Wednesday, January 28, 2009

Open question.

"The one-man show that is And Then You Die isn't as risky as Hansen's award-winning 2003 work, I Hate This, chronicling the stillbirth of his first son. But the work presented its own set of challenges."

- from Ed Sotelo's Jan. 22 Sun Papers article

So here's my question: Is IHT more risky than &TYD? Please comment.

5 comments:

Brian said...

I'm not sure how you could argue that, in terms of subject matter and concept, that IHT isn't the riskier of the two pieces. I always felt like you had a lot more riding on that piece's success than just its artistic merits.

That said, I was impressed at how much you pushed yourself with this piece - and not just all the oft-mentioned running. You took risks with the piece that I didn't expect, but in reflection made sense with the theme of 'breaking through the wall'.

Of course, I NEVER would have expected that, in a nice little show about running a very long distance, that I'd be staring at your wang for a full five minutes. When I saw the disclaimer sign warning about the nudity, I let out a sigh of relief when I found out it was for your show and not Jeff's.

pengo said...

Were you, Brian? Staring?

Brian said...

Well, I tried, but the lighting in that scene was so poor. All the light was on your head, for crying out loud!

Henrik said...

You see, full-frontal nudity isn't even risky anymore. (Maybe I've been watching too much Oz.)

Back to the original question. Was it your goal to be "risky" with the new play? Does topping the last one, in that way matter? Is this a standalone show or Part II of your memoirs?

pengo said...

What excellent questions. Can't say if riskiness was a "goal." No, I was not attempting to top the last one, if anything it was intention to present a show which was lighter than IHT (how could it not be?) and ended writing the sequel I was originally loathe to create.