Comments on: Money

By: Maximum Inheritance

Maximum Inheritance — Tue, 31 Aug 2010 23:48:19 +0000

This sounds like rather an excercise in self indulgence. I very well might give it a miss if it were still running.

By: steve

steve — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 00:03:14 +0000

I thought this was puerile tosh. Yeah, the set was great. As was the sound design. But the script, acting, drama, narrative, interest and empathy had long gone.

By: Matt Boothman

Matt Boothman — Sun, 21 Feb 2010 17:37:34 +0000

I don’t remember the riot police with balloons – they must be a new addition for the new run!

By: I cautiously recommend Shunt’s Money « A Fragment, Unidentified.

I cautiously recommend Shunt’s Money « A Fragment, Unidentified. — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 21:45:17 +0000

[...] Telegraph; Londonist; London Theatre Blog; [...]

By: Roland

Roland — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 19:32:02 +0000

Went to see this last weekend — my first time attending a Shunt performance. From the Banksy-esque riot police handing out coloured balloons at the entrance, to the immersive, constantly-changing set inside the machine itself, this was a feast for all the senses (including the champagne handouts, and rubber ball-fight with the rest of the audience!).

The only disappointments were the sometimes overly whimsical dialogue, and an unnecessary, crass, caricature of jewish bankers, that felt out of place in an otherwise witty and imaginative production.

The actors and production team are clearly a very enthusiastic lot and it will be interesting to see what they come up with next…!

By: John Sargant

John Sargant — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 15:08:10 +0000

The piece sounds great! The image of the machine is incredibly powerful, it’s directly linked to Popova’s 1922 constructivist design for Meyerhold’s The Magnanimous Cuckold, the model and implementation of which are outlined here: http://is.gd/3SuKX

It’s interesting how the resonance (in a Western European context) of the all-encompassing machine has changed over time. Whereas in 2009 we might see a cold, alienating mass, oppressive in its sheer physicality, symbolically oppressive in the working conditions it relates back to, in 1922, it was still very much a reality of the working man/woman’s life, simultaneously the life-blood of those who toiled over its conveyor belts, and the prospect of a brighter future in which the machine removes part of the drudgery of working class life — despite the very real dangers it presented in factories across the world.

Playing with this anachronism in light of the collapse of the machine’s progeny, the virtual network, the banking machine, is a clever move.

I haven’t seen the show and I haven’t read the novel by Zola either, but for anyone who has, I’d love to know what Zola brings to this show. If I can get a ticket then I’ll likely answer that question myself, but in the meantime…