THE DOCTOR - REVIEW OF ICKE’S PLAY AT DUKE OF YORK’S THEATRE, LONDON

Reviewed by James Karas 

WOW

Those three letters can express accurately  one’s reaction to The Doctor, Robert Icke’s play  with Juliet Stevenson playing at the Duke of York’s Theatre in London. You can say WOW to your friends or use other stock phrases of enthusiasm for outstanding acting in a brilliant production of a play that inspires thinking and provides heated discussion. I say WOW again but that is not enough to fill my column in the paper and I must elaborate.

Ruth Wolff is a brilliant doctor and the director of the Elizabeth Institute, a major health centre dedicated to finding a cure for Alzheimer’s. She is an outstanding researcher and a powerful woman who is called  Professor but also BB, for Big Bad Wolff. One of her colleagues refers to her as a woman in name only.

Professor Wollf is played by Juliet Stevenson and you will remember her performance long after you have forgotten the play.

Even though the Institute concentrates on dementia patients, a 14-year-old girl is admitted after a botched, self-administered abortion and she is dying. She is Dr. Wolff’s patient. A priest comes to the Institute to give the girl last rites.

Stevenson with Juliet Garricks as Charlie. Photograph: Manuel Harlan

There is a fierce confrontation between Wolff and the priest. She refuses to allow him to see the girl, while he insists on going in her room Dr, Wolff repulses him to the point of some physical contact. The girl dies without getting last rites which, according to the priest, would have erased her sins.

The battle line is drawn. The doctor in her medical judgment believed that letting the priest see the girl would have caused her to die in distress. The priest and her parents believe she would have died at peace having received last rites.

The medical defence of not allowing the priest to visit the patient explodes into a question of the religion versus science and then into a non-practicing Jew (Dr. Wolff) not respecting the position of the Catholic Church.

That’s just the beginning. The brilliant staff of the Institute become divided and antisemitism creeps in. The appointment of the next director of pharmacology becomes an issue. Do you appoint the most qualified who happens to be a Jew or the black Catholic who will be more acceptable to the donors for the construction of a new centre?

The issue becomes viral in social media and a pained Dr. Wolff has to defend herself on television before a hostile panel of journalists.

 Naomi Wirthner as Hardiman and Juliet Stevenson as Ruth Wolff. 

Photograph: Manuel Harlan

I will mention a few of the eleven cast members that carry the brilliant and provocative arguments and conversations in the play.  Fierce opinions, pride, convictions and arrogance erupt in riveting arguments and sit-on-the edge of your seat theatre. Naomi Wirthner as Dr. Hardiman, is a Catholic and an antisemite but a great neurosurgeon; Dona Croll as Cyprian, is the medical director and Wolff’s opponent. Chris Osikanlu Colquhoun as Copley and Daniel Rabin as Murphy join in the fierce arguments. The calm priest (John Mackay) visits Wolff after the issue blows over and shows that he did more in defence of Catholicism than of truth. Preeva Kalidas as Flint, the Minister of Health, is prepared to be treacherous for her own reason.   

There is an opaque side to the play in relation to Wolff’s home life, Charlie (Juliet Garricks) is her partner but I was not sure about the reality of his existence. Sami (Matilda Tucker) is her transgender daughter and we see Wollf’s tender and human side as opposed to the fierce defender of her medical ethics.

There are riveting arguments about identity, racism and the preponderance of science over religion. There are quick scene changes as the protagonists and antagonists move on and off the stage before can digest the last exchange.    

The set and costumes by Hildegard Bechtler are pristine and clinical as one might except in a hospital.

The Doctor is an adaptation by Icke of Arthur Schnitzler’s 1912 Viennese “comedy” Professor Bernhardi. Icke is fairly faithful to that play by he brings in his own ideas and the result is riveting and unforgettable theatre.

