[NEohioPAL]Berko reviews: Shaw Festival/Canada

[Roy Berko]

2003 SHAW FESTIVAL SEASON FILLED WITH HIGHLIGHTS

Roy Berko

(Member, American Theatre Critics Association)

--THE TIMES NEWSPAPERS--

Lorain County Times--Westlaker Times--Lakewood News
Times--Olmsted-Fairview Times	

The Shaw Festival, which is performed from April
through the end of November in lovely
Niagara-on-the-Lake, Ontario, Canada is the only
theatre in the world that specializes in the plays of
Bernard Shaw and his contemporaries (1856-1950).   
These plays represent the beginning of what is known
historically as "the modern world."  It also offers
Greater Clevelanders a short drive through the wine
country of both the Northern US and lower Canada to
escape for a few days and view high quality theatre
offerings, drop in at the casino in Niagara Falls, and
stay in well-tended B&Bs or plush hotels.  All of this
is made even more appealing due to the very favorable
exchange rate of the American dollar.  At present the
purchasing power of the dollar allows for savings of
about 1/3 on Canadian prices.

This season Jackie Maxwell has assumed the role of
Artistic Director.  She follows the legendary
Christopher Newton who did much to establish the
festival’s wonderful reputation.  She invites
audiences, in her Shaw program book remarks, to "Join
me, on the first step of what I intend to be a
delightfully surprising journey."  If Maxwell’s
direction of ‘THE CORONATION VOYAGE’ is any
indication, the theatrical journey she wishes to take
us on should be very successful.  

‘THE CORONATION VOYAGE’

It is May 1953.  The ship, Empress of France, sets
sail from Montreal enroute to England. On the pretext
of attending the celebrations marking the coronation
of Queen Elizabeth II, an important mafioso is on
board.  He  secretly plans to live in exile with his
two sons. Aboard this floating palace in the middle of
the ocean, the lord of the Montreal underworld must
face the most important decision of his dubious
career: will he sacrifice his youngest son for a
safe-conduct?   

The script has an interesting construction.  A
biographer is on-board to write the "true" story of
the mafioso leader.  We hear what he writes, in tandem
with what is really happening.  We gain an
understanding that history is made up of
interpretations and its interpretators.

Jeff Lillico is captivating as the 14-year old son. 
Dylan Trowbridge, portraying Etienne, the older
brother, a budding pianist whose hands were smashed by
some of his father’s underworld opponents, is
emotionally right on target.  Jim Mezon is properly
hateful as the mafia don.  Peter Krantz completely
captivates as the Diplomat who has ice in his blood
and evil in his heart.  George Dawson’s stylized
speech as the Biographer helps make him stand apart
from the goings-on, while allowing for clarity in his
role as our guide to the happenings.  Donna Belleville
is wonderful as the wife of the Canadian minister who
will represent the country at the coronation.  Susie
Burnett is the only weak cog.  Her portrayal of the
young love interest of Etienne is all surface.   

This is a fine, well planned, finely acted and
technically well developed production.  The boat set,
the sumptuous costumes, the lighting effects, all work
well.  The surprise ending brought gasps from the
audience.    If you have time for only one Shaw
production this season, this should be it.


‘DIANA OF DOBSON’S’

The Shaw Festival is noted for finding seldom-produced
scripts, plays like ‘DIANA OF DOBSON’S.’  This is the
story of a young shopkeeper's assistant who inherits a
modest sum of money and decides to spend it all on a
lavish tour of the continent.  While vacationing in
the Swiss Alps, she meets a young aristocrat who, in
reality, has only a little more money than she.  If
this were a made-for-TV movie, it is obvious where
this story will go.  But in the hands of feminist
writer Cicely Hamilton the viewer is not sure.

It is appropriate that the play be staged at this
festival.  G. B. Shaw, who was known for his
entertaining fiction, was also strong on social
conscience.  It could have been Shaw, not Hamilton who
wrote, "Girls, have you ever grasped what money really
is? It's power! Power to do what you like to do, to go
where you like, say what you like." The lead
character, Diana Massingberd, is also in the best
tradition of Shaw's heroines. She's a feisty,
intelligent and impoverished young woman, the daughter
of a deceased country doctor who left her to fend for
herself as a shop girl at Dobson's Emporium. 

As with many other Shaw productions ‘DIANA OF
DOBSON’S’ teaches the audience historical lessons such
as the concept of the "live-in" system common at
employment establishments at the time.  It created a
class of indentured servitude, with the girls herded
together in ill-equipped dormitories, dependent upon
the whims of their employers.   We also observe the
contrast between classes and the unproductive role of
the so-called ornamental class.

Director Alisa Palmer has a fine understanding of the
play and has developed an effective production. 
Severn Thompson makes a fine Diana.  Evan Buliung is
splendid as Bretherton, Diana’s love interest.  Goldie
Semple, as always, delights as Mrs. Cantelupe,
Bretherton’s conspiring aunt.  

Fine costumes, effective set design and tone setting
music all help to make this a polished and very
seeable production.


