cultural_philistine
HAL_9000Review of A Midsummer Night's Dream (Sydney Theatre Company)
August 24th 2007 06:44
All the interim complications will have passed as if in a dream, and future generations of academics will be given employment in arguing over possible interpretations.
Says the impish Robin Goodfellow (played by Dan Spielman):
| Then will two at once woo one;
And those things do best please me That befal preposterously. |
Now, enormous creativity has been brought to bear in this production, and it's only preposterous in the nicest way -- farce is handled with class. There are surprises from the time you walk in, and the play continues in similar vein.
If you sit in the front row, there’s a good chance you’ll get wet.
But there are also prop gimics (like curious varieties of tools, ancient and modern, used by workers, lights appearing miraculously on the walls, lights trained on the audience, and sparks spurting from a grinding machine, the smell of burnt metal drifting towards you). There is entertaining frolicking. There are daring/foolhardy fairies ascending and descending on ropes and platforms. There are musical numbers. There is amusingly staged intercourse when Titania meets Bottom. There are many welcome comic moments interpreted into the text, and many small but ingenious flourishes. And there is a striking climax added to the lovers' awakening in Act IV -- rain pouring down and washing the night from them (leaving four poor actors shivering in their underwear).
But "disappointing" is relative to what is a very high standard, and as an ensemble these guys were a well-oiled machine.
You're likely to be kept almost continually engaged for two and a half hours (no small achievement) -- in a story that's spoken in sixteenth century English, which you probably knew back-to-front from high school literature, which mightn't have been all that suspenseful in the first place, and which might well give you flashbacks to Dead Poets Society.
I don't know how much is memorable, but as a whole it's an entertaining evening out, and it's beautifully beautifully messy.
Thank God they breathed life into Shakespeare, and it’s a shame the production has so short a run.
~~~
A Midsummer Night's Dream is playing at the Sydney Theatre from Thursday 16 August 2007 to Saturday 8 September 2007. Tickets vary from $49 to $73. See the STC website for more information.
~~~
Random additional thoughts, including some quotes from the programme (which features an interview with Edward Dick by Laura Scrivano), and some quotes from an article in The Australian by Rosalie Higson (which features almost exactly the same answers from Edward Dick, almost word-for-word).
Director -- Edward Dick. Now, theatre is collaborative, and one can never really know what to lay to the director’s blame or credit.
But you can suspect the directorial hand in the way production elements are coordinated to produce an effect (the combination of lights, sound effects, movement, as the cast transforms into fairies), in interpretations that aren’t apparent from the text (Shakespeare doesn't write that Egeus has an angry outburst, shocking the onlookers, the live musician plays a discordant note, and Hermia gets thrown in the dirt), in the fact that the words are actually accessible to the audience (we can follow them because of how and in what context they're spoken) without their meaning being overstated, in stage business and blocking (for instance, in how Puck leads Demetrius and Lysander astray in the woods, in the use of the entire stage for lovers to quarrel over, in the peeking of fairies around corners as mortals go about their business), in solutions to potential problems (when Helena is pissed off with Demetrius and Lysander and announces she'll go, it's not necessarily obvious that she has a motivation to keep standing around), in keeping Shakespeare modern (so that lines appeal to contemporary tastes -- "I go, I go; look how I go" is played for comedy), in any overall unities (like the general dreamlike feel), and in the detailing -- the care invested to try to find interesting ways to present each moment, and to sustain interest (there were very few ordinary stretches).
In a sense, this was the director’s show. He "put his stamp" on it; the whole mattered more than the parts; and, if, before or after going to see the production, you read over the actual text, you'll get an inkling of how much Dick has brought (or seems to have brought) to this play.
One trifling criticism is that there were a number of times when an actor was standing front centre with his/her back to the audience concealing the action completely! Not sure whether this was intentional...
From the programme (relative uninformative, I thought, though it has some nice rehearsal photos): "As a director I am really most interested in acting, providing high stakes opportunities for actors". "The actors are terrific. They remind me of Russian actors in that they are physically able and imaginatively courageous and spirited."
