Audience Subversion—What's the Point? — TYKE DREAMS OF PLUMERIA STARS at LCC

by Guest Contributor

Shawn Thomsen

After watching a theatrical performance, one generally expects to receive some positive or moral message. A story should involve a through-line or something that the audience is supposed to take with them. If you were to ask me what I thought about Leeward Community College’s (LCC) student theatre lab production of Tyke Dreams of Plumeria Stars, I would tell you, “What’s the point?” After all, this is one of the most reoccurring phrases within the show.

Tyke Dreams of Plumeria Stars is one of those “show within a show” kind of productions, yet what is different about this one is that it has a constant meta-referential element. The story is inspired by Tyke, a female circus elephant who in 1994 killed her trainer, gored her groomer, and horrified hundreds of spectators in Honolulu, Hawai‘i. The other influence is from Shakespeare’s Othello, which I assume somehow inspires the other half of the title, “Plumeria Stars.” The setting is an occupy camp somewhere in Honolulu and the time is the present. What I enjoy most is that the story is told through scenes that are represented as dreams filled with imagery that is almost warrior and tribal-like. Some scenes are presented as memory, which are also stylized but get ruined by Death (a character) and the fake stage manager.

Within this show there are four main characters: Sister, Brother, Lover, and Bound Man. The entire ensemble, except for three—Death, the stage manager, and the real stage manager—take turns playing the different main characters. Did it matter whether or not the audience would get confused as to who was playing whom? No. The ensemble was able to convey the characteristics of each main character. The transitioning flowed effortlessly from scene to scene and from character to character. What really helped was the simple costuming each of the main characters had and which the actors exchanged throughout the play. The character of the Sister wore a red coat, the Brother wore a red cap, the lover a red scarf, and the Bound Man wore a red sheet.

Each of the scenes deal with some form of oppression, restraint, or a never-ending downward spiral of shit, and it seems that these characters will never be able to pull themselves out of it. You know the saying, “Shit happens”? Well, in this story, it happens a lot; the question is how long is it going to take to wash all that shit off? And to add to the pile of shit already made, the actors are constantly interrupted by Death, who in this case is a female and arrives late to the show because she had to wait for her son’s babysitter to show up. Death’s interruptions cause the actors to become frustrated, stop their story telling, have negative reactions, and spout endless profanity. Death interjects statements like, “Is this going to take long? My babysitter would like to know what time she can expect me to be home.” Another character who interrupts and from the beginning possesses the negative outlook of “I hate these actors!” was the fake stage manager, telling the audience, “This show sucks! I don’t even know why you want to watch this show anyway?” Audience subversion and negativity strikes.

The current instructor for the LCC student lab theatre production class and playwright of Cane Fields Burning, which world premiered as KKT’s season opener of 2011-2012, Kemuel DeMoville, mentions in the program notes, “One of the main themes we were working with was subversion. We try to subvert everything we do in this play: genre conventions, narrative, emotional connection, character, etc…” Which begs the question: If everything is subverted, what exactly is an audience paying to watch? So I ask again, “What’s the point?”

To be honest, I had to revisit the definition of subvert. To my understanding it means “to take away.” According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary online, subvert means, “ruin or corrupt by an undermining of morals, allegiance, or faith.” Okay, if everything in the play has been subverted, then the only thing left is to subvert is the audience. Do I feel, as an audience member, subverted or (by Merriam-Webster’s definition) ruined?

With all the condescending connotations, yelling arguments, and profanity in this particular show, I guess you can say, as an audience member I was subverted. I didn’t leave with the positive energy I had before watching the show. Instead, I felt I had absorbed the ensemble’s negative energy of frustration and irritation towards Death and the stage manager. This left me wondering: Was it the intention of the production to have audience members leave with such an uneasy feeling? Was there a moral understanding the audience was meant to receive or was this particular production only meant to cause a reaction? What? What was the point?

