Watching the real performance immediately after reading the text is a very interesting and educating experience for me. When I sunk in the theater seat and got immersed into the performance on the stage, those feelings which came from reading text was still lingering in my mind. In this way, the contrast is able to be so dramatic. For me, in the performance everything about Clov was unexpected, and I imaged Nagg as a little young man because of those biscuits but it actually was a old gentleman who plays Nagg on the stage. While these are still ok, and I can understand part of the reason why they set up the performance in this way. But as for the pacing of performance, I would say that it was unexpected and I still don’t agree on the way they play. When I was reading, I found that there was a lot of pauses in between the dialogues, and the content of dialogues are very symbolic. I can feel the dreadful essence of time through these pauses in the dialogue and killing repetitions of everything. I was imaging the performance would be like a Tarkovsky’s film. But In the performance, the actors speak very fast, and there is literally no pauses at all. Everything happens so fast so that I can hardly feel the repetitions. This is what I find the most significant difference between text and real performance.
3 Responses to Endgame
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I found it interesting how you mentioned what was unexpected by the play. After reading your response I found myself comparing the work to the play and looking back on how each reader sees the work in a different light. I agree on the fact that there was no pauses as one might imagine in the work, I wonder if they had to do that for time management or if it was just the director’s take on the writing. Your response was very thought provoking as it brought up differences, and required me to step back and realize some on my own.
I agree with your response of how the characters that you envisioned in your mind when reading the text was different than what was actually portrayed. I too had the same experience when I saw that Clov didn’t look as much as a madman as i had thought although when i saw that the actor gave him a limp i found that sort of symbolic in a way. As for the pace of the film i think that it depends on how the reader reads it because sometimes things do happen quickly but in our heads it is not. Or perhaps because this is a play being performed on a stage they could not pause as long as the text implied it did.
Hi!
I definitely agree with your post! When you state “When I was reading, I found that there was a lot of pauses in between the dialogues, and the content of dialogues are very symbolic” I could not agree more. I too felt as though the pauses in the text allowed you to feel the emotion of the characters and feel their sorrow and pain. It allowed the scenes to have a more emotional and deeper connection to each character. While in the play they kind of took that aspect away from the text making it not as touching. Even though I did feel bad for Hamm more so in the play than in the book, the pauses would have allowed me to feel more compassion towards the other characters like Clov. There are some subtle pauses but none of them allow you to really feel a deep connection to the characters.
-Kelly Kay