Analysis Of The Play On The Kiss

1113 Words 4 Pages
Kiss I saw this performance on Friday night, my initial reaction was a lot of confusion. The first act of the play was the story of some friends in Syria with a love affair, at times funny and sometimes awkward. The female lead was in love with her best friend’s boyfriend, who was also her boyfriend’s best friend, and they had wanted to start a relationship of their own. However she was going to be proposed to, this conflict made the story very intriguing because I wanted to see who the girl would chose. She ended up saying yes to her boyfriend, which left the friend confused and distraught. When the girlfriend of the male lead entered the scene she was upset with her boyfriend about an encounter she had while she was at work. After this altercation …show more content…
I was content with what I believed to be the plot and the ending had me wanting to know more. Also I saw aspects of the things such as status and status change throughout the play, which like you always say, made it a lot more fun to watch. Yet after this first act the actors came to center stage and had said they got this play from a Syrian writer and wanted to facetime her to see if they had interpreted the text correctly. They got a hold of her and for the first couple minutes I thought the interview was real. They began to ask her question on her life and about some of the dialogue in the show, she was living in a war ridden area and that is what she used all throughout her writing of the play. I am not sure if the facetime session was supposed to be posed as real, but the way the cast asked so many personal questions to a woman who they didn’t know, and the circumstance she was in. It seemed more and more staged, not to mention the lack of respect they seemed to have for a woman in a very violent country. The main purpose of this interview was to understand if they had interpreted her text correctly. The cast had believed it was a love story in which the female lead had been in the middle of a love affair and died of a broken heart. I remember specifically the cast asking the writer about some of the moments that seemed funny and awkward during the show, and she had told them “What is funny about war?” She had described …show more content…
As I said above I was content with the plot and ending from the first performance but after hearing what the play really should look like I felt cheated out of the real show. I was also confused with how the cast was going to redo the show and put it into the Syrian perspective. When they came back out onto the stage there was no elaborate set as there was before four microphones and a black stage. The scenes where cut into short choppy actions in which the characters would say their lines for a brief moment and the stage would go dark and move onto the next scene. They were using the same line as they did before but the way they said them and the way the scenes were shown gave it a whole different feeling. After they had gotten through the original text all four characters were on stage in jackets and head scarfs and were talking to each other with dialogue new from the first act. I wasn’t sure at first what they were trying to represent but after some time I came to the conclusion that they had all died and their souls where talking. They began to reveal to one another about the secret love affairs they had had, and that each one and be with the others so called lover. It ended with the stage going dark and the curtains

Related Documents