‘MISALLIANCE’

History has it that during the first rehearsal of the
first production of George Bernard Shaw’s
‘MISALLIANCE,’ the cast walked out because they
couldn’t understand what the play was going on about. 
The cast was not alone.  At intermission, many of the
attenders of the Shaw Festival production also
departed.  One was heard mumbling, "What is this
mess?"

Part of the problem with the play, and this
production, was that Shaw, in his attempt to stay
modern, wrote the script in a manner of alientation, a
new theatre movement of his time.

 It is the purpose of alienation to force the audience
not to transfer their feelings to the characters in a
play, but to be aware that the play is about them,
their lives, their society.  To achieve this writers
and directors of the early twentieth century broke the
action of the play, spoke directly to the audience,
built in devices to insure that the audience was aware
that this was a play, not a display of reality.  In
alienation staging it is common to have lights in full
view, scenery changes made without dimming the lights,
and non-real set pieces.

Some of these techniques were incorporated into the
Shaw Festival production.  Actors often went to
lecterns on stage to read parts of the script.  On a
screen above the playing area a film of G. B. Shaw
himself, commenting on the play and the ideas he was
presenting, was shown.  All of this added up to a
confused audience who were used to traditional story
development and presentation.  

The story centers on John Tarleton, a self-made
millionaire and manufacturer.  He has built his
business out of new products, new technologies, and
new efficiencies.  The Tarleton family occupies the
new seat of power in the modern England of the day. 
The wealthy scions of commerce are now the only ones
who can afford the best real estate and the best
educations.  The members of the hereditary aristocracy
may no longer have the money to back up their social
power, but they represent an old power base that still
wields substantial power in government and high
society. A marriage between the aristocracy and the
merchant classes--the marriage proposed between
Hypatia Tarleton and Bentley Summerhays--might be
considered a "misalliance"; but it represents the
consolidation of power between the classes that, for
better or for worse, hold the reins of power.

The question that ‘MISALLIANCE ‘ poses is: "how do you
live your life in the old world while waiting for the
new world to come into existence?"  Unfortunately, the
audience, at least this Shaw, didn’t seem to care.  

The production, under the seemingly misguided hand of
Neil Munro, simply never captivated or sped along. 
The pacing was static, the delight muted, the clarity
missing.   There was too much talking and too little
action.  The characters were either too rigid or too
overdrawn, but never the twain did meet.   All in all,
this was not a case of the Shaw Festival doing what it
does best...Shaw!


‘THE PLOUGH AND THE STARS’

Neil Munro was also the director of Sean O’Casey’s 
‘THE PLOUGH AND THE STARS.’ As with ‘MISALLIANCE’ the
play missed its mark.  

The almost 3-hour production centers on the 1916
Easter uprising in Ireland.  It concerns bitter,
disheartened people who illustrate Irish woe
concerning their lack of independence from the
British.  It showcases their poverty and their
frustrations. 

Acts one and two look forward to the citizen-led
liberation of Ireland, while acts three and four
expose the reality of the suppression of that
revolution.   The myths of the past and fervent
response to the leaders' rhetoric stirred the people
to give their lives. Eventually, the events overtake
them.  In contrast to "hero" plays, the
revolutionaries we see are not presented
sympathetically.  O'Casey argues that the defeat at
the hands of the British was inevitable.

Events are presented in relation to many characters,
with no central protagonist.  This leaves the audience
with no one to cheer for, to hate, or with whom to
emphathize.  We sit as outsiders observing, but not
being involved.  

The vivid colloquialism and regional accents of the
script, and the slurring of words, often lead to
difficulty in understanding.  Munro needed to decide
whether authenticity or understanding was his goal.
>From the standpoint of the audience, he unwisely chose
the former.

Characters were generally  not well developed. 
Concepts were not well articulated.  The scenery was
not well designed nor constructed.  

The production, as a whole, was much less than what
should be expected at the prestigious Shaw Festival.


WIDOWERS’ HOUSES

It’s a play about a slum landlord, an idealist who
falls in love with the slumlord’s daughter but rejects
her because of the source of her father’s income, and
how the story resolves itself in a happy ending. 
Sound like an old fashioned melodrama?  Not quite. 
It’s the plot of George Bernard Shaw’s very first
play, ‘WIDOWERS’ HOUSES.’ 

The play foreshadows the messages of future Shavian
plays including society as a villain, socialism as the
answer, and morals versus greed.   It includes lines
that helped make Shaw famous including, "The love of
money is the root of all evil" and "People who live in
glass houses have no right to throw stones."

This isn’t a play about widowers, so where does the
title come from?  Supposedly, it is based on an
alteration of the biblical phrase 'widows' houses,'
which suggests that the misfortunes which befall
widows can also afflict widowers.  Somehow, I’m
guessing the average viewer will miss that point
entirely.

