2013年6月2日 星期日

Some Case Studies of 20 Years of Hong Kong Community Theatre



Some Case Studies of 20 Years of Hong Kong Community Theatre

“There are more and more ‘performing arts venues’ in Hong Kong – the many city halls, the Academy for Performing Arts, the Hong Kong Arts Centre, the Fringe Club, City Contemporary Theatre....Nevertheless, we still need people who are willing to perform outside these venues.” (Yu Sau, 1987)

The paragraph above is quoted from the preface of the book “Elections – A Negation” published by the People’s Theatre. It was 1987, an era full of life : the negotiation between China and Great Britain over the future of Hong Kong after 1997 had been completed and Hong Kong’s future was settled. The economy was running well. In the area of the performing arts, the Council for the Performing Arts and the Academy for the Performing Arts had been established. Especially with the former, the resources it made available had generated great impetus for growth in the local theatre. The establishment also grew – both the Urban Council and the Regional Council set up in 1986 also provided much financial resources for the construction of venues and the presentation of programmes. Even more important was the fact that the people of Hong Kong became concerned with various issues which they had never thought of – identity, the question of “root”, local culture and Chinese culture.

Promotional Community Theatre
With respect to the fostering of a local theatre culture, the author began in 1983 to promote a community theatre movement in Shatin. His inspiration came from three sources: firstly, his teacher Mr. Lee Woon Wah once spoke in an open forum the sense of mission of the Chinese theatre artists and this made a significant impact on him. Secondly, the Hong Kong Government commissioned Andrew Leigh, the Administrator of the Old Vic Theatre in England to write a development report on Hong Kong’s theatre. In the report, various issues concerning regional theatre and development of original works were discussed. Thirdly, in 1984, the author was involved in the writing and directing of  “ I Am Hong Kong” with the Chung Ying Theatre and the success of this original work and its touring format added to his confidence. So in October, 1985, the author formed the Shatin Theatre Company together with Cheung Ping Kuen and Cheung Yim Cheung, and called it a “community theatre.”

In a newspaper article, the author reflected on the first ten years of the Shatin Theatre Company. The idea then was to set up some kind of “seeding areas” for grass-root theatre as an alternative to the main stream establishment. The way it worked was to tour the production to where the audiences were with dramatic contents relevant to society. This experiment was shelved because of the amateur nature of the company and other limitations. Instead of touring, the company decided to engage full time professionals to do training in the high schools. However, it continued to organise the Shatin Drama Festival and theatre fair, which were still very much community oriented. ( Hardy Tsoi, 1996)

There was not a lot of theory – just a group of theatre enthusiasts seeking an alternative to the current theatre and such was the beginning of the community theatre  in Shatin. New development naturally attracted attention. Da Shan, a people’s theatre worker who had attended community theatre workshops had this to say,” The Shatin Theatre Company possessed all the conditions of a community theatre...with the exception of one, i.e. the organic operation, organization and development from the bottom up.” (Da Shan 1987). Da Shan’s criticism was based on visiting community artist, N. Owen’s description of the art form. According to Owen, Community Theatre can assume the following formats: “Firstly, to stage a ‘related’ play by a company from outside the community and the purpose is to provoke thought and discussion among the audience. Secondly, to stage an open-ended play that will allow the audience to finish so as to provide an opportunity for information and opinion exchange and discussion of what they had faced in the process. Thirdly, to help organize a community theatre group for the community. (Da Shan 1987) N. Owen also pointed out that “No matter what kind of community theatre, the most important feature is to allow the community to understand its own situation through theatre. The community will then seek to make changes for the better. The whole process must be based on its own understanding and needs. Therefore the characteristics of a community theatre are discussion, participation and self organization. (Da Shan 1987). Another point considered by Da Shan to be faulty is that the survival of a community theatre should not rely on the funding of government or it would lose its independence.

In actual fact, when the Shatin Theatre Company engaged a full time community arts officer to provide service to the schools, it had also chosen the newly established Shatin Town Hall as its performance base. In terms of the plays staged, although many of them were original works, the community flavour had diminished. However, the author’s faith in the community theatre had not been wavered. He felt that the “From Training to Performance” model as testified by drama training in schools and youth centres followed by the Shatin Drama Festival could be further developed providing more time and money were available. He recognized that it should be professionally run and developed, and professionalisation was the inevitable trend. As good as his words, he founded the full-time group, Prospects Theatre Company, which took over the community theatre work originally conducted by the Shatin Theatre Company in 1993. At the same time, with funding support from the Hong Kong Arts Development Council, Prospects was beginning to “export” “community theatre” programmes to other districts in Hong Kong. (1)

The exported format, which usually ran within a period not less than 6 months, had consolidated from the Shatin prototype with the following features:

1.  Schools and youth and centres in the district were the primary targets;
2.  Theatre training will be given;
3.  Related drama activities will be organized as a complement;
4.  Organising a contest for amateur theatre groups in the district;
5.  a script about the people and events related to the district will be written and  people in the district will be invitedto participate in the performance of the plays
6.  If necessary, before leaving the district, assistance will be provided in setting up theatre bodies in order to sustain theatre activities in the district.

