By Cal
Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=fzEfgOYGM3g&t=38s
Available until: Unknown
A Hunger Artist is based on a short story of the same
title, written by Franz Kafka, streamed earlier in lockdown and now available
on YouTube. It tells the story of a man who fasts for forty days, publicly.
People come to see him, sometimes every day, either to observe this remarkable
feat or to catch him out because he can’t really be going completely without
food… can he?
Professional fasting was a form of entertainment in Kafka’s time. Forty days was typically the time spent fasting, though this was actually not for the artist’s benefit. The story – and also the play – examines, as many plays have done, what art is and what it’s really all about. Hunger artists do something most people would not choose to do, even supposing they could. But what is this form of art, or for that matter any form of art, really all about? Who is it about? The artist or the audience?
In more recent times (in 2003, so I don’t actually remember
it), the magician David Blaine achieved a similar feat when he remained inside
a small plexiglass box for forty-four days without eating. Public interest
showed that while professional fasting might have dramatically reduced in
popularity, it is still the kind of thing that will attract attention. And now,
even in the medium of a play, it is fascinating to watch the character of the
Hunger Artist and his physical and mental deterioration. As human beings, we
still have the capacity to consider this entertainment and it’s a sobering
thought.
There is also a very interesting observation made at the end
of the play. I don’t think I should really tell you what it is as it would give
too much away, but it really is something to think about.
The stage adaption was written by Carrieanne Vivianette, who
also directs and appears as the Narrator, with additional writing by Neil
Rathmell. Kafka’s short story has only a short section of dialogue, which
happens right at the end of the story. It would have been possible to write an
adaption that includes dialogue, allowing the hunger artist to speak and the
Warder to interact with him, but I think the way it’s told here works
brilliantly because it deprives the Hunger Artist of most of his voice. He
could be seen as a sort of puppet, there to fulfil a purpose, and his own
thoughts, feelings and ambitions are irrelevant to everyone. It is only the
thoughts and feelings that others project onto him that matter. He is no longer
himself, but a character in the drama the world has created for him.
Though I suppose you could actually say that all theatre is
like that.
The stage is set up with the three characters arranged
diagonally across the stage. The Warder is downstage right (or to the left of
the front of the stage, from the audience point of view). The Narrator is
upstage left (at the back, to the audience’s right). Between them, in the
middle of the stage, is the Hunger Artist himself, occupying only a tiny
rectangle of the stage. He’s been given his own space, but he’s also trapped;
observed from all sides.
Much of the play is performed in silence, other than Duncan
Evans’ original music. Often, there is not much to see, either. We watch the
Narrator and the Warder, who watch the Hunger Artist, who is actually not doing
very much. Yet it is powerful and, in a way, scary. He is living in a dangerous
way, by choice. And for what?
For attention. But not in a bad way. He’s a performer,
searching for his audience. Is a performer still a performer when they have no
audience? Are actors still actors when the theatres are closed and they’re
working in supermarkets or as delivery drivers instead?
Henry Petch plays the role of the Hunger Artist. He remains
in his small space, his movements repetitive; his face initially blank. At
first, he is strong, standing and moving easily; still at a stage where food is
unnecessary and there are no physical signs that he feels its absence. As the
play progresses, these physical movements become more difficult. There are more
signs of physical suffering. His deterioration could be considered the
narrative of the play, but I don’t see it that way. The Hunger Artist is a
professional. He is doing something he’s done before and will do again. It is a
cycle. The experience weakens him physically, but it does not change him
fundamentally. His situation changes, but his desires do not. He learns
nothing. He does question the rules under which he’s forced to operate; he
thinks he could do more and fast for longer. But he does not question himself.
Character and narrative development are usually things we
would usually want from a play, but their absence is part of the point of this
story. There is almost a hypnotic quality in Henry’s movements. There is
something in his performance that makes us want to keep watching and the slow
physical and mental deterioration is very cleverly done. Richard Koslowsky’s
Warder is a shadowy, creepy watching figure, devoid of any personal concern for
the Hunger Artist, but perhaps his absence is more disturbing even than his
presence. Carrieanne Vivianette is calm and detached but utterly present as she
tells Kafka’s story.
It’s perhaps more of a documentary than a story, or perhaps
a theatrical equivalent of reality TV, but lockdown has provided many examples
of plays which aren’t strictly stories, but which still make a riveting live
performance. A Hunger Artist, in a unique way, is another example of how
wide-ranging theatre can be.
No comments:
Post a Comment