As Harry Trench, Dylan Trowbridge follows up his fine
performance in ‘THE CORONATION VOYAGE’ with another
excellent portrayal.  Patrick Galligan is delightful
as Harry’s sidekick, the overly pompous William.  Jim
Mezon gives a polished performance as the slumlord. 
His lecturing speech about the need for slumlords is
so convincingly presented that if you don’t listen
closely, you’ll get conned into agreeing with him. 
Lisa Norton has some fine moments as Blanche, the
daughter and fiancee.

In spite of the misleading title the Shaw production
is quite good.  The sets are lovely and functional,
the costumes period correct, the comic timing
excellent, a lover’s fight scene is wonderfully
staged.  All in all, director Joseph Ziegler did a
competent job with a less than perfectly written
script.  ‘WIDOWERS’ HOUSES’ is not often done.  This
is a chance to see the initial Shaw effort in a fine
production.


THREE SISTERS

Anton Chekhov is generally recognized as one of the
Western world’s greatest dramatists.  He, along with
Henrik Ibsen, are credited with taking theatrical
literature to new meaning as during the early
twentieth century they transitioned western drama from
escapism to examining realistic problems.  Chekhov, in
many of his writings, foretold of the Russian
revolution.

Chekhov insisted that his plays were comedies. 
However, in most productions, the tragic elements are
stressed.   Chekhov described his purpose in writing
as wanting to say to people, "Have a look at
yourselves and see how bad and dreary your lives are.
The important thing is that people should realize
that, for when they do, they will most certainly
create another and better life for themselves."

It is Chekhov's examination of character that makes
‘THREE SISTERS’ a great play.  In this, as well as
other Chekov plays, we are less captured by the plot
then by the characters. In an effective production we
should feel for each of the people we encounter.  

Considered to be his masterpiece, in ‘THREE SISTERS’
Chekhov examines the  three Prozorov sisters who live
in a small town with their brother, Andrei.   They are
bored with provincial life, and look forward to the
day when they will move to Moscow, where all their
unattainable dreams will take place.  Eventually, the
sisters' illusory hopes fade away.

The Shaw production does not captivate as it should. 
Part of the problem is the new translation by Susan
Coyne.  She has lost much of the Russian flavor of the
play.  The language is too North American.  The angst,
the heavy tones are gone.  This missing element is
further showcased by director Jackie Maxwell’s failure
to texture the production with Chekhov overtones.   As
she did with last season’s misguided production of 
‘PICNIC’ Maxwell does not stick to the writer’s
intent, fails to showcase and reflect the place of
origin of the material.

The performances are generally good.  All three
sisters develop separate and clear characters, though
Tara Rosling’s Masha often stays on the surface of the
role.  Caroline Cave is vivacious early on as Irina
and effectively transitions to the frustration of
unfulfilled dreams.   Kelli Fox leaves no doubt of
sister Olga’s despair.  Ben Carlson never quite
creates a clear characterization for Andrei. 

The production of ‘THREE SISTERS’ is not bad, it is
just bland.  Too bad, since Chekhov’s works are not
commonly done and a good production of this "before
his time" writer is usually an experience to  look
forward to.


AFTERPLAY

Have you ever exited a play and asked, "I wonder what
happens to those people?  What will their lives be
like in ten or twenty years?" Irish writer Brian Friel
obviously had those very reflections.  In contrast to
most of us who only think the thought, Friel did
something about it.  

It’s the 1920s.  Two people come together in a
deserted Moscow cafe.  Both have stories to tell and
only a single evening to share them.   We are allowed
to eavesdrop.  

What is ironic about this meeting is that the two are
characters from plays written by Anton Chekhov. 
Andrei Prozorov, is the lackadaisical brother from
‘THE THREE SISTERS’ and Sonya Serebriakova is from
‘UNCLE VANYA.’ Freil’s approach allows us to revisit
the characters twenty years after the original plays
ended. 

‘AFTERPLAY’ premiered at the Gate Theatre in Dublin
last year to great acclaim.  The Shaw production
should also be hailed.  This is a well-directed effort
by Daryl Cloran.  The pacing is on key.  The Russian
feel is evident.  He gets two fine performances from
Simon Bradbury and Helen Taylor.  Each is character
perfect.  We feel for both of them.   We are concerned
about them.  We want to bridge forward another twenty
years to see what their lives will be like then.

The 50-minute show is part of the lunch time series. 
It is a must see!


SHAW 2003 WRAP-UP

Only part of the Shaw season was reviewed here.  The
season also includes ‘THE ROYAL FAMILY,’ ‘ON THE
TWENTIETH CENTURY,’ ‘BLOOD RELATIONS,’ and ‘HAPPY
END.’  Of what was seen I’d strongly recommend:
‘AFTERPLAY,’ ‘DIANA OF DOBSON’S,’ ‘WIDOWERS’ HOUSES,’
and ‘THE CORONATION VOYAGE.’

FOR INFORMATION FOR THE SHAW CALL 1-800-511-SHAW or go
on line to www.shawfest.com.

TO HEAR ROY BERKO’S VIEWS ABOUT THEATRE LISTEN TO
"ACTION TALENT LIVE" ON WERE-AM, 1300 FROM 1 TO 2 PM
ON FRIDAYS.


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com