Week #14 : 'EndGame' by Samuel Beckett

HAMM:  I wonder.  (Pause.)  

Imagine if a rational being came back to earth, wouldn't he be liable to get ideas into his head if he observed us long enough.

(Voice of rational being)  Ah, good, now I see what it is, yes, now I understand what they're at!

( Normal voice)  And without going so far as that, we ourselves...

(with emotion)  ...we ourselves... at certain moments...

(Vehemently)  To think perhaps it won't all have been for nothing!

Samuel Beckett, the God of Absurdism, brings us a disastrously tragicomedy in one long act.  EndGame, the tale of four misfits living their rudimentary lives in a post apocalyptic world, not in any hope of gaining a better one, but just - to be.

Living in a cyclical stasis, Hamm and Clov discuss the world, it's complexities and the nature of beginnings and endings, whilst being completely alone and devoid of happiness.

Clov and Hamm

Hamm is the Protagonist of EndGame.  All though his obnoxious and disagreeable behaviour at times makes him the Antagonist to his man-servant, Clov. Blind and completely imprisoned (we assume, by old age) in his wheeled chair, Hamm continuously comments that no one suffers more in life than he. For Hamm, there is no reason for being on this Earth, particularly not in the damp and chilly hole where he also polices over his parents - Nagg and Nell.

HAMM:   In my house. (Pause)

(With prophetic relish) One day you'll be blind like me. You'll be sitting here, a speck in the void, in the dark, forever, like me. (Pause.)

One day you'll say to yourself, I'm tired, I'll sit down, and you'll go and sit down. Then you'll say, I'm hungry, I'll get up and get something to eat. But you won't get up. You'll say, I shouldn't have sat down, but since I have I'll sit on a little longer, then I'll get up and get something to eat. But you won't get up and you won't get anything to eat. (Pause.)

You'll look at the wall a while, then you'll say, I'll close my eyes, perhaps have a little sleep, after that I'll feel better, and you'll close them. And when you open them again there'll be no wall any more.  (Pause.)

Infinite emptiness will be all around you, all the resurrected dead of all the ages wouldn't fill it, and there you'll be like a little bit of grit in the middle of the steppe.  (Pause.)

Yes, one day you'll know what it is, you'll be like me, except that you won't have anyone with you, because you won't have had pity on anyone and because there won't be anyone left to have pity on you.  (Pause.)

Clov is the Antagonist of EndGame (and as his character is more downtrodden and worn out – He is the more likable character and therefore assumes the role of Protagonist in our minds).  He is the servant to Hamm despite his own disability – Clov cannot ever sit, he is forever walking – often pacing from one side of the room to another and looking out the windows for something.

Adopted into his household by Hamm as a young boy, the play's tension centres around Clov's yearning to leave against his feelings of responsibility to stay with Hamm (an obligation he constantly questions throughout Endgame). Clov constantly attends to Hamm and his relentless commands, such as wheeling him around the dank hole, relaying the landscape outside the windows, giving Hamm his medicine and covering him up at night.  Clov has inexorable juxtaposing emotions of hatred and bonds to Hamm.

CLOV (as before):  I say to myself— sometimes, Clov, you must learn to suffer better than that if you want them to weary of punishing you— one day. I say to myself—sometimes, Clov, you must be better than that if you want them to let you go—one day. But I feel too old, and too far, to form new habits. Good, it'll never end, I'll never go.  (Pause.)

Then one day, suddenly, it ends, it changes, I don't understand, it dies, or it's me, I don't understand that either. I ask the words that remain— sleeping, waking, morning, evening. They have nothing to say.  (Pause.)

I open the door of the cell and go. I am so bowed I only see my feet, if I open my eyes, and between my legs a little trail of black dust. I say to myself that the earth is extinguished, though I never saw it lit.  (Pause.)

It's easy going.  (Pause.)

When I fall I'll weep for happiness.  (Pause. He goes towards door.)

Nagg and Nell

Nagg is Nell's husband and Hamm's father. Living (or should I say – Not living, as Nagg and Nell are in all aspects of the word – dead) in a rubbish bin next to his equally ‘binned’ wife.   He arises every now and then to yell out for food or to try, and always in vain, to kiss Nell and retell the identical story he always tells (we assume on a daily basis). Often, especially when demanding food, he is childish, barely verbose, but sometimes he can be quite profound and articulate.

