Sleep No More Changed Theatre (And You can too)

Today we discuss a spirit jam:

"How do you see 'the theatre of the future'"

The idea of a "theatre of the future" is a tricky one.
What would it look like?
Would it have cooler designs?
Better interfaces?

More impressive/realistic projections?

Be terminally consumed with comfort?

In order to engage with this idea, I would contend we need to think less about a "theatre of the future"
Because I believe theatre is of the now. This. The present this.
There can be no future for theatre; it is dying even as it lives, much like all of us.
So there is no future theatre to which we can speak.
Instead, I would suggest that we discuss "the future of theatre."
That can be guessed at, hinted at in our present time.

With that in mind:
I believe the future of theatre is moving further away from the idea of comfort, emulating cinema and their palaces of comfort.
We cannot compete

Cinema

Cinema has supplanted theatre as a means of entertainment:

• The seats are luxuriously comfortable
• The ticket is always a fair price point (usually under $10)
• The food is convenient and allowed into the theatre proper

Theatre has very little of that these days.

• The seats are usually fold out or worse.
• They are often cramped being a hundred years old.
• The tickets sky rocket to $25-250.
• Food and drink are highly discouraged.

In almost every respect theatre loses to the cinema when it comes to convenience, price point, and quite honestly, quality of content.

However, not all is lost, not all is bleak.

Theatre has some remarkable experiences going for it. 

Theatre is becoming what the critics call "immersive" and that I believe is the future of theatre.

Immersion

To define immersion:
Merriam Webster defines "immersion" as:
the act of immersing or the state of being immersed, as:

• baptism by complete submersion of the person in water
• absorbing/complete involvement
• instruction based on extensive exposure to surroundings or conditions that are native or pertinent to the object of study

The idea is that it can be

1. a physical act of immersing the senses in something
2. a mental act of engagement with their surroundings
3. a learning process through the first two definitions in order to learn something that otherwise they wouldn't be able

This can be applied to the type of theatre that is growing more and more popular.

I will use Sleep No More as a case study.

Sleep No More

Sleep No More is a dance piece that takes place inside of a six floor hotel.

First floor is tickets, coats, merchandise, pick up, and drop off. 

Second floor is a flow blown bar and jazz lounge.

Floors three through six are the play.

What play?

Macbeth and Hitchcock's films (Rebecca and Vertigo) in a kind of weird synthesis that (in my humble opinion) doesn't really make much sense, but lends to the creepy hotel vibe.

Why is Sleep No More so successful?

I maintain because the audience engagement is so fierce right from the start.

When you enter the second floor, through a dizzying labyrinth of ill-lit corridors, you find the jazz lounge.

And it is breath taking.

Filled with a complete bar, you can find your seat, order food, live up the high life in wonderful turn of the century fashion. 

It is a dizzying spectacle right from the get go.

Entertainment plays all night, the bar never closes, and the food is fair.

You could literally spend the whole night enjoying a jazz experience with friendly faces, a live band, a bar, and catered restaurant.

And some people do.

And that is okay.

Then, there are the other floors.
They are filled with unbelievable artistry and attention to detail.
This is the apothecary, filled with drying/dried herbs and flowers.
Dead things are preserved in jars along the walls...snake skeletons and things like that.
And this is just one room over many many floors.
You can spend literally the entire night exploring rooms filled with stuff you can lift and touch and play with.
And some people do.
And that is okay.

Then, there is the performance, which is so difficult to describe in words.

Everyone is granted a mask before entering the playing space.

Each mask provides a sense of anonymity.

They encourage exploration and interaction, but are very cognizant of safety.

The actors physically stop audience members from getting too close or interfering with the action of the drama.

You could literally follow one person, one character through the entire hotel up and down four flights and into countless changes/scenarios, into secret areas/wings.

And some people do.

And that is okay.

The reason that I think Sleep No More and shows like it are the future of theatre is because they immerse their audience wholly in the experience.