_________

The Doctor by Robert Icke adapted from Arthur Schnitzler’s play Professor Bernhardi  continues until December 11, 2022 at the Duke of York’s Theatre, 104 St. Martin’s Lane, London, WC2N 4BG  https://www.thedukeofyorks.com/the-doctor

THE CRUCIBLE – REVIEW OF 2022 NATIONAL THEATRE PRODUCTION

Reviewed by James Karas

Arthur Miller’s The Crucible is such a powerful play that it leaves you stunned and breathless no matter how many times you have seen it. The current production by the National Theatre of Great Britain in the Olivier Theatre has the same effect. 

The play is ostensibly about the witch hunts in Salem, Massachusetts in 1692 but its immediate inspiration was the witch hunts conducted by Senator Joseph McCarthy and the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) in the 1950’s in their relentless search for Communists. Miller was imprisoned for failing to disclose the names of people who were communists or leftists. Witch hunts are ever-present in American life today.

Lyndsey Turner directs a lean and highly focused production in the Olivier theatre that concentrates on the fate of the simple people of the village. They are caught in the morass of hysteria, bigotry and greed in a theocratic society terrified of the Antichrist. For the people of Salem witches and Satan were real and had to be fought with devotion and dedication.

Fisayo Akinade as the Reverend John Hale with 

Erin Doherty as Abigail. Photograph: Johan Persson

The problem in The Crucible starts when Reverent Samuel Parris (Nick Fletcher), the local preacher discovers that his daughter is inexplicably ill. She and the village girls participated in a dance in the woods near the village and may have performed some pagan rituals like dancing.

The village begins to buzz with the idea of witchcraft. Fletcher’s Parris is a small man, afraid for his position in the village and full of hatred and bigotry. Fletcher gives us a truly loathsome man.

With the town girls going hysterical, Parris invites Reverend John Hale (Fisayo Akinade), a learned man and an expert in diagnosing the existence of witchcraft, to come and investigate. Hale takes his expertise in the subject seriously and goes about investigating with zeal. In the end he realizes that the trials and executions of the villagers of Salem are indeed a witch hunt in the modern sense and he tries to instill some humanity into the proceedings. He fails but we sympathize with the presence of a decent man who is able to see the truth in the midst of hell.

The most frightful people are Judge Hathorne (Henry Everett) and Deputy Governor Danforth (Matthew Marsh). They are powerful characters, convinced of their righteousness and are warriors against Satan. Everett and Marsh gave such stunning performances, one was terrified of them even as characters on stage. The people of Salem did not stand a chance in these paragons of evil dressed in the guise of devout Christians fighting against the Antichrist. Shivers up your spine.

The hero of the play is John Proctor (Brendan Cowell), a decent farmer, a man who committed adultery, and is caught in the maelstrom of hysteria and bigotry. He tries to save his wife Elizabeth (tautly performed by Eileen Walsh) and his life but to do that he must give up his name or his integrity and sense of decency. He is sent to the gallows as are so many other villagers. Kudos to Cowell  for a superb performance.

The rainy stage. Photo: Johan Persson

The hysterical children led by the master of hysterical and devious pretence Abigail (Erin Doherty) are as scary as anyone because they pretend to have to have seen Satan.

As you enter the Olivier Theatre, you see that the stage is engulfed by rain. Real rain that necessitates the people in the rows closest to the stage to wear plastic covers. The rain stops when the performance begins, of course, but it is repeated after intermission.

The set by Es Devlin is sparse using only tables and chairs and a bed where needed an. Spotlights are used where the action takes place and almost nothing more. As I said, the director wants us to concentrate on what is happening to the people without being distracted by stage sets or props. There is no real indication about era when the play takes place. It could be in 1692 and it could be almost any time in history. And this outstanding production of a great play gives us an extraordinary example of how it can happen.

___________________________

The Crucible by Arthur Miller continues until November 5, 2022, at the Olivier Theatre in the National Theatre, South Bank, London, England.  http://www.nationaltheatre.org.uk/

KING HENRY VIII – REVIEW OF 2022 SHAKESPEARE’S GLOBE PRODUCTION

Reviewed by James Karas

Shakespeare wrote King Henry VIII in collaboration with John Fletcher near the end of his career. The play is produced infrequently, and it is not of the highest quality. Shakespeare’s Globe staged the play this year and decided that one collaborator was not enough and it has provided Shakespeare with a third one. The current collaborator is Hannah Khalil who tells us that her “brief was to sculpt the play into an exploration of the female experience.”

