When
the list of collaborators is that long you would hope that taking a gamble
on seeing a Wharf 2 experimental piece of theatre is worth it the ten minutes
it took you just to read the title. The odds of it being interesting, short,
original and different are high and seeing the Border Project and Ontroerend
Goed’s ‘Fight Night’ was like hitting the jackpot.
When
host Angelo Tijssens says ‘that every show needs an audience and in this show
we can’t do it without you’ he’s not joking. In ‘Fight Night’ the audience is
the most important character in the play. Armed with remote control devices in
which to cast their vote and relay information straight to the computers next
to the makeshift stage, the audience are able to enter information and cast
votes to determine not only the direction of the show but also vital
demographics about themselves. Interestingly enough in our audience the 60+ middle-class
married women were in the majority so if things don’t go your way in the show,
you know exactly who to blame.
Enter
the five candidates. Initially voting on physical impressions only, we cast our
first vote and the first winner and loser emerge. They address us, there is
some banter and then we’re told in the next round someone will get eliminated.
Now it’s getting real. The stakes are raised. We vote again and so it goes. Don’t
be fooled- even the most popular in one round can be eliminated next. Underdogs
can rise, champions can fall and ultimately, you’re left with one candidate,
whether you wanted them or not. The majority have spoken.
I’d
love to know whether the voting is genuine, which would require seeing it more
than once or comparing notes with friends. I’d happily see this show again but given
the intention of this show, to allow the audience to manipulate the outcome,
let’s presume it’s legitimate. ‘Fight Night’ is therefore a fascinating study
in human psychology. Candidates exponentially lessened their chances of winning
every time they spoke. In the end, giving a reason to vote for them was far
less effective than giving reasons why we shouldn’t vote for someone else.
Aren’t
humans curious? Even how we define ourselves in our answers during the show as a little bit racist, as spiritual
more than religious or that we still find the ‘c’ word more offensive than any
other word, candidates who mirrored the qualities of how we see ourselves did
not necessarily make them appealing to us. The most honest or trustworthy candidates were
sometimes the first to go. Apparently we love a shot of blatant dishonesty and
self-interest in our leaders. Well there’s the political system defined in one
easy sentence. We want rhetoric and lies that might sound believable and a healthy
dose of a smear campaign. Thank you very much Murdoch Press for preparing us so
thoroughly for this show.
So
did I get the candidate I wanted? No. She went first and in the end, spurned on
by my love of anti-authoritarian figures, I joined the peaceful protest group
and was duly evicted by the majority. It doesn’t get more Australian than that.
As tempted as I was to drop the ‘c’ word to the audience as I departed, I thankfully
restrained myself.
I
loved every moment of this show. It combines theatre, psychology and statistics
to appeal to the experiential inquisitive nerd in each of us. There aren’t many
shows where you can interact as audience in this non-threatening but integral way.
You shape this show and decide its outcome and in the process perhaps we learn
more ourselves than we do about any character on stage. We are easily
manipulated, our votes can be bought, we are judgemental, hypocritical and
fickle. We state what’s important to us and then act in the opposite way.
‘Fight
Night’ has a limited run but you must see it and be prepared to come out really
questioning how well you know yourself and those around you.
And
for the record- I never trusted that audience.
No comments:
Post a Comment