Nell is Nagg's husband and Hamm's mother. She is resigned to the routine and sameness of their existence, professing the frequent attempt and persistence of Nagg to kiss her a "farce." Nell, as a character, is minimal and not important to the plot, she appears to be the only reason Nagg keeps ‘living’ and is the the sole example of a normal relationship in the play.

NELL (without lowering her voice):  Nothing is funnier than unhappiness, I grant you that. …  ... ...  Yes, yes, it's the most comical thing in the world. And we laugh, we laugh, with a will, in the beginning. But it's always the same thing. Yes, it's like the funny story we have heard too often, we still find it funny, but we don't laugh any more. 

Hardly a verbose play, the dialogue is frequently one to three words in response from Hamm's musings and barking orders and Clov's responses.  Some of the longest sections are the stage directions for Clov.  They are long, detailed and highly important to the characterisation of EndGame.  The first entry to the play is Clov walking from one window, getting up on a chair, getting down and walking to the other side of the stage, only to repeat the same movement.  this is a long and laborious task, but gives the audience a clear depiction of the characters and the world that they are living in.

It is extremely  difficult to describe this play.  I suggest, if you have a week spare:

Read it.

Muse over it.  

Put it down.

Pick it up again and sigh.

Put it back down.

Stare at it wondering if the next time you attempt to read it, it will make a little more sense.

Pick it back up.

Read it.

Put it back down.

Sigh.

Pick up a pen.

Pick up the script again.

Read it and scribble notes all throughout the script.

Put it back down.

Sigh in realisation that you will NEVER fully grasp the complexity of Beckett's writings.

CLOV (straightening up): I'm doing my best to create a little order.

 (Don't ask why there is a red background to the text........ Grrrrrr... I have no idea why it is there and how to get rid of it......  Blogger is getting worse and worse to use.)

Next Week: 'Love, Loss and What I Wore' by Nora Ephron

Week #13 : 'Hedda Gabler' by Henrik Ibsen

“I am mortally bored to be everlastingly in the company of one and the same person.”

Hedda Gabler, the belle within her social standing, has just returned from her honeymoon with her new husband George Tesman, a colourless and forever tedious lecturer, to their new ostentatious villa given to them (under great sufferance) by Hedda’s aunt.

Upon their return from their overseas honeymoon and Tesman’s research trip, they receive many visitors to congratulate their union.  Tesman’s Aunt Juliane brings news that his Aunt Rina is on her death bed.  Mrs Thea Elvsted secretly ruminates her love for her children’s tutor Ejlert Lovborg, whom has just written a book to rival Tesman’s lifelong work and has the chance at ruining his career.

Throughout all of these untimely visitors, Hedda is cruel and callous to those who deign to become her friends.  She is deliberately and viciously rude to Tesman’s Aunt.  She conspires to move Thea and Lovborg together, only to rip them apart again by giving Lovborg the ‘ammunition’ to destroy himself.  She destroys the only manuscript of Lovborg’s book and treats their housemaid with disdain and condescension.

All to what gain?  There are many reasons, the main one possibly is for Hedda's own personal gratification.

In 2004, Sydney Theatre Company produced Hedda Gabler with Cate Blanchett at the helm with Hugo Weaving as Judge Black. This traditional setting directed by Andrew Upton was probably one and the last that we have seen with Ibsen 1800s traditionalist costumes and set.

This year, Australia's most revered playwright Joanna Murray-Smith took it upon herself to reinvent this classic for the South Australian stage.  When I say 'reinventing' I don't mean in a 'Simon Stone-kind-of-way' (not that there is anything wrong with that!! I adore his adaptations); Murray-Smith stayed true to the plot line and importance of the main character and Ibsen's classic writings for strong female characters. She updated the script within a modern framework, whilst keeping the tradition of Ibsen's work alive, and added a few tongue-in-cheek references to liven up the script and bring it bouncing into 2013. 

 Taking the title role of Hedda was Alison Bell, best known for her work in ABC's series Laid and for Sydney Theatre Companies performance of Doubt.

Director Geordie Brookman opted for a non traditional set for his production making the text and it's translation speak entirely for itself. Again, the costumes were minimalistic allowing the actors portray at the characters all the more important because they didn't have the stereotypical 1800s costumes to hide behind to help viscerally adopt the seriousness of the content.

