Experiencing “The Secret Love Life of Ophelia”

On the 7th of March, my friends and I went to the Kuala Lumpur Performing Arts Centre (KLPAC) to watch a “The Secret Love Life of Ophelia.” It was my first time watching a professional English play.

When I called the blockbuster’s office a few days prior to watching the play, the lady who answered my call said “just come and get your tickets on the day itself, there is no need to book, not many people come to watch the play.” So I thought that only my friends and I, and maybe a few other cultured individuals would be going to watch the play. The lesser that shows up, the lesser the distraction would be.

When I went to the counter to get my ticket on that day, I asked the guy, how many people had purchased the ticket to watch the show that day, he replied “only a handful.” To my surprise, the hall was packed for the play that day. A group of UPM students from the credited co curriculum of theater came to watch the play too.

We managed to meet the director of the play, Christopher Ling and moments before we went in the theatre. He briefed us on the play and also what we can do and cannot do when the play is on. We did not get the chance to speak to him personally about the play though.

The hall door opened 10minutes before the play started. I was the first one to step in, and looking at how small the stage was and how little the props were, it totally changed my view about theater. When we talk about theater, it is always this big stage and magnificent props that comes to mind. For this play there were just two couches and two tables positioned in the middle of the hall at the same level with the audiences in the front row. I was seating at the third row, and yet I felt so close to the actors. I had a clear view and I could see the actor’s expressions clearly throughout the play. The play started exactly at 2pm. The play started on time regardless the audience has not fully arrived. The actors seemed oblivious to the audiences shuffling in and continued on their act. I was very much distracted at that point of time.

It was quite blurry at the beginning, when Ophelia and Hamlet was in the same stage space, oblivious to each other’s presence and went on doing their own things. When Hamlet started to speak while writing an invisible letter, followed by Ophelia who answered the letter in the same manner, I finally understood that the two being is actually not in the same vicinity, but in different places. The whole play was basically the exchange of interactions of Ophelia and hamlet through imaginary letters, emails, text messages and phone call. Talk about technological adaptations!

The play was about Ophelia’s affair with Hamlet, somewhat an adaptation from Shakespeare’s Hamlet, but this part was not in the original play itself. It was an awakening, how an old play can be adapted and manipulated and still have that ancient play feeling to it but portrayed in a modern way.

The way the actors acted and the way they said their lines was totally inspirational. The amount of lines they had to memorize, I could just imagine how long they practiced for the production of the play. Even the lines that they spoke were well written, full of underlying meanings, and the language was beautiful. Thankfully I had familiarized my self with Shakespeare’s works and his use of language, if not I most probably be lost in this play like most of the audience that day.

I am really impressed with the way the actor acted during the parts when he was making coffee, imaginary coffee! There were no props at all, but his gestures really played with my imagination, I definitely felt like he was really making and drinking real coffee. The actress was impressed me too. I liked the part when she was playing with the imaginary cat, it was so real, as if there was a real cat there playing with her. They acted so real, it was so pure, not fake like what we see in the dramas on television.

The play was simple, nothing technical. I enjoyed it. I would advise that one should know what happens in the play Hamlet by Shakespeare before watching the play to better understand what the actors are doing on stage.

That day I learned how a play becomes a play. It is not the size of the stage or the greatness of the props, or even the number of actors on stage, it I how the play is brought by the actors, how the actors uses the stage and props available.

As for this trip to KLPAC, I am thankful that Dr. Edwin instructed us all to go and watch at least 1 play to fulfill one of the requirements of this course. If it is not for the purpose of fulfilling the requirement of the course, I don’t think that any of us would be bothered to spend time and watch any professional play. I would definitely visit KLPAC again for other plays in the future.

Teiresias???

