audience to join in with. Although on this occasion the audience didn't join in, I certainly felt a connection between myself and the performers. I expected that something else would go wrong at the end but we instead were left with hope that a perfect society could exist if we all worked together and overthrew those in charge. This has been seen many times throughout history and could be seen as though Gecko were suggesting that perfect communism could work, but as humans we know that this wouldn't work and could suggest that we'll never get to this point. Although, as the piece was left open ended with hope, it suggests that peace could occur one day.
I personally loved the piece although it did take me a while to get used to the physicality. When I did, I could feel myself become enraptured with it and the characters within it. The piece made me constantly think about the meaning behind each physical movement and allowed me to use historical knowledge. At the end of the performance I felt instantly empowered and connected to everyone else in the room.
(Most images taken from the Gecko Instagram page. No copyright infringement intended.)
No comments:
Post a Comment