Among the aforementioned features, the most remarkable would be number 5. A good example would be when as the Eastern District Community Theatre Programme was conducted, Prospect’s Paul Poon adapted the novel “The Sun Has Set”, which is about the district Saiwanho, by Shu Hong Shing into a play of the same title.

The model described above is directly related to an earlier field study visit in England by the author for a report after the visit. The author wrote:

“I went to Sussex, England in 1987 to observe the Community Theatre there. Famous playwright/director Ann Jellicoe was the founder of this type of community theatre and I was very much inspired. They operated in the following way: professional artists from the theatre company would take up residency in a town for half a year or up to one year. They would help the residents to organize various theatre activities such as training workshops, games, parade and carnivals, etc. At the same time, a playwright would do research with an aim to write a play about the town’s history. During my visit, I was able to catch such a play being performed. Platforms were set up inside a church at two ends. Only the elderly would be seated while the rest of the audience would mill around in promenade fashion. The characters in the play would come on the platform or appear right next to the audience. The actors were playing roles of their ancestors or historical figures of their town. It was obvious that the people loved and supported this kind of theatre and the local bars, restaurants and hotels were providing sponsorship to the professionals. In the evening of the performance, the church was crowded with people. Community theatre has become an important part of their life.”

The “Eastern District Community Theatre Development Programme” by the Prospects Theatre Company was somewhat modeled after what was written above except that, in Hong Kong, people generally did not have very high consciousness about their community or local culture. There were also so many alternatives for leisure activities that the outcome of the community theatre projects had been quite different. However, the viability of such a development had been proven. (Hardy Tsoi, 1966)

By 2002, the “tailor-made” scripting method devised by Prospects Theatre for communities had undergone changes. Under a programme named “Grasshopper Outreach Youth and Children’s Theatre”, an artist facilitator would take a group of young people enthusiastic about the theatre to visit different sectors in the district, e.g. home for the elderly, boys and girls’ dormitories, temporary housing estates, etc. Eager eyes towards new people and things, “Dialogues” would easily be struck up between the young participants with and the various groups of unique life experience. Thus, through observation, interviews, discussion, creating and rehearsing, a play about society as observed by young people’s eyes was produced. It then went on tour in other districts and served as an example for other districts in self-reflection, reviews and further dislogue.

Some Issues Revolving Around Promotional Community Theatre
If an overall review of the community theatre model developed by Shatin Theatre Company and the Prospects Theatre Company is taken, it can be seen that its prime purpose is for theatre promotion. When arts and culture are still not generally recognized by society, this had its value. This is a problem and a challenge. The major difficulty faced by this kind of community theatre is that of the huge size of the community – in terms of the physical area, the size of the populations and its diversity. Therefore, constant adjustment had had to be made in order that the “invisible communities” might be reached. Theatre groups’ reliance on government funding, on the other hand, had greatly affected their survival, the mode of operation and the scale of their plans and programmes. In actual fact, almost all arts organizations require government funding. In tapping resources from the district boards, the proactive programme “Community Theatre Scheme for the 18 Districts” formulated by the Hong Kong Arts Development Council only met lukewarm response from the boards. This not only a reflects the lack of enthusiasm and support for arts and culture by the district boards but also implies that there should be more lobbying and educational work to be done. Apart from that, theatre training in Hong Kong has been geared mainly to stage productions. But the know-how and commitment required of a community theatre worker are quite different. Therefore, human resources and quality control are areas of concern as well.

Community Theatre for Social Change
Apart from community theatre that promotes the art form, there is also community theatre for social change. It has the following features:

1.  Theatre is considered as a tool that would liberate the creativity, the body and soul of the human kind.
2.  It tends more to work with minority and underprivileged groups. As the participants have similar background, the impact is usually larger.
3.  The relationship between the theatre worker and participants is different from the ordinary theatre in that it is more equal. Participants are both spectators and creators.

