One of the most intriguing and unique aspects of M. Butterfly by David Henry Hwang is how the actors fully acknowledged that they were indeed acting and that they were just retelling their story. Multiple times throughout the play, Gallimard or Song would argue over whether it was necessary to tell a certain scene to the audience and in one instance Gallimard even decided to stop the play, and the lights went on and the stage crew began bringing the props off the stage. I thought this was extremely unique, as I don’t recall any other play where the actors acknowledged they were acting. Further, I think this practice also added doses of humor into the play, as the dialogue included stopping the storyline to discuss whether it was necessary to actually tell that scene or not, for example the scene when Song wants to tell about her giving information to the Chinese Communist Party and Gallimard asks if that’s really necessary and Song replies yes, that it is part of her story.
Another intriguing aspect of M. Butterfly was the set design. The set design was loud and proud, the exact opposite of the fragility of the butterfly. Notably the Chinese opera, which include walls of several beautifully designed and also very intimidating characters from the opera. All the colors and sounds were bold and strong, which foreshadows the fact that Song is not the true butterfly of the story, but Gallimard is. The set design also stood strong and intense during the Communist Revolution scenes. The rich red color with the bold black print and the many faces of Mao Zedong represented the power and strength of the revolution, which Song was apart of. The bold set played a major role in the storyline, as it symbolized the strength of Song’s character and the implied weakness of Gallimard’s character. Also, worthy of mentioning was the efficient use of the many walls to create different rooms and atmospheres. Many of the walls were painted on both sides for dual purpose, had free rotation (as many hung from the ceiling), and had different representations when placed at different angles. This concludes that the set design was extremely well thought out, as every side and angle of every wall was put to use.
I agree with you on the point about the breaking of the fourth wall; I felt that this made the play easier to connect to and made the audience participants in the action rather than just observers. I also felt that the set was dynamic, in that the design allowed for flexibility in changing from scene to scene. I think the panels were simple, but utilized in a clever way throughout the performance. They were easy to maneuver and helped the settings change smoothly. I also noticed that the hanging lamps were used to influence the setting in a similar way to the panels, oftentimes these set pieces worked together to create an atmosphere. For example, in the very beginning the lamp was used for dramatic effect in Gallimard’s prison cell, and served to illuminate the butterfly, foreshadowing the end of the play when we realize that it is Gallimard who is actually the butterfly.