STC’s PYGMALION dissected by me

Good old George Bernard Shaw. He really knew how to write and director Peter Evans has chosen one of the earliest versions of ‘Pygmalion’ to stage at the Sydney Theatre for your viewing pleasure.

There has been criticism levelled at me of late that I don’t tell my readers enough of the story. So if the following summary of 'Pygmalion' is not enough, I suggest you stop reading, go and look it up on wikipedia and come back later. 'Pygmalion', first staged in 1912 is the original My Fair Lady story, exploring the theme of the transformative power and pitfalls of class, language and education; it’s the Cinderella story with a socialist agenda.

Let’s accept that it’s hard not to enjoy the writing- its witty banter and colourful characters mean it’s hard to get this play wrong if it’s performed well. So let’s look at the choices Evans made to give his interpretation its best chance to entertain, teach and preach with the best of Shavian intentions.

The cast really do a fabulous job, especially given the gaping holes in staging (more of that later). Andrea Demetriades’ passion and energy in playing Eliza Dolittle was terrific as was her transition into sophistication and autonomy. Marco Chiappi as Henry Higgins conveys a magnetic gruffness and was superb at filling the stage with intent and power. The support cast did a wonderful job at finding the comedy and exploiting it and carrying the weight of the text with integrity at the same time. Being able to take minor roles and make the audience feel like they are major roles is the gift of a clever artist. The actors in 'Pygmalion' made this play work and there was a sense Evans gave them some license to play and I think this sense of life on stage was a bonus in its interpretation.

This is extended in choosing an early version of the text which allows the actors to explore the reported action, the arguments and the ideas of the text and relish in the playful interaction of the characters. His choice to also abandon Shaw’s very detailed stage directions has allowed Evans and his cast to manipulate the (cavernous) space.

His choice to also employ a dramaturg in Toby Schmitz was also a smart move to aid in unpacking the script and its complexities. Add to that, there’s something so deliciously subversive about Schmitz that suggest he is a good choice in analysing the possibilities of function and style.

OK- so having said all that, what didn’t quite work? Let’s start with the obvious…the set (or lack thereof). Whilst I understand the rationale of avoiding clutter and providing a magnifying glass to explore relationships, I think it’s a cop out. The Sydney Theatre is an epic space and it demands use. If you want to leave your stage bare, go to a space that allows the intimacy of that choice, such as the Wharf Theatre.  The gaping expanse of Sydney Theatre means the actors work as hard as they can and if they have a lapse in energy, there is nowhere to hide. I can only imagine how much energy the cast expend in filling that space night after night.

I also think the choice of no set is the cheat’s way out of the anachronisms of time. Does it want to be set in 1912 or contemporary times? Evans leaves that one floating out there but to the audience it just feels like a lack of commitment.

The empty stage also highlights issues in sound. When actors hit centre stage you can hear their lines reverberate around the space and is not the quality of staging we have come to expect from a STC production.

Finally the choice of using live video feeds in moments of the play, which can give theatre the elusive close up, also means the action on the big screen can eclipse what is happening on stage. Once again, the cast are left with the challenge of competing with a moving split focus. The very end video image also didn’t seem to know why it was there and even the long-time subscribers sitting next to me asked me what that meant. Are we suggesting Eliza Doolittle and Higgins might come together or has Higgins just turned into a dirty stalker?? I think what is an interesting idea didn’t have a clear function or rationale and therefore the play ends with a bit of whimper.

But if you can excuse the space of its distractions, 'Pygmalion' embraces a strong narrative and cast and for our more conservative theatregoers, there’s not an expletive in sight. And a show you can take your mum to can’t be that bad.

That Pretty Pretty; or, The Rape Play performed by Workhorse Theatre Company & dissected by me.

Excuse me in this review if I start by comparing myself slightly to the Workhorse Theatre Company and their debut play 'That Pretty Pretty'.

A new voice prepared to tackle subject matter generally taboo in the current scene. Check.

A complete shellacking from sources that overlook the very real content and style of the work and concentrate on a superficial understanding of what that work is attempting to do or engages in a personal attack in which to discredit them and their work. Check.