The Australian article mentions: "'A lot of people think that directing is about coming up with ideas. It isn't, really,' Dick says. 'It's about working with the people that you've got and releasing their performances, and connecting them to each other and to the text.' He aims to encourage and release life between the actors rather than reaching for an intellectual or conceptual interpretation of the play."
Associate director -- Jane Gibson. Not entirely sure what Gibson did, but I'm assuming that she's significantly to thank for striking stage pictures (as in the sex scene), and for coordinating prancing fairies.
The Australian article mentions: "Gibson is a well known choreographer... She specialises in everyday movement as well as dance, preparing actors to work in historic or very physical roles... Quietly spoken, Gibson typically works alongside the director, developing visual ideas, and with the actors to prepare them physically for their roles, in this case as heavy-bodied mechanicals or labourers, the weightless fairies and in the aristocratic world of the court."
The programme mentions: "We are both fundamentally interested in the same thing, which is releasing the actors and revealing the scenes... [Jane's] work is about releasing the actors into their bodies and allowing them to interact with each other and the space. The landscape of the play has to be provided by the actor's physical imagination because we're not illustrating it scenically."
Set designer -- Ralph Myers. Apart from endless mud merriment, I wonder what would be lost if the dirt were removed. An archaic feel? A woodlands feel? Or is it the dark soil of the unconsciousness, primal sexuality, etc?
The Australian: "The two directors wanted to give the play's various couplings an earthy, visceral quality, hence the dirt floor and inevitable puns."
A Daily Telegraph article mentions the idea "To enhance the 'earthy' feeling of the Shakespeare classic". And quotes a production manager: "We rake it and turn it over and kind of fluff it up before each performance. We're even going to try growing grass around the edges, we've got seed in there now so we'll see how that goes." It also notes: "When the season finishes on September 8, the STC will give away the soil to anyone willing to pick it up. If you are interested in a bag or two you should call 9250 1700."
On the ruined temple look generally, the programme mentions: "We wanted to try to engage the audience's imagination in the way that very illustrated productions sometimes don't. We decided we didn't want to shift sets... we wanted that to be done through lighting, sound and movement rather than scenically. It's really a huge space that offers many possibilities in the way it is used."
Costume designer -- Tess Schofield. Those swish threads don't stay pristine for very long...
The Australian article: "'The costumes are incredibly sexy. As they love, abandon, desire each other, the clothes come off, they're rolling in the mud,' Gibson says."
Lighting designer -- Jon Buswell. Quite brilliant, and possibly responsible for most of the atmosphere, particularly given the bareness of the set.
Since the lights were low (and perhaps the dirt absorbs light as well), occasional warm colours stood out by contrast. There were a number of striking effects -- for instance, during the rain sequence (I think the light was vertically downwards at this point), and during the post-coital Titania and Bottom scene.
Presumably one of the challenges was balancing a night-time dreamlike feel with visibility -- I wonder how much the nosebleed seats could see...
Composer and musician -- Max Lyandvert. Sound effects were important, even necessary; scenes wouldn't have had the impact they had -- even though they seemed to my tin ear to be occasionally heavy-handed, intrusive (seemed too obviously to flag one idea or another). This must be a hard balance to strike.
Assistant director -- Andrew Tighe.
Demetrius -- Martin Blum. Solid performance, though not much complexity was brought to it (could there reasonably have been more? -- I do not know...).
I was sitting close to the stage, behind the "Hugh Weaving" chair ("Does the seat have your name on it?"-- "Why, yes it does"), but it might be the case that since midsummer evenings are wont to have low lighting and theatrical mist, it's very difficult, from any distance, to discern that there really is quite a lot going on with many of the actors as they deliver their lines.
Theseus/Oberon -- Brandon Burke. In comparison with Rabe, Burke was never as regal and commanding (oddly weak, in fact), never as multi-layered (rather generically tense and angry), and never particularly "fairy". His Theseus wasn't really differentiated from his Oberon (whereas Rabe's Hippolyta was a striking change from her Titania), and I seem to remember he muffled a lot of his lines.
Mind you, any silly criticisms I purport to make should be taken in the context that: (a) who am I to judge; (b) all of the actors were very good, and all were concentrating, reactive; and (c) among such actors, it's dangerously easy to look worse than you are.