The representative of community theatre for change is the People’s Theatre group led by Mr. Mok Chiu Yu. Their development might be divided into two stages – the People’s Theatre in the 1980s and that of the 1990s. Influenced by the American radical “Living Theatre”, the People’s Theatre took part in performances, publications, making music cassette tapes and movie making. They did not perform in the usual venues of established theatres. Instead, they performed in the streets and in university campuses. Mok explained the rationale behind such activities,” We merely want to do things that the mass media do not or cannot do. We hope to communicate and act as a catalyst for social changes.” (Mok Chiu Yu, 1997). As to the effectiveness of this theatre operation, Mok had his reservations. He said, “What is political drama any way? Although one starts out trying to communicate, the audience would only endorse what they already believe and thus, only the solidarity of those sharing the same belief will be reinforced.” (Mok Chiu Yu 1997).

In the 1990s, Mok Chiu Yu et al came to know people’s theatres in Asia and Brazil and he revised his thoughts on “people’s theatre”. He wrote,
“What is people’s theatre then? People’s theatre is a kind of cultural action. It is theatre of the people, for the people and by the people. The purpose of people’s theatre is to allow the people themselves to alleviate themselves from two kinds of poverty. The first is connected with the mental and cultural... People’s theatre has empowering effects and is a means for empowerment. It leads to the gain of confidence within the people themselves and it allows them to utilise all the different artistic media to voice themselves, to critique and analyse their living conditions and to do what they feel they need to do, to change the unequal and unjust circumstances. People’s theatre promotes the practice of grass-root democracy and the realization of grass-root democracy will necessarily change the unequal distribution of wealth in society.” (Mok Chiu Yu, 1997)

It therefore should not be a surprise to find subsequently Mok Chiu Yu working for the Arts with the Disabled Association Hong Kong and founding the Asian People’s Theatre Festival Society.

As speaking out for the underprivileged and encouraging them to voice out are the basic goals of people’s theatre, “Playback Theatre” introduced by Veronica Needa, an ex-member of Chung Ying Theatre, in 1996 to Mok became an additional tool for people’s theatre. Playback Theatre since has grown by leaps and bounds and many names like “Well Drama Club”, “Chosen Power”, “Live @Life”, Michelle Chung, Grad Leung etc. have formed the backbone of the movement. Many social workers and organisations also used the same techniques to assist their work and the clients whom they served include the mentallly handicapped, youth out of school, new immigrants, migrant workers and other underprivileged groups. There are other young adults who have been attracted by the unique appeals of Playback Theatre to be enthusiastically involved, e.g. the Living Stories group.

Some Reflections on Community Theatre for Social Change
Since the Renaissance, western civilization has propounded humanism. Until the advent of the post industrial, post modern eras when society is being overwhelmed by the personal computers, the status of the individual has scaled new heights as society has become even more divisive. The theatre, being displaced by films and television into a minority interest, has gradually lost its educational and cohesive powers. Its justification for existence is further affected by a world of dangerous and unpredictable changes. Thus, community theatre for social change can be likened to social workers, who are always actively searching for soils worth ploughing, which is  a rare and honourable act indeed. However, if we were to take the following considerations into account, it might help in the course of community theatre for social change:
1.  The community theatre for social change is suspect of “preaching to the converted”, as its audience are like-minded. However, the answer lies in the keyword “change” as this is what the theatre aspires. From this, we may be able to relate ourselves to great speeches by political figures at public spaces and rallies. Does Agit Prop have a place in Hong Kong?
2.  The ideal theatre should have depth, and before depth, focus. Maybe the focus or issues in community theatre for social change is superficially simple and easy to be identified. But as the Chinese saying goes, “You are not a fish. So how do you know the fish’s concern?”, for the theatre worker is to find the issue and offer the right remedy, there must be thorough investigation and research. It is easy to whip up sentimentalism in a theatre, but follow -up action is what matters.
3.  The idea of empowerment seems to be in contradiction with the “from bottom to top” ideal model of community theatre for social change. Alternatively, if the deprived minority groups have the self knowledge and ability to organize and reform, they do not really need the existence of the community theatre worker. Therefore, the role of latter is rather intriguing; it requires remarkable skills and sincerity and it has to be pursued with humility and should therefore be much respected.
4.  Finally, there is the question of technique and content. Take “Playback Theatre” for example. It can be used to bring about social change but is also for entertainment. Nowadays many young people like to sing in karaoke and play electronic games, finding satisfaction and gratification of “being in control”. Be it community theatre or people’s theatre, the question of balance between content and technique should be addressed. Such theatre can be simply and economically produced in different touring environment but there is no reason to banish this type of theatre from main houses so that they can be seen by a larger audience under more favourable conditions. Successful examples can be found in Joan Littlewood’s “Oh! What a Lovely War” and the Asian People’s Theatre Festival Society’s “Macau 123” in 1998. Both shows were entertaining and thought provoking.

