In Act Three, Scene One of Lucy Prebble’s 2009 play Enron there is a restaging of the destruction of New York City’s Twin Towers on September 11, 2001. Prebble’s text reads:
September 11th 2001.
They improvise their responses.
Eventually . . .
Ken Lay comes out to give a speech.[1]
This is how it went down in Rupert Goold’s staging of the play: there is a projection of the towers engulfed in smoke. A cloud of some glittery substance meant to index ashes and broken glass falls from the lighting rig. Several members of the suited ensemble stumble forwards in slow motion, miming leaps from 100 storey windows, flailing their arms slowly, mouths open in silent screams.
Famously, London loved Enron and New York City hated it. In an article in The Guardian, British theatre critic Michael Billington attributes its failure on Broadway to New York theatre’s “conservative instincts.”[2] But Nicole Gelinas, writing in City Journal, notes how audiences enjoyed the first half of the play, with its velociraptors and light sabers. Once the representation of 9/11 hit, “shocked audience members launched a quiet but seething strike”, withholding their laughter and applause.[3] Patrick Duggan writes that “because of the conditions of its operation—the encounter of live bodies that gaze upon each other, the theatre might be considered an ethically dense and complex space, especially when attending to questions and representations of trauma […].”[4] It strikes me that an audience’s withdrawal of affective labour upon the performance of a representation of historical trauma might indeed be a kind of ethical encounter. No, the New York audience said, this is too much. Or, this is not enough.
Is theatre ever up to the task of representing trauma? As Duggan’s body of research on contemporary trauma theory and performance has noted, trauma itself has a dimension of repetitive performance—trauma marks an original event that is only accessible through “delayed psychic returns.”[5] He identifies a subset of performances he calls “trauma-tragedy”, which reflect the structures of trauma, rather than the actual event. But Goold’s interpretation of Prebble’s stage direction “September 11 2001” is not in this camp. Like the sinking of the ship imagined in John Thornberry’s A Night to Remember, the material indexicality of the theatre—the way often shabby, flimsy things point to “real things”, like glitter pointing to the ashes of the Twin Towers—transforms trauma into burlesque.
Thornberry’s piece imagines a staging of the sinking of the Titanic (though the word is never used) within the confines of the proscenium arch. We first encounter a tumbling, sinkable Molly Brown: “A well-turned-out matron in a maroon evening gown, replete with diamonds, pearls and a sable stole, tumbles down the tilted deck like an out-of-control child on a playground slide.” The spectacle continues in this fashion with items and people tumbling into the sea, in a manner that reminds the reader of Buster Keaton and Lucille Ball’s encounters with the material world, and by extension, Henri Bergson’s work on laughter (provoked by something mechanical encrusted upon the organic). Like Goold’s attempt to represent 9/11, the representation soon begins to strain and push the theatre itself past its breaking point. The audience is submerged in the wooden ocean. But then again, in witnessing such an event, perhaps it was already too immersed to return to shore. Thornberry’s audience, unlike the New York audience witnessing Prebble’s Enron, cannot withhold their affective labour, they cannot go on strike. They can only scream for help.
[1] Lucy Prebble, Enron (London: Methuen Drama, 2009), p. 159.
[2] Michael Billington, “Enron’s failure shows Broadway’s flaws”, The Guardian, May 5, 2010, https://www.theguardian.com/stage/theatreblog/2010/may/05/enron-broadway-close-early.
[3] Nicole Gelinas, “Why Enron couldn’t take Manhattan”, City Journal, May 13, 2010, https://www.city-journal.org/html/why-enron-couldn%E2%80%99t-take-manhattan-10729.html.
[4] Patrick Duggan, “Others, Spectatorship, and the Ethics of Verbatim Performance”, New Theatre Quarterly: NTQ, 29: 2 (2013), pp. 146-158 (p. 147).
[5] Patrick Duggan & Mick Wallis, “Trauma and Performance: Maps, narratives and folds”, Performance Research, 16:1 (2011), pp. 4-17 (p. 5).