Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Buddug James Jones on November 14, 2012 at 15:09

On Monday night we saw 'Stories from an Invisible Town' and there were a mixture of views on the actual show- so we had pleeeanty to talk about and ended up having a lock in. Not drinking...but talking. A LOT!

So...here's a little bit of what we said on the night. Tula, Josh, Hassan, Rachel, Sam, Adam - Please add anything I've missed out or any after thought you may have!

'Stories from an Invisible Town' is about Hugh Hughes's family- him, his brother, his sister, his Mam, and his Dad(who's passed away). It's about the house, the village and the island of Anglesey they grew up in. His mother decides to move to a new house after a couple of years of living alone in their home, but she becomes ill and in need of care. This calls on all 3 siblings to work together and overcome their rocky past...and from this the show is born...

There were moments throughout the show which everyone enjoyed, but the film seemed to be the biggest hit. It was endearing, funny, beautifully shot, and it had a very real feel of being nervous, frightened, excited and disappointed without ever having to say anything directly. Seeing the siblings preparing the house for their mothers return was a very real situation which is often hidden and private and it seemed to resonate on all of us!

Unfortunately, we all felt the rest of the show(not everything though) lacked what we loved about the film.

The show felt a little bit forced- they were trying hard to make us feel certain emotions in a slightly self righteous way. i.e there was a lot of describing how they felt. This didn't work!  If you want someone to feel loss, does it not work better to make the audience feel love for something or someone, and then take it away from them rather than tell them 'I miss him'...get our drift?

The show was very fragmented. And this divided us a bit. I personally loved the little sections and the jumpy-ness of it, whereas Sam (I think it was you?) wasn't that keen. In saying that, we all agreed that you can have fragments of stories, but you still need some form of linear story to tie them all together- like a row of balloons tied to a piece of string. Instead, we all felt these 'balloons' were just 'floating' about and getting lost. Sorry, I got carried away there...

That leads me on to the next point...the actual story. We all spend some time trying to work out the actual story and from what we could gather, it was actually a story about the making of the show which came from the unfortunate illness of their mother (like a pheonix from the flame!!). We didn't really understand why they felt the need to do that, and if it was for a particular reason, we are yet to find it. Adam felt this was a bit 'pretensions' (I won't use the actual word you used!)  if they did it with no real reason. Has anyone worked it out yet?? If someone does work it out then it all might make more sense, but otherwise it felt like it built a wall between us and the actual story and emotions they were trying to convey.

Because so much time (a lot of time- 2 1/2 hrs! It was too long!), was invested in telling the story about them creating the show, it ment that we only had glimpses of characters and stories. One big question was- what had happened to the brother and sister to have not talked for so long?? And how did they actually start becoming friends again? We all wanted to see more of the mother, she was the reason we were all there yet we didn't know who she was. Rachel wanted to know why the family doesn't hug? And why they made a big statement of it without explaining why?...saying that though I come from a non-hugging family, and I can't explain it. I just know it would be weird if my Dad tried to hug me. 

The Dad. He had a big roll in the show. But instead of the real Dad, we were given this false gameshow/comedian host and it was hard then for us to again engage with the real character and really care for who they are. 

However, my personal favourite part of the whole show was when the theatre went dark and we were all asked (if we wanted to) close our eye and just listen to a recording that Hugh and his sister had done. It was a conversation between their Mam and Dad during the time when their father was an alcoholic. I was close to tears at this point. There was something so real and genuin about that conversation and it again, said what it needed to say without saying it. We actually got a chance to meet the real Ma' and Pa' and they were lovely!

We all really found Hugh a completely charming and endearing character.

I personally, loved his older brother. He reminded me of so many men I know! (and was distraught after to find out they were actors!!)

There were some really clever bits in the show, and some lovely moments. But they all got lost in the sheer volume of stuff we saw over 2 1/2 hours and the unclear journey of the show.

Me and Rachel wern't too keen on them turning down the lights- we felt disconnected after feeling a part of their work at the start. Same, Adam and Josh were happy enough in the dark though!

The show has a lovely feel to it (as does all Hugh Hughes shows), and really good insight to family dynamics which we can all resonate with. It just needs tightening up, be harsher with themselves with shrinking and editing the material from 2 years to being a show. If they can find a way to overcome this and decide what they want to say with the show it could be a great show! 

I'm now going to have a look at their website (which the lovely Bianca from Hoipolloi who joined us on the the night advised us to do) and see if I feel differently about the show. Here's the website

I've missed out loads so feel free to add more and more to the conversation.

Enjoy!

Permalink Reply by Josh Coles-Riley on November 21, 2012 at 12:18

Hiya Bud!

First off, thanks for organizing this, I enjoyed the show (apart from the HARSH punishment I got for walking in late!) and the discussion afterwards was really interesting. I agree with a lot of what you've already said - I think basically I felt that while the show clearly wasn't short on ideas and creativity, it was lacking in focus - the thematic and emotional core that would've brought everything together. It felt at times that it wasn't sure what kind of show it wanted to be, and so some moments felt a bit redundant (and at 2 and a half hours the production definitely could have done with a bit of trimming!). Part of this was that occasionally I got the impression that we were watching a one-man show which happened to have an on-stage audience of two other characters, rather than a proper three-hander in which all the characters had substantial air time and the chance to tell their stories.

Also, like you, I really couldn't work out why so much of what was shown to us on stage was this kind of meta-narrative about them creating the show. For me, it meant that ultimately the stakes were quite low (as the only thing in the balance was whether the show would get made - and we knew it would), and the constant self-consciousness and deliberate puncturing of illusion eventually led to a bit of a feeling of detachment. I think this was partly just me thinking too much into things though - for example I found myself constantly asking myself whether the people on stage were actually related, which distracted me from investing in their characters a bit. One of the things that we talked about afterwards was the question of whether "autobiographical" theatre by its very nature raises questions of fiction and authenticity. This piece clearly recognised that and played with these questions very deliberately and explicitly, but in a way that sometimes felt like it was done for its own sake, in a slightly showing-off way (it was actually me that used the slightly PG version of "pretentious"!).

I do agree though that there are definitely the makings of a great piece here, if they can just trim away some of the fat, work out exactly what journey they want to take the audience on (and why) - and I think also find the emotional heart of the show. There were some lovely, thought-provoking and moving moments - but these remained scattered moments, rather than elements which cohered into a whole.

I've still not had a look at the website yet, though - did you Bud? Did it change any of your feelings on the show?

ps. Also "Sam, Adam and Josh were happy enough in the dark" - bitofan innuendo, no??? :p

Permalink Reply by HASSAN PANERO on December 10, 2012 at 13:50

 

hey Buddug the show was amazing and i will tell why i felt that way, now at first when i say the stage and its emptiness, i was happy that the simplicity of

the theme, yet again the performers were covering such a big topic that all humanity could relate to, so i was anticipating the show to take us through this

journey that involved relation to family memory and emotion, somehow i was watching two theatre shows simultaneously, i caught myself travelling from

Denmark to Somalia & back to UK and pit stops in Dubai along the Transit route, it fascinated me that the road that was displayed on the overhead projector

in counted so many memories, and that is so true, from the angles of the house and the carpet at the entrance of the house was class i love that.

the best part for me. was the mother being the gravity of the family!