From “Celebration” to “Rebellion”
Famous theatre scholar Professor Robert W. Corrigan once pointed out: “There has always been a continuing tension between rebellion and celebration in the arts. “(Corrigan, 1973) This is also an appropriate comment for the community theatre, which is both celebratory and rebellious. Looking at the experience of Hong Kong, in the short span of the last twenty years, we have experienced community theatre which evolved from political street theatre, to promotional community theatre, people’s theatre including Playback Theatre and even educational theatre in schools. There will be greater and diversified developments in the days ahead.

Talking about future developments, the two-year old theatre group “Ying Sheung Chuk Theatre Company” provides an interesting example. The group is made up of two persons adapting an integration of styles from the physical theatre, masks, poetry, folksongs, glove puppetry, Chinese martial arts and other forms traceable to Chinese folklore. They first performed in the elderly and youth centres, facilitated mask workshops and performed in the community centres. They are educational and community-based as well as touring. Their sources of funding come primarily from the workshops they organise and performances, supported by the Lesiure and Cultural Services Department. Around Chinese New Year this year, the Comapny organised at the Yuen Long Theatre a “Feast of the Supreme Lions”, which included the making of lions for the traditional lion dance, the lion dance itself and percussion workshops. Its promotion took on the form of a menu of a Chinese banquet and was quite outstanding. There were students from two primary schools, one high school and members from a youth centre joining the performance. The audience was also invited to take part. The one hour performance had a great atmosphere and participants were very motivated. It is indeed very meaningful to carry out community theatre activities basing on folklore and traditional festivals. However, it is obvious that, without government funding support, the number of performances that “Ying Sheung Chuk Theatre Company” could do and its impact are necessarily restricted.

Serving the underprivileged and the deprived groups – whether it is to bring theatre to people living in distant places or to awaken the oppressed, has always been the goal of the community theatre. From a macro point of view, giants like Shakespeare, Moliere, Ibsen, Shaw and Brecht were just doing the same thing. In Hong Kong, the total number of theatre goers amounts to somewhere between 40,000 and 50,000 (3). So even if performances are many, the social impact is not particularly high. Therefore, the theatre may be considered to be a minority which has to work hard for its survival. Take for an example in the Hong Kong Arts Centre forum on “Searching for Hong Kong’s Theatre: Revelations from Kuo Po Kun” on 9th February, one of the concerns with Hong Kong theatre raised was the over emphasis on theatricality and its lack of cultural depth. Owing to the goals and mode of operation of the community theatre, it  can definitely contribute much towards this end. Community Theatre in Hong Kong has a history of twenty years. Further formal research and study will be the way forward for this art form.

Notes:
1.  Since 1993, the Prospects Theatre Company had for four consecutive years received funding from the Hong Kong Arts Development Council to run “ Theatre Development Programme on Hong Kong Island East”, “Theatre Development Programme at Tusen Wan and Kwai Ching”, “Community Theatre Development Programme in Tuen Mun” and “Theatre Development Programme in Northern District, New Territories.” Apart from the above, Prospect Theatre Company has been repeatedly commissioned by the Leisure and Cultural Services Department to undertake various Cultural Ambassador Scheme and Artists in Residence Scheme.
2.  “The Grasshopper Outreach Youth and Children’s Theatre” is part of Prospects Theatre’s “ Insects’ Playground – Community Integrated Arts Programme”. The programme came under the Leisure and Cultural Services Department Cultural Ambassador Scheme 2002.
3.  Hardy Tsoi conducted surveys on theatre performances and audience in 1989, 1990 and 1991. Taking 1991 as an example, there were 82 Chinese theatre groups performing 173 plays in 764 performances. Total audience was 250,000. On average every person sees six performances and the number of theatre goers should be aound 40,000. Separately in a publication “Hong Kong’s Theatre Scene 360 Degrees” edited by Mr. Ting Yu (published by the Hong Kong section of the International Association of Theatre Critics, it was reported that in 1997/98, there were 178 plays with 1010 performances staged. There was a total of 310,000 number of viewers. Calculated on the same basis as before, there would be about 50,000 theatre goers.

References:
Yu Sau (1987) (Preface) [Elections – A Negation – Collected Plays of People’s Theatre] (page 6) Hong Kong People’s Association

Hardy Tsoi (1996) [Community Art and it Space for Survival] (Sing Tao Daily News) 27th March 1996

Da Shan (1987) [A Community Theatre in Hong Kong 1] in [Elections – A Negation – Collected Plays of People’s Theatre] (pages 155m 156)  Hong Kong People’s Association

Mok Chiu Yu (1997) [The Political Nature of Theatre and People’s Theatre] in [Hong Kong Theatre – Recordings of Seminars on Theatre 1997] (pages 116, 118) Hong Kong , Hong Kong Section of International Association of Theatre Critics.

