310 Blog Post

Consent

Consent was another production that I really enjoyed. After digesting the work’s purpose for a few days, I’ve landed on the interpretation that love is often taken for granted. They achieved this portrayal through the use of writing, staging, and the small details that often go unnoticed in theatre.

I thought the venue was gorgeous! It had a traditional feel with crystal chandeliers and embellishments alike. There were private box seats along the side that a few of us assumed had to be more expensive, even though we were positive no view was better than ours. Sitting at the edge of the balcony layer gave us a great bird’s eye view with no obstructions or distractions.

At first, I was confused as to why the actors weren’t wearing mics in such a large theatre. I quickly learned that hearing the dialogue would not be an issue, since much of the play’s premise was arguing and shouting. We’ll get to that later.

Something that stood out to me a lot in this production was the set movement. Furniture pieces would rise up from the floor to create various surroundings while light fixtures lowered from the rafters. All of the transitions happened in dim light, not a blackout. This allowed the audience to witness the transitions firsthand, offering a more intimate look at the characters. Since the plot delved so deeply into the characters’ personal lives, I felt this transparency within the production fit well; there was never a time on stage where a character could hide away from the audience. On a similar note, I enjoyed how the lit transitions gave the actors more stage time to process the gravity of each scene. They were able to connect to their characters fully, even in the smallest of moments.

An instance that stands out to me in particular is one transition between Ed and Zara. In the prior scene, Tim had just accused Ed of liking Zara, and the men debated it (hypothetically?) in front of her. In the last few lines, Ed offers to continue teaching Zara some specifics of law, which she accepts. The dialogue alone leaves the audience with the question of whether the two actually do ~fancy~ each other. To further emphasize that suspicion, the two interact in the following scene change. They move a couch into place together, making eye contact before exiting separately. This interaction is just enough to reiterate the characters’ connection, introducing the debate about Ed’s intentions in the rest of the work. If the transitions were in a blackout, this opportunity would be lost. The decision to make the transitions more transparent made for some compelling moments that could have just as easily not existed.

Another aspect of blocking I found interesting was how the actors could portray two different scenes taking place at the same time. This happened notably when Jake and Rachel were about to get a divorce, hashing out the logistics separately with Ed and Kitty. Two separate conversations took place on stage simultaneously, the actors moving between one another throughout. I found this visually interesting, as the movement built a quicker pace in this scene. I also took it as a way to depict the emotional distance between Jake and Rachel. The couple could have been facing one other, shouting, but still unable to hear what the other was saying. The actors portrayed this quite literally by separating their realities on stage while they were physically side by side, furthering the emotional distance between them.

Onto the plot itself. A piece I found odd was the distinction between Ed’s and Kitty’s mistakes. Ed cheated on his wife five years into their marriage. Five years after, it’s assumed that Kitty has forgiven him, and that the two have moved on in their relationship. However, Kitty had never truly forgiven her husband, so she sets out to do the same, hoping he learns his lesson. The intention was always an eye for an eye, a cheating husband for a cheating wife. The difference in Kitty’s case was that she fell in love with the man she cheated with. This made all the difference to Ed. It was one thing to have an affair, but to love another person was something they couldn’t get past.

Why was the addition of love so stirring? The characters here were not unaccustomed to affairs. Nearly every character had one, and it was an aspect of their relationship they simply had to get past. Once Kitty fell in love with another man, the story changed. The writers and directors decided to emphasize the importance of love by zoning in on misplaced love. The marriages shown at the beginning of the play were happy – exhausted, but happy. Love wasn’t given much of a thought, even when characters cheated on their spouses. They stayed together because they were expected to, and the characters’ emotions weren’t always taken into account. Kitty falling in love outside of her marriage woke the other characters up. It reignited the importance of love in a relationship, driving home the familiar message, “you just don’t know what you’ve got until it’s gone.”