Currently embroiled in a media scandal that propels them into a frenzy of free publicity and drives people to see them in action and creates a bigger fan base as a result. Check.

Art imitating life? It's pretty pretty clear where some of the other theatre bloggers would like to stick that grenade.

Now to the play: this is a bold choice for the new Workhorse Theatre Company. They have clearly branded themselves as an ensemble who will favour alternative styles, structures and writings with a subversive flavour. And as someone who likes to chance it in a generally conservative environment and rock that damn boat in my most provocative "mumsy school teacher" twin set, they have my vote.

Workhorse is a mix of experiences brought together by common artistic goals. Director Netta Yashchin, whose theatre background is grounded in Tel-Aviv and who recently graduated from NIDA’s directing course has given her cast the confidence to explore this polemic play in an intimate but difficult performance space. The sightlines sometimes hinder action and it felt there was a fair bit happening on the floor (cue jelly wrestling) that all but the front row could clearly engage in. However, it didn’t detract from what was an otherwise humorous and polished rendition of New York playwright Sheila Callaghan’s play.

There is an energy in pace and range in this anti-realism piece that the cast manage to sustain, much to their credit. Playing a multitude of characters and variations or interpretations of the one role meant that the play, structurally, gave the audience work to do in figuring out what version of the story’s thread they were engaging in at that point in time, but the cast do a commendable job of keeping their audience in the loop. The choice to even sometimes cheekily direct dialogue to us as if we were part of their narrative increased the connection in embracing the subversive structure of the play.

Most impressive was Kellie Jones in her roles as Jane Fonda/Jane (and I’m not just saying that because it’s my name). Her comic timing, commitment and playful charisma of Fonda as opposed to her role as the intimidated victimised maid demonstrated a skilful range of abilities. All the cast demonstrated a strong skill set in this episodic play.

‘That Pretty Pretty’ is, at its heart, a play that explores the misogyny of male dominated narrative obsessions and pushes it to its extreme. Scantily clad women, shootings, rape and the other penetrating issues of the work are juxtaposed with homage to 80’s icons and pop culture references. It is a pastiche that doesn’t always hang together and this seems more in the writing than direction. It feels like every inspiration Callaghan found amusing, appalling or interesting found its way into this play and that someone needed to give it an edit, like in Owen’s monologue unpacking his blockbuster narrative that went on just a little too long and then the interview scene at the end that didn’t quite feel like it wrapped up the play.

All in all, Workhorse should be pleased they have managed to stir the pot. I’d like to see them succeed in this tough business and so thank you Daily Telegraph. I think you’ve given them a wonderful step up to do just so.

And for those keen to follow this penetrating provocative reviewer, I am now on twitter. Follow me on @janesoyp.

BELVOIR’S ‘BURIED CITY’ dissected by me

There’s a six minute lockout at the start of Belvoir’s ‘Buried City’.  I suggest you take advantage of it and leisurely finish your dinner or simply enjoy the emptiness of the foyer before going in, if you must, to see the show because once in there, the painstaking crossing of the stage by Perry Keyes before he picks up his guitar and starts singing, will make you feel your tolerance of the world is ebbing away.

Also be warned, there’s no interval, so pray you get a seat discreetly close to an exit or strap yourself in for 80 minutes of hearing yourself sigh and looking at your watch every two minutes in the hope that you have entered a time warp and the show will miraculously end soon. 

Look- it’s not all bad. Some of the actors give it their best. It’s one of Russell Kiefel’s strongest performances and relatively new talent Meyne Wyatt also gives a fine turn out. But really, if you are looking for a night of entertainment, this is not it.

Let’s break it down.  Writer Raimondo Cortese seems to specialise in intimate small cast pieces that are more conversational than plot derived and this means his stories are almost on the verge of going somewhere but they rarely do. It’s like waiting for the tag in the joke that never comes. His plays take you nowhere and very early on you realise the pointless message is tied up in the writing and the cast and director can try whatever they can to make the play feel like it’s building tension but the only journey it will take you on is tedium. And not in a Beckett way. It’s more like a ‘not-particularly-clever I-don’t-give-a-toss-and-why-am-I-trapped-in-a-seat-restricting-my-ability-to-stage-a-walk-out-and-reclaim-my-life’ kind of way. Does anyone remember his play ‘Holiday’ from Griffin a few years back. Duologue of sheer inane-ness.  And I so want to like him but I just can’t help being bored witless by his work so I’m officially giving up trying. Cortese bores me. There. I’ve said it.

