Scan barcode
chaseledin's review
4.0
Patrick Cash's (2016) The HIV Monologues explores two generations of HIV-positive experiences, illuminating the centrality of the clinic (and positive support within these spaces) as well as the uneasy and often hostile social sphere of gay nightlife in London. Cash's monologues describe the unsettling world of HIV stigma, especially for gay men (though an instance of an African woman with HIV does pop up, however briefly). This collection is marked by anxiety and tension--its performative measure is historical and affective; the characters draw on the long history of HIV social encounters, and they recognize the power of honesty, remourse, and recovery in negotiating the politics of sex, and the pleasures inherent to the body regardless of HIV status. Reading Cash's collection, I am reminded of so many AIDS memoirs that have explored the undying tensions of queer life and illness. While not entirely surprising in its scope, The HIV Monologues explores the sustained (chronic) realisms of HIV and gay life in the 2010s, connecting back to the "epidemic conditions" of the 1980s and 90s. A step removed from the positive proliferations of the HIV Voices performance group in London, Cash's work is an important and reflective text on the complexity of affective networks that continue to thread London's gay communities.
A note on the author: Patrick Cash is clearly very well-read, and his interactions with Neil Bartlett are important to note because (I argue) they define much of his craft. His work reads largely discursive because he draws from a very specific vein of AIDS writing: the confession. There is something necessarily forceful about confession that manifests in uneven and disruptive ways in both live performance and in literature. I'm inclined to believe that the tension between the performance and publication of The HIV Monologues is a necessary tension; it proliferates a "confessionary culture" in which gay men continue to practice and perform their narratives about HIV-impacted society (whether HIV positive, negative, or serounsure). Cash's work is surprising, if sometimes irritating, because it attempts to characterize the long history of stereotypes within AIDS memoirs, performances, and literature. For this reason, I think it's difficult to read his work outside of the HIV/AIDS confession repertoire since Cash is implicated in its production.
A note on the author: Patrick Cash is clearly very well-read, and his interactions with Neil Bartlett are important to note because (I argue) they define much of his craft. His work reads largely discursive because he draws from a very specific vein of AIDS writing: the confession. There is something necessarily forceful about confession that manifests in uneven and disruptive ways in both live performance and in literature. I'm inclined to believe that the tension between the performance and publication of The HIV Monologues is a necessary tension; it proliferates a "confessionary culture" in which gay men continue to practice and perform their narratives about HIV-impacted society (whether HIV positive, negative, or serounsure). Cash's work is surprising, if sometimes irritating, because it attempts to characterize the long history of stereotypes within AIDS memoirs, performances, and literature. For this reason, I think it's difficult to read his work outside of the HIV/AIDS confession repertoire since Cash is implicated in its production.
coralkathleen's review against another edition
challenging
dark
emotional
funny
tense
slow-paced
3.5
Strong characters with an enjoyable form made up of interlinking monologues. Found the imagery of orchids particularly capturing. Almost wish this could be made into a full-length play as there are so many elements of the stories that could be explored more. Good, solid play.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Chronic illness
catdad77a45's review against another edition
3.0
Although well-intentioned, Cash's play is more clunky and didactic than truly enlightening or emotionally compelling- and is the rare play that probably READS better than it plays, due to dialogue that even the most talented actor would have trouble making sound naturalistic. Also, since it tries to cover EVERYTHING about HIV from the early 80's horror-show to the present day and Truvada, the timelines in the various interlocking stories don't quite line up. Still, A for effort.
More...