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 #5 : 'Crave' by Sarah Kane

M - I don't want to die alone and not be found till my bones are clean 

and the rent is overdue.

A - I am not what I am, I am what I do.

C - No one can hate me more than I hate myself.

B - The fags aren't killing me fast enough.

These are the characters of Sarah Kane's 'Crave'. Four disturbed and self-destructive characters of interweaving dialogues where there is no clear ending or beginning for any of them.

It remains unclear whom is talking to whom, if at all.  Multiple conversations, multiple plot lines, multiple phrases of repetition, yet you get this unyielding feeling that no one is really talking to anyone and that no one truly understand what the others are saying.  Yet you get the feeling that each character really does understand the others.

The four characters, known only by singular letters, have distinct personalities and tones within the script:

A is an older man whom has lost his partner.  We are not given specifics to the facts behind her departure... He admits that he is a pedophile (we can take a pretty clear guess and to why she left).

B, a younger man is intent on killing himself with booze and cigarettes, but without it looking like a suicide.

C is a younger woman whom, we assume, was abused by her father with only her mother as solitude.  She is a sufferer of anorexia and bulimia.

M, an older woman, who is desperate to have a baby before she dies.

The premise of 'Crave' is.... well..... I'm not really sure how to describe it....  
The play really has no plot per say, it is a non conventional, non physical indication about four different characters journeys towards love, truth, lies, and self destruction... yet there is something about the script that draws you in, wanting to know more, wanting the characters to give up more information about themselves.  There is no location, no time setting, no tangible information to allow you to grasp onto anything.  All you have is this wanting to find out more - Who are A, B, C & M? Where are they? Why are they here? How are they connected? Is there even a connection to be made?
It is a fascinating and riveting play that allows you into the psyche of these four characters.

Sarah Kane, a inherently private person who wrote experimentally and with an uncompromising vision for In-Yer-Face theatre and it's forms.  She was heralded as one of the most talented playwrights of the 1990s.  Unfortunately, the world lost this prolific writer in 1999 when she committed suicide.  Mark Ravenhill (a fellow playwright who wrote 'Shopping and Fucking') labelled her "a contemporary writer with a classical sensibility who created a theatre of great moments of beauty and cruelty, a theatre to which it was only possible to respond with a sense of awe."

'4.48 Psychosis' (which was posthumously directed at the Royal Court Theatre in 2000) is often stated as her suicide note, but I personally think we need to be careful not to read into all of her plays as a layered version of her life and depression as we can often do with other poets whom have suffered from debilitating illnesses.

This short documentary (4 minutes) gives a fantastic snapshot of her and her works and their importance within the post-modern theatrical society.

Her dialogue in 'Crave' is less of a dramatic script but more of a tonal poem that is fractured and lacking direction of any linear form.  For instance, over 2 pages we are surrounded by the words 'Yes' and 'No' repearted over and over by all of the characters in no repetitive format.  Sometimes the characters respond to each other, mostly it seems they talk to themselves, infrequently you can follow a characters lines (disregarding the lines in-between) to follow a plot angle of a particular character. Each character also has their prophetic moments in this seemingly ramble of random dialogue. 

C - Depression's inadequate.  A full scale emotional collapse is the minimum required to justify letting everyone down.

A - Death is my lover and he wants to move in.

B - There's a difference between articulacy and intelligence.  I can't articulate the difference but there is one.

M - There's something very unflattering about being desired when the other person is so drunk they can't see.

Kane deliberately uses no stage directions in her poetry driven plays (she does use them in her more linear scripts - 'Cleansed' and 'Blasted', and sparingly in 'Phaedra's Love' - however they do not interfere with the dialogue and are more used in moments of silence and to frame a particular emotive premise).

Is this really true?
It takes an imaginative mind to work
towards a truly inspiring art form that has
been created by another imaginative person.

All of her five plays (and one 10 minute screen play) do not conform to the rules of grammar, but use punctuation to indicate delivery of the lines instead.  Kane had a clear idea on how she wanted her works to be heard, not staged.  

Her plays are tough, terse and troubled yet deal with a tremendous amount of compassion and drive.  (yes, I see what I have done there with the alliteration... I didn't mean it!)

Due to the difficult language and inherently difficult staging, so little Kane productions are directed that it was difficult to find a recent review of 'Crave'.  

