岸西！

張學友很努力，但戲很爛。湯唯很好。
又、雖然硬件很一般，但在文化中心和千多人一起看戲，別有一番感覺。

Eye-openingly fascinating, recommended for all piano players.

'I've heard the piano movers in Melbourne is a-bit unorganised.'
- Civilisation v barbarians

 

青春就是不在意蹩腳的借口

Professional

Innovative includes thoughtful

一隻碟、一首歌

不聚不散

似乎會好看

Adult Movie

That's a nice touch

有些音樂唱碟比現場好，有些音樂則現場較唱碟佳，魯特琴(lute)與高男高音(countertenor)屬於後者。年前在電視劇Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip其中一集中看到一場Sting客串以魯特琴伴奏的演唱性感非常，於是跑去購進唱碟，回家一聽卻大失所望：Sting的歌聲姑且不論，魯特琴的琴音始終太過單薄，純粹耳聽很容易失去注意，更談不上好好欣賞。上月偶爾在電視上看見今年藝術節廣告，竟然有劇中魯特琴演奏者伊汀‧卡拉馬佐夫(Edin Karamazov)的演出，於是在最後一刻購票欣賞。

是次演出由正統古典歌唱家高男高音安德烈亞斯‧修爾(Andreas Scholl)演唱。高個子非常紳士的修爾與卡拉馬佐夫一起坐著演出，清裊的高男高音不時以手部和上身姿勢輔助帶出十六十七世紀世俗歌曲的強烈感情，卡拉馬佐夫的魯特琴情摯專注，抱琴撥弦深情始終如一，看著令人感動。所謂十六十七世紀的世俗歌曲其實即是當時的流行情歌，以現時聽來非常古雅的英語頌唱有其獨特的魅力。可惜購得的坐席位置並不太好，視線常被演出者的樂譜阻礙，如果修爾和卡拉馬佐夫能不以樂譜演出，音樂感情的傳達當會更好。另外值得一提的是很進入狀態的卡拉馬佐夫有數次想一氣呵成的連續演奏多首樂曲，可惜都被觀眾熱情的拍掌聲打斷而被逼放棄，也是非常可惜的事。

初次接觸魯特琴是在林行止的遊藝文章讀到，林甚喜彈奏這種類似結他的文藝復興/巴洛克時代古樂器，曾多次為文介紹。記憶中羅賓漢的愉快夥伴們(Merry Men)其中一位也是常彈魯特琴，而每位香港中學會考生的惡夢 — 綠袖子，於十六世紀時當也是以魯特琴伴奏的吧。

P.S. Special thanks to Richard who accompanies me at the call of the 11th hour in the busiest month of the accounting season.

Animal Farm performed by Wide Rice
Hong Kong Arts Festival, 2010.03.05

Just a brief comment for my friend now happily in Singapore, who gave me the opportunity to watch the sold-out drama in this year’s Arts Festival with her friend and another girl which also happens to seat-in for an unavailable friend of friend. It's quite an interesting experience to have three connected strangers sitting together watching a two-hour show.

It's difficult to make a production on a contemporary classic like Animal Farm. It is not Shakespeare, which the archaic language & background sets free the director no matter he's doing an urtext version or a modern remake. It is also not some latest Nobel, which few would attempt to swallow or understand the original, allowing the director to do whatever he wants in the name of the work. No Animal Farm is not one of those -- Animal Farm is a book that actually everybody read. It is a short book -- the paperback version is only 112 pages and weighted 5.6 ounce. Its story and language are even simpler than Harry Potter – Orwell appended ‘a fairy story’ after Animal Farm in its original title. It’s a compulsory reading in many high schools, much more amusing than Romeo and Juliet… In short, putting Animal Farm on stage is like making a "金鏞" on stage, with most of the audience knowing fairly well the original story, expects the drama-version to follow the large part of the original story, but still expects to feel the dramatics from the drama. It’s like putting the weatherman on stage and expecting him to do magic.

Of course the safest way to impress the audience is by stage/lighting/sound design, which tonight’s performance is brilliant. The use of air-con duct simulating the building of the wind-mill is a smart use of the stage horizontally (and to some extent vertically), and a live on-stage drummer/percussionist makes a stunning difference to an average drama experience. Another route is by the actors' performance, which the actors tonight with their body and voice imitating different animals is quite persuasive, though I sometimes may not be able to recognize immediately what those animals are (elaborations below). The original Song of the Beast and a few well-chosen classics in the drama also lit up the audience, at one point the audience even claps the beat with the stage together. Overall, it is an entertaining show.