She did some pruning and stitching of lines from Shakespeare’s 37 plays and 154 sonnets “to tell a story that feels most relevant to now.” Some of her changes are obvious but most of them escaped me.

Khalil dispenses with the turgid Prologue and replaces it with a woman strumming a guitar and singing Sonnet 116 which is a beautiful paean to the glory of love, permanent and unalterable. “Let me not to the marriage of true minds / Admit impediments.” Henry VIII had six wives so the idea that love “bears it out even to the edge of doom” has no application to him. But reminding us of the ideal or perfect love compared to what Henry did is salutary.

Khalil has added a number of songs to the play giving it a mini-musical flavour that did not do anything for me.

Adam Gillen as Henry VIII. Photo: Marc Brenner

Henry VIII was a monster of a magnitude to rival even 20^th century dictators, but Shakespeare was not about to portray him as such out of respect for keeping his head attached to his body. Director Amy Hodge, however, does not hesitate to have Adam Gillen represent him as a ranting, almost unhinged man who is paranoid, egotistical and murderous. He wants a son and Queen Katharine, his wife of 20 years, has given him only a daughter.

As much as Henry wants a son, he wants Anne Boleyn (Janet Etuk) but he can only have her if he marries her. He needs a divorce, and it is hard to come by in the sixteenth century. The Pope is the only one that can grant it.

He leans on Cardinal Wolsey (Jamie Ballard), a trusted advisor and the most powerful man in England. Ballard gives a marvelous performance as the arrogant and corrupt Wolsey who falls from grace when he fails to deliver the much sought-after  divorce. We see a graphic illustration of what can happen to a powerful man who displeases the king. A humiliated Wolsey takes off his red robes of office slowly and methodically in front of us. He is left with only his underwear, a man destroyed. A stunning performance by Gillen.

The masque in the original play is turned into an almost bacchanalian orgy. Henry is seen with a large, gold phallus and that is a good illustration of his and that society’s contempt for women.

The most powerful performance is delivered by Bea Segura. As Katharine she stands up to the King and the nobles who try to persuade her to agree to the divorce. In an era when women had almost no rights and were treated as a little more than producers of babies and toys for men, she shines as a powerful person.    

In her tinkering with the play, Khalil adds the character of Princess Mary (Natasha Cottriall), the daughter of Queen Katharine and future Bloody Queen Mary. She threatens to get even with everyone. The play does not end with the happy baptism of Elizabeth but with a fulsome speech by Elizabeth I.

I am not sure how that or the other additions result in an exploration of the feminine experience or make the play more relevant to us. Shakespeare, like Aeschylus, Seneca and Chaucer, reflected the views of his era. Some of those views changed very little over the ensuing centuries reaching their apogee, I suppose, in the 1928 decision of the Supreme Court of Canada. It found that a woman is not a person. How does adding a speech by a great Queen make it more relevant to us?

Henry VIII is produced infrequently because it is not a very good play. Tinkering with it even if one cuts and pastes from Shakespeare’s works does not improve the play nor the position of women in Shakespeare’s time. And it does not help us to see the disgusting position of women in a better light.

____________________  

Henry VIII  by William Shakespeare played until October 23, 2022, at Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre, 21 New Globe Walk, London. www.shakespearesglobe.com/

THE TEMPEST – REVIEW OF 2022 SHAKESPEARE’S GLOBE PRODUCTION

Reviewed by James Karas

The Tempest, like all of Shakespeare’s plays, is prone to numerous interpretations. In the First Folio it was classified as a comedy, but it could be seen as a romance. The questions of imperialism and slavery are recent topics of examination and there are demands for apologies and reparations by the victims of both. The Tempest can be seen as dealing with both topics and they are inescapable while watching any production of the play.

