We are taught not to talk about politics or religion in social situations. I don’t recall a similar restriction on sexuality but judging from the response to “Tongues” last Saturday, we should perhaps, add sexuality to the trio of taboo topics.
Several members of the audience walked out during the no-intermission 90- minutes play. Both the structure and the content of “Tongues” proved challenging even for an experienced theatre audience. Anyone expecting to be lulled into the darkness and a narrative may have felt irritated or disoriented when the house lights rudely came on, twice, to have director Sean Tobin step in as the absent “God”, to answer the prayers of the play’s sex-centric characters in search of divine vindication.
I understood from Sean during a lunch conversation months ago that “Tongues” would explore the attitudes of the different religions towards sex. I grew up with a Catholic perspective (sex is only for procreation!) and was anticipating to hear a diversity of attitudes inspired by classics like the “Kama sutra” and especially after reading the news about the “Obedient Wives’ Club”. Out of the cast of four tumbled a montage of experiences underscoring the paradox of why God endows humans with bodies that feel pleasure only to sanction them for indulgence in such pleasures.
I survived the play by approaching it like a Cubist painting. No clear narrative but an eclectic juxtaposition of viewpoints – front, back, top, bottom, sides – all valid. I identified with confession boxes, having done my share of confessions as a Convent girl. I also recognized people swaying, praying in tongues as they attain spiritual ecstasy. I came away amused that words and turns of phrases that may connote depravity on the one hand can also connote piety on the other – “coming”, “tongues”, etc. Clever word play by both writers – Sean and Jason Wee.