However, one goes to the theatre to watch such classic on stage could hardly not expecting the director’s treatment on the story/text. On this the production is quite disappointing. The drama follows the original text most faithfully (even a large part of Old Major’s speech is repeated at the beginning of the play, which lasted for a couple of minutes), and replicated almost ALL major episodes and characters of the story (but with a curious cut/swap of the last episode). The result is a performance exceedingly ‘rush’, with actors using a very fast pace both in speech and acting, without any substantial change of tempo throughout the performance (perhaps with the exception of the very last scene). Even the time-allocation among the acts seems to be a constant, without any differentiation corresponding to their significance (say not the dramatic build-up). The attempt to imitate almost all major characters in the original story requires the six ‘animal’ actors (by no means a mini-cast) to change their imitations fairly frequently, and the rushing pace means that the interval for their ‘transformation’ is almost nil. Often the audience has to follow a few lines in the wonder-wonder land before noticing there’s a change of character on the actor, and there is little sign of directing. Unless the director is trying to convey the message that there is practically little difference between characters/episodes or even the stage & reality, as every under-class is equally exploited by the upper-class in all systems all-the-same, this lack of treatment reduced the performance to a book-stage adaptation exercise, with many possibility of the theatre regrettably unexplored. Of course I may be too harsh on the drama company Wide Rice, which is Singaporean where drama scripts may be under close scrutiny by the authority, but nonetheless the performance is shown here in Hong Kong, and at least currently, I don't find the play a very attractive interpretation of George Orwell’s most classic story.

信報 2010-03-03
楊照〈最空洞又最充實的生命 —重讀古龍的《楚留香傳奇》〉
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

初讀《楚留香》，書不是自己的。高中校刊社裏隨時都有武俠小說流傳著，從這個人手上轉給那個人，到後來誰也搞不清楚書原始主人究竟是誰。這樣到手的武俠小說，很少能剛好從第一冊讀到最後一冊，有一本就讀一本，計較不了那麼多。

所以我的楚留香，不是從無花、南宮靈那段故事讀起的。書一翻開，楚留香已經和姬冰雁、中原一點紅身陷石觀音的洞穴裏，危機愈來愈深，每一個新的場景都是新的困境，陣仗鋪開，看起來他們一點脫險的機會都沒有。但他們卻一次又一次解圍。其中有一次，是因為他們遇上了曲無容。曲無容因為長得太美了，被石觀音逼迫毀容，所以名叫「無容」。可是她掀開面紗露出令人不忍卒睹的災後之臉時，平常冷血冷酷看似沒有一絲感情的「一點紅」卻在經過她身邊時，輕輕地說：「妳不醜，妳很美。」曲無容大受震動。不過曲無容寧可說服自己：「一點紅」是為了誘引她相助，才如此違心讚美。她表達了這樣的懷疑，已經中毒的「一點紅」很傷心，二話不說，決定無論如何不離開了，選擇死在洞穴裏。

這段簡單的情節，讓高中時的我讀得鼻酸眼眶泛紅。而且後來幾度重讀，都還是毫無例外地在這裏引發同樣的感動反應。

至少十幾歲時的我相信這樣的感情在古龍筆下，這是兩個從來沒有得到過愛的人。他們的冷酷冷漠，是一種自我保護。但是在那一瞬間，兩個同類的冰冷動物，突然辨認出彼此，從內在—可能是自己都不理解其存在的最深內在—迸發出最熱的熱情，他們不可能在那麼短的時間裏學會如何表達，卻可以在那麼短的時間心甘情願將自己的生命交出去，靈光閃爍的信任與肯定，比什麼都重要、比什麼都值得。

我相信，至少十幾歲時的我相信這樣的感情。甚至懷抱著夢想，以為人一生就是應該遭遇一次這樣可生可死、刻骨銘心的愛情，才算不枉。年歲漸長，種種經歷磨蝕了去追求這種感情的衝動，也理解這種感情畢竟不可能真正將時間凝住，讓剎那停住成永恆，熱情會有燒掉冷掉的「後來」，不過我卻還是退一步堅持：人至少應該為自己保留著一點相信這種感情、被這種感情感動的心理空間吧！