Snug / Egeus / Mustardseed -- Peter Carroll. One thing to mention is that the guy has a powerful set of lungs. He shows up actors whose projection is less good, or whose voices are less flexible.
And there are reports of spittle drops flying as far as the fifth row. So, book early, and maybe you’ll have a little Peter Carroll souvenir to take home with you.
Lysander -- Eden Falk.
Starveling / Peaseblossom -- John Gaden. Peaseblossom has all of five words -- "Ready", "Hail, mortal", "Peaseblossom", "Ready". But one surprise about both Gaden and Carroll is how much they fleshed out, how characterization they brought to such minimum dialogue.
Flute / Cobweb -- Alan John.
Hermia -- Hayley McElhinney. On the one hand, she's very committed and selfless, always energetic, and always interesting to watch. On the other hand, there are times when she at least verges on overacting.
Helena -- Amber McMahon. Great comic sense and timing.
Bottom -- Colin Moody.
Hippolyta / Titania -- Pamela Rabe. Nice to see Rabe being sexy, giggly and soft -- a sharp contrast to Hippolyta, and to other virago characters she's lately been playing.
There was a memorable scene when she espies Bottom, and poses herself in various ways on her hanging platform. You hold your breath, wondering whether she'll fall off (although she was probably wearing a safety harness).
An article in the Daily Telegraph (Gary Smith, "Delirious dreams", 1/9/2007, p 10) notes that Rabe appeared in three Midsummer productions before this one.
Snout / Moth -- Emily Russell.
Puck / Philostrate -- Dan Spielman. Really quite an extraordinary physical actor. The guy seems pretty much born to Puck, if this wasn’t already obvious from previous productions like The Lost Echo. He’s got chutzpah, grace, quickness, lightness, impishness, and versatility of movement. He bounds in on all fours in one scene, and is climbing over the walls in another. You don't know what he's going to do next.
He also has a sort of magical theatricality of gesture (think Paul Bettany as Geoffrey Chaucer in A Knight’s Tale). I particularly liked the way he cast a sleep charm over the lovers.
There's a memorable image near the end of the play where he descends from the rafters holding fire in his hand.
Quince / Fairy -- Helen Thomson.
~~~
More from the programme
* "Why did you want to direct this particular Shakespeare?" -- "It is full of anguish, magic and joy. At its heart it's about what it is to grow up and become ready to be married. Four young lovers... play out their worst fears... then they wake up with almost no memory of the night but somehow ready to be adult."
* "We did a lot of work on invisibility and lightness which seemed to work well in contrast to the mechanicals being very heavy and real. We decided... fairy was going to be more about a state of being, a physical transformation and a way of moving in the space than it was about an externally applied 'look'."
~~~
From the text
-- On dreams:
DEMETRIUS: Are you sure
That we are awake? It seems to me
That yet we sleep, we dream.
PUCK: If we shadows have offended,
Think but this, and all is mended,
That you have but slumber'd here
While these visions did appear.
-- On the proven rarity of true love:
Or, if there were a sympathy in choice,
War, death, or sickness did lay siege to it,
Making it momentany as a sound,
Swift as a shadow, short as any dream;
Brief as the lightning in the collied night,
That, in a spleen, unfolds both heaven and earth,
And ere a man hath power to say "Behold!"
The jaws of darkness do devour it up:
So quick bright things come to confusion.
-- When Demetrius and Lysander are in love with Helena (though maybe you had to be there)...
LYSANDER: [To Helena] Demetrius loves her, and he loves not you.
DEMETRIUS: [Awaking] O Helena, goddess, nymph, perfect, divine!
To what, my love, shall I compare thine eyne?
Crystal is muddy. O, how ripe in show...
HELENA: O spite! O hell! I see you all are bent
To set against me for your merriment...
HELENA: [To Hermia] Fie, fie! you counterfeit, you puppet, you!
HERMIA: Puppet? why so? ay, that way goes the game.
Now I perceive that she hath made compare
Between our statures; she hath urged her height;
And with her personage, her tall personage,
Her height, forsooth, she hath prevail'd with him.
And are you grown so high in his esteem;
Because I am so dwarfish and so low?
How low am I, thou painted maypole? speak;
How low am I? I am not yet so low
But that my nails can reach unto thine eyes.