Corrigan, Robert W. (1973) “The Theatre in Search of A Fix (pg 348) USA: Dell Publishing Co. Inc. 


(此為莫昭如主辦社區劇場研討會之主題演講英譯本。譯者不詳。在另一刋物發表時改名為《發展弱勢社群的社群劇場本身就是弱勢社群》。)










劇本精妙 佳句神來— 談潘惠森「珠三角系列」之《龍頭》



劇本精妙 佳句神來—談潘惠森「珠三角系列」之《龍頭》

    繼成功的「昆蟲系列」之後﹐新域劇團潘惠森推出「珠三角系列」﹐月前在文化中心劇場上演。本文試圖從戲劇文本的角度﹐探索《龍頭》一劇的特色。

    典型的潘惠森那「分段交貨」式的台詞﹑各自表述的配搭﹑匪夷所思的情節和趣味盎然的劇場效果都一一呈現。然而﹐劇作者給予自己最大的挑戰﹐是政﹑商概念的戲劇化或擬人化。

    劇中劉文自詡說﹕「別人沒有的我要他有」﹑「自從二十一世紀以來沒有人拒絕我」。他又批評另一角色秦海說﹕「我是你叫的嗎﹖」﹐一個銳意發展珠三角﹑財大氣粗的中國人物已然呈現。物流業近年在香港興起﹐秦海在《龍頭》中矢志開發珠三角內河航運網﹐他的名字也真改得貼切。

     然而﹐最饒有興味的角色是石飛。開初﹐沒有人知道他的身份是什麼﹐他只是一個跟磚塊有關係和喜歡實業的「人」。後來他經歷了被蜜蜂螫傷﹑包紮﹑用「凌空燒磚術」煉磚﹑提倡以核污染的磚來為外國建築防恐設施﹐以至最終全身包紮成木乃依扮秦始皇飲酒﹐角色由實至虛﹐形象方始經營完畢﹔他儼然就是中華歷史文化的化身。選擇以秦始皇作為文化表徵有其值得商榷之處﹐然而﹐當考慮到一統天下的霸氣﹐呼應廿一世紀中國的鴻圖發展﹐那又非他莫屬。

       潘惠森愛寫小人物﹐雖說老闆娘是編劇最同情的角色﹐但是她的愚昧﹑土氣也被同時呈現﹔儘管她口口聲聲的說她「要與世界接軌」﹐「服務要達到國際標準多元化」﹐但秦海以其港人身份批評她﹐說「她不知道客人要的是什麼」。她為了迎合顧客而扮「被姦」,叫得力歇聲嘶,既可憐復可笑,修到震撼的效果。到了最後,老闆娘在一片火車開進的場境中,述說著一個孤兒的故事,然後倒下,意味著在經濟發展中人民的苦況仍是沒完沒了,回應了編劇在劇本最初所提出的主題:「人的需要是什麼?」

    《龍頭》劇本精妙﹑混然完整。台詞的節奏感和感染力豐富﹐而佳句神來﹐好像「機會,就像我放的一個屁,當你聞到它的時候,也就是它要消失的時候…」,令人忍俊不禁。劇本的目標已達﹐可謂微言大義掩藏於插科打諢之中﹐抽象的主題和劇場效果都能兼顧。「珠三角」是一個龐大的題材﹐開首既有《龍頭》佳作﹐令人對下面的作品更有所期盼了﹗

    像《龍頭》般質素的劇本是導演夢眛以求的﹐但是也會有被它「掩蓋」的危險。李國威作為新域的註團導演當然不會受這個問題困擾﹐所以他的表現是清晰的﹔這一點對像《龍頭》一類的劇本尤為重要。一個導演的功夫同時也在「台詞外的動作」中得見﹔譬如在「三溫暖」那場當老闆娘一聽到劉文是集團的首腦的時候﹐立即從秦海處「過檔」到劉文為他澆水﹐突顯了老闆娘的勢利﹐就收到很好的效果。在設計方面﹐「沙雨」的處理或許仍有發展的餘地。

     新域的有利地方﹐是一群合作無間的「班底」﹐好像設計的譚孔文是同事﹐而燈光的劉銘鏗﹑ASM的馮之浩和演員邵美君都是由以前沙田時代培訓出來的﹐他們際此新域劇團十周年齊集助慶﹐是十分有意義的。助慶兼助拳的是葉進﹑尚明輝和陳淑儀三位﹐都是香港話劇團的舊人。他們三位曾在灣仔劇團的《老馬有火》中擦出火花﹐在《龍頭》中再續前緣。

    我會向導演進言﹕如果在劇中劉文的型象更「官」﹐而秦海的造型更「Slick」﹐可能效果會更好一點。這一建議也牽涉到兩者的普通話口音的問題了。喜見邵美君嫻熟和如此有信心的表現﹐在普通話版本第二場中她的「扮姦」獨白更加淋漓盡緻。因為老闆娘是最寫實的角色﹐所以也必須如此要求之﹕「吐蔗渣」的動作是否可以更粗魯一點﹖那應該是更能配合角色身份的﹗

(本文是當年應邀於某報紙而寫的劇評)

西班牙領事的信




Don Quixote is not the only universal character produced by Spanish literature but he is, along with Don Juan, the best known in the world.

