Yam Seng Lah: Wait, who’s making a scene now?

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Dabble Dabble Jer Collective (@dabbledabblejer.co)

You walk into a restaurant for the Tan family reunion. There are familiar and unfamiliar faces, but on the whole you’re not quite sure who is who or how they’re related to you. Or if they even are. But you’ve been invited, and this is quite a fancy-looking place, so you might as well just make yourself at home.

There’s some drama going on in the background: cousins squabbling, so-and-so monologuing, gossip and rumours making their rounds. Nothing unusual. What’s a family reunion without a huge shouting match anyway? There are five branches of the Tan family here—really, who is that making a scene now?

*

Source: facebook.com/dabbledabblejer.co

Yam Seng Lah by Dabble Dabble Jer Collective and Curios-City was quite the experience. I attended the immersive theatre-and-dining show on Saturday evening, 27 July. Doors to The Lazy Bar opened at 6pm, creating a waiting space for those attending to check in and receive their “name cards” denoting which of the five families they were supposed to be part of: Tan, Teng, Raj, Mapon, Lee (I think?). I don’t know if I missed part of the instructions/information because I joined my group a little late, but this would’ve been a good time to set up quite a lot of expectations for the show.

At 6.30pm, we were ushered into Curios-City’s main dining hall. There was a bit of confusion—choose your tables, get snacks, wander around, look at family photos stuck on the pillars… but we were not really given enough time to do all this before things (sort of) kicked off with various family photos on the main stage, organised by individual “families” plus a whole group photo. I say sort of, because it was all terribly confusing.

Felicia Teng (Ysabel Loh) and Willy Teng (Yee Heng Yeh) threw us into the whole drama side of things after the photo with their dialogue (squabbles) about Sweet and Sour (chicken) versus Grandma’s Fried Chicken, playing up the differences between the studious girl making her way in fashion design in London and the spoiled party boy living it up and trying to assimilate in the USA. It was a great reflection on comfort food—especially for Chinese-Malaysians far from home, where just going to the nearest “Chinese” shop doesn’t actually reflect how things taste back home. Flavour profiles change in the diaspora, and I speak from experience when I agree that Chinese food overseas does not quite taste like Chinese food back home. (Also, what do you call yourself when you are a diaspora of a diaspora? Are we Chinese or Malaysian diaspora now?) We were then called to take our seats for dinner; most of the rest of the show was performed in between courses.

I am PEKASAM came next, with Darynn Mapon (Darynn Wee) bursting into the restaurant right off the plane from Sarawak carrying a tub of pekasam and an air fryer. The start of the monologue had Wee speaking as if she were the pekasam itself, which came off as a little awkward and weird, before she segued into what this traditional dish really meant for her and finding her identity as a half-Chinese, half-Bidayuh woman. Personally, I felt that the dual narrative could have been combined a little better. Trying pekasam itself was interesting (heh)—but it was much milder in taste that they made it out to be. It was also nice to have different variations of how it can be eaten!

This was followed by Sofea Lee’s (Sofea Lee) reflection in Laksa Lessons on how only one kind of laksa is true laksa for her, despite the fact that there are so many different styles of laksa throughout Malaysia that all bear the same name. This was the only piece that truly used the ensemble as a whole, with some kind of group speak going on so it felt the most “performed”. Two kinds of Northern laksa were served; I’m assuming the non-sour one was from Kedah.

Life is a Brief Khichdi was the final (main) course of the day, which involved rumours from the Raj family, a “secret” stove at the back, and a directed migration to “see what they’re hiding”. VJ Raj (Villmett Thanakody) fiddled with the stove, gave a monologue about khichdi and missing his grandmother, then made a pot of khichdi on the spot. The staging was such that since he invited us (the Raj family) to sit on the benches at the back of the stage before the others came around to kepo. Because he was mostly facing the crowd, this one fell a little flat for me. Maybe it’s because I was looking at his back? Then again, this is the third show I’ve seen Villmett in, and in all of them I have felt that his emotions were just not quite there. So there’s that.

We moved back to our seats for khichdi before being called again to a separate cooking area at the back for Love is a Plate of Kesari, where Monica Raj (Charity Yong) cooked Kesari with the help of Wee and Yee while reminiscing about her grandmother’s kesari and the last time she had it at fifteen. I couldn’t help loving this one because I originally published this creative non-fiction piece by Miriam Devaprasana as part of Nutmag 7: Inheritance in 2023. They tweaked it to fit the staging but Yong gave a delicately emotional performance to round up our dessert.

With these last two dishes also being cooked on the spot, we were offered a home-recipe version of the dish in contrast to the more modern/fusion restaurant version—the homestyle version was obviously better, despite how slapdash the cooking process looked!—which I thought was a fantastic personal touch.

*

Source: facebook.com/peopleideasculture

As a whole, Yam Seng Lah was an interesting exploration of food, memory, and culture. It offered a lot to reflect on, and a lot to taste as well! I won’t comment more on the food because I’m a picky eater, but everything was edible even with my limited palate (I was a little worried pre-show). There were some weaker spots in the performances as mentioned, but all the separate monologues mostly hung together, especially with how the separate narratives and families tied up at the end.

