From a balcony, I looked down on a backyard, attended by an ethereal-looking woman, and went down to take a closer look.
What she was tending turned out to be an altar.
“Are you afraid of dying?” she asked, and waited for my answer
I was taken aback. I thought we weren’t supposed to speak. “Sure,” I replied, feeling lame.
“Can I wash your feet?”
Was she serious? Did she expect me to take off my shoes and socks, or was this going to be a pantomime. Just in case it was the former, I said simply “No.”
She seemed to lose interest then.
This was Eve (portrayed by Sandie von Brockdorff), who the Doorkeeper had described as “a devout priestess.” Her approach to imminent death was to face it with penitence and prayer.
My next encounter, back upstairs, was with Mistress Mari (Silvana Malmone), Eve’s mother, a woman with voluptuous hair and a flowing gown, who beckoned me into her bedroom (given all the silk hangings, better to call it her boudoir). She patted the bed beside her, then showed me a large, old-fashioned key.
“Do you see this key?” she said with an odd smile. “What do you think it opens up.”
I shook my head.
She took out an ornate, carved wooden chest the size of a loaf of bread and asked me what I thought was inside.
Again, I felt dumb.
She opened it. Inside were sex toys and a book: the Kama Sutra. (I thought that smile might be lascivious.)
By this time, two more “guests” had been lured in. She asked us to use the toys to re-create the poses in the book. I exited quickly.
Mistress Mari was the head of the family and a hedonist; to her, life should be an orgy, even when it’s ending.
I had less uncomfortable interactions with two of the other characters. Rachel (Rebecca Camilieri) the scientist, Mari’s other daughter, spent time in a lab full of tubes and flasks and medical equipment—apparently looking for a cure. Mari’s stepson Will (Chris Scicluna), a committed death-seeker who frequently held a live snake, was a curiosity to me, not a menace. But then the fifth member of the household came storming by, screaming, his face full of fury. He handed me a rifle and brought me into a dark, cellar-like room. There, he had tied up a young woman, dressed in the hooded cloak of the “guests.” He asked me to help him bind her tighter. This suddenly felt like the Milgram experiment. No, I’m not going to help torture her. Again, I fled.
I realized too late that in each of these uncomfortable encounters the characters had been offering me a quest, or a task, that would drive the story forward.
Over the two-and-a-half hours that I was at the house, I witnessed many intense scenes: Another “guest” (evidently a plant) contracted the laughing plague, hysterical presumably unto death; Eve cut off all her hair and carried it in a bowl; there was much confrontation and running around.
I was impressed by how much the show adhered to the definition I had come up with for immersive theater. I had identified six elements that seemed to exist in the best of the immersive work I had seen, and 1881 fulfilled the first five:
. Did it…
- …create a physical environment that differs from traditional theatre? Undeniably.
- …double as an art installation and hands-on museum? Spectacularly.
- … make individual audience members feel as if they have had a uniquely personal experience? The actors spoke to me directly, waiting for my response, and reacting to what I said or did (or didn’t do).
- …feel like a social gathering? The characters sometimes put us together as a group; we were served hors d’oeuvres; there was a bartender serving drinks.
- …stimulate all five senses? There was the food and drink, the usual (for immersive theatre) constant eerie soundscape and underscoring, vivid costumes; the production even offered an array of smells.
- …have a story to tell, and give respect to storytelling? This is the element in which much immersive theatre stumbles. Many have little or no dialogue, relying on dance and acrobatics.
With 1881, however, I felt I was the one who stumbled. I didn’t truly grasp what was going on until I left the house and met some of the other theatregoers, who told me we were supposed to go on quests, perform tasks, and join teams. I had noticed slips of papers with little messages on them placed around the house, and at one point Mistress Mari gave me a medallion to wear, and then Will gave me one and took Mari’s. But this felt part of the atmosphere, not central to the story.