So, as result, the whole play suffers.  Oooh..the world has rapidly changed. No-one cares anymore. Unions are dead. It’s all about money. We’re all alone. Who are we? What’s the point? Why can’t we sleep? Why can't we connect with each other anymore? There we go people. No need to see the show- I’ve just encapsulated it for you for free.

I know the cast had some input into the play and that’s obvious by the fact that they all retain their real names as the characters. Honestly, the show feels like a final year school piece, polished yet unoriginal. You’re not going to care about the characters and the play itself won’t take up valuable brain space shortly after you leave the theatre. For the most part, it’s a big fat ball of yawn.

Design wise you are confronted with the scaffolding of a stalled building site with all the characters stalled there as well in the mess of the site, as a metaphor for their lives, which becomes increasingly more broken as they play continues. And apart from drawn out conflict of stolen phones, ex-girlfriends, etc ultimately everyone will find a corner of the set and stay there. And they’re the lucky ones. At least they had easy access to the exit. I had to pay to stay and watch them stay too until two standard curtain calls later. Life is so unfair.

What is hammered home in this play is that an audience, we are so polite. Where are the groans from the audience to get on with it? Where’s the obvious stand, boo and exit. Can someone start that club? I’m happy to enrol in that support group. How on earth can we communicate to our theatre companies that the work they are putting on is giving theatre a bad name. There are so many people out there that believe theatre is tedious. Why give them a play that confirms that theory?

Shame on you Belvoir. You are capable of much better.

TAMING OF THE SHREW dissected by me

On Friday night I braved the weather forecast and ventured off to Bicentennial Park in Glebe to see the Sydney Shakespeare Festival’s version of ‘Taming of the Shrew’. This is currently running in rep with ‘Hamlet’ and so actors have been duly charged and challenged with learning many parts and lines this January & February.

The location of the Shakespeare Festival is certainly is a great location with the throb and lights of the city surrounding the action and an industrial speaker system and spotlight keeping us all in the action once the pseudo-summer light faded. The makeshift stage on its portable trailer is also a versatile and well-utilised design concept for either play.

Firstly, the play is a bit of fun and the actors seemed to be enjoying the open space and its proximity to the audience as part of the playing space ran between the picnic blankets and beach chairs of those watching. Sometimes the movement and conflict of stage business seems overdone but this wasn’t an issue for those lazing around, cheese and biscuit in hand (someone please remind me that the lactose intolerant aren’t cured just because you’re eating outside), getting their Friday night Shakespeare quota.

Director Julie Baz has given an active and entertaining interpretation to the play. It can skip over the fundamental feminist concern of the treatment of women and how their submission is the prime object of desire,  but as a crusty middle-aged woman myself, according to modern literature I could do with a lesson in this too. Just ask any poor male who has to spend more than 10 minutes in my company. I could teach that Shrew a thing or two. In fact wouldn’t it be interesting to have Katherina played by an obvious middle-aged woman (No- I'm not looking to audition). Certainly when Petruchio claims he is “too young” for her or when Katherina’s father states he will not marry off his younger daughter Bianca  “until Katherina is married” would certainly give another dimension to Shakespeare’s play.

Some actors seemed to have a better grasp of the rhythm of the language than others and it was fairly clear that the leads were more comfortable in the skin of the words- not that the production had major flaws, just some inconsistencies in conveying text and meaning to their audience. Strongest by far was John Michael Burdon (Petruchio). Having said that, no-one let down the team. Christina Falsone, Emily Elise, Nicole Wineberg, Cherilyn Price and Lana Kershaw were a strong female ensemble who all had moments of connection with audience and character, especially as many played more than one role. The guys also held their own out there in a venue of great distraction where keeping your audience engaged is certainly a tough ask.

