Production Statement

Fuddy Meers presents a few problems in the script that need to be addressed. They are few but diverse. The show opens in Claire’s bedroom. Then we move to Limping man’s car. Then to Gertie’s kitchen. Then to Gertie’s basement. Then to Richard’s car. There are two different cars as setting! Another issue is the staged violence. There is a tussle between Richard and Heidi when he wrestles her gun from her using his self defense class knowledge. Later there is the struggle between Heidi and Kenny when she is trying to get the gun back from him. On top of that Kenny is shot in this process. And there is the fact that there is a gun on stage. Then there is the stabbing. Gertie stabs Limping man in the back. And to top off the staged violence, both Heidi and Millet are conked on the back of the head with a shovel. Lastly there is the problem of the two speech impediments that Gertie (aphasia) and Limping man (lisping) to consider. They make it hard for the audience to understand if not done properly.

Here at SHSU, however, we have more specified concerns. First of all I see Fuddy Meers as a show that would be in the showcase theatre. Assuming that this was the case, the size of the space right away sends bells off at the thought of the two cars that are settings. Not to mention the kitchen, the basement, or the bedroom that. Then there is the question of violence. The staged combat can be dangerous for professionals and we want students to be as safe as possible. Something else to think about with the small space is the audience’s close proximity to this action. This means that the wrestling, gun use, and stabbing have to be believable on top of the safety concerns. One plus with the small space is that the language issues are easier to handle. The easier it is to see an actors lips the easier it is to understand what they are saying. So, therefore, in the case of Limping man and his lisp, there is some relief to the concern of the ear picking up what is being said.

There were a few interesting solutions to the set that I read in reviews or saw in the production photos. More than one production had a revolving set, sort of like a Lazy Susanne, as an answer to the different sets. But most treated the sets and props as abstracts without walls. I saw one picture that had an actual car on stage…Or at least part of it (the front end) although I’m not sure if this production used the same car as both sets or if they used two different car fronts. Another way the cars were solved in a few of the productions was that the seats and steering wheel only as the car. One solution that I saw that did not work for me was the production that used a Fisher Price toy car! HUH?! There didn’t seem to be much said about the violence and or stabbing mentioned in my research. I saw one photo that had what looked like a large butcher knife being used. In another photo from the same production they seemed to be using depth as a way to fool the audience in sewing up Limping man’s wounds. One would assume that they used angles to have the stabbing work or a collapsible knife. To address the gun, I think that this was something that some of the smaller productions treated as part of the audience’s willing suspense of disbelief. I saw one photo that had Heidi and Kenny fighting over a more than obviously fake gun. Further more, none of the reviews addressed problems with the speech impediments that the characters have. I don’t know if this is due to a very well rehearsed set of actors or a translation sheet of Gertie’s lines slipped into the program. Every review I read seemed to understand her completely.

In the majority of the reviews that I read, the script was hailed as hilariously funny and spot on for this type of comedy and the productions nailed the performance. There were, however, mixed reviews in Europe. The professional English productions had some reviews that didn’t enjoy the outrageous comedy that switched into the moral lesion with a thoughtful, poignant even, ending. The critic that I am thinking of in particular that I’m thinking of ( and most like it about the same production) blamed part of the problem on the playwright and part on the director. Apparently there is a fine line that is easy to cross put forth by the playwright and the English production crossed it.