The Weekend In Review
Mar. 27th, 2006 12:52 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kingandyFriday: Went to Yorkshire to celebrate sister's birth, also mother's day (early). Saturday: Lunched at The Far Syde, where we learned that harder is better (when it comes to hand dryers).
Returned to Manchester that evening for Jerry Springer: The Opera.
I can easily see how some Christians would be offended by it. A lot of the material would simply be offensive to anyone of a prudish disposition, and it must be said the intersection on the Venn Diagram of "prude" and "religious" is nontrivial in size. (That's not to say that Christians are universally prudish, nor vice versa, but I digress.) There is, of course, plenty of swearing and "adult" themes, but then it is an opera of the Jerry Springer show and anyone offended by such things should probably not be in attendance. The point of the show is not to endorse or encourage such things - in fact, being a comedy, it could be argued that the intent is rather to ridicule and condemn the proceedings (indeed, as Jerry himself notes, "I don't solve problems, I just televise them"). That rather falls down at the end of the second act, though.
The second act was somewhat disappointing on a number of levels. To summarize (SPOILERS), Satan recruits Jerry for a very special show in order to get an apology from God for his mistreatment. Personally I was disappointed with Satan's characterisation. I had expected a master planner, with plots and schemes and an angle beyond just getting Jesus on a chair and demanding an apology. A little exploration of why he wanted an apology would have been nice too - mention was made of his rebellion against Heaven but they did not touch on his reasons or internal justifications. (I have read a version where he rebelled because God gave him free will, and he decided that there is no point in free will if you cannot exercise it.) Similarly, Jesus was initially promising, greeting Satan with "Old friend, old enemy, I've missed you" - Jesus, of course, being both love and forgiveness. This quickly devolves into arrogance and childishness. It could have been fantastic, it could have been well-observed and accurate and still tongue-in-cheek, but instead it was just Stewart Lee indulging his anti-Christ prejudices.
Most disappointing was God himself, who made a fantastic entrance and then sort of petered off and joined the chorus. The supreme being seemed relatively impotent, to the point of engaging in a physical struggle with Satan for Jerry's soul (because everybody loves Jerry). I was at this point still hoping that this was part of Satan's master plan - perhaps to lure Jehova into a place where he was vulnerable - but then Satan simply threw his hands up and said he had no more cards. It turns out the King of Lies genuinely just wanted to sit Jesus in a chair and shout at him until he got an apology.
Or maybe the plan was to put Jesus on stage and make him look stupid.
There were people from Christian Voice (ignorant bigots) outside handing out leaflets. They weren't very good leaflets. Aside from pretending to present CV's opinions in a neutral tone and then blatantly not, many of the points made were misinterpretations, misrepresentations or just plain mishearings. They complain that the production tries to make Springer more intellectual by setting it to music, where in fact the intent is to parody. They complain that Mary is informed she was raped by God, when it is demons who are saying (singing) this and they are somewhat biased. They complain that Jesus is presented as the same infantile, nappy-wearing character as in the first act, when ... well, technically it's not actually the same character and the costume is authentic (albeit pristine white) Egyptian garb, but I am somewhat in agreement on this point. While the costume and character are technically different (certainly Jesus never asks anyone to spank him), there is a clear intention on the part of the writer to make a thematic connection. Anyway, after this the leaflet discards all pretense of discussing the opera and concludes with a reasonbly standard evangelical tract about how Jesus died for our sins. Which is somewhat entertaining considering how the opera itself (or rather, the Satan character) complains that Jesus is always going on about his crucifixion. (Incidentally, it has been argued elsewhere that this is a comment on how Christians should focus on Jesus' teachings of love and forgiveness rather than the sacrifice He made. I disagree; Satan just wants Jesus to shut up about how bloody fantastic his is.)
The end of the play - Jerry waking up on the brink of death - changes the rest of the second act from an actual exploration of Christian dogma into a discourse on Jerry's own mental state. This is, after all, "Jerry Springer: The Opera", and not "The Jerry Springer Show: The Opera". The story is, ultimately, not about the human condition or the TV show, it is all about the man, Jerry Springer, and how he can live with himself. This is at once a cop-out and a saving grace. Naturally these spiritual beings acted as guests from Jerry's show, because it was all his fevered imaginings. Naturally Satan was ultimately ineffectual, as at that moment he was in Jerry's mind embodied by the useless warm-up man (even if he did look very natty in a red suit). Of course Jerry saved the day, as he made peace with the moral cesspool that has become of his life and his inner demons. Even so, the production also presents a clear glimpse inside the mind of the writer. Whether these beliefs can be held against him is a matter for the inquisition.
Controversy aside, the opera was reasonably clever at points (using techniques of repetition to convey ideas - comparing the church to insurance salesmen, for example - and the device of having Jerry speak while everybody else sang, which I suppose was to help the audience connect to him) and had a lot of good comedy. It did meander at points, and some characters seemed more relevant than others; Baby Jane, for example, felt as though she was thrown into the first act purely so she could act as a guide/intermediary in the second, though she did introduce one of the musical themes without which the chorus-dancing Klansmen wouldn't have been quite so funny. And without a doubt certain parts are self-indulgent on the part of Lee.
Overall, though, a reasonably solid work of comedy.
In other news, in case you missed it: I am officially on the market. That is all.
Returned to Manchester that evening for Jerry Springer: The Opera.