Where it failed for me was in how it was set up—I loved the fact that this one Tan grandma had such a multicultural extended family, but I still have no idea how the families are connected or how each character is related to each other. I don’t even know if I got all five surnames right even after scrolling through their social media for clues. Felicia and Willy at times sounded like cousins, but also felt like siblings (I’ve been told they’re cousins); I couldn’t figure out if VJ and Monica Raj were siblings or husband and wife; and if both Sofea’s and Darynn’s fathers were the ones related to this Chinese Tan family, why were their surnames Lee and Mapon respectively? I wish they’d given us a copy of the family tree along with our “family names” while we were waiting at the doors. Moving the family photos outside would also have helped with this, besides giving us more time to actually look at them.

Seeing that immersive theatre isn’t quite common, it would have been helpful to have a little announcement (or reminder) when the doors opened that once we entered the hall, the actors were already in character, and we were not waiting for a traditional type “play” to start. It took a little while for me to figure out what was going on; amidst the general confusion of where to sit and herding towards snacks and photos, it was only when Loh and Yee got into their actual scripted dialogue that things really began to click for me.

Though in all honesty, part of this disconnect could have been because I know most of the cast personally. As quite a few of the scripts were written by the actors themselves about their personal experiences, there was quite a weird blurring of lines between reality and fiction. I do wonder if this affected the general visiting audience in the same way, or if they would have been a little less disoriented.

*

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Dabble Dabble Jer Collective (@dabbledabblejer.co)

Dinner concludes with a song, a dance, and the longest, loudest yam seng everyone in the room can manage. You look around and feel like you’ve gone through a journey with them, even if you still don’t know who they are. The family fight has been settled—for now—and it looks like you’ll be added into yet another WhatsApp group you’re probably going to mute immediately. But hey, that’s family, right?

You leave, sated. Thoughtful. Maybe a little nostalgic. Maybe it’s time to head for some comfort food after all that fancy restaurant stuff?

*

Despite all my quibbles, I loved what Dabble Dabble Jer Collective and Curios-City presented in Yam Seng Lah, as part of George Town Festival. It was a true celebration of our mixed, slightly confused cultures that’s coalesced into our Malaysianness. The restaurant itself was a lovely, cosy place that really set the mood. The music (Bernadine Jeanne Abeysekra) was superb and added to the vibe of the night—changing according to the culture of each piece. I guess I understand the need for the dim lighting—and the coloured lights were a nice touch—but I do like to actually look at the food I’m eating, instead of having to move the table light back and forth every time any one of us wanted a little more light!

This second show by Dabble Dabble Jer Collective, whilst quite a vast difference from their 2023 debut, Burden of Proof, is equally as stellar. It’s amazing to see the thought and care they put into each performance they craft—making it not just mindless entertainment, but something that reaches deeper into your soul.

Here’s to their next show!

Yam Seng!

Source: facebook.com/dabbledabblejer.co

#review: Fresh 14.0 | ZXC Theatre Troupe

Okay so I did this thing (again) where I went to see a show without knowing anything about it except that my friend wrote a script in English, but it was going to be performed in Hokkien with surtitles. 

SHOULD BE OK KAN. SUPPORT YOUR FRIENDS KAN.

It was actually this:

I dunno what all the other words say, I only know Fresh 14.0 hahaha. And I'm too lazy to google translate. So anyway, the first 3 plays were in Mandarin (probably) and only the last (Heng Yeh's) was in Hokkien, and apparently my half-past-six Hokkien is better than my non-existent Mandarin, who knew! (I knew) But anyway, the surtitles were much better written and felt more complete than the ones during A Complete Woman.

Some general notes on the overall experience first. I know this show isn't catered to bananas like me, but... these would probably also help the Chinese theatre-goers, I feel. 

(1) The thing with programme booklets (and why we have them, even if it's a one-page A5 flyer) is that it helps the audience understand the background or premise of the play(s), even before the show starts. I suppose there has been copious stuff posted on their facebook page (which I didn't know existed until now that I'm writing this and stealing their pics), but none of it was at the venue, that I saw at least. ETA: I found a QR code on the FB page but it doesn't want to open on my phone. Also, all of that is in Chinese, which brings me to...

(2) There should also have been a little more general translation for the technical type things as well, especially all the really, really long announcements before the show, between the plays, and after the whole event. With the existence of English surtitles - the ushers even tell you where to sit/where the surtitles will be projected - you're basically inviting a multilingual crowd so there's an expectation that other things should be translated as well. Beginning with the usual "we're about to start, turn off your phones, no recording" etc which can be just the usual pictograms on the screen. 

Right. So the four plays. 

Bathroom was the first play. And this is where context is important because... when it first started, I thought it meant that was where the scene was taking place (obvious, there was a bathtub there). Adding a few lines for as playwright, director, & actors' names (which I think was what they were announcing) would have clarified that a bit. 

Anyway, remember: no programme booklet, no foreknowledge of what on earth is happening. A woman struggling with depression is in the bathroom, where she can be free to be herself. She's talking to another woman about the past, bringing up memories that don't quite match up sometimes. I could never figure out who they were to each other. Were they friends? Sisters? Is she talking to herself and this is a split personality of sorts? Was it like the happy side of the person talking to the sad side? Is it her past talking to her present?

It was all very metaphorical, a long search for something amidst multiple internal breakdowns and external crises. What was the significance of the white balls and the one random blue one she was looking for but not really looking for? Was she cutting? Was she committing suicide? I dunno. Nothing was obviously explained in the dialogue itself, and nothing in the scene clued me in. 

