Its Majesty the Market – part 2 – Theatre
Before even started writing this article I was aware of a danger that I would expose myself to. I know that some of you would not understand my reasoning when assessment of quality of artistic work in theatre and its relationship with the market is concerned. I also know that many of you would not agree with my opinions and maybe I will even draw anger of some of you on myself. No matter what, I must talk about this because I cannot pretend that I don’t see what is happening around me. Since I am actively participating in theatre life in China, I feel all the pressure of the market on my own work. The pressure is so big that it endangers not only my own artistic existence but the existence of other artists that share the same ideas with me, that have the same ideals and dreams about the arts but are unable to realize them due to this unbearable dictatorship of the Market. I can contemplate even deeper and argue that the Market itself is threatening the very essence of theatre art and is questioning the reasons of making theatre in general.
As I said in my previous article, in a culture that is market oriented, the quality and a criterion of success in the arts is measured by the success at the box office. The very reason why a performance is being produced is not a show itself but money that it can earn. Such a sweet word Show Business! Before entering a new production, every producer will calculate, examine, and estimate profit that a new production can make. Profit is the motivation of producing theatre. Without it, nobody would make theatre performances. In order to eliminate any financial risk and be sure to earn money, producers will do everything that the performance meets expectations and the taste of the Market and ensure that the audience will be pleased and thus willing to spend money. To achieve that, producers are following the beaten paths and keep producing the same old realistic style performances, staging already proved famous plays (mainly literary classics) in the realistic set up, choosing the stories that will provoke basic emotional reaction of the audience. Producers know that Chinese audience like to cry, so they are offering them sentimental, pathetic stories that are squeezing the tears of the audience along with their money. That is a proved safe path to success. No risks! No production problems! Here is the pattern:
- Famous script with emotional plot, preferably classic, or a relatively new play that was already proved on Broadway.
Recently, I was asked to propose some plays to a producer in Beijing. She asked me to propose plays that I have already directed somewhere else and that were successful. She wanted to be sure that she will not make a mistake, so the success of the performance abroad is a kind of guarantee. The easiest way to do successful production is simply copy and paste already existing performances or, in theatre for children, copy and paste Walt Disney movies, and the examples of this we can see all around.
2. Plays that don’t require paying copyrights and royalties.
3. Realistic set up
Realism is a mainstream in Chinese theatre. Although we can find realistic theatre in theaters across western world, especially in the US and the UK, it is incomparably different from the realism in China.
Realistic theatre in China still has the characteristics of the 19th century realism and is acting as if there is no century and a half gap between. European Modernism, Postmodernism, Post-Postmodernism, Post Dramatic Theatre, all those movements that radically changed the face of theatre in Europe, in China is called Avantgarde. Any attempt of theatre artists to do something different from realism, something that will move theatre art into the development and progress is declared avantgarde and as such moved from the mainstream into the off off off off scene. Of course, there are exceptions, so welcome in a 19th century theatre environment in China. Here I think about Meng Jinghui. His directions of Rhinoceros in Love and Tea House, the performances I was lucky enough to see, can easily stand as the excellent examples of European mainstream productions (the global success of the play Rhinoceros in Love by Liao Yimei is a proof of this statement), but in China it is called experimental or Avantgarde.
4. Pathetic and monumental music
5. Pathetic and highly emotional acting
Nevertheless, I must say that I really appreciate and like Chinese actors very much. There is some theatrical beauty in this pathetic way of acting, something that is bringing us back in the romantic era of acting with pathos, when theatre was based on emotions and not on intellect.
Let me give you two examples of Chinese good theatre practice, one for adults and one for children, that I witnessed in spring this year.
House Guest
House Guest written by Yu Rongjun (喻荣军) directed by Zhou Xiaoqian (周小倩) in the production of Shanghai Dramatic Arts Centre is an excellent play that deals with one theme in three different versions.
The idea to explore “what would happen if …” in three different versions is not at all new. While watching the performance, I instantly remembered Three Versions of Life (Trois versions de la vie; Life x 3), by the famous French playwright and an actress Yasmina Reza. In it, Ms Reza showed an awkward situation—a couple arriving a day early for a dinner party—working itself out in three different outcomes.
The play House Guest, regardless the inevitable comparisons and questioning the authenticity, deserve all the praises. As well as the Three Versions of Life, the House Guest also offers wonderful possibilities for actors. Zhou Yemang (周野芒) , Song Yining (宋忆宁) and Qian Cheng (钱程) grabbed this opportunity with both hands and created memorable roles.
However, it is not enough to have a good play and good actors to make a good performance.
On stage we see a face of a big house made in a hipper-realistic manner with a porch in front, table and chairs.
Through the windows of the house, we see that there is no back wall, but only few little elements that are signalizing existence of it. In the naturalistic setup, one cannot omit the back wall of the house. Thus, every experienced person in the audience knows instantly that something is wrong, that this is made by purpose, that something will happen with the house. In our theatrical jargon we call it “telephoning to the audience”. So, when later the house fell apart, and when all the elements of the house were dismantled and separated from each other symbolizing breakup, nobody was surprised. (By the way, we saw that so many times already in different performances before.)
This set design, this big house made in a naturalistic way, with all those realistic details, belongs to the aesthetics of realism and naturalism of the 19th century, and is completely inappropriate for the format and the style of the play itself. House Guest, as well as Three Versions of Life, is a conversational drama. In it, three characters are talking. Since there is no action, there is no need for big movements or big stage directions.