I can easily see how some Christians would be offended by it. A lot of the material would simply be offensive to anyone of a prudish disposition, and it must be said the intersection on the Venn Diagram of "prude" and "religious" is nontrivial in size. (That's not to say that Christians are universally prudish, nor vice versa, but I digress.) There is, of course, plenty of swearing and "adult" themes, but then it is an opera of the Jerry Springer show and anyone offended by such things should probably not be in attendance. The point of the show is not to endorse or encourage such things - in fact, being a comedy, it could be argued that the intent is rather to ridicule and condemn the proceedings (indeed, as Jerry himself notes, "I don't solve problems, I just televise them"). That rather falls down at the end of the second act, though.
The second act was somewhat disappointing on a number of levels. To summarize (SPOILERS), Satan recruits Jerry for a very special show in order to get an apology from God for his mistreatment. Personally I was disappointed with Satan's characterisation. I had expected a master planner, with plots and schemes and an angle beyond just getting Jesus on a chair and demanding an apology. A little exploration of why he wanted an apology would have been nice too - mention was made of his rebellion against Heaven but they did not touch on his reasons or internal justifications. (I have read a version where he rebelled because God gave him free will, and he decided that there is no point in free will if you cannot exercise it.) Similarly, Jesus was initially promising, greeting Satan with "Old friend, old enemy, I've missed you" - Jesus, of course, being both love and forgiveness. This quickly devolves into arrogance and childishness. It could have been fantastic, it could have been well-observed and accurate and still tongue-in-cheek, but instead it was just Stewart Lee indulging his anti-Christ prejudices.
Most disappointing was God himself, who made a fantastic entrance and then sort of petered off and joined the chorus. The supreme being seemed relatively impotent, to the point of engaging in a physical struggle with Satan for Jerry's soul (because everybody loves Jerry). I was at this point still hoping that this was part of Satan's master plan - perhaps to lure Jehova into a place where he was vulnerable - but then Satan simply threw his hands up and said he had no more cards. It turns out the King of Lies genuinely just wanted to sit Jesus in a chair and shout at him until he got an apology.
Or maybe the plan was to put Jesus on stage and make him look stupid.
There were people from Christian Voice (ignorant bigots) outside handing out leaflets. They weren't very good leaflets. Aside from pretending to present CV's opinions in a neutral tone and then blatantly not, many of the points made were misinterpretations, misrepresentations or just plain mishearings. They complain that the production tries to make Springer more intellectual by setting it to music, where in fact the intent is to parody. They complain that Mary is informed she was raped by God, when it is demons who are saying (singing) this and they are somewhat biased. They complain that Jesus is presented as the same infantile, nappy-wearing character as in the first act, when ... well, technically it's not actually the same character and the costume is authentic (albeit pristine white) Egyptian garb, but I am somewhat in agreement on this point. While the costume and character are technically different (certainly Jesus never asks anyone to spank him), there is a clear intention on the part of the writer to make a thematic connection. Anyway, after this the leaflet discards all pretense of discussing the opera and concludes with a reasonbly standard evangelical tract about how Jesus died for our sins. Which is somewhat entertaining considering how the opera itself (or rather, the Satan character) complains that Jesus is always going on about his crucifixion. (Incidentally, it has been argued elsewhere that this is a comment on how Christians should focus on Jesus' teachings of love and forgiveness rather than the sacrifice He made. I disagree; Satan just wants Jesus to shut up about how bloody fantastic his is.)
The end of the play - Jerry waking up on the brink of death - changes the rest of the second act from an actual exploration of Christian dogma into a discourse on Jerry's own mental state. This is, after all, "Jerry Springer: The Opera", and not "The Jerry Springer Show: The Opera". The story is, ultimately, not about the human condition or the TV show, it is all about the man, Jerry Springer, and how he can live with himself. This is at once a cop-out and a saving grace. Naturally these spiritual beings acted as guests from Jerry's show, because it was all his fevered imaginings. Naturally Satan was ultimately ineffectual, as at that moment he was in Jerry's mind embodied by the useless warm-up man (even if he did look very natty in a red suit). Of course Jerry saved the day, as he made peace with the moral cesspool that has become of his life and his inner demons. Even so, the production also presents a clear glimpse inside the mind of the writer. Whether these beliefs can be held against him is a matter for the inquisition.
Controversy aside, the opera was reasonably clever at points (using techniques of repetition to convey ideas - comparing the church to insurance salesmen, for example - and the device of having Jerry speak while everybody else sang, which I suppose was to help the audience connect to him) and had a lot of good comedy. It did meander at points, and some characters seemed more relevant than others; Baby Jane, for example, felt as though she was thrown into the first act purely so she could act as a guide/intermediary in the second, though she did introduce one of the musical themes without which the chorus-dancing Klansmen wouldn't have been quite so funny. And without a doubt certain parts are self-indulgent on the part of Lee.
Overall, though, a reasonably solid work of comedy.
In other news, in case you missed it: I am officially on the market. That is all.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-03-27 12:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-27 12:46 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-27 12:51 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-27 12:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-27 03:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-27 12:49 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-27 12:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-27 01:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-27 03:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-27 12:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-27 01:01 pm (UTC)Did you see the episode of ST:DS9 where everybody was suddenly science-fiction authors in the 1960s, and the only way the editors would allow Sisko to write a story about a black space-station commander was if it turned out to be a dream at the end? It's such a tiny change, and doesn't make the preceding scenes any more or less fictional, but it's a layer of buffer between you and the audience's sensibilities that devalues the entire thing.
But that's just one man's opinion.
no subject
Date: 2006-03-27 10:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-27 10:15 pm (UTC)