What is also especially nice about this event was the camaraderie in the ensemble who take on roles as designers, choreographers, production assistants as well as act and direct. I think the very concept of this is a wonderful thing. January has been filled with seeing a lot of independent and alternative theatre and I have come to really appreciate the spirit and commitment of those who have been locked out of a fairly limited pool of mainstream opportunities and created their own. It’s one of the things I love about the Arts, that any venue can serve as a theatre (read Richard Schechner’s thoughts on that). I love the bravery of independent artists who realise that theatre and engaging in the empathy of the craft through any means is not dependent on waiting for the call up but in creating your own performance opportunities and for the truly dedicated, even your own theatre company. Julie Baz and David Jeffrey should be congratulated for their passion in staging the Sydney Shakespeare Festival over the last 5 years.

And the audience seemed to agree that the night was an enjoyable foray into the world of Shakespeare. It's a very user-friendly environment and evening for kids, family and friends.

SHORT & SWEET WEEK 4 dissected by me

Last time I reviewed Short & Sweet (week 3) I seemed to bruise a few egos (ironic given that I thought I was being quite nice compared to how I have slaughtered some of the big guns). It all stems from the word ‘amateur’. Those people taking umbrage at the concept of being called amateur, can I remind you that the essential meaning of the word is to do something for love, not money? Almost all people involved in this community event are unpaid. The draw of being involved in Short & Sweet is to not only enjoy your moment in the light, maybe showcase your work or experiment in a non-threatening environment and to most importantly, celebrate the Arts in action.

Yay for you. Now get over yourselves. This is not a high stakes career move. Even the pro’s understand this is an amateur festival so don’t get offended if I continue to call it such. It doesn’t mean you won’t find talent on stage, it just means that it’s open to everyone and results may be inconsistent because of its open door policy. But isn’t that worth celebrating too? I have seen some people hop up who would never get a look in inside the industry and probably never seek to pursue it and I’m moved by their joy at having their moment on stage in front of family and friends.

Enough. Let’s look at week 4. This week stepped up the standard from last week. In fact when it came time to vote it was actually difficult to decide between 4 of them out of the 10 and the others were mostly solid pieces of work too. And in the spirit of inclusiveness, let me briefly cover some of the positives of each 10 minute play.

‘Shackles’ was a solid duo exploring the bond between sisters when the rest of your life has turned to crapola. ‘The Forgetting’ was played with risk in exploring the metaphor of the ‘fringe’, ‘Tis The Season’ was an energetic homage to ‘Cosi’, as was ‘Like a House on Fire’, an engaging monologue performed confidently by Erin McMullen, ‘Let Me In’ was a nice showcase of young talent with a brief committed cameo by Rita McCormack and ‘Dispatch’ was a thoughtful piece on life, love and death.

Special mentions go to the comic tropfest style piece ‘Three’s A Crowd’ whose tag paid dividends and ‘I’m Falling Through The Sky’ was another strong contender and delivered with skill and emotion by its cast Gael Ballantyne and Tessa Coulter.

But the highlights of the show for me were ‘Driving The Holden’ and ‘The Athiest’.

‘Driving The Holden’ created a world and backstory in its short time frame, developing dimensions in the relationship between the characters as their journey intertwines. It’s the sort of play you wish was longer. Special acknowledgement of Harley Connor’s performance of Eddie, whose magnetic presence and focus made this play enjoyable and engaging.

When ‘The Athiest’ started I thought it was going to be another sledgehammer of obvious tactics and stock characterisation so for this play to completely win me over is a credit to performers and directors (who are one and the same). The expressiveness, comic timing and clever concepts in writing were a great way to finish the night.

I am a real fan of the (amateur) Short & Sweet Festival. It is absolutely worth the Government Arts funding and it warms my cold, bitter (amateur) heart seeing all those (amateur) punters up there in one form or another having an (amateur) ball.

It’s the power of theatre and theatre for the people at its most inclusive (amateur) best.

