I think the appropriate question to ask now is whether one can still be pleasantly surprised since there is a basic assumption that ceteris paribus will kick in somehow sometime. I dare you to amuse me. In other words, I think my work is affecting my judgement - since I only felt compelled to do whatever I am going to do at the end of the day, after work for the last few days.And let's not  think of  the opportunity costs I have to bear as a consequence of my actions.

Provided that (i) I find my balls; (ii) I am not tired; and/or (iii)I am not summoned back to attend to "urgent" matters, I will stay for the dialogue session (unlike the last time), which is particularly illogical since I will most probably drown into the seat or try as hard to blend into the shadows which defeats the point of it being a dialogue (i.e. 2 way communication). Anyway, in case I lose my way, possible questions to ask:

1.      In view that most local productions run for a relatively short period (i.e. usually no more than 1 week), what on earth was Wild Rice thinking in staging "The Importance of Being Earnest" for more than 2 weeks? Werent the risks and opportunity costs very high? I know ticket sales have been good (since I contribute to quite abit) but has the sums tally up to meet the costs in view of the extravagances (i.e. good-and-I-expect-expensive cast and costume)? 

2.      How long did preparations take? How was the cast selected and please do not recite their credentials printed on the programme booklet because I can read?

3.      The cast comes from about 3 countries in total - are the differences in the theatre scene significantly different (in terms of production mode, marketing, audience)? On the assumption that Wild Rice wants to take this show out to your country, do you think the show will sink or swim?

4.      Why the idea of getting T'ang Quartet in and have them share the stage as "break performance" instead of weaving their performances with scenes instead?

5.      The director Mr Goei wants to overturn the prejudices against homosexuality. Does he think that this performance has suceeded in achieving his goal or has it instead slapped the liberation movement instead, since people may now instead of associating "homosexuality" as personal choice, freedom and preference somehow link it to men prancing about the stage acting as girls? Does the director not think that his choice of using a all-male cast achieves nothing but re-enforces the stereotype that gays are effeminate?

6.      How are the director and cast dealing with this hype over the "homosexual" issue? Especially in view of the calling for the ban of the show by specific individuals on specific news forums. 

7.      In 2008 when Kumar performed "The Queen", a booth was set up especially calling for people to sign the petition for the revocation of Section 377A of the Penal Code and for the neutering of the laws such that they are not gender biased. In view that active actions were taken by others to call for the repeal of section 377A while Wild Rice has well... only staged this performance, what would the director's comeback be if faced with the accusation that he is just using a lame excuse to use the "homosexual" issue to create hype and sell its tickets?

8.      As the director rightly points out that many homosexuals have not emerged out of their closets due to prejudices, dare the gay actors (if any) stand up to state their sexual orientation? Or if on the assumption that they are homosexuals, do they think they will be held back by these prejudices from actually standing up to admitting it?

9.      Lining up the "homosexual" issue with theatre - does the cast and director not feel that it just re-enforces the sterotype that most men who do theatre are turned the other way?

10.      Wild Rice has been infamous for projects that deal with homosexuality and politics. But what is that the direction the group intends to brand itself?

11.      While audience is maturing and growing in terms of size, the existence of other theatre groups and the lack of exclusive actors since the actor pool is shared, how is Wild Rice dealing with competition or what is Wild Rice's feedback if it was asked whether they think they match up in terms of selling power and fame (group fame not Ivan Heng/Glen Goei fame).

12.      It is noted that Wild Rice gives back to the community by giving education talks (e.g. the one at RI recently) and cultivating new talent. Similarly, a good turn deserves another, there will be persons interested in joining Wild Rice to help either by way of internship or volunteering. But interested persons need to know is there some sort of intern plan around? Interns dont hear of impending plays - what does an internship with Wild Rice equates to? Is this need for interns all year round. You need volunteers, everybody theatre group does. But in what specific areas do you need help in, save for monetary injections. Is this need all year round? Is Wild Rice reaching out enough to obtain the help it needs?

13.      "The Importance of being Kaypoh" after staging "The Importance of being Earnest"? What is Wild Rice thinking?!

14.      Comedy sells. More comedy? So what's next? What projects? What new challenges?

15.      T'ang Quartet.... Lionel will still play for the art festival outing that T'ang Quartet has with Jeremy Monterio, right? RIGHT?


Now, I wonder what the answers will be.........



n3g0t0 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()