Man from La Mancha is a story of the human condition, the story of the arrow that escapes from the bow when it is not held tightly by the reins of reason. The arrow is the human soul's highest aspiration for justice and generosity; it is forgetting about the entangling web of socially suitable interests and Realpolitik. Don Quixote is mad, but we cannot fail to identify with him because his madness also represents a yearning of the human soul.

However, the hero's companion, the humble, other man from La Mancha, Sancho, also represents another dimension of the human condition. His is such a careful portrait of human behaviour and his earnest loyalty to his master is treated with such tender acceptance of his simple rudeness, that we certainly learn to love him.

Seen against the background of what was being written at that time, Cervantes masterpiece is the first novel ever written in the West, that is, the first story that is at the same time a product of the imagination and wholly credible as a practical possibility.

Let us hear with enjoyment and respect the most contemporary musical version of this portrait of ourselves, as rendered by the company TNT Theatre, its Director Mr. Hardy Tsoi and the members of the company.



Camilo Alonso-Vega
Consul General

November 12, 2004

給BB



BB
     很高興告訴您,三十年前我已經興起在香港搬演的 Man Of La Mancha ,今天變身以《拉硬柴的夢遊騎士》的名字與本地的觀眾見面,可以說是一嘗多年的素願!可惜您不能前來觀劇!

     以前在沙田的日子,為了推廣本地創作,把翻譯劇擱下了。現在眾劇團開宗明義地傳統與時代並重,看來也是切合時宜的,因為,像鐘擺一樣,現在的本地創作大行其道,外國經典成為少數而反有一定的空間。所以,我在四月演完一個 「沙士」戲,現在再來一個百老匯音樂劇,更是我心儀已久的Man Of La Mancha,那可真不枉了!

     您看見 「拉硬柴」這三個字,肯定會問為什麼有一個這般地道的俗語,放在比較文雅 的「夢遊騎士」前面?一雅一俗兩詞並列,又好像會引起一些什麼的效果或感覺。不錯,我相信任何劇本在一個與它創作時空不同的環境中演出的時候,不論在戲劇家的演繹或觀眾的接收方面,都肯定出現一種 「文化轉移」的情況,因為根本無法可以 「原汁原味」!當然,在宇宙性的前提下,我們可以欣賞和理解到別國異鄉的情調,但終歸,文化差異會帶來距離和趣味。說上來還真有點兒吊詭的味道!

    另外一種的 「文化轉移」,則產生於編、導、演的過程中;我們都說導演的工作屬於第二度演繹,至於演員的創作是否賦予原著再進一步的層次,與編劇的原意更有所偏離,則同是屬於 「文化轉移」的一種。更加有趣的是,在導演第二度演繹的時候,也會出現一個幅度;這幅度由盡量 「依書直說」,到視原著僅為出發點而致「產品」與原著面目全非;其實,這倒要看藝術家如何運用他的 「藝術執照」(artistic licence)而作出選擇了!

    Man Of La Mancha是一齣經典的作品。無論出自法律的原因,或是對原著的尊重,我都無意把原文删剪;可以這麼說,我是希望比較完整地把原作品介紹出來。在另一方面,Man Of La Mancha劇中涉及的西班牙宗教栽判所的高壓與強權,與我們反對基本法第二十三條的憂慮何其接近?賽萬提斯筆下的唐吉訶德在今天的香港又可以存在嗎?抑或,他會 「拉硬柴」、 「死梗」?!有人或許認為我這個閱讀會太過 「對號入座」,可是,我以為不論是賽萬提斯的原著、D WassermanMan Of La Mancha的劇本和我的 《拉硬柴的夢遊騎士》 所接待的方式,都是 「不設劃位」;聰明的讀者或觀眾是可以各取所需的!

    親愛的BB,這兩年隨著您和PK的離去,我也上演了 《望春風》、 《儍姑娘和怪老樹》和 Sorry,估唔到係你!》三齣劇,還有現在的 《拉硬柴的夢遊騎士》。我發覺這些作品都有一個一脈相乘的主題,那就是尋找生命的意義。希望我繼續在戲劇中成長,亦希望戲劇可以照耀人生!