Ben Brooker of the blog Marginalia commented that "the most remarkable thing about Joanna Murray-Smith’s adaptation of Hedda Gabler – which replaces Henrik Ibsen’s hermetically-sealed world of the Norwegian bourgeoisie in the twilight of the 19^th century with a slice of contemporary upper middle class Australian suburbia – is how unremarkable it is. That is not to say it is bad, but that it is good for a curiously self-defeating reason: that it leaves so much intact. Whole lines of dialogue, and even several longer exchanges, come across from earlier English translations virtually unchanged in Murray-Smith’s one act version. Her most original contribution is her first-rate line in barbed humour which makes its way into a great deal of the dialogue."

Along with No Plain Jane (another Australian Arts blogger) who also commented that:

"Perhaps one of the dangers in adapting Hedda Gabler to a contemporary context is the way that women’s place in society has changed in 120 years. Ibsen’s women, his Hedda and his Nora in particular, were revolutionary in their portraits of middle-class women unhappy with their lives, questioning society, and, ultimately, taking control of their own destinies – in radically different fashions. It would be all too easy for a contemporary Hedda to not ring true: while women are still under many pressures and societal expectations, today’s women are, on the whole, more activated both inside and outside the home. Yet, Murray-Smith’s adaptation brings with it startling relevancy, none more so in the ever-prevailing expectation and tension on women to become mothers: here, this conversation feels shocking but in no way false."

Next year the new Director in Residence at Belvoir St Theatre Adena Jacobs will be tackling this text.  It will be interesting to see what take she will have on the play and female lead.  Jacobs has a flair for strong female characters and I think that this is an excellent choice for her to approach in her first appointment at Belvoir St.  Will she heavily adapt it, as per the state of theatre in Australia at the moment? Or will she subtly maneuver the text into the 21st Century as per Murray-Smith??

I certainly think there is a place for adaptation. There are those out there that think that this contemporary theatre practice is ruining the theatre for emerging artists. (Check out this scathing articlehttp://m.theaustralian.com.au/arts/the-local-voices-being-swept-off-the-stage/story-e6frg8n6-1226651624628?sv=4d4d97a3d6abaddf86efff684124e275)  There has been extensive research gone into this area, especially by Alison Croggon, Australia's most outspoken theatre spokesperson - and all for the triumphs and waves that new Australian theatre is bringing. Theatre is a burgeoning area that the needs of the many (and the few) are being indulged, but also bent treated with respect.

You can read Alison Croggon's views on Adaptations Vs New theatrical works here: http://m.theaustralian.com.au/arts/review/hooked-on-classics/story-fn9n8gph-1226648616479

I also highly recommend you read the Andrew Upton (co-Artistic Director of Sydney Theatre Company) Phillip Parsons Memorial Lecture delivered on the 2/12/2012 at Belvoir St Theatre.  It is a stirring speech about Theatrical pursuits of the many and the few.  It made me triumphant and tearful all at the same time.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/arts/theatre-is-a-place-of-here-now-and-destiny/story-e6frg8n6-1226528488602

(Sorry about the messy links.... I really with they would update the blogger app for the iPad to have the ability to embed links in posts.)

I LOVE Australian Theatre. It is such a small scope of what happens here, yet the Directors, Producers, Actors and blossoming major and indie companies are becoming more recognised for the passion that goes into the works and the tremendous output and brilliant productions that are happening across this land. I would not ask to be anywhere else right now.

I realise that this post is a week late, unfortunately due to some personal issues I had to delay this entry.

Next Week: 'EndGame' by Samuel Beckett

Week #10 : 'The Comedy of Errors' by William Shakespeare

"Am I in earth, in Heaven, or in Hell?

Sleeping or waking, mad or well-advised?

Known unto these, and to myself disguised?

I'll say as they say, and persever so,

And in this mist at all adventure go."                    (Antipholus of Syracuse, Act 2: Scene 2)

24 Hours....

+   TWO sets of identical twins.....

+   Separation at birth from a shipwreck....

+   A port-side town of Ephesus.....

+   Mistaken identity....

+   A collision of family and friends.....

+   Far-fetched coincidences.....

= Chaotic hilarity unfolding!

