Dedicated to the Revolutions
Produced by Small Wooden Shoe
Created by Frank Cox-O’Connell, Chad Dembski, Ame Henderson, Erika Hennebury, Gillian Lewis, Aimée Dawn Robinson, Trevor Schwellnus, Erin Shields, Evan Webber and Jacob Zimmer
Runs March 31 – April 12, 2009@ Buddies in Bad Times Theatre
By Daina Valiulis
As the audience enters the theatre, the performers are mingling, casually playing a game of Jenga on a table in the centre of the stage. A troupe member sits by the entrance, competing against a printer in a speed-writing contest. The Jenga blocks tumble, and desk-dude stops the competition — the performers demonstrate how, in a short amount of time, the printer can produce more text than a person, though they never explain the relevance to the show. The performance continues in much the same vein: presenting “experiments” that never reach a conclusion or prove anything — problematic since experiments by nature are meant to prove or disprove a hypothesis.
An informal ensemble piece, Dedicated to the Revolutions features seven performers speaking about and attempting to demonstrate, through various experiments, the seven revolutions that have had the most impact on our world. The set is a wide expanse fenced in by dry-erase boards on all sides with a giant projection screen in the middle (used to project images of the events as they unfold through a hand-held camera).
At the top of the show, the ensemble lists the seven revolutions they mean to explore: the Gutenberg Revolution, the Copernican Revolution, the Newtonian Revolution, the Industrial Revolution, the Darwinian Revolution, the Nuclear Revolution, and the Information Revolution.
The show continues haphazardly; unclear jumps from one scene to the next make it difficult to follow along. Each experiment seemed to exist in its own world, failing to connect to the main thesis of the piece (about which I’m still unclear).
In the first experiment, two performers arrange an old-school child’s communication system using cans and wire. They introduce more and more people (and cans and wires) to the system, which eventually becomes complicated and clumsy. Point understood — revolutions, in the name of progress, have often complicated matters more. However, transitions lacked a certain flow. The very next experiment showed how light technology has progressed over time, demonstrating what light would look like illuminating the streets of Paris at night in the 1900s, a Toronto street, Dundas Square, and a fully illuminated theatre. What did this have to do with the communication experiment? Or any of the revolutions? It’s a mystery.
Also problematic: the two question periods. The audience was encouraged to ask the performers pre-arranged questions found under the seats. Examples: “Which conditions would create stillness?” and “Are time and space the same thing?” (The answer was “Yes.”) “What was the social impact of trains?” (Answer: “Madness.”) Another favorite of mine was, “What do you need to start an industrial revolution?” The answer was, “Babies (for their small, dexterous fingers) and capital.” Before the audience had time to contemplate this experiment, the performers were on to a giant mathematical equation meant to “spend some time alleviating your anxieties about the end of the world.”
While at times the experiments were clever and had an amusingly casual, goofy science-fair vibe, some of them were straight-up boring and poorly executed. They didn’t prove anything or have anything to do with one another. The cuteness they achieved with style in the beginning wore thin by the end. The show ended with a song: “Nothing ever wants to change, but it does and that’s what’s strange…” Was that the point? If so — achieved. But I left scratching my head.