The actor who had been tying up the woman, Nicholas Jackman, came out onto the street then too. His character, he told me, was Albert, the survivor, charged with protecting the household. He did this by finding the evil cult leader who had infiltrated the house disguised as one of the guests and interrogating her. That was the woman (portrayed by Kiely Agri) who I thought he was about to torture.
I realized too late that in each of these uncomfortable encounters the characters had been offering me a quest, or a task, that would drive the story forward.
Sean Buhagiar elaborated in a later email exchange: 1881 was “a fusion of immersive theatre and interactive game design.” Indeed, one of its three co-creators is Gordon Calleja, a designer of board games and the founder of the University of Malta’s Institute of Digital Games.
Buhagiar, the director and co-creator of the show, explained its basic gameplay approach:
You are not just an observer. You are a participant, a character, a variable in the equation. Every choice you make has weight—your actions affect the story, the characters, and even other audience members. It’s not a promenade piece where we guide you from scene to scene. You are given partial agency to explore an unfolding narrative, where multiple storylines play out simultaneously, and quests lead you deeper into the world… Our goal was to strip theatre of its rigid conventions while preserving its ritualistic power.
Immersive theatre has evolved, in other words, to include gaming. The six elements I had so congratulated myself in extrapolating from immersive theatre in New York no longer seemed adequate to defining it. And I felt pretty inadequate, too. I wondered if I was no longer the right demographic, or even the right personality type, to appreciate it.
Immersive theatre, in various forms, has much older roots in European performance traditions.
Day Three: Karnival
I had come to Malta to see 1881, but I couldn’t leave without visiting Valletta, the capital city, with its historic limestone buildings lining narrow cobbled streets, including “Old Theatre Street” (as the wooden sign nailed to the stone corner building announced), where I took a tour of the eighteenth century Teatru Manoel and Republic Street, where I saw Caravaggio’s The Beheading of St John the Baptist inside the breathtakingly ornate sixteenth century St. John’s Co-Cathedral. But by far the most eye-opening sight occurred after I felt somebody grab me and push me aside. He was moving me out of the way to avoid colliding with a huge float. I had been looking up at the architecture, unaware that I was in the middle of Karnival ta’ Malta. This is an annual event that has been celebrated on Malta since the fifteenth century. One float after another, each obviously handcrafted, each on a theme, each accompanied by a troupe dressed in spectacular costumes, often paused for synchronized choreography. There was one for The Lion King.
“Are you sponsored by Disney?” I asked one of the members of the troupe.
“No, this is our own. But it’s the same story.”
The same “story.”
Karnival ta’ Malta struck me as more than just a parade. It struck me as immersive theatre. Site-specific, miles of handcrafted wares, a social gathering, certainly a personal experience for me.
In our later email exchange, without any prompting from me, Buhagiar said something that felt like confirmation: “Immersive theatre, in various forms, has much older roots in European performance traditions,” Buhagiar told me. “Think of medieval mystery plays that immersed audiences in religious narratives in the streets. One could argue that local traditions like Good Friday re-enactments, and even our carnival performances carry elements of immersive storytelling.”
Comments
The article is just the start of the conversation—we want to know what you think about this subject, too! HowlRound is a space for knowledge-sharing, and we welcome spirited, thoughtful, and on-topic dialogue. Find our full comments policy here.
A side note to my adventure: I was struck by the conversation I had with the director of “1881,” Sean Buhagiar, as I note in the article, about the immersive theater genre’s continuing, palpable presence throughout Europe. What was particularly striking was that he singled out the UK company Punchdrunk. But just a few months earlier, when "Sleep No More" shut down in New York 14 years after it launched the immersive theater trend in the city, the Punchdrunk people had said “It’s the end of an era.” So, did they just mean in New York? Why is there this contrast between the immersive landscape in Europe and that in New York?
Not long ago, we learned that Andrew Lloyd Webber was bringing an immersive version of "The Phantom of the Opera" to NYC at the end of July..
So, the conversation in Malta and the announcement in New York has inspired a companion article: Will Masquerade revive immersive theater in New York?