The current production at Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre in London does not seem to focus on those aspects of the play but it does not avoid them either. Prospero is the former Duke of Milan who was dethroned by his brother with the collusion of the King of Naples. He was thrown on an island with his three-year old daughter where he took control of Ariel, a local spirit and the wild Caliban, the son of a witch. The latter is treated like a slave and both he and the spirit Ariel want their freedom. Prospero is an imperialist conqueror by any description. What are we to think of him?

Ciaran O'Brien as Caliban and Ferdy Roberts as Propsero 

in The Tempest. Photograph: Marc Brenner

Prospero is described as a scholar, a man of learning and presumably wisdom who has magical powers and a knowledge of alchemy. In the current production director Sean Holmes gives us a Prospero (Ferdy Roberts) who is arrogant, dictatorial and aggressive. There is scant evidence of his wisdom and humanity. He treats Caliban abominably and even Ariel gets better treatment only because she is useful to him. Prospero is a conqueror who does not think much of the natives.

In this modern dress production Prospero, with his hair tied in a ponytail and sporting a beard, wears nothing but a skimpy, yellow bathing suit for much of the time. Is he sunbathing all day or ready to go to the beach?  He yells most of the time even when speaking with his daughter Miranda. We do not develop much sympathy for the deposed Duke. I found it a confusing portrait of Prospero.

Nadi Kemp-Sayfi made a petite, pretty and wonderful Miranda. She may have not seen a young man before but when she lays her eyes on Ferdinand, she knows what she wants and goes after him. A wonderful performance.

My only issue with Olivier Huband as Ferdinand is that he looks too old to be the innocent and youthful prince with whom Miranda falls in love. As I watched him, I wondered why the younger-looking Ciaran O’Brien was not cast as Ferdinand instead of Caliban. I do not know their ages and they are irrelevant. My comments are about how they looked in their roles.

Caliban is a central character in the play as the representative of the natives of the island. I imagine him as wild, unruly and openly rebellious, but Director Holmes presents him as a clean-cut young man who is perhaps understandably very angry at the treatment he is getting from Prospero. Like many conquerors, Prospero justifies his treatment of his “slave” by telling us he freed him from bondage and that Caliban made an attempt to rape Miranda.

Rachel Hannah Clarke is a perfect Ariel. She moves like a spirit and performs her magical tricks with panache. We have a burgeoning plot by Sebastian (Lucy Phelps) and Antonio (Patrick Osborne) to kill the King of Naples (Katy Stephens). They do a good job in their roles.

Nadi Kemp-Sayfi and Ferdu Riberts. Photo: Marc Brenner

And there is another murderous plot by the butler Stefano (George Fouracres) and the jester Trinculo (Ralph Davis), led by Caliban, to assassinate Prospero. There are two scenes by these nincompoops, and they can be simply roll-on-the-floor hilarious. In this production they did produce some laughter, but the full comic possibilities of the scenes were not accomplished.

The productions at Shakespeare’s Globe are supposed to derive energy from the imagined performances at the Globe Theatre in Shakespeare’s time. One of the most effective methods is the interplay between the stage and the yardlings, the several hundred people standing on the ground floor. The interaction in this production was moderately successful at the beginning and far more enjoyable in the second half. But they hit the perfect note when Stefano and Trinculo were plotting the overthrow of Prospero and agreed that both would become prime ministers (just in case one of them resigned). There was a huge gale of laughter. At about that time Prime Minister Liz Truss was announcing her resignation.

The opening scene was handled judiciously. There was some commotion and the people on board the ship that was about to founder were shown in a glass cage on stage. They were all wearing tuxedos and party hats as they were returning from a wedding and then ended up on Prospero’s Island.

A credible and enjoyable performance with some disagreement about details.