The second play, I don't eat meat with bones, started off well. Three people and a dog get lost in a cave. They start off optimistic (don't worry! my boyfriend will find us soon!) but when their supplies run out after 3 days, they have to start making difficult decisions. Will the vegetarian let the others eat her dog in exchange for a packet of dried mangoes? Will the young man who's afraid of choking on bones finally eat meat that has bones? And when that too is gone, do they just lie down and die or do they start sacrificing each other for their own survival?

The Dad figure (idk the character's name or the actor's name lol) stood out in showing his slow descent into madness, his obsession with survival to get back to his wife and son at the expense of everyone else. And yet he's still The Dad, taking care of the others and trying to get them to eat. There was a rather amusing discussion of reincarnation (if you will reincarnate as a chicken if you eat chicken, does that mean you need to eat humans to be reborn as a human?!) and holding on to your principles in times of crisis. What would you do if your survival depended on it? 

I'm not sure if the playwright/director meant it to be a funny show. I mean, it's an absurd situation and people laugh at dark things, but some of the humour felt a little displaced alongside the horror of the scene. I also felt rather ambivalent about the ending, which didn't quite make sense to me. Honestly, I felt that the play could have ended about half a scene earlier and it would have been much stronger for it. 

Ok, I'm not sure what the actual name of this play is. It sounded really lyrical on the screen something about the fog and the heart and the ocean? But Google translates it as The Dark Ocean, I Am Alone (which ????? lol). I guess I'll just call it Ocean??

The theme for Ocean is rather similar to Bathroom: facing the past, dealing with depression. The protagonist is sitting looking out at the sea, where he finds peace. At first, he cannot see the three others, who are very clearly representations of himself from different times in his life. And when he finally sees them, he doesn't recognise who they are, finding fault with how they live their lives. But soon he has to face up to reality, to remember amidst the crippling fog, and learn to let go of the past in order to move forward in life. 

The only thing that threw me off a little, was that there was this fog horn going at intervals and I kept thinking that the boat would crash into them and kills them or something. HAHAHA. But the ending felt rather hopeful with him burying his past in the sea! Side note: I do hope that their feet are okay because I could see leftover detritus from the earlier play on the floor... and that looked painful. 

This was overall very beautifully done, with amazing choreography. Even though the actors cycled through various characters in presenting the past to the protagonist, it was always very clear what was going on. And the dance at the end! So good!

And finally, the play I was actually there to see: 163288. (Eh, why no fancy pic with all the cast for this one?)

I was impressed with Ocean, but I can definitely say this was my favourite (not cronyism). It was hilarious and also very thought-provoking, exploring friendship and money, and how the latter can make or break the former. Even when both friends are adamant that they will help each other out no matter what since they're practically family. 

Two friends are looking for a tree stump which has a spirit that can grant wishes... for a price. But when the price turns out to be a hand, will either of them be willing to give up a hand (or mutilate the other) to get the winning numbers for the lottery? (do you want to give up a hand to the spirit or give up a kidney to the loan shark?)

And so starts a hilarious argument over whether one needs to pay back loans between friends, whose need for money is greater, whether brothers with cancer are burdens, and what they would do with FIFTY BILLION RINGGIT.

---

There's another run of the show tomorrow (12/3) at 3pm. More info on ZXC Theater Troupe's page!

Dear Malaysian churches, here's how to pretend to be more creative than you really are

Look, the easiest way to be creative (when really, you're not), is to hire a creative. There are many hidden creatives in your church, most of them not doing anything because you do not ask them to. 

Ask them. Better still, pay them.

Whether you pay them or not, most Christian creatives will usually feel, uh, led enough to offer their time to you for free or at a severely discounted rate because, church, you know?

When that isn't an option for whatever vague reasons you tell yourselves, remind yourself that stealing is a sin. So, whatever you do, DO NOT STEAL. Even if your intention is to give credit and skate along on the safe side of the applicable laws.

However, as they say, "Good artists copy. Great artists steal." 

What? But you just said don't steal! Go read the article. I'll wait.

---

You back? Well, okay. Here is a super handy-dandy cheat sheet on how YOU as a Malaysian church can ultimately pretend to be OH SO CREATIVE by being inspired by Christian shows from America. Because honestly, one come-to-Jesus youth summer camp romance is pretty much the same as another, and as the author of Ecclesiastes says, there is nothing new under the sun.

There IS nothing new under the sun. 

The idea itself (falling in love at summer camp and also finding Jesus) is not copyrighted, but the execution of it is. First of all, here are a few DO NOTS you should adhere to.

1. DO NOT under any circumstances copy all the dialogue and present yourself as the scriptwriter. NO. That is copying, that is stealing, and that is LYING. 
2. DO NOT use all the same songs (or 90% of the same songs) from the show because that is being really, really blatant. 
3. DO NOT use the same names la. Even if you change the surname, it's pretty obvious ok. Can don't be so obvious or not?

Why? Really simple. Because if there are sufficient similarities, even if you credit the original inspiration, people are going to be like, "eh, copy only. So same wan." Very not creative!

But you have an edge here, okay? Because once you localise the show, and I mean seriously localise it, not just change a few words, you have the best opportunity to pretend to be WAH SO CREATIVE HOW YOU THINK OF THIS?!

Remember: the idea of it is not copyrighted, the execution of it is. So take the overall idea and run with it. 