'I’m Your Man' created and directed by Roslyn Oades and dissected by me

Downstairs Belvoir are continuing a relatively successful tradition of new interesting works, playing with form and exploring local content and writing. This is certainly encapsulated in Roslyn Oades’ creation and direction of ‘I’m Your Man’.

Oades’ play uses recorded transcripts of interviews with 7 professional boxers and has edited these down to represent the journey and life of her subjects in this 70 minute play. However, rather than her cast memorising lines, the actors wear headphones and speak along to the sequence of these carefully edited audio interviews word-for-word, including every cough and stumble.  This technique has ensured there is an authenticity to the words and ‘hyper-real’ performances.

Having 5 actors play a series of characters with different accents, backgrounds, ages and in one case, gender, has enhanced this strict verbatim technique and is thoroughly engaging for the audience. There is some initial confusion, as alluded to before, regarding the one female in the cast, Katia Molino, whether she is playing a male boxer but it becomes clear through her skill and commitment that her characters are all male and the bravery in casting pays off in this respect (and FYI, her incredible agility and fitness made every woman in the audience green with envy).

One of the challenges for the performers but delights for the audience is in the action and design of the play. The stage is kitted out to represent a training gym for the ‘boxers’, complete with fight posters and inspirational quotes, and they circuit around the equipment with incredible commitment between their direct audience addresses or interaction with each other or their audience. Heaven knows, watching John Shrimpton’s sweat pour off him and form pools of occupational health and safety certainly added to the authenticity of the whole event. There is a real sense of the world of the boxers and the choices they have made in whatever stage they are in their careers as well as their hopes and, at times, dashed dreams. The play honours the integrity of the subjects in the most theatrical yet real way possible.

Kudos to the entire ensemble for their ability to bring a truth and belief to each moment and their ability to communicate this to their audience. The cast realise all their roles with great empathy as well as vocal and physical skill.

This is a play that you really should try to see before its season finishes for the festival, although I sincerely doubt we’ve seen the last of it. It’s the sort of play I’d love to see do a Regional tour so aspiring auteurs of theatre can be inspired by local writing and acting.

‘I’m Your Man' is a success of verbatim technique and I can’t imagine any audience member leaving the space having not enjoyed Oades’ experiment in recording and staging the courageous subjects brought to life in her unique and skilled direction.

SHORT & SWEET WEEK 3 at King St Theatre & dissected by me

Let me start by emphasising the word amateur, not because I am about to vomit vitriol on the work but to remind everyone that the Short & Sweet Festival is designed for the average punter on the street to have a go at writing, directing or treading the boards. Do not go to this expecting polish and frou-frou. What you will get is the chance to see your friends, neighbours and rellies trying to make a fist of their designated 10 minute play, not always successfully but certainly supportively. You will see cardboard props representing everything from cars to spaceships- there is something endearingly kitsch about the whole thing.  

The festival is structured into many weeks and a couple of different venues playing 10 x 10 minute plays over the 5 days of their allocated week. The plays are a mixed bag of styles and stories, directors come from all walks of life as do their cast. In each week there is bound to be a play that hangs together a little better than the others- sometimes because of the writing but mostly because the cast may have some professional or trained actors and the director, who also may have some experience, has been able to utilise their skills.

The audience also get to become part of the festival as at the end they get to vote for their two favourites and the winners eventually find their way to the finals. That is the night to make sure you have your ticket- the best of the best. However, there is something wonderfully democratic about the festival and the rawness of the heats that are worth checking out. Everyone has the same opportunity of success.

In this week kudos goes to the cast of the first play, ‘Just The Ticket’, who came to the director’s rescue when her cast pulled out 48 hours before the show opened. You wouldn’t have known- they managed well. Another play with potential was ‘Other People’, where the quality of performance stepped up a notch in ability. ‘Mother Love’ had a poignant ending, ‘Last Man on the Moon’ had some comic writing and ‘Macspin’ was another script with potential in its clever ideas.

The plays and performers overall have the subtlety of a sledgehammer when expressing their intent. But let me finish by reminding you once again of the word amateur. Forgive the festival its sins and revel in the joy that anyone can bravely live out the desire to have their moment in the spotlight and appreciate the communion of theatre.