_____________________  

The Tempest  by William Shakespeare  played until October 23, 2022 at Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre, 21 New Globe Walk, London. www.shakespearesglobe.com/

James Karas is the Senior Editor - Culture of The Greek Press, Toronto

RUCKUS – REVIEW OF 2022 SOUTHWARK PLAYHOUSE PRODUCTION

Reviewed by James Karas 

Ruckus is a play and a performance that one finds rarely, accidentally and in utter amazement. It is performed by a single actor with the voice over of a man and lasts one hour. In the end it leaves you breathless.

The writer and performer is Jenna Fincken and this is her first play. Its debut was at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival in August 2022, and it was “noticed”. It then transferred to the small Southwark Playhouse in London where I was able to see it.

First, the performance. Fincken performs with so much energy, concentration and stamina as if this were an Olympics’ competition. It is not or she would have to be tested for taking enhancement drugs. How else can you account for what she does: runs, no, dashes around the small playing area, uses vocal and physical variations that are simply astounding and gives a simply astonishing performance.

Fincken plays the part of Lou or Louise, a young, intelligent, attractive and spunky teacher. She has two friends, Bryony and Jess (she plays both of them) and Ryan (Matthew Durkan’s voice). We hear Ryan’s voice but never see him. Lou speaks her lines, the lines of the other characters (except Ryan) and describes the context. All of it meticulously directed by Georgia Green.

Jenna Fincken in Ruckus. Photograph: Ali Wright

She performs in a corner with white curtains hanging on each side. Before Lous speaks we see lights flashing and numbers like 824 days ago. At that point the flashing lights go off and Lou sees Ryan and asks him why his friend popped one of the balloons. She is at Jess’s wedding and the balloons form an arch. Lou shares an apartment with Jess and will now have to look for affordable accommodation on her own.

She does not get an answer about the balloon popping and the friend makes a rude comment. She then “accidentally” pours her gin over their shoes. This lady has gumption and will not stand for crap like that.

That is our first impression of Lou. From then on, we will find out that she and Ryan get together and their relationship blossoms and wilts into something with very serious consequences for Lou.

Fincken starts dropping clues about Lou’s relationship with Ryan. They seem innocuous at first. Lou starts smoking so she can get away from people.

She goes on a date with Ryan. He orders her food and acts like a gentleman. After dinner she suggest sex in very plain terms, and he suggests they go to a pub. She insists on getting his way. End of date. Lou has a low opinion of herself and perhaps some difficulty with close relationships. When Ryan suggests that they live together she agrees but feels he has yoked her.

But like any young couple they furnish and decorate their apartment including a collection of farm animal toys.

Jenna Fincken in Ruckus. Photograph: Ali Wright

Time goes by and the number of days to go is flashed on the curtains. Lou’s mother and her friend visit and Ryan takes exception to the latter touching her waist. He touched her elbow, she replies, but it was her waist insists Ryan.

He becomes increasingly possessive. She does not have a key to the back door; he refuses to discuss holiday plans; she can’t log into their joint bank account. She goes away with her friend and realizes that Jess is a free spirit who gets what she wants. She returns home to find that Ryan has trashed the apartment but all is calm.

Things deteriorate until the end. I will not disclose what happens but many of you have probably guessed it.   

Ruckus is a play about coercive control. It involves an insidious pattern of behaviour like the one illustrated by Fincken in the play where her husband controls her life to the extent of isolating her from her family and friends, monitoring her movements, controlling the family finances and ultimately controlling her basic freedoms and dehumanizing her. Just in case there is a misunderstanding about how coercive control is perpetrated, Lou tells us that Ryan never laid a finger on her.

Fincken does it all with finesse, subtlety and surgical precision. The play is not a lecture on coercive control but the story of a woman. It is an extraordinary play, a stunning performance and a great night at the theatre.