Ok ok, but how? Here are some very simple pointers:

Change the main character backgrounds

The Boy is in his last-chance foster home? Foster system WHAT foster system. It kind of exists in name la, but in practice??? In Malaysia, the Boy is more likely to go to an orphanage or group home, or even, say CPS. Even where places mention "fostering programme" it's more towards child sponsorship (like World Vision-style) and not USA-style where the child goes to stay with another family. Also, the government portal talks about "Probation Hostel/Asrama Akhlak" not "juvie" and they seem to jump directly from shelter homes to adoption (though foster child is mentioned once or twice). Also, the Boy is in trouble for stealing a cop car. Do people steal police cars? IDK maybe they do. But that is a very recognisable plot point. So change it. Make him a Mat Rempit or something. 

Then the Girl is the daughter of the campsite owner? Look, no one in Malaysia owns a summer camp, ok. We all just rent a hotel or maybe a campsite owned by some big church or NGO. So "owner of the campsite and daughter" doesn't make sense. Change it to the youth pastor and his daughter. Wah tension already. You want more tension? Try senior pastor's daughter. Bwahahaha.

The rest are teens, everyone's in school, not much is said about them so it's fine to just not mention it.

Just changing these two key background stories would actually already make your story different enough that it's not immediately recognisable.

Localise the jokes & language

Look, the reason it was ridiculous/funny that the Boy lied that they were "cousins" was because the Boy is White and the Friend & Camp Mom are Black. It's an obvious LIE. Your casting has two Chinese guys, cousin ma cousin lor, your church is 90% Chinese, what's the big deal? Find another joke that makes it obvious they're not actually related. Or think of another joke altogether. 

Your localisation must be thorough. John Hughes who? If it doesn't make sense to you because it's too American or too old, find something else that people watch which has the same "makeover" impact. The Chinese-Ed/English-Ed divide is also big enough a barrier - and probably more relevant in a local context. If the final connection point between Friend and his Love Interest is a quote from some super obscure show from the USA that no one here knows, find some super obscure show from Malaysia (or Singapore) that they can be crazy about and quote from. (I like horrible, terrible, vegetable as an inside joke, but that's just me.)

Malaysia is very multilingual. We tend to call things by their original names, whether they're in BM or in Chinese or whatever. USE THOSE TERMS. Lean into stupid bilingual puns. It's what your audience is used to anyway.

You have your own version of church camps, each has its weird points and competitive aspects. At my youth camp, we used to have marks for how tidy our rooms were, so there was a guy who SLEPT ON THE FLOOR so he wouldn't have to make his bed the next morning. What dumb things have your own friends done in camp? Draw from your own experiences.

You can also draw inspiration from scouts/guides camps and their chants! 100% relatable because I was never a girl guide but I've heard them in school and from friends anyway. 

Choose new songs

Keeping one or two key songs might work, but if most of the songs are the same, there's no running from the fact that you're drawing very heavily from the original. You probably don't have time to write your own songs because duh, otherwise you'd have written your own script, but you can find songs with similar themes that may even fit your revised script better! Plus, if you consider local songs as well, you have a wider range to pull from. Or, well, yeah BTS will work. 

You have to pay for the music license anyway, no matter what songs you end up choosing.

Actually adapt it for stage

A screenplay and a stage play are very different things. There are many things you can do on screen that you can't do on stage, and vice versa. So the act of just adapting the script for stage will already change key scenes and how they play out, maybe even the sequence of events. You need to figure out entrances and exits because you can't tell people to only look at one part of the stage. You can't have a quick montage of days passing or camp games that involve the beach and diving, but you can't just remove the scenes either because then the heavy lifting of character development and establishing relationships would then disappear with those scenes. You'll have to find another way to do it on stage. 

The Boy has a fear of heights but brags about the Blob (a high dive) because he doesn't know what it is? That's not something you can do on stage. Find something else that he could possibly be afraid of but brags about anyway because the Camp calls it something else. I dunno, some food he just can't stomach? 

If you've changed the location, you can't have that special garden anymore. But you can still have a special hangout spot, especially if they always return to the same campsite. It just won't be a garden she's tended for eleven years.  

---

Just changing these four things would lead to vastly different dialogue, which would lead to a very, very different execution of the idea, which is still Boy meets Girl at Camp and finds both Jesus and love. 

Is it a lot of work? Yes. Will it take a lot of time? Yes. Will it make you seem more creative than you really are? Probably, yes, depending on how much you actually end up changing.

Now, wouldn't it have been more worth it to write your own script in the first place?

#review: Ignite Solo Performance Festival 2022 - Week 1

I guess FB ads do work. 

Ch'ng saw an ad on Facebook yesterday and so we ended up catching the first night of the Ignite Solo Performance Festival Week 1 at iBOX Theatre. Two performances, A Complete Woman and Kenapa Tak Tukar Nama, form Week 1's offering. Week 2 will be at Jetty 35, featuring Hujan Pagi and 11:11 A Tribute to Loving (V3).

Two questions immediately came up:

1) Where on earth is this theatre, why is the address in some office complex?

2) Got subtitles or not? 

First time at this space!

iBOX theatre is on the second floor of Sunny Point Complex and was relatively easy to find because a) they had the poster above right by the lift telling you where to go, and b) you can actually see the theatre itself on your right the moment the lift doors open. It's pretty small, black box style, and fits about 50 pax. (We counted 6 rows of 7 chairs in the main seating area, there were a few more chairs in front of the sound desk. They could probably add more in a pinch, but I don't know if there are still any SOP limitations.)

And yes, they have subtitles. They have all the subtitles. 

