Blood Brother
Blood Brother Performance Essay
On the 14TH June 2012, we watched Blood Brothers, by Willy Russell, at the Phoenix Theatre. The play ‘Blood Brothers’ is set in 1980s Britain; it deals with numerous themes such as fate, the class system, insanity, superstition and division. The genres of the play are drama, tragedy & comedy-to an extent. Something I found particularly interesting was how the genre of comedy became less and less apparent as the play went on, whereas the genre of tragedy- became more and more apparent as the play went on-the opposite. The play was a musical.
I didn’t have any expectations of the play prior to watching it, as I believe art and especially performance art revolves around an experience, a new experience, that one must freely allow to affect them in whatever way it will, and therefore its essential to not ‘expect’ anything. However, I suppose there were things I instantly imagined would happen in the play, with the title being ‘Blood Brothers’; I imagined it would be very violent.
The narrator’s role was tremendously significant, he was an interventionist narrator, his role was to be the voice of superstition, the force who injected the sense of superstition into the characters spirits; he was responsible for the sense of superstition-which was perceptible throughout the play, and for it being so significant and strong. The narrator did not have a set location on the set-like most narrators would, he always-surprisingly appeared in random spaces on the set, at the beginning of the play he stood in the centre of the stage, and at other points he appeared in other spaces. He often appeared on the centre balcony, above all the other characters and at several different spaces on the stage. This was highly effective as it caused the narrator to be perceived as a higher force-a force with an upper hand, someone spiritual-like a voice of conscience. It also made him seem tremendously powerful. He was invisible to all the characters, yet
On the 14TH June 2012, we watched Blood Brothers, by Willy Russell, at the Phoenix Theatre. The play ‘Blood Brothers’ is set in 1980s Britain; it deals with numerous themes such as fate, the class system, insanity, superstition and division. The genres of the play are drama, tragedy & comedy-to an extent. Something I found particularly interesting was how the genre of comedy became less and less apparent as the play went on, whereas the genre of tragedy- became more and more apparent as the play went on-the opposite. The play was a musical.
I didn’t have any expectations of the play prior to watching it, as I believe art and especially performance art revolves around an experience, a new experience, that one must freely allow to affect them in whatever way it will, and therefore its essential to not ‘expect’ anything. However, I suppose there were things I instantly imagined would happen in the play, with the title being ‘Blood Brothers’; I imagined it would be very violent.
The narrator’s role was tremendously significant, he was an interventionist narrator, his role was to be the voice of superstition, the force who injected the sense of superstition into the characters spirits; he was responsible for the sense of superstition-which was perceptible throughout the play, and for it being so significant and strong. The narrator did not have a set location on the set-like most narrators would, he always-surprisingly appeared in random spaces on the set, at the beginning of the play he stood in the centre of the stage, and at other points he appeared in other spaces. He often appeared on the centre balcony, above all the other characters and at several different spaces on the stage. This was highly effective as it caused the narrator to be perceived as a higher force-a force with an upper hand, someone spiritual-like a voice of conscience. It also made him seem tremendously powerful. He was invisible to all the characters, yet