_____________________ 

Ruckus by Jenna Fincken in a production by Wildcat played until October 29, 2022 at the Southwark Playhouse, 77-85 Newington Causeway, London SE1 6BD. http://southwarkplayhouse.co.uk/

James Karas is the Senior Editor - Culture of The Greek Press

DMITRY - REVIEW OF NEW PLAY IN NEW THEATRE IN LONDON

 Reviewed by James Karas

Dmitry is a big, poetic drama dealing with Russia’s Time of Trouble at the beginning of the 17^th century. The history of the period is convoluted, and the play by Peter Oswald with Alexander J. Gifford after Friedrich Schiller deals with the usurpation of the Russian crown and the wars of the period.

The play is the first production at the new Marylebone Theatre in London and my first question after seeing a performance was what persuaded Artistic Director Alexander J. Gifford to stage the play? It has a cast of more than thirty and its poetic diction proved difficult for some of the actors and a few of them could not be heard.

Let’s get to the story. It starts after the death of Tsar Ivan, better known as the “terrible” who died without an heir. That is unless his son Dmitry survived which he did not because Boris Godunov had him assassinated and became tsar.

A young man shows up in the Polish parliament claiming to be Dmitry, the rightful heir to the Russian throne. The Polish parliamentarians accept him and with the blessing of a Cardinal and the help of some Cossacks they all prepare to attack Russia and put Dmitry on the throne and convert it to Catholicism. 

Moving quickly, Dmitry’s mother is found in a convent and says this Dmitry is not her son but she changes her mind and says yes he is. In Moscow there is consternation because Godunov knows that Dmitri was snuffed. The war goes on. Godunov’s son Fyodor is murdered, he commits suicide and Dmitry is found out for sure to be a pretender and he is dispatched out of this world. As we all know Romanov becomes tsar and his family stays on until 1917 when the Bolsheviks put end to the dynasty unless Anastasia survived which she did not. 

Dmitry, the Patriarch and Marina.  Photo: Ellie Kurttz

Oswald tells an epic story that involves many entrenched national, religious and personal interests and it requires a larger stage, a bigger budget, and the resources of a huge organization to do it justice. The Marylebone Theatre has none of these.

The Polish parliamentarians where Dmitry opens are wearing modern, well-tailored suits and they are debating very loudly whether to recognize Dmitry as the tsar of Russia. We know that this is a story about Russia around 1605 and it requires many scene changes. But if we expect a parade of costumes from that era, we will be disappointed. All the action takes place in the paneled stage of the Marylebone with almost no props. This is 17^th century Russia looking like a 21^st century country. No problem with that and we get the message.

Back to Poland. Prince Mnishek (Mark Hadfield) and Cardinal Odowalsky (James Garnon) with most Polish parliamentarians are, as I said, enthusiastic supporters of Dmitry. Each may be accused of having his own agenda. The Prince plans to have Dmitry marry his daughter Marina and the Cardinal wants to convert Russia to Catholicism. Dmitry agrees to both. Marina (Aurora Dawson-Hunte) also agrees to marry Dmitry.  

Korela (Piotr Baumann), a wild-looking Cossack warrior arrives and pledges his support for Dmitry. The war begins and we have to follow its course by hearing snippets of information from the front. In the meantime, Dmitry’s pretend mother Maria (Poppy Miller) is making her way across Russia and ends up in the Russian camp. The Cardinal, Korela and Dmitry are wounded.  The Pretender Dmitry is visited by the soul of the real Dmitry, the one that Godunov assassinated many years ago.   

Things work out and there is a coronation, a marriage and cries of joy from the populace. The fraud has worked, and Dmitry is the tsar. But it does not last, and the final and inevitable resolution comes. Dmitry is a fraudster and Romanov becomes tsar and the illusion of Dmitry, the heir of Ivan taking the throne disappears. Romanov tells us that the wisdom that is Russia prevails.

Oswald packs more than we can absorb in his play and having written most of it in free verse makes it even harder to digest. The colourful language of poetry proves difficult for some of the actors to deliver properly. There are far too many exhortations and war-like barks of orders. Speedy entrances and exits abound and there are far too many soliloquys that do not add much to the complex plot.

