Tuesday, September 16, 2008

Forced Entertainment

Do Forced Entertainment consider criticism and use it to improve their performances?

Forced Entertainment has been around since 1984 and over the years we have received a lot of praise. For example, the Guardian Newspaper has stated that we are "Britain's most brilliant experimental theatre company." However, our work varies quite a lot and is not always enjoyed by all audiences. Sometimes in a performance, members of the audience will simply get up and leave due to the dissatisfaction of what they are experiencing. An instance of this is "Who Can Sing a Song to Unfrighten Me?", which lasts 24 hours and is not only entertainment but a test of endurance.

We also receive a lot of criticism from respectable theatre reviewers. There are many who argue that our work lacks understanding and is targeted at a minority audience that is too small. However, we believe that our work is stimulating, challenging and provocative and should therefore not always be understood and it is part of our expectations that our performances are sometimes misunderstood.

Criticism rarely directly affects our performances or next performances. The entertainment we provide is forced upon the audience and should not be adapted to satisfy the critics or else it is no longer forced. However, we once received criticism that our performances were a "bloody mess". This is a usual occurance and remark directed towards our hard-work, we were not ready to change everything we do for this one comment. But we did however, use this comment for the title of our next performance which was named "Bloody Mess".

In conclusion, Forced Entertainment does not consider criticism, unless using the comments as a stimulus for a new, stimulating, challenging, provocative and exciting performance.

Sunday, September 7, 2008

Practical Performance Proposal

269 word pitch about a piece entitled:


From the stimuli of the Nazi oppression as well as the reminiscence of Italian Fascism, I was inspired to devise a piece where a joint assassination attempt (Hitler and Mussolini simultaneously) takes place. It is carried out by German and Italian army generals and is to take place at the 1938 Munich Agreement. The set design would be based on three separated areas. Stage left would be where the Fascist camp is located, decorated with nationalistic and fascist banners and stage right would be the Nazi camp, also decorated with loud Nazi banners. In the middle is neutral ground where the generals would meet and conspire and where the Munich conference would ultimately take place. These contrasts of banners would emphasise the difficulty of the plan of coordinating an assassination of two powerful dictators from different nations at the same time. The dictators, when on their respective stages, would always be centre stage (on their platform) and higher up in levels – possibly with a raised chair – to emphasise their power and importance. Lighting would be used to represent the seriousness of each scene as well as the importance of secretive meetings – a dim, perhaps red, light would be used when the generals conspire or meet – representing secrecy and conspiracy. A bright white light would be used when the generals are present with the dictator in order to highlight apparent loyalty. Heavily uniformed army officers constantly looking around would be randomly situated in the audience to provoke a slight fear as well as the notion of distrust among the audience as well as to emphasise the motif of nationalism and militarism.