Escape from Godot
Produced by Mister & Mischief
Experienced in Los Angeles ~ April 2024
By Eve Weston
The Experience & How it Works:
It’s a play. And it’s also an escape room. In order for the play to begin… and continue… and end, the audience has to solve puzzles and follow instructions.
Why it’s Interesting, IMHO:
It’s a narrative game in a way that narrative games are rarely presented. It is play, and the play has a story. And there is the story of the audience, who has been asked by the producer to help the show in the absence of the stage manager, who’s recently and unexpectedly left. And then there are puzzle games throughout that need solving and are also intrinsically connected to the show. (The play is wonderfully not the equivalent of “cut scenes” in a real-world game experience.)
Experiential Viewpoint Expression (E.V.E.):
Embodied, 1st/3rd person visual, 1st/2nd/3rd person narrative, participant, mortal
Note: The audience has control over how they experience the story or scene. Specifically, they have control over time—which makes one want to consider deity posemperic POV. That being said, they do not have the ability to time travel; what the audience has control over with regard to time is pacing. The rate at which they solve the puzzles determines the pacing of the show. Since in real life, as humans, we also have control over the pacing of our life, this experience has mortal posemperic POV.
Initial Impression & Critical Discussion:
Escape from Godot is a thoroughly enjoyable experience. While at first it feels weird to get up and collect things from the stage in the middle of a play, once it becomes apparent that this is necessary, one gets used to it. After all, the show must go on, and in this case, it won’t go on without the audience’s help. In fact, in some instances, actors will continue to repeat the same lines over and over again until the audience figures out what to do. This technique is useful in at least two ways: one, it let’s the audience know that they need to do something; and two, it let’s the audience feel less bad about talking over the actors (as needed).
Thinking about narrative and visual points of view in this show is particularly interesting. As the audience of a play, one experiences the show as 3rd person narrative—it is not their story, 3rd person visual — watching it from “outside the story world.” That being said, as the player in a game, the audience experience the show as 1st person narrative, 1st person visual; it is their story and they are seeing the story world through their own eyes. And, while most of the time, the actors do not break the fourth wall, at times they do.
There is a messenger character that specifically acknowledges the audience and even comes into the audience to hand a participant an envelope (which they are to open and read). Additionally, if an audience member steps out of line or needs help in some way, the actors may address the audience to some extent.
In our performance, someone (me) tried to take the hat box too early. It was the right move, but I figured it out before it was appropriate to do so. The actor told me clearly, “Let it go.” I did, and the show went on. (We had a lovely chat about this after the performance; there were no hard feelings on either side. These are the unexpected adventures of a show of this nature.)
All that being said, the key takeaway of the previous two paragraphs is that sometimes, the show is in the second person narrative, as it acknowledgees that there is a medium. It is debatable—and not likely—that we ought to consider it ever to be in second person visual because, though theatre is a medium, it is not one we are seeing through. (If you have thoughts about second person visual, please reach out. I’d be curious to hear.) Even when we are being addressed with the second person narrative, we are still watching the play through our own eyes, first person visual.
What is perhaps most stunning about this experience—even though many things are stunning—is that despite jumping between points of view, the shifts are never jarring. It is likely that this is due, at least in part—if not in whole—to the fact that the audience maintains an embodied experience throughout. They are never pulled out of the experience; they are only pulled into it.
Story Anchor:
When the producer explains to the audience that the stage manager has left on account of threatened legal action — expected in one hour, the audience agrees to both enjoy the show and help facilitate the show by calling the cues, and then it becomes apparent through actors actions that the audience will only learn the cues by solving clues.
Pillars of Game:
Voluntary Participation — check!
Goal — to help the play proceed (“get out before the lawyers sue”).
Rules — use the clues to cue the actors and stagehands as needed.
Feedback — when a cue given correctly, the play progresses.
Conclusion: This is a game.
The puzzle games in this show strike an excellent balance of being challenging but solvable and also of requiring teamwork.
Who Should Experience This?
Everyone except Godot. If he shows up, it’d really spoil the whole experience.