Egeon, a merchant shipper of Syracuse has just been condemned to death in the town of Epheus for violating a serious ban against travelling between two rival cities.  As he is being lead to his execution Egeon tells the Duke Solinus that he was travelling to Syracuse to search for his long lost wife and twin son, who were lost in a shipwreak 25 years ago.  Egeon has one of the twins, Antipholus... of Syracuse (this will seem quite necessary in a minute, believe you me!) and a slave named Dromio... of Syracuse - whom is also a twin and has also lost his other half.  The Duke is so moved by this tale that he grants Egeon 24 hours to raise 1000 marks to save his life. 

In the meantime, and unknown to Egeon, Antipholus of Syracuse is also in the town Ephesus, with his slave, Dromio of Syracuse.
Unknown to both Egeon and Antipholus of Syracuse, the town has a prosperous citizen, known as...... Antipholus.... of Ephesus and his slave Dromio..... of Ephesus...... 

Confused yet???  Well, try to keep up for a sec...

Adriana, Antipholus of Ephesus' wife mistakes Antipholus of Syracuse for her husband and forces him home for dinner, whilst leaving Dromio of Syracuse at the door to stand guard.
Shortly following, Antipholus of Ephesus, along with his slave Dromio of Ephesus returns home and is refused entry.

In the meantime, Antipholus of Syracuse has fallen in love with Luciana, Adriana's sister, who in turn thinks that her brother-in-law is trying to seduce her.

Ok.... are you keeping up??

The hilarity and total confusion continues when a gold chain, that has been ordered by Antipholus of Ephesus is given to Antipholus of Syracuse.  Antipholus of Ephesus refuses to pay for the chain (and rightly so, it was never given to him) and is arrested for this debt.  Adriana decides that her husband has gone mad and orderes him to be bound in their cellar room.
At this point, Antipholus of Syracuse and Dromio of Syracuse try to escape the city immediately, yet only to be caught by the debt officer and Adriana......

Take a deep breath!!

Bell Shakespeare alongside the State Theatre Company of South Australia is currently producing this wonderfully absurd and highly physical comedy.  If you haven't had a chance to see it, you only have a few more chances to see it in Canberra (29 Oct - 9 Nov) and Sydney (12 Nov - 7 Dec).  There are a few regional dates upcoming in Tas (on RIGHT NOW!), Vic and NSW - Check the website for these dates and venues.

Director Imara Savage departs from her darker and torturous theatrical roots to direct a comedy for one of the first times.  She comments in an article to 'The Age' newspaper that "I didn't feel that I had to drag it kicking and screaming into the modern day.  It feels like it sits there quite comfortable.  That's a testament to Shakespeare, because comedy is something that can date quickly."

Savage takes the reigns of this hilarious Shakespearean comedy, updates the setting to a contemporary location with gaudy costumes and settings.  If the sold out season in Melbourne is anything to go by, this revisioning of this play has been a tremendous success.  The 'Hearld Sun' reviewer Byron Bache had nothing bad to say about the production at all, discussing that "Modern dress Shakespeare is so often over-inflated, confused, or downright pointless.  Here, director imama Savage has performed magic.  Her 'The Comedy of Errors' takes place is a twisted, hysterical King Street-cum-Carrum Downs hyper-reality.  Every line reading, every joke and every piece of physical comedy sings.
This is Shakespeare for the populace.  The text is intact and Savage's clever staging, full of tweaks and subversions, is redoubtable proof that the 'burn everything to the ground, throw away the text' school of adaptation that's currently in vogue brings far less to a work than the guiding hand of a capable and imaginative director with a little bit of trust in their playwright."

 

If Imara Savage likes the dark and disastrous plays then I can't wait to see her tackle another Shakespeare in this vein.... Titus Andronicus, for example??  or maybe a bloody Macbeth or Julius Caesar??  My vote is for Titus! (My favourite Shakespeare play!!)
Any production of hers will be a success if this production is anything to be counted upon.


The final, final word comes from Dromio of Ephesus:

"Nay, then thus,
We came into the world like brother and brother,
And now let's go hand in hand, not one before another."



Next Week: 'The Laramie Project' by Moises Kaufman and the Tectonic Theatre Project

Week #2: 'The League of Youth' by Henrik Ibsen

A political idealist is released and consequentially run out of town because of social and sexual complications .... How poetic! (especially  in this day and age of political tenacities!)