The most recent production that I can find was in 2012 (the previous one was 2008) in York at the Theatre Royal.  It was played as a double bill with a Russian play - 'Illusions' by Ivan Viripaev.  Reviewer Lyn Gardner writes "... there is noting remotely cosy about this evening, which turns despair into an art form and constantly asks what it is that makes us human: our capacity to love, or our capacity to lie to others - and most of all to ourselves?

During Crave, the audience experiences a universe seen though a cracked mirror; Illusions begin with the expectation of a punchline, but as it continues it starts to feel as if we, huddled on the stage and staring out at the empty auditorium, are the joke.  it's like a bedtime story gone awry.  The threat is our inability to make sense of a shifting universe, to really know another human being and keep love constant." 

Sarah Kane's plays will never date.  They will endure though time and space.

Next Week: 'Electra' by Euripides

Week #4 : 'Die Hamletmaschine' by Heiner Muller

For a 9 page script, Die HamletMaschine (or in English - Hamletmachine) certainly packs a massive punch.  A visual feast as well as a thought provoking experience.

Written by German Heiner Muller in 1977, Die Hamletmaschine is a short 5 scene play script that is loosely based on the lengthy text  - Shakespeare's Hamlet, but more on the bare components that make up the tragic tale.  The images are striking and are a great hook for the audience.  For instance:

"Grief gave way to joy, joy into munching, on the empty coffin the murder mounted the widow SHOULD I HELP YOU UP UNCLE OPEN THE LEGS OF MAMA."

"One should sew the wenches shut, a world without mothers."

It is a post-modern script that is open to varying different interpretations.  Some versions focus on the consumerism and the references to such (Coca Cola, "I go though the street malls faces, with the scars of the shopping blitz").  Some performances have focuses entirely on the images and neglected the script.  Some the entire focus is the references to East Germany Communism and and the influential role of intellectuals during that time.  In 1992 a university recreated the text set in meat factory setting with Ophelia hanging on meat hooks...  
There is no right or wrong way to perform this script.  You devise your performance from how the script speaks to you and your actors.  
It has been performed as a radio drama which included a soundtrack by Einstürzende Neubauten.  
Listen to it!  And listen to it LOUD!! I dare you!!!!!


From the opening scene (FAMILY ALBUM) we are introduced to the character Hamlet and are instantly aware of his internal monologue and the links and allusions to the original Shakespearean text.
However, the audience are also immediately aware that the actor playing Hamlet is looking onto himself as a character.  The very first line - "I was Hamlet"  to where he describes himself as an actor "Horatio Polonius.  I knew that you're an actor.  I'm one too, I play Hamlet."

In Scene 4 - PEST IN BUDA BATTLE OF GREENLAND, again we see Hamlet refer to himself as an actor playing a role "I am not Hamlet.  I play no role anymore.  My words have nothing more to say to me.... My drama is cancelled.  Behind me the scenery is being taken down."

In opposition is Ophelia's first line in the second scene (THE EUROPE OF THE WOMAN)- "I am Ophelia".  Muller describes her as having a clock as a heart.  Immediately the audience connects with Ophelia and knows that her time is coming to an end.  The contrast is that 'Hamlet' can look from the inside out and in again, whereas 'Ophelia' looks from the outside in.  She describes her end "I dig the clock which was my heart out of my breast."

In the 5th and final scene - WILDSTRAINING/IN THE FEARSOME ARMAMENTS/MILLENIA Ophelia is onstage alone in the deep sea strapped into a wheelchair with body parts floating past (again a direct link to the original text), she laments that she is not Elektra with her heart of darkness and under a sun of torture.  In this she speaks about burying the revolution and that all will know the truth soon.


Muller has also used capital letters and spacing that doesn't form to the rules of grammar in order to create these visual images.  For instance Scene 3 is nearly entirely all imagery where 'Hamlet' is dresses up as a woman by 'Ophelia' and voices are heard from the coffin. However Scene 1 and 4 are very aural based where 'Hamlet' is speaking directly to the audience as to the dealings within the script and his interpretation of his life and what he believes to be true - or not.

If you haven't had the chance to read the script, I highly recommend that you do.  You can download it here.  I really have only just scrapped the surface of the text in this post. Remember it's only 9 pages long..... but you will be engrossed with it for hours!

Next Week : 'Crave' by Sarah Kane

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