The Uwm’s theatre department's production of the Mystery of Edwin Drood

constantly draws attention to the nature of theatre through constant breaking of the 4th

wall, costume choice, and gender identity: making the overall production rather meta

theatrical.

The 4th wall is an imaginary barrier between the cast and the audience that

separates those presenting material and those who are receiving it. To break the 4th

wall acknowledges the existence of those who are receiving the information which

happens in more ways than one during the play. The first example we see is before the

first number when a vast majority of the cast is roaming the audience, in character,

conversing with the attendees. They abruptly transitioned into a song shortly after that is

more or less based on how they are glad the audience is there and even mention a few

patrons, specifically some they interacted with earlier. What I thought was interesting

and perhaps even correlated was that this performance occurred at a time when COVID

restrictions are loosening and live theatre is resuming which ultimately points towards

the audience being an important part of theatre and makes for a pretty convenient time

to put on a meta theatrical performance. I think these first few moments serve to open

the audience's eyes to what they are trying to communicate. The next notable moment

is that every actor is playing as an actor from the original showing who is playing one of

the original characters. Aside from being extra, I think this serves to let the audience

know that even the characters are acknowledging that they are in a production which I

believe hints further at the idea that the production is trying to communicate something

about theatre. There are plenty other instances of the 4th wall being broken but I just

want to touch one last major one; when they ask the audience to vote on who they
thought we’re the the lovers, detective, and murderer. I believe this reveals the

entertainment and improvised aspect of theatre: giving the audience what they want.

Audience members would vote through applause and depending who was chosen a

number would be sung, implying that there are possible different outcomes and that its

showings at different times have the possibility to be different. The idea that no two

shows are going to be the same is a given but the fact that directors imply it is what

makes it metatheatrical since other members of the audience may not have drawn that

conclusion without such blatant actions.

Many of the costumes used in the play were time appropriate to the setting of the

play but what is unique is that many of the performers still wore modern shoes. Do I

think that this was a deliberate choice? Probably not, but since they didn’t likely supply

shoes they still made that choice. The contrast of “vintage” clothing to modern shoes

reveals, though rather obvious, the actors don’t actually come from the same time

period of the setting of the play. Which serves as a reminder that what we are seeing as

well as most other theatre is actually just an interpretation. In short, the Docs (Martin)

are telling us there are bound to be variations to how a play is performed and

interpreted as time moves forwards. Another costume-related aspect of the show that

leads me to believe that the play is meta theatrical is that the “men” are in suits and

women are in dresses. This is simply to allow the audience to make a clear distinction

between male and female roles despite many of the male roles being done by female

actors. I interpret this as a visible statement that alerts the audience to the fact that the

cast are not who they appear to be which is a nod to the performative aspect of the

theatre. Examples of this can be found all throughout the plot of the play such as: An
uncle who is respected and pictured as put together by the public eye but actually

frequents opium dens and has questionable motives, lovers who don’t actually love

each other but no one knows, and actors playing multiple characters. All of these

examples work together not only to hint at the fact that no one is exactly how they seem

but also theatre is a compilation of people playing roles that they may have no

connection to.

My overall takeaway is that UWM’s production of the Mystery of Edwin Drood

was that the directors were trying to communicate certain principles of theatre at a time

when live performances are still recovering from a couple years of solitude caused by a

pandemic.