The League of Youth, written in 1869, was a turning point for Ibsen as it marked his first play in colloquial language away from his previous verse writing.  The play of five acts (and over 125 pages...) centres on protagonist Stensgaard and the beginning (and ultimately the crashing demise) of his young and vivacious anti-capitalist political party 'League of Youth'.
Stensgaard is a conceited entrepreneur who has been suitably termed by many as 'a political Peer Gynt."  He first sets a provincial town in Norway alight by his radical attack on the social structures of the town and the formation of the 'League of Youth'.
Although, ingratiated by the community's conservative, all-powerful chamberlain, Stensgaard swiftly changes tact and, after a local electoral triumph, is happy to be proposed for a seat in higher parliament.  What eventually undoes Stensgaard is his sexual, rather than his political, cynicism.  it is discovered by the town that he simultaneously proposed to three differing women (and comprehensively rejected by all three), he becomes a local laughing stock and is run out of town.

Having started reading this play with full intentions of its possibilities for a younger cast (namely my Theatre Studies class), I propelled myself into reading it, only to come to a halting end.  The language is, in true Ibsen fashion, proper and loquacious.  Unfortunately I could not envisage the production, making it difficult to form a deep impression for reflective comment.

It has been said that the character of Stensgaard was a political allegory of Norwegian outsider Herman Bagger, who in the 1830s, arrived in the town of Skein (Ibsen's home town), was subsequently elected to political office in 1848.  Even though Bagger was involved in a few scandals, he went on to further his political life and eventually retiring from office in 1874.

This is a script that is rarely staged.  The most recent production was in 2011 adapted by Andy Barrett and Directed by Giles Croft for Nottingham Playhouse.  This production, complete with traditional setting, was highly commented upon.
Steve Orme for the British Theatre Guide states "in the programme Andy Barrett points out that Ibsen's original work is a very long, five-act play and he's had to condense it so that it could be bought to a UK stage for the first time." ... "Barrett's adaptation is authentically perceptive, Giles Croft directs with an assured confidence, Dawn Allsopp's design is impressively grand and the actors - fifteen townspeople and servants as well as eleven speaking parts - throw themselves wholeheartedly into the production."

Michael Billington for The Guardian comments - "Although the play strains the resources of a regional theatre, Giles Croft's production adroitly makes use of non-professionals to embody Stensgaard's supporters, and allows the teeming action to spill out into the auditorium.  There are also good performances from Sam Callis as the overwhelming antihero, smiling unfazed by temporary setbacks, Phillip Bretherton as the easily hoodwinked chamberlain and David Acton as a suave conservative who sees though Stensgaard's expediency."

The production took use of modern political imagery, most notably the iconic two tone blue and red image used in the Obama election.  Maybe this was a political theatrical opportunist choice in itself in order to garner an audience?? (I would say that it was a very clever marketing ploy for this particular production for their season in conjunction with the Nottingham European Arts and Theatre Festival.)

I can recognise that if you were to adapt this script to a more contemporary setting, that audiences could create a deeper understanding of the context in which it was written and form a greater appreciation to the overall comical presence within the play.  Particularly if it was to be adapted for an Australian audience; due to the current political climate and humorous nature of the catastrophes that the two major parties have placed themselves in, an audience could immediately associate the attempts at forming a working party for the masses, whether they are the working class or the upper ranks of society.
It would be a highly poignant production is treated with a modern re-write and adaptation to our current political mess.




Next Week:  'Six Characters in Search of an Author' by Luigi Pirandello

Week #1 : 'Miss Julie' by August Strindberg

Miss Julie..... Mistress Julie...... Mademoiselle Julie....... Oh, how your prestigious birthright belies you...

August Strindberg wrote a gripping tale of a society woman bent on seducing her fathers porter into a sexual experience to prove that she still has power over men of any status after her disastrous engagement that has just ended. The events that follow allow herself to be wrapped in his tangling web of seductions all to be humiliated, belittled and ultimately manipulated into sacrificing herself in the end.

Written in 1888, 'Miss Julie' was so controversial, it was not produced in Swedish theatres for over 14 years. This seminal text of the Naturalism period, that Strindberg himself described as a "modern psychological drama", has been depicted as volatile, psychologically turbulent and captivating. 

