Technically, it was more of a "year and a half" of absurdism... but who's counting, really?
When I was a senior in high school, we performed the play The Skin of Our Teeth by Thornton Wilder. Personally, I was a bit disappointed by this decision; this was going to be my last play in high school, possibly my last play ever. And instead of doing something fun, we had to do an absurdist play, which frankly was very very very confusing. For those who don't know, absurdist plays tend to highlight the absurdity of human existence through various theatre techniques. For example, many plays contemplate existentialism, the concept of destiny, and free will. Characters are often forced into strange situations, and often have little or no control over their circumstances. Communication frequently breaks down, and plots tend to be absurdly grand in scale or infinitesimally unimportant.
The Skin of Our Teeth was my first experience with absurdist theatre. I played the Stage Manager of the show… I wasn’t the actual stage manager, but as part of my role I had to pretend to be the stage manager to the audience. I helped the crew move set pieces on and off stage (a stone wheel, a mammoth and a dinosaur costume, a boardwalk, and several pieces of broken furniture just to name a few), and in the middle of the play I had to stop the show entirely for an out-of-character discussion with the people on stage. We broke the fourth wall by interacting with the audience and arguing with actors and actresses while they were in the middle of a scene. The whole thing was totally scripted, but it was convincing, and helped point out how the audience couldn’t simply be passive viewers of the show. But it was hard for me to really pretend to be the stage manager. Instead of being an actor, I had to convincingly portray myself as someone outside the play… despite the fact I was actually an actor. With my headset on, a radio in my pocket, and covered in black clothing, I tried my best to be as removed from the production as possible while simultaneously remaining an important part of it.
Then in my English class the same year, we read the play Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead by Tom Stoppard. The play was profoundly strange and funny at the same time. I laughed as Rosencrantz and Guildenstern tried with all their might to make sense of their situation as minor characters in Hamlet, while our teacher pushed us to think deeply about some of the concepts presented by Stoppard. If these two characters are simply acting on their own scripts, what’s to say we ourselves aren’t doing the same? What exactly is our purpose in life? Do we even have a purpose at all? Or is thinking about such things futile, since nothing in life is truly “a sure thing” or for certain. I still have my copy of the book at home, it’s one of my favorite plays.
For a scene from a movie adaptation of the play, click the link below:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-Sx4W2cKlU
The one thing I remember from both of these plays is exactly how confusing they both were. They were both left largely up to interpretation by readers and audience members, and the playwrights seemed to take extra steps to make sure everything was as ambiguous as possible. I was befuddled and bewildered at every moment, and just when I thought I was beginning to understand something… the entire play would change, leaving me in the dust. Surprisingly though, I did end up enjoying them. No matter how dark the material, or confusing the script, I have fond memories of these two plays.
Then, I went to college. And the very first semester at Purdue, I found another absurdist play: Waiting For Godot. So I decided to try and see this little gem; my mother had told me about reading the play while she was in college... she hadn't liked it. And frankly, after having seen it, I'm not sure I like it either. The entire play is based around two men who are waiting at a single, lonely tree for a man named Godot. They only meet a few other people in the entire play, and the rest of it is just them talking to each other. In the end, Godot never actually shows up.
Frankly, I felt cheated. I knew the play was simply meant to make us think, but at the same time... the whole point was to be waiting for Godot, and then he never shows up. Which makes the entire play pointless! And of course, that's probably what the playwright wanted us to feel, but it doesn't make me enjoy it anymore when it actually happens. The particular performance that I saw had the entire play set in New Orleans, after Hurricane Katrina. I have to applaud the actors for their performances; the play's words and hopelessness really take on new life when juxtaposed against the sad background of a flooded house.
Click here for a scene from the movie adaptation of the play, which shows the longest monologue I've ever seen performed in theatre.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uS5gU3-0giE