This monologue, written and acted by Suzanne (directed by Chee Sek Thim), explores the lifecycle of a woman from marriage and pregnancy to the birth of a daughter, coming full circle to the woman writing a letter to her eighteen-year-old daughter who is about to get married. 

It's a very heavy monologue, though it starts off somewhat light, talking about the blessings of getting married and being pregnant, and how everyone is happy for you. It also explores the different taboos and practices around pregnancy - and this was just between two different Chinese dialect groups (in this case Cantonese vs Teochew), proving that there really is no Chinese monoculture, even in Malaysia. Some of these points - including the part where she was stuck in GH and couldn't understand the nurses speaking in Malay - could have been funny, but presented as it was (by a woman who seemed to feel trapped in her marriage), it felt more like a panicked cry for help. 

Where it turns dark is when she talks about not being prepared - how the child was an accident in a moment of passion and how she desperately wanted an abortion because she was not ready for marriage and children. There's also a reference to her mother staying in an abusive marriage because that is her home and she will not let it go. It felt like a distorted point of pride for her at being able to "keep the family together", implying that the current rate of divorces show that these modern women are not tough or dignified enough to hold their marriages together.

At the end of it all, the daughter (and the audience) is burdened by the question: are you ready? Are you ready for the way that marriage will change you? Do you realise that getting married is not just being in love, but also having to adapt to and change for the family you are marrying into? Is your identity strong enough for that? Can you hold on to yourself through the pressures your in-laws will put you through, and emerge the other side still complete and whole? Does marriage make you complete or are you already complete before marriage?

This was the one I worried about because it's... Chinese theatre and I am a banana hahaha. A Complete Woman was mostly in Mandarin, with some Cantonese, Teochew, and Malay. There were English subtitles, but these were not very well done - ignoring grammatical mistakes, there were parts where the translation didn't quite make sense. In fact, there was this whole section that either wasn't translated or the projector got stuck, because the words didn't change.

Performance-wise, it was a good show, though I probably didn't get the full experience, being distracted by reading and figuring out the subtitles. But as I said, it was also very heavy-hitting, ramping up pretty quick and staying there for quite a while, so you get an overwhelming hit of raw desperation and not many other emotions. Maybe if you could understand the actual dialogue it would hit you differently. 

Hoe Mei Ying wants to get married to her boyfriend Zahari - and they've already gotten tickets for their honeymoon at 70% off during the Matta fair! The only problem is that she needs her new IC after her conversion to Islam, but JPN is delaying the process because she refuses to change her name. 

Yiky Chew's performance was brilliant. As a solo performer, she switches between different roles seamlessly, but also leaving the audience with no doubt as to which character she is playing at any point. I especially loved her portrayal of Puan Fatimah, the woman at JPN who interviews Mei Ying to try to convince her to change her name to a Malay one even though it's not required by law. 

Despite the hilarity of the situation and the way Chew played it up for laughs, it is also a very poignant piece. Zahari points out that no matter what happens, no matter her name, it's still just the two of them, in love. Mei Ying's parents panic (What? When did he propose?) and point out all the difficulties she might face, from being unable to eat pork anymore to whether her body might be snatched by the authorities in case of death. Mei Ying describes the goosebumps she had during the conversion ceremony and how surreal it felt. 

But Mei Ying's declaration of why she wants to keep her birth name is the one that resonates the most: the connection to her forefathers and the generations before her by the surname she bears, the love with which her grandparents had picked out her given name even if it is a very common name. And while she may change her religion and marry into another culture, these connections with her past, her race and ethnicity itself do not change. So why should she change her name? Why must she meMelayukan herself? (Muka masih Cina lol)

Kenapa Tak Tukar Nama? is primarily in English & Malay, though the section with Mei Ying's parents had some Chinese. There were subtitles throughout in both English & Chinese. I only looked at them at the points where they were speaking Chinese, so I have no major thoughts about them.

---

Both plays worked well together thematically, with their emphasis on marriage and its impact on a woman - whether through cultural norms or the inner workings of bureaucracy. One thing that stood out was the fact that both these pieces were biographical - it's not fiction or conjecture, not a simple "what if". A Complete Woman was written from Suzanne's own experiences; Kenapa Tak Tukar Nama? was developed by Chew and Syafiq Syazim (the director) based on the experiences of a friend as told to them by that friend and their family members.

There was a Q&A session after the two plays, which is not something I've ever seen done in English theatre. I don't know if it's a common thing in Chinese theatre? 

---

If you have no plans for today, do catch their performances at 3pm and 8pm. It's worth the RM40!

Pretty sure you should be able to walk in because the theatre was less than half full on Friday. Though if you want to check and reserve tickets, you can contact them at:

FB专页 / Facebook Page: Triple I Production House

电话号码 / Phone No.: +604 – 296 4353

WhatsApp: +6011-2070 6550

Day 36: Not that far behind the #wordcountgoals, also #shakespeare

Writing comes in spurts.

I find that if I write for long hours and get about 5k to 8k in the day, I can't really write much the next day unless a) I'm under a really tight deadline, or b) it's a really exciting part of the story and I just have to keep going.

Right now I'm in the "I know what's supposed to happen but I don't know how to write it" stage so everything is just SO HARD. So I'm in procrastination mode.

Therefore, behold the great plateau.

It's getting better, though. I think. Because I HAVE A DEADLINE, so I'm panicking myself (needlessly) to actually get through writing it because once it's down I'll be able to actually edit it and make it work but as long as it's not written, it's just this nebulous cloud of idea. Or something.

