Remember the days of Switched-On Bach? It wasn't a bad take on Bach's works. Sure, it may have changed the ontology of Bach's notes a little bit, but this was a time of Moog synthesizers, Kubrick's Clockwork Orange, and Wendy (formerly Walter) Carlos' musical variations.
Times have changed. Now, we have Stripped-Off Shakespeare. In case you are not aware of this, an all-female cast recently performed William Shakespeare's The Tempest in New York City's Central Park. Nothing unusual about an all-female cast. In Shakespeare's times, roles of women were played by men. You could go as far as to say that gender switching and bending has always been part of Shakespeare's oeuvre as well as the performances of his plays. Gender "problem" is one of the many reasons why Shakespeare's works endure.
But there is something brand new that this cast brought to the performance of The Tempest: nudity. Yes, the cast was entirely nude. Although, I am inclined to write "naked" rather than "nude." The cast is part of (and brace yourself!) The Outdoor Co-ed Topless Pulp Fiction Appreciation Society - phew, try saying that in one fast breath! Their motto, according to their website, is "burn bras, not books." I'm all for not burning books, but bras give good support, and are much needed. Plus, all the left over debris from the burnt bras can't be that good for the environment. God knows what toxins are being released when those underwires begin to burn!
Speaking of environment, methinks that this "live nudity" is bad for the planet too. Reflecting on their performance as well as nudity, these thespians write: "And if you are a bold, body-positive woman — or if you’re unsure, maybe even nervous, but you’d like to be one — you can join us and try it in our company. You don’t need to be an actress, a dancer or a musician. You just need to have a body, and a desire to be free."
Well, there you go. You just need a body. Soul or mind may or may not be applicable.
Maybe the performance was wonderful. I am sure it's not easy to remember all those lines and umm...other stuff. But are you really going to think that the viewers who came to see the play truly wished to watch Shakespeare or did they just want a glimpse of tits and asses? I'm inclined to believe the latter.
There is no doubt that America has an issue with naked bodies. Moralism about any nudity is almost vicious, whereas violence is accepted. But there is something desperately missing in this mise en scene. The players (and most of the society) use words "nude" and "naked" interchangeably. Therein lies the problem.
To be "nude" is to reveal something of yourself, to be vulnerable when faced with the other. To be "nude" is to disclose the veiled self whether clothed or not, whether the lights are on or off.
To be "naked" is to "let it all hang out," be unnaturally and obsessively proud of one's parts, to impose and demand the unbridled devotion of bodily fluids that are coming out from..."wherevah." This nakedness is limiting. This is the sad irony of such movements. The desire to be free (one of the most beautiful human expressions and emotions) is destroyed before it even has a potential to reveal itself.
I am sure that you will accuse me of being a purveyor of Greek ideal of beauty, and as such I support body shaming (by the way, what the hell does that even mean?). That's ok. You are free to do that. Yes, we pee and poop and fart and sneeze. And we emit all kinds of odors. But that's why God made the deodorant!
The question here is one of intention. It is true that humans are fascinated by each other's bodies. But we must ask ourselves, what are we truly seeing? This nakedness ultimately wears a metaphysical mask. What would have been actually far more interesting and perhaps even courageous is if these actors performed the play naked but wore theatrical masks. Now, that would have been a far more intriguing and provocative statement than what they've attempted to do. That would have opened the doors for so many questions of who we are, as well as illuminating the difference between what it means to be nude and naked.
2 comments:
All the world’s a clothing-optional beach,
And all the men and women merely nudists?
This actually sounds like harmless fun. I think (methinks) you may be delving a little too deeply into the metaphysical/intent argument. So what if knaves and libertines were drawn to the play merely for the promise of some Elizabethan tits and ass. Maybe they'll get some culture out of the bargain. Like you said, we're all fascinated with naked bodies.
Actually, I kind of like your mask idea. The imagery that pops into my mind, but it's not exactly the right context, is the Illuminati "Masked Ball" scenes from Kubrick's "Eyes Wide Shut."
Incidentally -- speaking of bras -- wasn't it Dolly Parton who quipped “I was the first woman to burn my bra -- it took the fire department four days to put it out.” :D
I hope I did not present it as some moralistic treatise! haha! Not my intention at all. I just think that at this point, in our society, we need to elevate human beings to something far more than a bunch of hippies. Perhaps I appear to be snobbish about art...certainly not what I want to be. But there will always be demand for tits and ass. Personally, I think we're more than that. :) You know me, I am always concerned with the interiority of a human being. Maybe this has to do with me being a woman. After all, man's perspective is different.
Yes, I thought of Kubrick too. But I suppose, what I am realizing now, is that such an act belongs in cinema or painting. Don't know why yet, but I will come up with the reason.
Dolly Parton is a helluva lady! Love her! And those boobs!
Post a Comment