• They encourage free exploration.
• They create a dynamic, free-flowing atmosphere where audience can seamlessly go from one stage to another in an instant. 

I remember crawling down after the second repetition too tired to stand and in sore need of a piss, wandering into the rest room as a guy with a drink was coming out.

He appraised me, and with a shrug of his shoulders that said, "Once more?" he downed his drink, put his mask back on and headed for the portal I had just vacated. 

There was a sense of camaraderie with that audience that I have almost never felt with another before or since.

And I think it came from that sense of play.

There was a freedom to the experience; the creators had designed a beautiful playground in which we could lose ourselves in almost any of it.

Now, I say seamless. 

There were clear holes in the work:

• A drawer full of lost rings that were all the same size bands of brass
• Plastic plants that were meant to be exotic fixtures
• Sterilized patches of art

I didn't begrudge the experience for the gaps in the design like so many other productions that I see.

Because in other productions those things are glaring.

It is clear and immediate what is wrong with the whole.

In Sleep No More, I had to literally search for those types of things. 

And why?

Because the rest of it was so compelling, so nuanced, so interesting.

So that is the trend that I am noticing in contemporary theatre that I wish to be built upon and be the foundation of future endeavors: 

The future of theatre will be built on the experiences that are only possible in the immediate present with bodies sharing space and breath within a singular theatrical design.

And you can see the trend developing with theatre companies like:
Slipstream Theatre Initiative:

 Or Nerve: 

Or The Hinterlands: 

 

Where immersion, where experience is the name of the game.

Where audiences are not told what to feel or how to interact, instead they are given ever more carte blanche to write or even change the experience because they are willing participants in the action. 

It is daring, new, exciting, and dare I say, slightly medieval.

The practice of throwing rotten vegetables is an age old way for the audience to show appreciation for the action they are experiencing and to interrupt it, if they so desire.

So maybe the future of theatre lies in its origins.

But, that is another tale.

Picking out a Spot in Heaven (What Really Happens when we Die)

Today we discuss what happens when we die (good morning by the way),

PHYSICS!

So there are a number of things that I hold very dearly with regards to this topic.
One is this online comic:

Happle Tea. 

• God?
• Hm?
• Where do people go when they die?
• The same place people go.
• Heaven?
• The ground.

It's sad, but it's true.
But, there is also something deeply beautiful about the idea.
There are no concerns like in the Greek mythology of different places where people end up, let alone the animals:

Civil planning was a nightmare

Instead, we all get the same treatment.
No cosmic judgment.
No good or bad or the other.
Just the ground.
With everyone else.

Hamlet actually says it best:

HAMLET

Dost thou think Alexander looked o' this fashion i'
the earth?

HORATIO

E'en so.

HAMLET

And smelt so? pah!

Puts down the skull

HORATIO

E'en so, my lord.

HAMLET

To what base uses we may return, Horatio! Why may
not imagination trace the noble dust of Alexander,
till he find it stopping a bung-hole?

HORATIO

'Twere to consider too curiously, to consider so.

HAMLET

No, faith, not a jot; but to follow him thither with
modesty enough, and likelihood to lead it: as
thus: Alexander died, Alexander was buried,
Alexander returneth into dust; the dust is earth; of
earth we make loam; and why of that loam, whereto he
was converted, might they not stop a beer-barrel?
Imperious Caesar, dead and turn'd to clay,
Might stop a hole to keep the wind away:
O, that that earth, which kept the world in awe,
Should patch a wall to expel the winter flaw!

Alexander, the world's greatest conqueror would one day act as a stopper for beer. 

We should all hope for so much.

METAPHYSICS!

