May 14, 2019

AFTER

What happens the moments before we die? Do we have one last burst of human thought before entering the afterlife? Do we experience hallucinations? Clarifications? Darkness? Light?

These are the questions explored in, “After,” Andrew Schneider’s technical theater performance which Adrienne and I experienced last Friday at the University of Maryland. It’s hard to describe this 80-minute program which included 15 minutes of complete darkness in the entire theater. Click on the hyperlink above for the program’s website which includes a video preview. It also includes this description:

From the spellbinding chaos of digital machinations and pulsating sensory extremes emerges a poignant, shared consciousness perceiving where we are, how we got here, and what comes AFTER.

“After” is mostly a sequence of quick takes, frenetic and exact. A chair is there and then it isn’t. Bodies materialize and vanish. Voices are thrown around the room. Strobe-like effects, theatrical haze and sound produced by 380+ overhead speakers engage all the senses so much so that the program included a warning:

This performance features a prolonged period of darkness. You are in a controlled environment, and not in any danger. If you have a personal emergency, please raise your hand and a house manager will assist you to an exit.

Does it work? Not sure. I’m still pondering, but it clearly mesmerized. British theater director, Peter Brook, once said, “A stage space has two rules: 1) Anything can happen and 2) Something must happen.” “After” played by those rules and then some. However, it’s still not clear to me what happened. But perhaps that’s precisely what “After” was after.

A shout-out to Adrienne who read about “After” and thought we ought to check it out. You think I’m curious? I have nothing on Adrienne.

6 Comments

  • Believe it or not, Sharon’s description is accurate. It is difficult to talk about this performance with those who have not seen it. Even having seen it, we had difficulty completely understanding what and why they had done some things. Definitely pushing the boundaries and experimenting with sound and visual, and the narrative arch.

    It is a unique experience, which is not for everyone. (I had three students sitting next to me talking and looking at their phones at times during the performance, which was incredibly distracting), but, I am glad we went.

    And kudos to Sharon for being willing to take the plunge to see this with me. Definitely a night we will continue to discuss.

  • The weakest part of this performance was the writing, but then again, that may be because the “characters” on stage were hallucinating.

    The strongest part was the choreography. I still don’t know how they did it, but imagine a full disco floor with 20 people dancing, then a 2-second blackout and when the stage lights come back on, just two people are lying on their backs, chatting casually with ocean sounds in the background, then two second later, a complete stage blackout, two seconds after that, what looks like a doctor’s office with desk and chair and two people talking, one of them sitting on the chair. The scene changes were THAT fast. The blink of an eye.

    In an Q&A afterwards, the performers demonstrated how they made these changes . . . in the wings, they are constantly running in place, waiting for a signal in their ear microphone (or whatever it was) that tells them to move. But it just wasn’t only the movement of people on stage. ENTIRE SETS were changed in two seconds. A posh cocktail party one second with someone suddenly choking on food; then a second later one woman standing in the middle of the stage continuing a sentence she began three different scenes earlier. It was wild.

    I typically don’t like technology, but this was technology as art. Bring it.

  • Glad I checked my spam today. I would not want to have missed this. Thank you for including the link. Fascinating! Now you’ve got me thinking, with her saying, “I don’t want it to be after.” and him responding hesitantly with, “There is no after.” And really isn’t that just how life happens, one thing after another, sometimes piling up, gone in the blink of an eye … and maybe it is no different “after.”

    • Beth — my notifications continue to show up in spam as well. No rhyme or reason.

      Love the curiosity — and bravery — you invested to watch the video which is just a snippet of the performance. I’ve also,been pondering overnight your thought about maybe life being no different “after.” I just hope there will still be books and art. No social media or email notifications.

  • Oh my! Just reading through this post was exhausting! I cannot imagine actually experiencing this! Kudos to you and Adrienne.

    • Hope you aren’t too exhausted, Carol. Thanks for investing the time to check it out. We weren’t exhausted as much as we were kind of silenced by the performance. We still don’t know what to make of it. We’re still talking about it which says a lot about “After.” But again, it definitely is NOT for everybody. It is not “Tea and Sympathy” or even the more challenging, “Waiting for Godot.” It’s an experience more than a performance.

Comments are closed.

Discover more from Spark and Spitfire

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading