Al Thawra
Syrian National Daily
Damascus, 14 November 2001

In the British show "Stiff", the actor's techniques are the medium to the ideological presentationSome theatre performances are so bad that the spectator cannot wait for the show to finish; and he might even leave in the middle of the show without any regrets. While few rare performances make the spectator sad at the end, because he wants to see more. Examples of the first kind are most Syrian performances presented in the last theatrical seasons; and an example of the second type is the visiting English performance "Stiff". This opinion does not come from the fact that this show is English, or from any inferiority complex that we feel towards our own works, but from resorting to pure scientific and artistic criteria.

The show falls under the framework of black comedy, i. e, what is funny in tragic situations. This kind of comedy is the one that is most aware of the conditions of contemporary drama and the entailment of expressing human feelings with their transparency, harshness, multiplicity and variety. This modern speech is implicit and not explicit: it expresses what is implicit more that what is explicit and obvious. The English performance, which was presented at the Higher Institute for Dramatic Arts' Theatre from the 1st to the 3rd of November 01, represents this kind of approach in its main theme (burial of the dead). Events take place in the undertaker, where we find all the equipment found in the undertaker: coffins, a table, few chairs, a telephone and three workers, who advertise their job in a bright way and use all possible ways to sell their services, while they deal with selling parts and treat the corpses as a kind of merchandise. The plot of the play starts when a client whose beloved wife has passed away enters the stage. Through the skills of this actor, the show presents its ideas and forces the spectators to laugh hysterically sometimes. In this show, we are watching an actor, who is not merely using eloquent speech and acting skills, we are rather faced up by a dramatic idea that cannot be expressed except on the stage and through the actor, who is the backbone of the show. The actor doesn't need any backup from illumination, theatre design, accessories, clothes or makeup; he controls the elements of the show and he is the element that makes the show spring to life. For from the outset of the play the viewer can feel the concentration and confidence in the actors' eyes: Concentration, which is not centred on the individual role, but rather on the performance as a whole. The viewer can also feel the relaxation in the actors' bodies, voices and eyes; this shows their readiness and self- confidence. So we can see from the very first moment that the actor imposes a rhythm on the show and this is clear in the perfect communication among actors, which helps achieve perfect harmony with other stage elements and the script of the play. This excellent performance of the actors shows us that the script cannot be the only source for the actors' performance. And in spite of the utmost discipline by which the actors abide, the acting looks spontaneous as if it seems as the outcome of the present moment. The accuracy and skill of the actors resemble those of a symphony team, who might get slightly out of the note without getting out of tune.

In this black comedy, we find that the script is not the main comic element; the actors are, in fact, the main source of laughter. They do not depend on extracting laughter based on contradictory situations or ideas, but on the actors' viewpoint about the elements of the script and the actions they, as actors, perform; these can be a blink of an eye, a movement of the hand or even a the movement of a finger. So the actor is the scene, and at the same time he is a part of a whole. He makes the moment, which is embodied in him. In short, he is the player and the musical instrument at the same time. When Petra, for example, starts her monologue on stage, she doesn't depend on changing her tone of voice, she depends on her make up. So we find that her face changes in each phase and she looks like a new actress. This new formation is employed in the hierarchical build up of the visual image accompanied by the dialogue, until it reaches its climax leading to the next scene.

The same hierarchical build up is clear in the second scene, when Toby starts saying his farewells to his wife and the dead wife insists on refusing death. Her body performs acts of mutiny until she comes to make her lust for a man quite explicit. This lust is an evidence of the deeply rooted love of life and fertility inside a human being.
The show ends up as genius as it has started, through the technical /visual scene when the coffin gets up by itself and walks towards the glass barrier. The show end, without a single word, accomplishing its dark message to say that man is a postponed death or that man, in his quick rush towards life, is in fact heading towards perpetual silence. The source of man's tragedy lies in his struggle with his riddles. And the spectator can assimilate the essence of human tragedy in spite of the amount of hysterical laughter.

This show managed to achieve the highest possible level of entertainment, maintaining at the same time the depth and seriousness of the main issue. All this is done through a very simple plot: a man who wants to have his wife buried. This shows us how a theatre performance can choose simple issues then disentangles them, and it shows us how complicated an issue becomes, when disentangled.

We don't know why we don't have enough performances and sufficient publicity for such excellent theatre creations. The three days of the show passed without many of the concerned people knowing any thing about it, let alone the normal public, while we find that many unimportant performances receive a huge publicity, and we find that the audience comes out disappointed because of high expectations and poor performance.