Yasmina Reza placed her characters around the table. They are sitting, drinking and talking. That’s it! House Guest, as well as Three Versions of Life is for a small, intimate stage where actors and play itself can be in focus. Even when it is performed on a big stage, like in National Theatre in London where I watched the performance, the focus was on actors around the table. Who cares about the house!
House Guest was directed in the manner of Stanislavsky directing Chekov at the end of 19th century. We shouldn’t do it like that in the 21st century! We shouldn’t put the new wine into the old barrel. We shouldn’t put a big shoe on a small leg. It simply doesn’t fit. Every content asks the appropriate form. Looking for the form is one of the duties of a director. Even when dealing with realistic drama, a director should look for the form that will represent sensitivity of time. The idea of “realism” on stage in the 21st century, after all theatrical movements in the 20th century, must be revised and adjusted.
The lack of directing ideas is obvious in stage directions too. Actors are standing in a geometrical arrangement — one on the left side, one on the right side, covering the big stage and talking to each other from 10 meters distance (luckily, they have microphones, so they don’t need to shout). The actress in the middle is walking in and out, left and write between two men, cleaning the table or doing some senseless movements, trying to bring some dynamics. There is no need for movement and artificial action though. We don’t need all this 19th century stage design and formal stage movements to fill the stage. We need three chairs and the table, but only if it is needed. That’s it.
But Its Majesty the Market demand a big stage and a big realistic setting that can impress the audience in a big venue with thousands of seats (of course: – more seats more money). When I told Yu Rongjun that there is no need for such a big and realistic setting, he told me that this setting is small and simple one comparing with what others are doing. When I told him that I don’t think it is a good performance, he answered me that it is very popular amongst the audience and that they are performing already four years in front of full theaters around the country. I stayed speechless and decided not to write about the performance because nobody would understand me. For the majority of people success on the Market is more important than the artistic purity that I am advocating.
Still, after many months, I decided to write about the performance, risking to provoke wrath amongst the majority of artists and spectators respectively. I decided to write having in mind this ingenious insight of Henrik Ibsen from his play The Enemy of the People: “The majority is never right. Never, I tell you! That’s one of these lies in society that no free and intelligent man can help rebelling against.”
Grandma’s poem
Also in spring this year I watched a beautiful performance for children《奶奶的诗》Grandma’s Poem directed by Li Siyao and produced by Ningxia Siyao Li Theatre.
In the announcement of the performance it can be read: 本剧脱胎于李思遥自己从小与奶奶一起生活的情感经历，这也是写给所有奶奶的一首诗 (The play grew out of Li Siyao’s own emotional experience of living with his grandmother, which is also a poem for all grandmothers.)
《奶奶的诗》Grandma’s Poem is indeed very warm performance with nice atmosphere, very good puppet and stage elements, with excellent manipulation of the puppet done by three puppeteers. Some excellent director’s ideas (that I missed so much in the House Guest) made a performance a little gem in the overall Chinese theatre for children. After so many Snow Whites made like a Disney cartoon, classical folk tales done in a realistic manner, moralistic stories that want to teach something, after so many abuses of technology (that I wrote about in my previous articles), finally I watched a performance for children that is made in a dignified way. Even when using technology (excellent idea with life video screening of the puppets in the manner of Katie Mitchel from the photo from Ms Julie above), Li Siyao is doing it in theatrical way, using technology as a tool not as a mean.
However, the performance has problems that are worth talking about.
For my taste, there are too many different stylistic elements, as if Li Siyao wanted to put all he knows about theatre in one show. There are some illogical dispositions of the stage elements and painful lack of dramaturgy. The most annoying to me, though, is Li Siyao’s fear that the audience will not like the performance. So, he is playing safe, doing everything to please the audience. As a result, the performance is too sweet, without strong and problematic points, sentimental and pathetic. The performance is screaming “Like me, like me!” Li Siyao is doing everything to bring tears on audience’s face, and he is succeeding in achieving what audience expect from theatre for children. The performance is dutifully fulfilling Its Majesty the Market’s wishes.
Regardless all this, I do like and appreciate the performance and I strongly support Li Siyao and his work. I see him as the one of few who can lead so necessary change in theatre for children in China in the future.
Working for the Market
Working for the market and following demands of the market is the main characteristics of the mainstream theatre not only in China. However, every market-oriented culture has a big and the same problem — there is no development in it. Look into the theatre in the US: – It is dead and thus unable to develop. As well as Chinese theatre. Development can happen only if the artists are allowed to take risks and try to do something new, to explore new horizons. Without taking risks there is no development and no arts. Development in theatre throughout the history was made by playwrights and directors who were exploring new and different possibilities of theatrical expression. That is the biggest problem of Chinese theatre – we don’t have enough good theatre directors, but we have too many greedy producers.
What should we do? I think the answer is obvious. We need to start education on all levels. We need better education of the artists, especially playwrights and theatre directors. We need to educate the audience. When theatre for children is concerned, I don’t think about education of children but of their parents. The biggest work, however, need to be done with general theatre policy and theatre funding. Theaters, and specially theaters for children, should not be at the mercy of the market. A transition from Market Oriented Theatre to the Art Oriented One should happen. The only way how it can be done is to change the structure of funding. In this desired different structure, artists would not serve the Market and producers’ financial ambitions, but the producers would serve the needs of the artists and create a market for artistic products.
It is a huge work to be done, but we all need to start working on it like 愚公, and maybe that’s how we can save the theater from inexorable death.
Ivica Theater Studio 