---

To date I've watched three shows at Shakespeare's Globe Theatre, because you can get cheap £5 tickets and stand like a peasant for 2 plus hours. It's not so bad. I have strong legs. haha.

The Merry Wives of Windsor was slightly confusing because I went in without any idea what the play was about. The second act was pretty good though. It's not quite the kind of comedy I like, but eh.

Comedy of Errors was much better, or at least I liked the storyline better, because it's more due to chance and honest mistakes rather than being... lewd. This is probably the most accessible of the plays so far. The cast for this was also very brilliant--better than the first.

Pericles was an aesthetic choice due to having read The Porpoise. If you did not have background knowledge of the myth or the source story, you'd just be very, very confused, especially since it jumps from royal family to royal family. There are also long bits of narration in between, in classic Greek drama style, so it's different, I guess.

My April/May West End spree

Right after formal classes ended last month, I went a little crazy and decided to buy tickets to as many shows as I could afford. Obviously, I'm also rather cheapskate and I need to save money, so I ended up buying cheap, upper circle tickets to three shows (altogether less than GBP100, so yay me).

My selection felt rather eclectic overall so I thought I'd talk a little about why I picked the shows and also what I thought about them. 

The first show I watched was Betrayal on 15 April, for two reasons: I've still regretted missing the PenangPAC run with Marina Tan and OHLOOKIT'STOMHIDDLESTON. Lame? Maybe. But I'd heard that the story is amazing, and it has a famous actor, so why not? 

Well, the show was fantastic. I do have to admit that I didn't always pay close attention to the acting, mostly because I was fascinated by the staging as well as the moving pieces of the stage. (This might be a thing with me; I remember being super distracted by the moving stages in Lion King too LOL). I was waaaayyyy at the back so I might probably have missed some frontal projection cues if they were blocked by the overhang (and maybe super close facial expressions), but it was a really good vantage point to see the lines between the actors, the use of space, that revolving stage indication of going back in time. It was a really minimalistic staging (except for that revolving thing) that played a lot with lights and shadows--the silhouettes were so sharp you could actually just watch that instead of the actors. 

I loved Tom Hiddleston's and Charlie Cox's performances, but Zawe Ashton just gave me the feeling that she was trying a little too hard? I don't know what it was but somewhere between the tone of her voice and some of her actions/reactions, I just got a little annoyed at her. I might probably be judging her a little too harshly (always that but *I* wouldn't have made those acting choices) but I could just be disliking the character, though (which by implication would mean Ashton did a great job, so idk).

The next one was The Phantom of the Opera on 29 April. A classic choice-- loved the songs, wanted to see it because I'd seen the movie and wanted to see how they could do all that on stage. Realised that I have fuzzy memories of the plot, so there were some bits where I was like, eh, did that happen? Not sure if there were substantial changes in the movie version, though. (I have read the book, the book is 0% like the musical. Well, 20%. The characters and the basic setup are the same-ish. If I recall correctly (it's been decades), it was very much focused on the phantom, I think, and Christine was really a side note. But reading the book you'd be like, how did this become the musical?!)

Anyways, mixed feelings about this. I'd been pre-warned by Choon Ean that it might not have aged well, seeing it's a really old show and it's using the same original stage, so whatever was new/fresh/impressive then would seem kind of old-fashioned now. 

I liked all the dungeon scenes, with the moving bits and the lights and the smoke and the candles and the tilting walkways and the boat! (See, moving stages gets mentioned again haha). The singing was impressive, the staging and the acting and the mirrors and illusions... everything was AWESOME, except the one key bit that spoiled everything. 

When the chandelier "fell", you could literally SEE THE STAGE HANDS WALK OUT THROUGH THE CURTAINS AND CATCH IT. 

Another thought that struck me though, was that my memory of the Raoul-Christine-Phantom triangle seemed rather romantic? The Phantom had a sort of sad romantic vibe, like, aww you like this girl so much but she doesn't love you in return, poor puppy let me give you a hug. Seeing it again, the Phantom was all kinds of creepy. Like the friendly neighbourhood dad/teacher/helpful uncle/starstruck fan, who suddenly turns into a perv. And I was going like, NO THIS IS NOT ROMANTIC. The Phantom is AWFUL. And then the songs don't seem so romantic anymore. lol. 

Finally, I caught Fiddler on the Roof yesterday! This was 100% nostalgia and throwback to the time when we were stuck in a house in Sweden and had the movie on replay until we could sing all the songs word for word. I can't do that now, but I *know* all the songs. 

It was fantastic! No moving stages for this one--it was flat and static boo--but the scene changes were as interesting to watch as the show itself, so yay. I might decide to watch this one again from a better vantage point--the place I was sitting had a bit of a restricted view, so there was this corner/angle of the stage that I couldn't quite see. Idk yet though, if it comes down to it, I'd rather watch a new show than to re-watch one. We'll see. 

---

As a minor writing update, this is today's stats!

I didn't do all this today, it's just that I didn't update my stats yesterday, being out and all. Things will seem more slowgoing from now on though, since I've reached the end of my pre-edited stuff. From now on, it's actual writing and slogging!

Inside Voices: exploring feminism, faith, and freedom

Photo from the Inside Voices facebook page

INSIDE VOICES

Described as ‘witty, enchanting and poignant’ (Global Voices Theatre) and “funny, energising... a charismatic ensemble piece” (Nick Hern Books), Inside Voices blends dark comedy and magical realism to shine a spotlight on Southeast Asian Muslim women, exploring feminism, faith and freedom.