    BB,這齣劇,送給您!

                                                                                                                      Hardy

(登於《拉硬柴的夢遊騎士》場刋

《夢遊騎士》具教育及時代意義



《夢遊騎士》具教育及時代意義  
     
眾劇團獲康樂及文化署的主辦,將於今年十二月初在大會堂劇院上演百老匯音樂劇《夢遊騎士》Man Of La Mancha。對眾劇團藝術主任兼該劇導演蔡錫昌而言,他在美國唸大學時曾參演此劇,回港後一直想怎樣把它搬上本港的舞台,但是後來為了當時集中推廣本地創作劇的宗旨而擱置。如是者一等已差不多三十個寒暑。時移勢易,今天本港劇壇反而少見西方經典,眾劇團的方針也定為傳統與時代並重。於是,上演 《夢遊騎士》 此其時矣!

十三、四世紀元曲大家馬致遠在他寫的詞中勾勒出「……古道西風瘦馬。夕陽下,斷腸人在天涯。」的傳世意象。無獨有偶,二百年後,唐‧吉訶德的角色也誕生在西班牙大文豪塞萬提斯筆下的同名小說中。瘦馬同樣是瘦馬,然而所不同者,斯人已非「斷腸」,而帶著「眾人皆醒我獨醉」的痴憨,再加上一支長矛、一件破甲,衝前向著風車挑戰,因而建立同樣不朽的追求理想的代號。Man Of La Mancha 的作者 Dale Wasserman 原本想寫一齣關於塞萬提斯的戲,但《唐‧吉訶德》鉅著當前,可謂不知如何置喙。後來決定先寫塞氏因犯官非入獄(這倒是寫實的,因為他的確常坐牢),然後再在獄中帶出唐. 吉訶德的故事;這是「戲中戲」的故事結構,然後再配以音樂劇的包裝。在1965年首演於紐約百老匯之時,獲得空前的成功。前後三年共演了2,328場,成為六十年代百老匯音樂劇最長壽演出的第三名!

時至今天,Man Of La Mancha 依然是英美劇場最受歡迎的劇目之一,2002年在百老匯仍有重演。在香港,致群劇社和演藝學院在八十年代都先後演出此劇,給本地觀眾留下深刻的印象。事隔多年的今天再演這音樂劇還有意義嗎?答案是肯定的,因為好像 Man of La Mancha 這樣雋永的題材,的確放諸四海皆準,而特別在高壓政治陰影籠罩、「核心價值」可能備受抑制、磨損的今日香港,Man Of La Mancha / The Impossible Dream等劇名、曲目,是會蒙上一層新的、更具時代感的意義!

對本港中學同學而言,《夢遊騎士》Man Of La Mancha是一齣極為適合欣賞的演出,其中原因可包括:一、本港中學盛行上演音樂劇,而尚未有學校一嘗把此劇搬上舞台。二、《夢遊騎士》歌曲悅耳,劇情吸引。三、主題深入淺出,對已然懂得逆境生存的本地學生,更容易產生共鳴和帶出人生啟示。四、這齣劇是校方、老師對學生溝通和教化的最佳「工具」!因此,本演出值得大事向學界宣傳!

(2004年12月香港大會堂劇院)

2013年6月1日 星期六

時事悲喜劇《上水、未水》



時事悲喜劇《上水、未水》

香港戲劇工程自去年成為北區大會堂場地方伙伴以來,所採取的製作路線是經典與原創並重。原創劇的來源既有透過邀約,也採用「北區發現計劃」的方法,經過採風、藝術整理、創作以至演出,最後在十二月的「冬季戲劇節」與觀眾見面。這樣產生出來的作品都歸屬於「北區故事」系列名下,計有《上水、未水》、《放逐》、《石湖墟的故事》和與沙頭角有關的《香港最後的老虎》。這四齣劇之中,以《上水、未水》最為成熟,而演出時觀眾的反應也較好。為了這原因,香港戲劇工程2013至2014劇季的巡迴劇目中,除了《伊狄帕斯王》之外,還有《上水、未水》。

《上水、未水》說的是香港水貨客的故事。一個潦倒的中年縮班小學教師為了生計,改行「走水」。劇情以主角第一身的「我」說出。「我」本是一個文質彬彬的老師,一時難以適應新的工作環境和頗有不同文化水平的人際關係,結果「我」處處碰壁。劇情開展在今年二月底政府「限奶令」實施的前夕,「我」被水貨拆家排斥,不給他帶高價貨,「我」只好轉而走一些回報低的奶粉和尿片,目睹了限奶令實施前的瘋狂。在上水火車站外,「我」飽受度尺過磅人員的咀臉,憑他的機智,他終於上了火車。可是,到了中國海關的時候,被內地海關人員扣留問話…

