HHHH
When director and designer Stewart Laing comes onstage two-thirds of the way through his production of Jean Genet's elegantly brutal power play to take questions from the audience during the set change, it sums up every deconstructed moment that preceded it. Laing may have obeyed Genet's gender-bending maxim that all parts in his flight of fancy about two maids who role-play their mistress's decadence be played by young male actors, but he takes things much further.
The noises of war open the show, as the stage curtain is painstakingly raised, lowered and moved backwards and forwards in an extravagantly choreographed performance of its own. Three seated young men rehearse a Metallica song on electric guitars, before performing it before projected footage from Vietnam.
Later, against a perfect reproduction of the stage's actual back wall, Scott Reid, Ross Mann and Samuel Keefe play songs by the Velvet Underground and David Bowie before tearing emotional chunks out of each other as sisters Solange and Claire and their Mistress. Their self-destructive, sado-masochistic nihilism resembles a 1990s in-yer-face play.
One scene replicates a rehearsal room read-through. Genet himself makes an appearance by way of an infamous 1985 TV interview when he turned the tables on the crew and subverted the artificial construction of the situation.
All of which questions the nature of performance itself in Martin Crimp's razor-sharp contemporary translation. Notions of reality and artifice are pushed to the limit in a pop-art hybrid that is part-gig, part-multi-media happening, part-installation. It's relentlessly and radically sustained, right down to the final, wonderfully unexpected musical interlude, and no, it's not The Jean Genie.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article