To relate on a more metaphysical level:

Zhuangzi (one of the greatest Daoist thinkers) had this dream that most everyone is familiar with:

"Once upon a time, I, Chuang Chou, dreamt I was a butterfly, fluttering hither and thither, to all intents and purposes a butterfly. I was conscious only of my happiness as a butterfly, unaware that I was Chou. Soon I awaked, and there I was, veritably myself again. Now I do not know whether I was then a man dreaming I was a butterfly, or whether I am now a butterfly, dreaming I am a man. Between a man and a butterfly there is necessarily a distinction. The transition is called the transformation of material things." 

•  A man has a dream that he was a butterfly
• In the dream he was unaware of being anything but a butterfly
• Awakes again as the man
• Is no longer sure he is the butterfly dreaming or the man who dreamt

In no medium have I seen this more accurately portrayed than Roy in Rick & Morty.

Meet Roy.

Roy is a game.

A game that people play.

Where they wake up as a child from a horrid nightmare where they lived with otherworldly beings.

We are reassured by our mothers back to bed.

And we live a life.

And when we die it's GAME OVER. 

And then we wake up.

And that is Roy's life.

To us, to Roy it is complete and real and whole and valuable.

But, from a larger perspective, it is just a game.

That disturbs me more than anything.

What if the nightmares from our childhood were the reality we are trying to escape?

What if when we die, we wake up?

Are we really butterflies?

Are we monsters?

Something inbetween?

Finding your Way (Getting Lost & Why it's Good for the Soul)

Today, is a spirit jam:

"What do you do to feel free?"

I don't know.
I really don't.

One of the hardest questions I have been asked in a while.
The other being:

"What do you do for fun/play?"

I was without answer then as well.

Art is hard.
And by that, I mean the artist life.

Enter the Slings and the Arrows

Meet Slings & Arrows.
One of the scariest portrayals of artistry that I have ever seen.
Mostly because it is too real.
Mostly because it is too art.
Meaning, it is a show about a Canadian Shakespeare Festival that is run by incompetents, the insane, and all around artists.

It revolves around the travails of the festival and the man on the left, Geoffrey Tennant.
Who, in the first season, ignores his mentor until said mentor commits accidental suicide by pig truck, only to have Geoffrey haunted by his ghost/hallucination in a Kafka-esque/Family Guy question: IS THE GHOST REAL? IS HE NOT?
Oh and Geoffrey is the Artistic Director of the festival...meaning he runs the whole things.
For those not in the know, a synonymous theatre festival's budget was approximately 57.4 million dollars last year. 
He is the CEO of a multi-million dollar corporation!

Artists love this show.
I love this show.
As evidenced by this video:

Stuff people say at a Shakespeare Festival:

"This is exactly like Slings & Arrows. This is just like Slings & Arrows. It's better than Slings & Arrows! We're just like Slings & Arrows!"

Over and over again, classical companies compare themselves to this show.
And why?
Because it is a great show that makes you want to be a part of a festival.
It is also psychotic, maladjusted, and lacks any semblance of communication.
At one point, Geoffrey stabs his artistic rival Darren Nichols in a duel. Twice.
It makes for great television, but why do we love to compare it to our lives?
Maybe because it is a little bit true.

That while we get to wake up for work every day and go in and do sword fights and play...well, maybe that is actually really hard work.
Yes, there is an incredible pay off.
Nevertheless, that is work.

The reason I bring all of this up?
There is a wonderful scene where one of the characters is getting audited.
She has no idea what to do, so she goes to her acting friends.
They tell her:

"Claim everything. Make up, skin cream, shampoo. And every book you read and every record you play. We, as actors, have to be in touch with the zeitgeist."

This did something very interesting to a young and burgeoning artist such as myself (me).
It taught me that every single thing that I do is a part of what we might call: research.
This does wonders come tax season, not so great for my mental health.
And why?

Well, damn near everything that every reasonable person does for fun or as a hobby now becomes an exercise in futility and a drain on energy for me:

• reading
• writing
• walking
• hiking
• exercise
• cooking
• nights out
• nights in
• move nights
• learning skills
• whittling wood

All of it becomes character work.