The production is presented by an all-female, all-Asian cast and creative team. The play will be published by Nick Hern Books as one of seven best new plays at VAULT Festival and is a selected festival highlight of renowned theatre critic Lyn Gardner.

Inside Voices also interrogates larger conversations about intersectionality, Islamophobia and the #MeToo movement.

WHEN: 23 Jan - 27 Jan (Wed-Sun: 6.20pm, Sat 3.20pm)
WHERE: Pit - The Vaults, Leake Street
TICKETS : £12.00

For more info, visit https://vaultfestival.com/whats-on/inside-voices/

~

It's funny when you think that you've moved into white spaces but the things you make an effort to go to are things from your side of the world. Eh. Homesick la kan.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Anna Tan (@annatsp) on Jan 26, 2019 at 5:32am PST

(Also had a nice banana leaf rice with kari ikan before the show. lol.)

Inside Voices was held in the Pit at the Vault, which was all very underground indie cool, except the part that it was a bit hard to find. You have to go through this graffiti-ed tunnel passing by various artists spraypainting the wall.

The Pit itself is a small space, probably a little smaller than PenangPAC's Stage 2, and it was set up as a theatre in the round. The first thing I noticed when I entered was a tray full of food, because food. (They were props for the show.)

Official descriptions of the play uses the term "Southeast Asian Muslim women", but I don't know if that's really the best term to use because it's really very Nusantara, in the older (non-Malaysian/Indonesian nationalistic) sense of the word. Maybe I'm just being pedantic about it; SEA includes a much wider range of identities who may or may not be Muslim, but who don't fit into the conversation here. The dialogue is unapologetic about its use of Malay phrases, exclamations and sentence structures. It's something I would expect in a show back home, not one in London. But well, the playwright is Singaporean as are most of the cast and crew.

Inside Voices starts off with a very normal domestic scene: three women getting ready for a meal. From the beginning, their identities are established: the motherly, dependable one; the wild, sexual one; and the newly married, childish one. Actually, I struggled with that last one--her identities seem to run all over the place, as does her accent. Kak Fatimah (played by Nur Khairiyah Ramli) is the most secure in her identity--she is the most comfortable in her skin and her language. Lily (played by Siti Zuraida) fits her flamboyant, wild-child role quite well--her language is sharper, more upper class, as befits one who's educated, urban and sophisticated. Nisa (played by Suhaili Safari) seems to switch between a local Malay-English patois to something more articulated--I don't know if these shifts are intended since her character is insecure and naive, the one who is asking the questions that need to be answered. It just seemed a little confusing somehow.

Using the idea of a safe space, the narrative then delves into their backstories, the things they struggle with as Muslim women--domestic abuse, societal expectations to marry and have children, miscarriage, the politics of wearing the hijab. It veers into the mystical and the superstitious as well, with this hilarious (but also slightly gross) segment on Nasi Kangkang, that plays on Shakespeare's three witches. I can't seem to find an English translation for this, but it's basically black magic, where a woman mixes bodily fluids in food (rice) to gain control over her husband.

It's the location (for the want of a better word--situationality? Story world?) of this play that is its weakest point. Is it the real, physical world? Is it happening in their minds? Is it a dream world? Is this a mental hospital? The scene shifts clearly mark changes in the mental and emotional landscapes and the themes covered, but there seems to be a lack of rootedness as to where it is which is never fully explained. For the first half of the play, I assumed it was a real-world situation, where three friends have taken time off together, like an all-girls holiday. But later on, they talk about not remembering these conversations, about hiding from yourself, as if they were psychotic episodes, and then they plan to leave together, if each of the others are ready.

I highly enjoyed the play (it's more drama than dark comedy, I feel, but I'm not that good in segmenting stuff). There is enough raw emotion and truthfulness to tug at your heartstrings (I had to tell myself not to cry).

~

Short + Sweet Theatre Penang: A Completely Biased Review

In the interest of full disclosure, I'll say right from the start that I have stakes in this.

Not very high stakes, but some stakes. So yes, I am biased, but I shall try to be as unbiased as possible.

Now that's out of the way, let's begin.

What to expect in general:
A mix of everything. There's drama, comedy, and confusion. (We'll get to the last in a bit.)

I haven't been to watch S+S in a while so I didn't know quite what to expect. There were eight short plays altogether - half in BM, half in English. It used to be mostly in English with maybe one play each in Mandarin/Hokkien and BM (or something like that), so whilst I'm maybe sad that there were no Chinese ones this round (despite my comprehension of that being near nil), I think that this turned out to be a pretty good mix.

Overall, the scripts were biased towards drama-type shows, with two (clear) comedies, and one... that I couldn't decide if it was trying to be comedic or serious... which leads to confusion. Out of the eight, I thought four were really good, two were okay... and I don't know what to think about the other two. My brain pretty much just went ? ???? ???!?!

Last general comment: Accents, OMG ACCENTS. I really love the Malaysian accent, I do. Except when it makes everything sound so awkward. Like. WHY YOU ALL SPEAK SO CINA. I know you all are Chinese but don't be so cina can ah. (Speaking about two of the English plays. The other two were okay. The BM ones were pretty fine except one, where the loghat was a bit strong so I couldn't follow everything.)

