Within the production I witnessed many aspects of which contributed to making a very effective production including the lighting, set, costume and performances. One of the features which I found particularly successful was the staging of the play, which although was very minimalist was very striking. The stage was one level and circular, with a stone eerie aqua blue colour floor, ornamented with stones at the rim of the stage. This striking colour enhanced the minimalism of the stage and a sheer lack of materialism one usually takes for granted in Western society, reflecting the poverty of the characters. In the middle of the stage was a prop of a table with the Aid prescription, significantly centre stage to reflect the action revolving around it and its power. This scenery did not give a sense of an actual place, which made us realise that the events of the play could be occurring anywhere The sharp colours were indicative of a sterilised environment such as a hospital, reflecting the “Aids homicide”. Each separate story was clearly indicated by a vivid projection of “Aids homicide” “The child soldier” and “Stoning Mary” clearly defining the separate stories to the audience. As I had standing position, the stones were within my grasp, submerged me into the action almost as if I myself represented one of Mary’s stoners. The costume complimented the stage; the wife and husband were dressed head to toe in one colour: the wife purple and the husband black. Their ego-selves were also dressed in one colour; the same eerie aqua blue of the stage. This accentuated their poverty; their lack of materialistic luxury and this once again reminded me of a sterilised environment.
Although the play had a very short duration and therefore the actors involved within the separate stories did not appear very often, all of the performances were particularly effective, some of which I shall outline. As the piece is set in a contemporary style, the acting performances required a less-naturalistic, and as it was a small theatre the actors’ projection and movements had to be very precise as the acoustics within the space picked up every sound.
Claire-Louise Cordwell played Mary’s hostile, aggressive, unsympathetic, hysterical and loud older sister. The main energy of her character was directed to feelings contempt towards her younger sister of which was immediately conveyed. Although she was diverting this anger in to a meaningless comment about Mary’s unattractive glasses, her vocal and physical abilities conveyed her loathing; and gripped her chair tightly she squinted her eyes at Mary keeping firm, uncomfortable eye contact, using the higher range of voice and spitting out the words in a fast-paced torrent. Her body language was very tense and stiff, leaning slightly forward towards Mary portraying her dominance as the free sister. Her contrasting behaviour towards her boyfriend was significantly portrayed;
Mary, the younger sister was played by Claire Rushbrook. Her character’s transformation within such a short period of space was very effective. She adopted a rough, working-class accent, fairly low-pitch and pace.At the beginning of her sister’s visit, her answers were almost monosyllabic, delivered in a quiet toned, disinterested voice, with a neutral facial expression. However, within her memorable speech about “bitches” Mary conveyed a powerful sense of desperation and despondency; at the beginning of the speech “what happened to the womanist bitches?” Mary began in a neutral tone, yet as the speech developed, her vocal dynamics increased significantly using the higher register of her voice and speaking through clenched teeth, reaching a climatic “Whadafuckabout them” which conveyed a sheer loss of control through such intense anger, screaming the words at an uncontrollable pace and clenching the sides of her chair very tightly with a visible shaking in her arms. The end of the speech returned to her quiet, neutral tone as if “Not one of them would march for me?” was more of a statement than a question. Her voice quietened and she looked down, unleashing a powerful sense of hopelessness which was clearly conveyed.
The broken relationship between the married couple in mourning for their son “the child soldier” was effectively portrayed by the two actors. The mother played by spoke in a high pitched, wailing voice, completely avoiding eye contact with her husband. Her posture was droopy; hunched shoulders and back and floppy arms conveying a strong air of despair. The father played by Alan Williams was continually trying to get at his wife; he would lean in close to her as if entering her mourning space, speaking in a light hearted, chuckling voice, with a cruel fake smile on his lips and his eyes boring directly in to hers, and mocking her agony.
Another aspect of which I found extremely effective was the relationship between the husband and wife’s alter ego’s. During the production, whilst the married couple were arguing the alter-ego’s stood there, exactly behind the couples adapting their exact body gestures.
I believe that the production was extremely effective through all the aspects of which have mentioned within this essay, and combined these elements clearly conveyed Tucker’s main message within the play; visually portrayed within the set and vocally enforced by the effective performances of the actors.
