The
statistics are
staggering – on
average, one woman is killed every week as a result of intimate partner violence; one in three
women have experienced physical and/or sexual violence perpetrated by someone
known to them; one in four children are exposed to domestic violence, which is a
recognised form of child abuse; while two-thirds of domestic homicides are committed
by an intimate partner. These are not figures but people, lives which are
affected and often cut short by violence and/or abuse.Angus Cerini’s new
play The
Bleeding Tree – winner of the 2014
Griffin Award – takes to this world with gusto and gives us a harrowing and
darkly-funny play in which women don’t die, but rather get their own back at
the man who has been such a violent presence in their lives.
Produced
by Griffin Theatre Company,
Cerini’s play unfolds upon Renée
Mulder’s steeply raked and pleated stage, and his words cascade and hurtle
around the little theatre, a potent and heady rush of adrenaline and relief in
chiaroscuro (courtesy of lighting designer Verity Hampson). But before a word
of Cerini’s script is spoken, we are thrust headfirst into the world of the
play – of a mother and her two daughters – by a swirling cresecendoing
soundstorm (Steve Toulmin) that shakes the theatre and our seats with unease
and trepidation. It’s a powerful mix, and in the hands of director Lee Lewis,
the three women – Paula Arundell as the mother, and Shari Sebbens and Airlie
Dodds as the daughters – never put a foot wrong on Mulder’s steep set.
On
the page, Cerini’s dialogue is unallocated, a forceful stream-of-consciousness
bullet of a play, almost more of a tone poem than a play, and it takes a while
to find it’s rhythm; once there, however, it rockets along with all the swagger
and vitality of one of Nick
Cave ’s murder
ballads. On stage, however, the pacing is quite different, but that’s not a
bad thing. One thing Lewis has done is to open up the play, find the breathing
space between Cerini’s cascading scenes; amongst his dialogue are three
powerful women, almost like the
Furies from Greek mythology, who rid themselves (and their small town) of
the menace in their lives by taking matters into their own hands. When they
relate the story to each other, or one of the (unseen) visitors who come
knocking on their door, there’s a sense of pride, of trying to mark their role
in the deed, as though to say ‘I helped too; she can’t get all the credit.’ It
is undoubtedly powerful – and some would say disturbing – but there is also a
tenderness here, a sense of compassion, even if it is slightly out-of-joint
with our preconceptions.
There’s
a beautiful scene, about halfway through the play, where Arundell talks to one
of the rats that has taken over the corpse of her husband; in another’s hands,
it could seem frivolous or tonally disjointed from the rest of the play, but
Lewis and Arundell make it seem entirely natural, and there’s a sense of wonder
amongst her initial disgust, a wonder which soon gives way to glee or joy. But
her two daughters don’t share the same view – Airlie Dodds’ character is
disgusted by the idea of animals eating her (abusive) father, and would rather
they face the consequences of their actions; while Shari Sebbens’ character is similarly
scared of being caught out, she also shares her mother’s glee in her father’s
change of fortune.
The
tension in Cerini’s play comes from the intrusion of three (unseen) neighbours
or townsfolk, played variously by Arundell, Sebbens, and Dodds, through nothing
more than a shift in voice or stance. First, Mr Jones, their (late) father’s
drinking companion, who hears the shot and decides to make sure his friend is
alright; next, is Mrs Smith, a well-meaning woman who brings a pie and a small
collection from the townspeople to help the women out; last, is Stevens, the
town policeman-cum-postman, with his dog. With each visitor’s intrusion into
their house, the women’s fear of being caught out escalates, but we soon learn
that their father wasn’t much-liked by the rest of the town, and his passing is
a welcome sigh of relief. There’s an extraordinary sense of collusion among the
visitors and the women, a communal sense of gladness, which might seem strange
to some people, but its pay-off during Stevens’ visit is well-calibrated and
handled by Cerini, Lewis, and the cast.
While Lewis’
production might not be set decisively in the present day – the costumes and
set suggest a time perhaps in the 1950s – there is a universality in the story,
an unfortunate timeless in its resonance which means that its temporal location
makes it more powerful – how much we haven’t changed. That these three women
survive, that they can make light of their circumstances, is extraordinary, but
so too is the possibility that we can bring about change through a
conversation, through telling these stories, through making people take notice
of these events. Even though my doubts about the theatricality of Cerini’s
script remain (I would call it more of a poem than a play), Lewis and her cast
and crew, as well as this production’s supporters, have demonstrated that
sometimes it takes an extraordinary leap into the unknown, to take a gamble on
a play which doesn’t show us a clean or neatly-packaged version of life, and
bring it into full-blooded life on Griffin’s tiny stage. I sincerely hope this
play brings about change – both legislative, social, and creative – as we
strive to tell stories that really do matter, that have the power to change our
situation, and make our society and world a safer and better place to live and
work.
No comments:
Post a Comment