Strindberg influenced such writers as Tennessee Williams, Edward Albee and Ingmar Bergman (to name just a few) with his intellectual thoughts on morals and class structures all wrapped up in characters that were multidimensional and contained within a plot that was not fabricated. 

'Miss Julie' is all this and so much more!

                    

The action happens across the span of a single night where societal status is challenged and crumbled beneath the weight of seductions from both Julie and John. Both try to best each other with desperate actions that would shake the morals of any human being, yet John takes it in his stride and cuttingly overhands the dangerously enticing situation to manipulate and ruin Julie for his own gratifications.

The script allows a man and a woman to create a growing psychological tension on stage that not only covers sexual attraction and eventual domination, but the mechanisms of polarised upbringings of the upper and lower classes of society and their desperate layers of control.

          "Why do you go about in livery on a holiday evening? Take it off at once." (Julie to John when in the company of his fiancée - the kitchenmaid)

John, who will not be bested in any situation, seemingly plays right into Julie's flirtations and enables the situation to grown beyond her power. As the night spins beyond anyones control, the status of men and women, class distinction and the strong and the weak are put to the test.  John clearly sets the tone and in one fowl swoop, cheapens Julie's actions and a forces a flow of abuse onto her:

          "No one in my station of life could have made herself so cheap as the way you carried on tonight, my girl... Have you ever seen a girl in my position offer herself in the way you did?" 

Strindberg was quite specific about the way in which he wanted his play to be seen: a small stage, the single setting of a small working kitchen and fireplace, with a glass door leading to the garden. Other items on stage reveal a large bell and a horn for the residents of the upper house to contact their staff. (Later on also Julie's pet canary and large knife...)

The dialectic of class conflict is delivered through the only openings to other parts of the household: the staff quarters on one side of the stage and the opulent gardens on the other. The kitchen then becomes the intermediary between both worlds. The very personalised relationship display between Julie and John in this middle ground forces the tension out in the open where the themes of love, desire and control in a world with rigid class conventions override any visceral perceptions. 

Strindberg's stage directions are almost stifling in specificity in parts, but kept relatively open when the dialogue becomes overwrought with dramatics and emotions. Writing around the same time as Ibsen, whom also heavily focused on the specificity of the actors movements; Strindberg knew exactly how he wanted his writings to be imagined on stage and did so in these directions to whomever tackled his script. (Oh,and painted  backdrops were definitely not allowed on a Strindberg production!) 

In 2012, Yael Farber re-imagined Strindberg's play to post-apartheid era with tremendous success, winning the Carol Tambour Best of Edinburgh Award. Claire Simpson reviewed the performance for Fringe Reviews: "One of those rare exceptional productions where all the elements - writing, direction performance and technical direction - combine to become more than the sum of its parts, this powerful Mies Julie lets out a cry of anguish for today's South Africa that won't be easily forgotten." Rory Eddington also commented on the performance: "While individually giving exhilarating performances, the chemistry between Bongile Mantsai and Hilda Cronje is torrid, creating a perspiration drenched eroticism. Yet perhaps the most enduring image is that of John clutching both shovel and scythe at the play’s denouement as if to ask one simple question: is this the only way? Sexy, dangerous and riveting."

     

Not so successful was the French adaptation in 2011 staring Juliette Binoche, however more for the bold minimalist modern setting rather than the performances. The reviews for this show focus on the design rather than the acting, which is disappointing considering Juliette Binoche is renowned for creating deep and often beguiling female characters. One comment made by Michael Billington for 'The Guardian' concluded that "In the end, the production makes little sense. Strindberg dreamed of a 'small stage and a small auditorium' where the entire focus would be on the situation's emotional reality. Instead the play is presented as a pictorial spectacle with the emphasis on a mood of debauched glamour and where either the glass screens or the lighting render the actors' faces semi-visible."

     

I feel that I could easily write a thesis discussing the psychological complexities of this play, let alone the numerous adaptations of the text. However, I think I may have to stop here as I draw alarmingly close to the 1,000 word mark.....

I chose this play to be my first as it will be on at the Belvoir St Theatre in Sydney in August/Sept with aussie actor Brendan Cowell as John.  I had the chance to work with Letitia Cáceres at MTC and I am really interested to see how she will tackle this with Simon Stone's adaptation of the original text.

http://belvoir.com.au/productions/miss-julie/

Next week: 'The League of Youth' by Henrik Ibsen