HELENA: [To Hermia] I will not trust you, I,
Nor longer stay in your curst company.
Your hands than mine are quicker for a fray,
My legs are longer though, to run away.
Exit
HERMIA: I am amazed, and know not what to say.
~~~
Further reading
-- STC website
-- Full text of the play
-- Wikipedia article. "It is not known exactly when A Midsummer Night's Dream was written or first performed, but, on the basis of topical references and an allusion to Spenser's Epithalamion, it is usually dated in 1595 or 1596." (And Shakespeare's dates are given as "baptised 26 April 1564 -- died 23 April 1616".) "Samuel Pepys saw it on Sept. 29, 1662, and thought it 'The most insipid, ridiculous play that ever I saw'" (and frankly I'd kind of agree, if this is part of what Pepys was suggesting, that the plot is somewhat lacking). Further information is provided on the way the text has been adapted and changed over the centuries -- for instance, some folk cut Bottom's farce from it, others add more musical numbers, the Victorians performed it with hundreds of fairies, Max Reinhardt planted a forest in tonnes of dirt and held a torchlit wedding procession, "Brook also introduced the subsequently popular idea of doubling Theseus/Oberon and Hippolyta/Titania, as if to suggest that the world of the fairies is a mirror version of the world of the mortals", etc.
-- "It's more than fun with Dick and Jane" -- article in The Australian by Rosalie Higson. Mentions that rehearsal time went for around 12 weeks!
-- "Shakespeareans get a little dirt on their hands" -- article in the Daily Telegraph by Simon Ferguson.
-- Sydney Morning Herald review by Bryce Hallett. Includes the comment: "Dick gives the actors plenty of scope to find the essence of their characters but the language and rhythms have not been given due care." I'm not entirely sure what he means, and I don't claim to know much about Shakespeare, but I do think the actors did a good job of delivering lines naturally that could easily be pompous and stilted. Perhaps there's an argument here about the "proper" way to speak a Shakespearean line. Agrees with me about Spielman: "Spielman is memorably unpredictable as Puck". Agrees that the music is necessary: "Max Lyandvert's brilliantly effective sound design and music, which he performs out of view, is crucial to the work's delicacy and darkness."
-- The Australian review by John McCallum. Makes some insightful comments on characters, that I didn't think to put into words. "Dan Spielman's Puck is magically powerful but wearily obedient." Captures some additional thoughts about Burke that I'd agree with: "Brandon Burke plays a remarkably abject Theseus and Oberon, all stupid cruelty, almost petulant." Agrees that Pamela Rabe is sexy.
-- Don't know if this is available online, but Jo Litson wrote a review for the Sunday Telegraph (26/8/07). She criticizes the play on the basis that it's too dark, which seems kind of a bizarre claim to me. She even comments: "As the lovers fight, caked in mud, the atmosphere darkens further." Wtf? "It all feels more nightmare than dream. You long for more humour to break the constant gloom but the mechanicals are not terribly funny. Production values are first-rate, there are strong performances and lovely moments but the darkness means the magic is missing." Well, there's no arguing about taste, and personally I didn't find the mechanicals terribly funny either. But I didn't long for more humour. And I reckon any "darkness" that was there added to the magic rather than detracted...
-- At Australian Stage Online, James Waites is also critical of Burke -- "Brandon Burke's Theseus and Oberon do not fit well with this production", "Burke looks a little like he has been shoe-horned into his roles as the last actor left standing; with little cultivation of Oberon's pansexuality." He notes that he wanted to see more love between Titania and Oberon, which is probably a fair cop. Also mentions "It's a pity, after mountains of thoughtful and artful invention throughout the course of the evening that we are proffered so predictable and commonplace a wedding nuptial", which I'd agree with. It seems to me, though this might horrify anyone over 40, that the entire wedding and Pyramus and Thisbe bit should have been cut out. Finish the action with the rain scene, then close with Puck's epilogue.
-- Incidentally, there was an earlier version of Midsummer Night's Dream in January of this year -- "Shakespeare's most enduring comedy is given a complete rejuvenation by the Yohangza Theatre Company of South Korea..."
| 77 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
Subscribe to this blog