Director Tim Supple tries to maintain a brisk pace but still needs almost three hours to finish the play. A slower pace and a shorter script with more subtlety may have solved the problem

Dmitry is written after Friedrich Schiller’s unfinished play Demetrius, and I do not have a copy of it to comment as to the extent of its use. There is room for plays in verse but the people, the ambitions, the mendacity, and fraud involved in Dmitry did not resonate with me. You may draw your own conclusions and comparisons about Putin’s attack on Ukraine and Russia of 1605, but it strikes me as a bootstrap’s argument at best.   

___________________________

Dmitry by Peter Oswald with Alexander J. Gifford after Friedrich Schiller played at the Marylebone Theatre, 35 Park Rd, London NW1 6X, U.K.  www.marylebonetheatre.com

 James Karas is the Senior Editor - Culture of The Greek Press

THE CAUCASIAN CHALK CIRCLE – REVIEW OF 2022 ROSE THEATRE PRODUCTION

Reviewed by James Karas

Bertolt Brecht wrote The Caucasian Chalk Circle after World War II when he was living in the United States. At the time there were millions of displaced Europeans living in refugee camps and the play is about them. Brecht places his play in Georgia. 

The production at the Rose Theatre in Kingston upon Thames near London, England uses an adaptation by Steve Waters that places the play in a contemporary United Nations’ refugee camp. Some refugees have mobile phones, but the camp is predictably an awful place for destitute people.

The promise of the play seems simple. A UN representative visits the camp where two groups are arguing about the use of the land. That is the prologue before we are launched into the play-within-a-play that will keep us trying to figure out what is happening for about three hours, including an intermission.

The Singer (Zoe West) enters strumming a guitar and singing. It is Brecht telling us that theatre is the telling of stories and not realistic representation of events. He called it epic theatre.

                                                Photo by Iona Firouzabadi.

The refugees are assigned parts in the story about a revolution that the Singer will relate to us. The Governor of wherever the revolution is taking place is beheaded and his wife (Joanna Kirkland) leaves in a hurry with her clothes but not her baby son Michael. Grusha (Hope Fletcher) rescues the child and takes care of him. Michael does appear but for most of the performance he is represented by a small stuffed toy. 

At the beginning of the second act one of the actors looks at the audience and confirms what we already know: the plot is very confusing.  For a start there are more than 50 characters that are played by nine performers. What’s more, Director Christopher Hayden has decided to use various accents to indicate different origins or status in society by whoever these people are. It looks like a clever idea, but all the accents are presumably English and comprehension if often minimal. Perhaps they are intended to represent other nationalities but if you don’t understand what they are saying, it makes no difference. Hayden was probably not thinking of Canadian visitors.

Jonathan Slinger in The Caucasian Chalk Circle. 
Photo by Iona Firouzabadi.

The play winds itself towards the crucial end where we meet the great Azdak (Jonathan Slinger). He is educated, an officer of the law and completely corrupt. He speaks to the audience and is quite funny. He becomes the judge in the case of Michael’s fate. His biological mother returns and she claims her son. Grusha has the moral claim as the woman who saved Michael’s life and raised him at great risk to her own life.

The trial is a travesty, of course, but Azdak mandates that he will make his decision based on the Caucasian Chalk Circle. It is as described. A circle is drawn on the floor and the child is placed in the middle. The claimants pull the child by his arms and whoever gets him out of the circle wins. The biological mother does pull Michael out but, in the end, Grusha the “real mother” gets to keep him. 

Set and Costume Designer Oli Townsend provides a dramatic set with rickety beds and several levels of shelves that looks like a huge storage facility. Michael Henry composed the music, but it made little impression on me amid the confusing plot. 

The Rose Theatre deserves a great deal of credit for this ambitious production, and I hate being churlish about it. The acting was superb by any measure and the production values were there. But there were several issues, perhaps partly my fault, that made comprehension and appreciation difficult.

______________________________________

The Caucasian Chalk Circle by Bertolt Brecht in an adaptation by Steve Waters was performed until October 22, 2022, at the Rose Theatre, Kingston upon Thames, England. www.rosetheatre.org/