大凡一個好的劇本或文學作品,總有多層面的內容以供觀眾或讀者欣賞,也會為他們提供不少想像和思考的空間。《上水、未水》正是這麼樣的一齣戲,劇本的視點角度也是聰明的;縮班老師以「外來者」的身份把觀眾引進水貨客的大千世界,他如「出水之魚」的不協調也帶來了幽默和笑料,在絕處求生,在惡劣的環境中插科打渾,實屬於悲喜劇一類。此劇帶出的嚴肅題材,不論正面側面,可有以下種種:

1.  內地假貨充斥市場,缺乏食品安全是罪魁禍首。
2.  水貨商人的屯積居奇,其實也是導致走水貨的社會現象的原因之一。
3.  香港教育制度的短處和學生質素的下降。
4.  上水的市容民生因為水貨橫行而備受衝擊。
5.  在打擊水貨的措施當中,「拿雞毛當令箭」的小人世態咀臉。
6.  小市民的生活壓迫。
7.  中港兩地的文化差異。
8.  內地海關黑暗的一面。

本劇寫得非常出色的一條副線,是等待「我」回家帶她看醫生的媽媽。自從「我」在金融風暴變負資產而妻子離他回上海而去之後(「中港婚姻」元素!),他母子雙依為命。「我」在拘留室「胡思亂想」的時候,往往被母親的來電把他帶回現實。「我」並且憶述兩段非常重要的與母親有關的情節:一是在上世紀中國文化大革命時期(1967至1977),母親帶他回鄉接濟親戚的事。二是在更早的時候(大約是文革初期),母親攜二子攀山涉水,偷渡來港的情節。話說他們一家三口終於上了來港的舢舨之後,哥哥因為累極而掉進水中,因為安全理由或者媽媽體力已經不支,哥哥無人能救。幼小的「我」問母親哥哥何處去?媽媽說他「未」水(粵語,即潛水的意思。)去了。聊聊數語,中港近代歷史和人民的苦難、無奈盡顯無遺,足以使人落淚!對現今年輕的觀眾而言,這是十分好的通識題材,可算是中港近代史的一課。「未水」等於「潛水」,言有盡而意無窮的結束縈繞於心,也是點題,堪稱神來之筆!

《上水、未水》去年十二月首演的時候,限奶令尚未出爐。現在巡迴在即,劇本自然需要修改,與時並進。這恐怕是以時事作為題材的劇本的一般命運。因此,限奶令甚麼「傷害了內地人民的感情」這些官腔八股都用上了。人民成為了擋箭牌、藉口、被欺凌的弱者和殘殺的對象,使人極端不齒。當海關人員「廢基」(別號)拿「我」沒法子的時候,他說出了以下一段說話:

我告訴你,不要踏出這個房間半步!不然我一定告你逃罪!你就死
定了!
你從來沒有深入瞭解確切認知事實。這個世界,你對別人好,別人就
會對你好。如果我現在給你水,是我給你的;如果我給你菜,也是我
給你的,但是我現在也不給;你喝西北風;如果連雞也在關口扣上
幾天,你過節就都沒有了。要不是人家照顧你,給你吃給你喝,你
早完蛋了,有錢就能買到嗎?現在我有錢可以把你所有東西全買下來
!但是你不感恩,從來沒有深入瞭解遊戲規則,別人歸還新界時一併
交還九龍港島,為甚麼?萬一斷了你的物資供應,人家拿著一個孤島
沒用呀;人,你會做嗎?就算我現在叫你離開,你真的能離開嗎?

透過這大石壓卵式的話語,編劇捕捉了部分內地人對香港的態度,聽了令人難過,但真實地反映了過去數十年來港人恐共的因子;正如母親對兒時的「我」說:「深圳、深圳,一過關心就震!」

那麼,《上水、未水》是否一齣很嚴肅,迫使觀眾赤裸裸面對現實的社會劇?絕不!上文已經透露,本劇主人翁主觀的固執和客觀的際遇令人有啼笑皆非之感,幽默感是他的護身符,是為觀眾提供的正能量,而他的妙語連珠可以搏得我們莞爾一笑!《上水、未水》是一齣獨腳戲,由一名演員分飾劇中五、六個角色,對演員來說是一項挑戰,而對觀眾來說,是很有瞄頭的娛樂性。

由六月開始至今年年底,《上水、未水》將會到北區學校以及本港一些大學作巡迴演出。到了明年二月,劇團正打算把《上水、未水》和《伊底帕斯王》安排在北區大會堂重演!