Elangovan's Play Analysis

In an email conversation with Lee, he chose those three banned plays as dramatic texts for its intense, hard-hitting and vulgar quality. He felt Elangovan’s vision was to ruffle a few feathers - societies’ and the authorities’ - “Also, because Elangovan’s plays evoked such strong reactions, it's inconclusive in nature and he aspires to respond to its dramatic texts” (Lee M.W. 2017). Lee’s performance was staged this year, explored on how as a dance practitioner, these energetic texts can be translated on to the choreographic body. Elangovan’s three plays were Talaq, Smegma and Stoma - “Their banning serves as a rather violent gesture to thwart engagement on the topics and ideas highlighted by the plays. Most of these topics are still relevant to local society today” (Lee M.W. 2017). Nevertheless, Lee’s work serves as a gesture to put Elangovan’s themes back into the public sphere where we can reassess the social dimensions in the context of today. Like Loo’s work, the reconstruction of Elangovan’s work to showcase, definitely had its squabbles with the authority as it was a banned play. Lee was sensible at applying for MDA’s licensing as he managed to inundate the text through submitting a soundtrack. Lee had a brilliant …show more content…
His performance seeks to prove his activistic intent. Not playing by the rules, his work garnered much attention for his audiences - the public and the government. If juxtaposed to Josef Ng’s “Brother Cane” performance, Palay’s piece might be considered a selfish pursuit as consequences may hit hard for the scene (once again). However, it's artists like Palay and Ng that are constantly pushing, probing the cultural realms of what can or cannot be done in the state as we advance, exemplifying the Manifesto for the Arts. “To be rebelliously creative is a high-risk undertaking... Where the price of failure is high… are considered threats of a nuisance by the establishment” (Lim