All of it is transformed from play into something that is done for the benefit of the art.

Which is really, really hard, because they are fun activities that I enjoy. But,...

It is really hard because I burn out very quickly with no sense of play or rest.

So what do I do for play?

I consider almost synonymous with

What do you do to feel free.

Because I am trapped in a world of work.
I have to work to play.
I have to work really hard to feel free.
So I find I often have to trick myself.
So I start with a common hobby that I have turned into research: walking.
And I keep doing that.
I keep doing it and keep doing it, exhausting myself.
And then I find myself in a new place.
A new experience.
Usually on accident.
Something unexpected works its way into the exercise and I am given a choice, embrace it or keep going with the exercise.
If the prospect is free and a lot of fun, I go with the flow.
If it isn't, I often have to wrestle myself into it for a while.
Point being you can keep walking/running:

Joy.

 Or join the lantern festival you didn't know was happening downtown:

You wanna set fire to the night?

So to come back full circle...

What do I do to feel free?

I get a little lost.

It is one of the hardest things to do in this day and age.
We have enough distractions, mini maps inside our pockets, and enough social media events happening pretty god damn constantly.
But, it is worth it to get a little lost.

Those we Love? (Making Molehills out of Who Picks up the Check)

Today we discuss one of Bevin's spirit jam questions:

What is our responsibility to those we love?

I'll just insert this here and go back to it:

Initial response:

NONE.

My initial answer is nothing.
But, that sounds too harsh.
We have no responsibility to those that we love?
That doesn't sound right.

But, there must be a truth in the gut reaction, right?
So, taking it as a partial truth.

"We have no responsibility to those that we love."

Why?

Because we are our own persons.
We are responsible for making ourselves happy.
That is true of us all.
Therefore, we have no responsibility or obligation to those that we love because it is up to each of us to make us happy.

Okay.
What else?

Considered response:

SOME.

There is some responsibility to the ones we love.
But, what is it?
How do we determine what it is/might be in any given situation?
Partial truth:

"We have some responsibilities to those that we love. "

So what might that be?
I think it is an understood relationship.
Something that is crafted and that we can all agree with.
Meaning, those who engage in sex and expect to have a baby have a responsibility to each other.
They expect and, I think, are responsible to one another and to the child to take care of one another, to support one another.
Now, what shape/details does that entail?
I do not know, they could be anything that is agreed to or understood.
The point is that there is a relationship that is entered and agreed upon.
"We are going to be parents. Therefore, we must enter into a paternal/maternal//paternal/paternal//maternal/maternal//(whatever non-heteronormativity you can insert) responsibility.

Final thought:

FRIENDS

Watching the video, I think it is one of the best ideas for responsibility to those we love:

"Treat them how you would your best friend."

What a beautiful idea.
If everyone treated those they loved as if they were their best friends? What a world in which we would live.
The idea of EQUALITY: out the window!
The idea is one of FAIRNESS!
I want to contribute to this date/holiday, but only make a fifth of your earning potential.
It is a lavish, extravagant holiday.
I cannot pay for half the holiday.
Can I pay for a fifth?
Fair.
That is what I would expect of friends and of partners who work well together.
No one is obligated to pay for everything.
But, it is our responsibility to do our fair share.
Right?

Doing it the other way round.
I could feasibly pay for this entire holiday, but to have the other person not even so much as offer to help out?
Or have them offer to help and then deny them the ability to do it?
None of that seems fair or friendly.
It is important to allow people the opportunity to contribute where they can and to accept help whenever possible.

So that would be my best answer.

"Our responsibility to those that we love is the same as that to our best friends."

We enter into a relationship, a partnership, a teammate situation where we each contribute fairly to one another because that is what we have agreed upon, recognizing that it is to ourselves that we must turn to if we are unhappy with a situation, but we can always ask for help.

Here is a picture of foxes to illustrate the point:

Happy Little Fox Family