The audience is tasked to actively piece together the show with hints towards the plot within the episodic thematic expressions portrayed. Really? You are going to make me work to figure out what is going on? It was bad enough in the pre-show being asked to sign a petition called P.E.T.A—and no, not the animal rights activist group that we know—this P.E.T.A stood for People for the Ethical Treatment of Actors. I enjoy shows that involve audience interactions and, being an actor and improviser myself, I love to take part in any interaction. When one of the ensemble members (female) asked me to sign the petition, I asked for the nature and cause (and this is why I say “bad enough”) and the ensemble member told me nonchalantly, “We just need your signature.” Seriously? I thought to myself, You want me to just put my signature on something, some “cause” that supports the ethical treatment of actors and you can’t give me an idea of what kind of issues are concerning the matter? Do you even believe in this “cause”? Why are you even here? What’s the point? How about you fill me in on the issues and maybe I will consider signing this petition. So naturally, I responded to her with, “No, that’s okay, I hate actors.” She was speechless and walked away. Moments later, another member of the ensemble (male) came to thank other audience members for supporting their rally. When he came to thank me, I told the actor, “Don’t, I didn’t sign the petition.” When he asked me why, I told him what I told the other the ensemble member, “I hate actors.” This ensemble member was offended. As he emotionally expressed the nature of the petition, I simply told him, “Prove it! Prove to me in this performance that this is really an issue.” The actor seemed to have taken great offense from my statement and ran off “crying” in a campy sort of way. Already, the negative energy began to fester.

DeMoville also mentions that they were more concerned with thematic expressions rather than creating a typical narrative drama or comedy. The thematic expressions performed in the show resembled the whole hippy peace, love, and war movement during the 1960’s. Some of the thematic expressions were performed in sort of a dreamscape atmosphere or as DeMoville describes it “fragmented dreams or nightmare.” Infused with a rhythmic “stomp” style of percussion from pounding on boxes, stomping the ground with their feet, entrancing vocals, and choreography to match, the directors and ensemble delivered the performance brilliantly, sending out emotional messages and establishing an immediate connection with the audience. I even joined in, adding an extra beat as the ensemble was performing (as far I knew the ensemble couldn’t tell) but the connection was cut short or interrupted by an outside element.

In regards to plot, although the idea of subversion is in place, the plot is delivered through scenes, much like the dreamscapes, but more in a style of a memory. The “Dinner” scene, as listed in the program, was one of the most powerful of scenes. It revealed more as to how these four characters came to exist in a world filled with negativity. What I mean by negativity is that many of the relationships between the characters had no sense of empathy or even sympathy for one another. The characters acknowledge that something has happened but neglect to deal with the issue, much like the elephant in the room. The elephant, which I assume is inspired by Tyke, who was neglected, which caused havoc on the streets, destruction, the loss of a human life, and the death of Tyke herself.

Because the ensemble builds upon negative scenarios, dispensing negative remarks, and releasing negative energies to each other and the audience, it’s hard for a message of hope to be received. It’s like being in a pitch-black tunnel. You hope to see some sliver of light somewhere, anywhere, or something to be reflective in the dark. Totally blinded by darkness, if you also have a negative mindset, there is no way of seeing the light, but if you are positive in mindset, the light will appear sometime soon. Negative actions, such as taking out frustrations wildly and exploding without consideration, can cause others to be affected in a negative way. When we react calmly and show support positively, like, “let’s get through this,” instead of, “fuck just finish it already!”we spread hope. This show doesn’t allow the audience to receive any positive messages because our minds are responding to the negative energy and so we end up with the same attitude as the ensemble: “Yeah, just finish it already!”

So what’s the point? As I mentioned earlier, before I watched this production I was filled with positivity. From the moment of my first interaction and through the course of the play, I absorbed and became filled with negative energy. I felt frustrated and irritated yet there was no one to be frustrated or irritated at. It took me a few hours of psychological repairing to bring me back to the level of positivity I had before the show. Then I thought to myself, “Maybe that was the point: perseverance.” The characters of the story had gone through so much loss and trauma and couldn’t grow past the incident. The actors, while performing their show for Death, were not being respected as artists by Death with her constant interruptions. The actors retaliation against Death, with such direct aggression, spewed over within the ensemble and they began to spread the negativity amongst themselves, talking over each other, changing the story, arguing and stopping the show the actual audience wanted to see. The ensemble, however, still managed to finish their performance. I guess that was a kind of persevering.

[Leeward Community College Lab Theatre, runs till 4/14, Thu-Sat 8pm. $10]