If you read the book you will know that this is a very satirical and personal account of Suad Al Amiry’s experiences in Palestine and more specifically in Ramallah under siege. The book is an easy read and as you go through it you learn more about Suad and her perspective and approach to living under occupation.

The play was my third encounter with Sharon and My Mother In Law. I had read the book, attended a reading by the Author and now this. The play takes this book and adapts it for the stage. In one hour they try to convey the emotion, the confusion, the resilience of not just this woman but rather this struggle and how people adapt and cope even under the most difficult of circumstances.

I thought that the play was well done. They adapted the book superbly and were able to make it a cohesive one hour work. The acting was good even from the back row. Considering they didn’t have much in terms of sound and depended on their voices I thought the actors did well. However Albalad Theater leaves much to be desired in terms of seating and sound. I love the place and what it does however as a venue I always dread going there for fear of being stuck in the back and missing much.

Being part of an audience that saw that adaptation, that laughed at the jokes and exaggerations I couldn’t help but have mixed feelings. Each one of us has their own Palestine and their own relationship with this Palestine. Laughing and making light of the trials and tribulations of this woman may be a coping strategy for her but it created within me a conflict. Laughing lightly, from the safety of my seat at what can only be a tragedy. The play confronts you in a way a reading whether by yourself or the author doesn’t. It dramatizes and brings to life the words such that they strike a completely different cord.

But if this is what this play achieved I am happy. Why because it gets people thinking or so I hope. If people’s emotions are conflicted then Palestine is not a distant memory. It gets them thinking of their own Palestine and how it is similar or different from Al Amiry’s.

There are numerous scenes that stand out in both the book and the play. Namely Suad’s mother in law and their fleeing of her house to live with Suad and her son. Suad persuading her to leave things behind and with one statement Um Salim drives home reality of the situation “That’s what we said in 48”. When reading the book and seeing the play my throat clamed up at that statement. We are losing the generation that saw 48 happen and it is in these small references that we can only begin to understand what this resistance and this struggle means. The other is Suad’s dogs freedom of movement and how animals seem to always get what humans cant .

I won’t say more read the book, attend the play, and see where your Palestine fits into all of this. My Palestine is a bittersweet place where all this happens and much more. We laugh at it, we adapt, we watch from afar, but the real heroes are the ones who live day in day out under occupation, trying to etch out a place for themselves and their children in a god forsaken land called home.

Play poster

Friday night I saw a play being performed at the King Hussein Center. It revolved around two people and their confrontations with daily issues. It was in three acts. the play required a lot of concentration, which if you know me I lack after the sun goes down, especially if I am placed in a dark room in a comfortable chair. So I made sure I put the effort in to stay awake and focused, the result of which are the following impressions.


The play, to me, was a commentary on modern society and relationships at the very basic level. It was the give and take and confrontations of two lovers, a married couple. It was daring in a way I hadn’t seen before: in its interaction between the actors, the dialogue, the issues. They were everyday things that we never really talk about. I heard a friend say it was about couples and as single people we can’t relate. For in their portrayal they spoke of their neurosis and their issues, things we can all relate to. Even in their struggle between each other I could see the dichotomy that lies within each of us and how we struggle between two poles.


We are all part male and part female. We are all socially conditioned and predisposed to certain behaviors and opinions. We all adhere in one way or another to the socially acceptable ideas, norms and ethos. Yet at the same time we struggle against them. We struggle with our selves, our fears, our beliefs, our gender roles, equity among others. And it was all there, if you chose to see it. And like us and our lives, it was inconclusive.

 

I think the play was enjoyable with its satire, sarcasm and cynicism. The actors, while maintaining the conflict, were able to make us laugh on numerous occasions. They reflected us and when we laughed we laughed at ourselves too. I only wished I could concentrate more on what was being said, for both actors spoke at the same time most times. But that too is part of our communication style, internally our confused soul and its voices try to drown each other out. With others we just want to be heard and so we don’t listen, we just shout, talk, drown the other out. We only hear ourselves. This makes our lives, our issues, our strife inconclusive, despite there always being an outcome of sorts.



That evening was mentally stimulating and even taxing. I enjoyed it and it was worth the hour or so of my time. I look forward to more theater in our cultural scene.