As of January 7, 2013, this website will serve as an archive site only. For news, reviews and a connection with audience and creators of theatre all over the country, please go to The Charlebois Post - Canada.

Search This Blog

Tuesday, August 14, 2012

Review: Huff (SummerWorks)


this true downer of a tale unfolds with a dead mother, a self-involved stepmother, a neglectful alcoholic father, a sexually obsessed older brother with Fetal Alcohol Syndrome as well as the relatively neutral narrating middle brother and the addicted younger brother, huffing gas and Lysol
when people become punchlines
by Jason Booker
A meandering, overlong monologue without message or moral, Huff is predictable, self-indulgent and a tour-de-force of stand-up-comedy style drama. Cliff Cardinal, the writer and performer, plays over twenty roles in the show including every member of a family of eight (if you include their dog), the children’s teacher and a personification of “Smell” (don’t ask). Using stereotyped characters, Cardinal portrays these people in the worst possible light and fails to make anyone sympathetic, other than the two school-aged younger brothers. These are not people an audience roots for, nor do they get many laughs.
The show begins with a moment of shock and violence – if you’re squeamish, you’ve been warned, this is a graphic show – as this true downer of a tale unfolds with a dead mother, a self-involved stepmother, a neglectful alcoholic father, a sexually obsessed older brother with Fetal Alcohol Syndrome as well as the relatively neutral narrating middle brother and the addicted younger brother, huffing gas and Lysol. Cardinal’s show does little to humanize them either; these are not people but punchlines for he hopes to be darkly amusing with his strong but erratic physicality and personable presence. Often the jokes do not land though, with their reliance on conventions, cattiness and misfortunes. Unfortunately, his casual approach to the audience (calling them his invisible friends) and off-the-cuff addresses to them leave people confused, in place of offering the needed encouragement to participate or respond.
Adding to the confusion of the piece, these characters often speak to one another and cut each other off but Cardinal – in his excitement – sometimes allows the individual voices to blur and the physicalities of each are not distinct. Add to this what seems to be a non-linear narrative, an ambiguous tragic ending, one false ending, three beginnings before the action starts and a choppy device where a radio station summarizes what has already happened and you are left with a mess of a script. The piece desperately needs to be workshopped (maybe that is why it is in the festival, but the work-in-progress nature of it was not made clear in the festival guide or the non-existent programs) to focus the material, make it more cohesive and to trim the extraneous material like the amusing trip to the school where the brothers are barely present. As it stands, it feels about twenty-five minutes longer than it needs to be and no clear purpose remains for this story to be shared.
The backdrop of white plastic sheeting is strikingly effective but underutilized (outside of the fire sequence) because the projections are so ugly and banal.
Just because you can doesn’t mean you should. In one staged moment of sexual abuse, not only does the physical action become graphic (in an almost comic and totally artless way) but Cardinal demonstrates his lithe physicality with a chair. While it is impressive, the act inappropriately upstages the seriousness of the story as he becomes extreme and pulls the audience focus from the horror of the abuse and to questioning why he and director Karin Randoja chose this depiction of rape.
Definitely not amusing nor worth the time invested in it, Huff should be snuffed.

3 comments:

  1. Dear Mr. Booker,

    You probably should have done your research before writing your scathing article. Huff tackles highly important and political subject matter: the solvent-abuse and suicide rate plaguing this Canadas First Nations youth. However, perhaps your position of privilege in respect to these issues is why you are so readily dismissive. This "true downer of a tale" is in fact a harrowing journey into the truth - the reality of life on this countrys reserves.

    Content aside, in terms of the artistic merit of the piece perhaps you are best to turn to the wizened insight of your contemporaries (both the CBC as well as Mooney On Theatre credited Huff with FIVE STAR reviews, citing it as the best piece of theatre they have seen this year - please see below).

    In terms of the development of this piece, you also failed to do your research. Huff has been workshopped by Native Earth Performing Arts, is a production supported by the Toronto Arts Council, Ontario Arts Council and Canadian Arts Council; was presented at the Ode'min Giizis Indigenous Arts Festival and at the WInnipeg Fringe (prior to SummerWorks).

    So dear young man, my advice to you: cultivate your awareness. The audience you were in participated, laughed cried and were moved to a standing ovation. As a member of the press your have a responsibility to provide balanced and factual reporting. What you have presented is an ignorant opinion piece.

    To the Charlebois Post - in future you should consider hiring writers with more substantial artistic background, and/or journalistic training. Retail Management at Ryerson University isn't a qualification.