As I was reading “Oedipus the King” by Sophocles, Teiresias’ character came about. Teiresias? The blind prophet? It was like déjà vu. Isn’t he one of the Greek myths? Suddenly it rang a bell. I remember Teiresias being in Homer's Odyssey, where he was pictured in the underworld, with his golden staff, and having the power of prophecy; where Circe advised Odysseus to go to the entrance to the underworld evoke the “shade” of Teiresias so that he might tell Odysseus how to find his way home; Teiresias told Odysseus that his homecoming would be laden with hardships but that he would eventually overcome the wrath of Poseidon and return to his home on the island of Ithaca. That was the Teiresias I remembered. Teiresias in Oedipus the King? Is Homer’s and Sophocles’ Teiresias the same person, or is it different? I left it there and accepted that, ok Teiresias is just a random character. Somehow when I continue reading the play and we discussed the dialogue exchange between Oedipus and Teiresias in class, I realized that Teiresias’ character is significant in the play. Teiresias is worth to be checked out!

When I Googled Teiresias, there were lost of information about him, and different version of stories of his blindness.

In Greek mythology, Teiresias was a blind prophet, the son of the shepherd Everes and the nymph Chariclo. Teiresias was a prophet of Zeus. According to the mythographic compendium Bibliotheke, different stories were told of the cause of his blindness, the most direct being that he was simply blinded by the gods for revealing their secrets. An alternate story told by the poet Pherecydes was followed in Callimachus' poem "The Bathing of Pallas"; in it, Teiresias was blinded by Athena after he stumbled onto her bathing naked. His mother, Chariclo, a nymph of Athena, begged her to undo her curse, but Athena could not; instead, she cleaned his ears, giving him the ability to understand birdsong, thus the gift of augury.

On Mount Cyllene in the Peloponnese, as Teiresias came upon a pair of copulating snakes, he hit the pair a smart blow with his stick. Hera was not pleased, and she punished Teiresias by transforming him into a woman. As a woman, Teiresias became a priestess of Hera, married and had children, including Manto, who also possessed the gift of prophecy. According to some versions of the tale, Lady Teiresias was a prostitute of great renown. After seven years as a woman, Teiresias again found mating snakes; depending on the myth, either she made sure to leave the snakes alone this time, or, according to Hyginus, trampled on them. As a result, Teiresias was released from his sentence and permitted to regain his masculinity. This ancient story is recorded in lost lines of Hesiod.

In a separate episode, Teiresias was drawn into an argument between Hera and her husband Zeus, on the theme of who has more pleasure in sex: the man, as Hera claimed; or, as Zeus claimed, the woman, as Teiresias had experienced both. Teiresias revealed woman's greatest secret: that she receives the greater pleasure: "Of ten parts a man enjoys one only." Hera instantly struck him blind for his impiety. Zeus could do nothing to stop her, but he did give Teiresias the gift of foresight and a lifespan of seven lives.

Stripped of its narrative, anecdotal and causal connections, the mythic figure of Teiresias combines several archaic elements: the blind seer; the impious interruption of a natural rite (whether of a bathing goddess or coupling serpents); serpents and staff (Caduceus); a holy man's double gender (shaman); and competition between deities.

According to Sostratus, author of an elegiac poem called Teiresias, he was originally a girl, but had been changed into a boy by Apollo at the of seven; after undergoing several more transformations from one sex to the other, she (for the final sex was feminine) was turned into a mouse and her lover Arachnus into a weasel Eustathius on Odyssey. Teiresias died after drinking the water from the spring Tilphussa, where he was struck by an arrow of Apollo. Teiresias' grave was at the Tilphusian spring; but there was a cenotaph of him at Thebes, and also in later times his "observatory," or place for watching for omens from birds.

In the play “Oedipus the King”, by Sophocles, Oedipus calls upon Teiresias to aid in the investigation of the killing of Laios. Teiresias refuses to give a direct answer and instead hints that the killer is someone Oedipus really does not wish to find. After Oedipus blinds himself and wanders, Teiresias appears in Antigone, also by Sophocles. King Creon of Thebes refused to allow Polynices to be buried. His sister, Antigone, defied the order and was caught; Creon decreed that she was to be buried alive. The gods expressed their disapproval of Creon's decision through Teiresias. However, Antigone had already hanged herself rather than be buried alive. When Creon arrived at the tomb where she was to be interred, his son, Haemon, attacked him and then killed himself. When Creon's wife, Eurydice, was informed of their death she, too, takes her own life.

Teiresias is certainly an interesting character to be discovered in whole, and I am certainly glad that Dr.Edwin made us all to look deeper into Teiresias' character beyond “Oedipus the King”.