|
What's in a name? When the title in question is The Campaign to Confer
a Public Service Star on JBJ, quite a bit. Such a title raises
certain expectations, and if the entire play turns out to be mere sleight-of-hand
(the real JBJ never appears), the audience is bound to feel cheated.
One could argue that this was the point: that the title and the expectations
it engendered were really a comment about the power of certain words,
about (real or imagined) boundaries and the preconceived notions an
audience carries with it into a theatre. But no one is going to enjoy
being taken for a ride (unless it's a superbly constructed one).
Part of the problem with the play was an indulgence in double-speak
and nudge-nudge wink-wink. There were puns and allusions and dances
around the mulberry bush... and, by the end of act one, I was left wondering
if it was going to be all peep but no show. Tan Tarn How commented in
the programme that "the craft of beating about the bush is part of the
playwright's arsenal too." Fair enough, but clearly, beating about the
bush is not an easy craft to master.
So what was Wong gunning at exactly? She teases us with the prospect
of a government conspiracy with regard to the JBJ campaign, tells us
that what happens to David Lee, the student leader behind the campaign,
is not the result of the supposed conspiracy and then proceeds to present
us with a conspiracy anyway - in X-Files style, complete with
clandestine meetings in a car park. At this point the play veered dangerously
close to the territory of farce.
Despite the murky whole, there were scenes that worked. In the first
act, David Lee (Rodney Oliveiro) seeks to harness the power of the internet
to rally people to his cause. Wong milks the mrbrown episode (a blogger
who was censured when he criticised the government in a newspaper column)
for a number of laughs and even lampoons New Age hokeyness in the process.
Even the non-sequiturs were funny.
In the second act, Clara Tang, the bureaucrat "tasked to exercise damage
control," (played by Pam Oei) has a hilarious encounter with the Deputy
Superintendent (DSP) of the police. This was where the political satire
was sharpest. As the DSP put it, in the Old Singapore, things were clear
since nothing was allowed. The problem with New Singapore and the loosening
of constraints was the sudden abundance of grey areas. In the Old Singapore,
a memorandum from the "powers that be" would have made clear what was
to be done in the matter of David Lee's case. In the New Singapore,
one was not given instructions and yet could easily run afoul of the
powers that be since constraints, albeit loosened ones, were still in
place. It was enough to make one curl up, hide under one's desk and
suck one's thumb! This was an over-the-top moment that illustrated perfectly
the maddening frustrations of negotiating this New Singapore for the
bureaucrat (at heart).
Unfortunately, there were also several dud scenes to sit through. Was
there really a need to parody the Singapore Idol auditions?
It was too easy a target (the singing! the judges!) without much of
a pay-off.
The bifurcated structure of the play, with its focus on David Lee in
the first act and Clara Tang in the second, meant that both actors had
to take on a number of roles. Oei's comic timing and excellent
use of accents were most welcome, though the less sympathetic Clara
proved to be a harder nut to crack. In contrast, Oliveiro's David
came off as rather bland, and he never seemed to fully inhabit his different
roles.
Staging-wise, director Ivan Heng kept things simple, often conveying
entire settings successfully with just a few props. However, there were
a couple of questionable choices. The video projection unnecessarily
stated the obvious (e.g. a transition into evening) and served only
to distract from the play. It was also a strange decision to have Oei
announcing the act and scene number, which constantly took the audience
out of the world of the play.
So the sum of these uneven parts did not coalesce into a coherent whole.
The ending, a dance between David and Clara, is meant to evoke... what
exactly? Are they "dancing on graves" as Clara mentioned? What died?
Are they mourning the passing of Old Singapore? Clara's loss of innocence?
Was this meant to be a poignant moment between the two? If so, it was
not earned, and the play ended, not inappropriately, on an odd, neither-here-nor-there
moment.
|
"Tan Tarn How commented in the programme that 'the craft of beating
about the bush is part of the playwright's arsenal too.' Fair enough,
but clearly, beating about the bush is not an easy craft to master"
Second Opinion
Credits
Playwright: Eleanor Wong
Director: Ivan Heng
Cast: Pam Oei and Rodney Oliveiro
Scenic Designer: Ivan Heng
Video Artist: Casey Lim
Lighting Designer: Yo Shao Ann
Costume Designer: Mothar Kassim
Hair and Wigs: Ashley Lim
Production Manager: BB Koh
Stage Manager: Elnie Mashari
Technical Manager: Teo Kuang Han
Assistant Stage Manager: Alycia Finley
Stage Assistants: Ben Ng, Kala Rahman
Wardrobe Mistress: Pauline Tan
Wardrobe Assistant: Chang Jia Yin
Producer: Tony Trickett
|