Right. I'm not going to give a rundown of each play, but I'll highlight the four I really liked, in all its biasedness.

Happy -- of course I liked this. I wrote this. Well, I wrote it in English and they translated it into BM, and I still think it's awesome. I usually hate everything I write the more I read it (hahahaha) so having watched this twice (Tuesday at full dress and Wednesday at opening night) means that they did really well!
(VOTE FOR MAH PLAAAAAYYY)

The Setup -- How can I not like this? It features Penang superstar names like Chen and Lucille Dass, so it can't go terribly wrong. Though, to be honest, Lucille wasn't quite stellar in this. I had questions about her weird overacting and blocking choices (though that's probably more a director thing rather than an actor thing).

Overheard at a Cafe in Taman Tun -- Of all the skits, this felt the most natural. It was also one of the most static, but the actors were strong enough to carry it through. A lot of listening, though.
(Note: LGBT themes if you're the squeamish sort.)






Death is Satu Permulaan -- Malay slapstick at its best. Just park your brain at the door and enjoy. The comedic timing was spot on.

Tickets are still available for shows on Thursday - Saturday, so do do do do dooooo go watch! And also come say hi. :D

Head to the FACEBOOK EVENT PAGE for more details.

#Fridayflash: Come Home

Extracts of Nan's diary, as pertains to Walker. 

1994
October
He's gone. I don't know where he is. No one knows where he is. Milly asked about him at the funeral: Where's Uncle Walker?
He's late. He's coming. 
He never showed. I lied. Only Walker would pull a stunt like this in the middle of a funeral. I'm so angry I could kill him.

November
It's been a month. The detectives can't find him. No clues. No bloody clues. He's just vanished. Poof.
Magic.
I don't believe in magic.
He just "walked out of his apartment" and nobody has a clue where he's gone. This is ridiculous.
I hope he's alright.

December
Milly wanted to know why Uncle Walker didn't show up for Christmas. I want to know why Walker hasn't shown up for months.
Maybe he's dead in a ditch somewhere.
Good riddance.
Lina doesn't know. I can't tell her.


1995
January
Maybe he's gone crazy and forgotten his name and address. If he's institutionalised, how will we find him? Will he grow old alone, forgotten in a home?
Lina's doing better. Time to break the news.

February
I can't deal with two crazy people in a family. Maybe he's dead so I won't have to deal with him.
Harry says I should let go. I try.
We're letting the detectives go. We can't afford it anymore. They said they'd leave it on the radar, let us know only if something pings.

March
I managed to catch Pip's show again. I miss him.
I miss Walker.
I wonder if they checked if anyone jumped off the bridge.

April
Six months. Six months and we don't know if he's dead or alive.
He's probably dead. I can't--
Milly turned four today. We had cake. Balloons.
She asked about Walker again. I don't know what to tell her.
I said he's on a long trip in a faraway land. I hope she'll forget about him soon.

May
Harry says Walker can't possibly be kidnapped because no one has asked for ransom. He also says Walker's probably not dead because the police would have asked us to identify his remains.
Unless they haven't found his remains.
Or his body's been eaten by wild animals and there's nothing left with which to identify him.
Or maybe they can't ask for ransom until the estate's settled, but we need Walker to settle the estate so--

June
I cannot not think about him but I cannot think about him. If I go crazy, it will be Walker's fault.
Maybe he was in a plane crash. Or a car crash. Train crash. Burning wreckage out in the desert. Somewhere.

July
What if he's homeless? And too ashamed to ask for help?
Why did he just walk out of his apartment?
Ned's death must have set off an episode.

October
I'm meeting Walker tomorrow. It's been a year. But he's back.
Finally back.
We'll meet the lawyer with Pip.
It'll be good to see Pip again.

---

EVENT PAGE

Our Pip/Theo was injured, so we're starting fresh this week.

---

You know who you are, though I doubt you'll read this.
Come home.

---

EDIT for additional note: realised it's supposed to be cold in New York during the time the original scene takes place, so the months are probably off. Oh well. 

#fridayflash: Lina

She is
        Sharp lines and taut strings
        Focused on
        Theo, Theo, Theo
but Ned.

No, Ned is comfort. Ned is safety. Ned is the sudden silence in a world of cacophony and if only Theo could be that be comfortsilencesafetysimplicity --

Oh what is the secret behind Theo?

But maybe there is no secret. Maybe he is as empty, as broken, as loud, as crazy and Lina cannot see it. Lina cannot see past -- He wants. Fame. Fortune. Acknowledgement. He is consumed and she is drawn into his orbit; sucked in swallowed down engulfed --

-- no.

She draws herself up, pulls away. The Southern belle has her strength and her dignity and she may not have weight, but she has her power.

A tilt of the shoulders
        A twist of the fingers

Ned doesn't need seducing. Ned is just... there. Easy. Simple. A rock. An abstraction turning into facts. A lifeline. He pulls her out of deep waters, just by kindness. And she needs to escape because Theo, but Ned --

And maybe it's not wrong. Maybe this simplicity is what she wants and needs and craves but cannot get because Theo wants and Theo needs and Lina

cannot be anything other than what she is needed to be.

No matter how hard she tries. 

What you want.
                                  >
                                             >
                                                        >
                                                                   >
                                                                              >
                                                                                         >
                                                                                                    >
                                                                                                                >

What you will get.

But it's not her ascent.

it's her descent

into madness

---

Character work on Lina; Three Days of Rain by Richard Greenberg.