    REVIEW FROM CBC:

    Huff
    Posted by Chandra Mayor | Sunday July 22, 2012

    Rating: FIVE STARS
    Company: Dependent Theatre Productions, Toronto, ON
    Genre: Drama
    Venue: Venue #9 - Shaw Performing Arts Centre (MTYP)


    This flawlessly-acted and beautifully-staged one-man show by accomplished Aboriginal playwright and performer Cliff Cardinal is the most stunningly powerful piece of theatre that I've seen in a long time, on or off a Fringe stage.


    Performance, script and staging come together to create a play that does everything that theatre should. It reaches inside and grabs you so hard that you forget it's make-believe. It makes you rethink what you thought you knew. It leaves you transformed.
    http://www.cbc.ca/manitoba/scene/fringe/2012/07/huff.html

    REVIEW FROM MOONEY ON THEATRE:
    HUFF (Dependant Theatre Projects) 2012 SummerWorks Review

    By Winston Soon

    The minute the lights went out, the person next to me gasped. Then the audience was instantly on it’s feet. This isn’t just my favourite show of SummerWorks – it’s my favourite show this year. Just like his characters, Cliff Cardinal has a “sacred gift from Creator”. What absolute power it is to witness. If there is a government official that doesn’t believe that SummerWorks deserves funding, they need to see this show. It is a story of Canada’s First Nation’s community and that is a story that deserves telling.

    http://www.mooneyontheatre.com/2012/08/13/huff-dependant-theare-projects-2012-summerworks-review/

    ReplyDelete
  2. I am aware of some of the issues plaguing residential communities across the country and support efforts of awareness to change those conditions. I do not however support sloppy theatre.

    Similarly to the debate that raged in these comments yesterday concerning the SummerWorks logo, art can have one unified meaning but often does not. It is whatever the audience takes away from the piece. Admittedly, I did wonder if Huff was a tale that I missed the point but that’s why I mentioned that the creators did not seem focused with intent or message of the piece or fully aware of what potential audience members may need to access the moving story underneath the messy dramaturgy.

    Reviews are a reviewer’s impression of the piece – we won’t all agree on the merits of a show as we are unique individuals. I’m thrilled your show was better received by other audiences, but my opinion of the show is mine: an encapsulation of the impression that was made upon me by Huff. I went into the show without much knowledge of Mr. Cardinal or the plot of the piece. If there is research required for an audience member to sit and watch the piece, make sure we know that before entering the theatre – hand out a program with detailed notes, write an extremely descriptive summary for the program guide. And be prepared for the fact that – even with those tools – some audience members will walk in ignorant to what you want to tell them. These are still paying customers coming to you show and their opinions are still valid as patrons and people that have joined your community.

    If I had received a program that evening as noted in the review – I am unaware if you were simply out or if none were printed – I would have had a better awareness of the support and development your show has received. I am also certain that the organizations that have helped you get this far would have appreciated the acknowledgement, just as I would have loved a context within which I and my theatre companion could have appreciated the show more.

    ReplyDelete

  3. IN RESPONSE TO:
    "Admittedly, I did wonder if Huff was a tale that I missed the point…”

    Good. The first glimmer of awareness is an important one. My main critique was your seeming inability to take the pulse of the room around you. Undoubtedly reviewers bring their own sensibilities to the assessment of that which is under review, and are entitled to their unique reaction (by no means was there an expectation that this reaction be unified).

    However, a good reviewer, a journalist of merit, would also take into consideration, and note with accuracy, the audience impact and response. Instead you made sweeping statements spurned from personal misgivings. Had you provided a true portrait of the evening’s event you might have noted the room wracked with emotional engagement. But such is the misfortune of the untrained eye and ear.

    To apply the kinds of broad value judgments you have, as opposed to well formulated and nuanced aesthetic critique, is juvenile. You can continue to write this way, but it doesn’t mean you should (it certainly wont get you very far).

    IN RESPONSE TO:
    Your deep concern about programs: the box of programs had been misplaced in the Theatre Centre (to no fault of the production). All support for the show has been acknowledged with utmost gratitude.

    "The piece desperately needs to be workshopped (maybe that is why it is in the festival, but the work-in-progress nature of it was not made clear in the festival guide or the non-existent programs)"

    To state that a production is in “development”, or hasn’t been workshopped, is a fabrication. It is due to your false presentation of information that I suggested YOU do your research.

    NO research is necessary for an audience member to appreciate or experience the production. However, it never hurts when doing your job to do a little homework before operating out of assumption.

    While there are further points of contention with your writing, I feel no need to continue to defend the work in the face of such unqualified rebuke.

    Our view of the world and the events around us is nascent of our thought process about ourselves. In this sense, your envisioning of “sloppiness” is a sound one.

    Sir – there is no need to masquerade as a journalist.

    I encourage you to pursue that which you –truly- love, and to move through the world with awareness and openness. Had you entered the theatre within this context I'm certain you could have appreciated the show. Program or no program.


    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.