Six Characters in Search of an Author | Sydney Festival & Headlong UK
- January 23rd, 2010
- Posted in Reviews & Responses
- Write comment
A very brief note about my experience of Six Characters in Search of An Author which has been programmed as a part of The 2010 Sydney Festival. Luigi Pirandello’s play written in 1921- arguably one of the great classic texts in the Western Canon- is a self-reflexive examination on the creation of theatre, character and life and a comment on the shifting sands of reality. In this version, by Rupert Goold and Ben Power- the framing of the production has shifted to that of a TV station which produces documentaries- and is under deadline to find an ending to a documentary on a child who is about to euthenased. It has been delivered to us with a string of raving snippets from UK reviews- in one of the trickiest of venues- The York Theatre at The Seymour Centre.
For those who know the story- the re-imagining rattles along and the sport becomes the finding of the parallels between the original and the re-imagined. (A fine preoccupation for a play with its history.) For those who don’t- it may seem to be a little confused or oversaturated.
This is a very clever piece of programming-especially for Festival Goers who saw Ostenmeier’s Hamlet- the links to the text of Hamlet are present and even a comment on festival programming and touring… appropriately self-referential.
There were flickering moments in the first half that sparked interest- the operatic scream on screen for the mother as she walks in on her husband with her daughter in the room above Mr Pace’s Hat shop. But on the whole it was rather forced and somewhat piecemeal in performances- in particular some of the “characters” were overly characatured (as opposed to finely drawn characters- which is what the authentic confusion between reality and imagination is hinged)- and the documentary makers seemed more cliched than real… SO the even playing field between the true and the imagined was at all times severly lop-sided. Particulary irritating was the relocation to the TV station- because this would really work best and in the spirit of Pirandello’s text if this was a TV show which was then interrupted by characters. But we are in the theatre. Inescapably in our seats.
Most disappointing in the second act was that the cast/crew did not bother to re-shoot the footage of the Documentary maker going out the back of the theatre into the outside world for this audience. Instead a backstage area was shown (not the Seymour Centre) and we ended up outside in the English snow. I thought this woudl have been effective and interesting if they could have translated their production to the space . Since their production was already about translating through time (the original 1921 script to 2009)and medium (from theatre to TV Documentary)- why not translate through space? Lets be clear here- I have no beef with re-inventions- none. But I have a huge amount of trouble with re-inventions which are half-baked and misunderstand the original text. This concept would perhpaps work best in the medium it is commenting on- TV. But this is a clumsy adaptation of a text, translated clumsilly into a challenging venue.
For some theatre experiences- the first 20 minutes is brilliant and the rest is repetition of the same ideas. In this instance the last 20 minutes were the most interesting- but hardly worth the pay-off of having to sit through an overly cumbersome 1st half.
An “overly cumbersome first half” is a deeply charitable way of describing it Augusta. The words I would use are patronising, overwritten, lazy, arrogant and shoddy. And the opening to the second half is possibly the weakest scene I have ever seen in the theatre.
Thanks David- someone (another reviewer) asked me if I didn’t like it because I found it pretentious. It hadn’t occured to me that it was pretentious…(I think the point of Pirandello was to expose pretentiousness in storytelling and process) but it had occurred to me that it was boring.
I was humbled to know that I had at last encountered the most boring piece of theatre ever conceived by literate humans – I feel like Hilary atop of Everest – at last – no further to go????
Alas James, bad though this might have been, there is always the potential to see something far worse!
I’m going to say it… I loved it! I don’t know the original play at all, so this was my first exposure to the text. I found it to be a wonderfully theatrical experience about our sense or identity, reality, why (or perhaps how) are we on this road called life. It was wonderfully self-referential about it’s own story telling devices.
What is character? Who is an author? Who is the author of the words we utter, and are we the ones who speak the speech. I would go again!
I now want to read the original text to enrich the experience I’ve just had further.
I’m glad you enjoyed it Luke- Seems Steve Rodgers feels the same way… as does Jack Tiewes… and there is room for us all!
I do wonder how you will feel about the original text now you have experienced that interpretation of the play’s ideas? I’d love you to follow up and let me know if reading the text post show does enrich the experience further?
I can’t escape my own burdening context and knowing the play as well as I do- and being very familiar with several homages to the self-referential idea of text and ownership (including a play I short listed for Spankers last year)I felt it was nothing to write home about… but above all else- I love it when people have a good time at the theatre (even when I don’t)!