Superfluities Redux

On culture and theatre, by George Hunka

A new journal for theatre minima and organum posts exclusively can now be found here.

Tuesday, 08 July 2008

Richard Foreman: The Toast of Broadway?

Not quite, but it might have been. Ian W. Hill and his Gemini CollisionWorks company will offer a production of the once-Broadway-bound Harry in Love, a comedy that Foreman wrote in 1966, for a three-week run at Brooklyn's Brick Theatre beginning on 31 July. According to the press release:

In 1966, [Foreman] wrote Harry in Love: A Manic Vaudeville, which came very close to having a Broadway run with Vincent Gardenia in the eponymous role (though Foreman had hoped for Alec Guinness in the role – that of a large, manic, Bronx-born, Jewish New Yorker, which is a hint to the creative conflicts that kept the show from being staged at that time). This "boulevard comedy," as Foreman calls it (he also compares it, accurately, to the 1960s plays of Murray Schisgal), remained unseen for over 30 years, until Foreman gave it to director/actor Ian W. Hill in 1999 ... saying that the part of Harry was a good one for Hill to play and he should do the show – which he did, to appreciative audiences and excellent reviews, for a very short run, the only run this obscure work has ever had. ...

The plot? Harry Rosenfeld is a big, neurotic, unnerved and unnerving man who believes his wife, Hilda, is planning to cheat on him (and he seems to be right). His response: drug her coffee and keep her knocked out until her paramour goes away. The plan works about as well as should be expected and, over several days, a number of people – the paramour, a doctor, Hilda's brother, and an "innocent" bystander – are sucked into Harry's manic, snowballing energy as it becomes an eventual avalanche of (hysterically funny) psychosis.

Harry in Love runs at the Brick from 31 July through 24 August. Tickets and schedule information available soon at The Brick's Web site.

Posted at 1.08 pm in /Openings

Permanent link to this story


Tuesday, 08 July 2008

No Shakespeare for You

Over at Praxis Theatre's Theatre is Territory blog, several commenters are taking semi-seriously Lyn Gardner's whimsical call a few weeks ago in the Guardian for a moratorium on new Shakespeare productions. In the comments section, a few other prospects are trotted out – among them Chekhov, Andrew Lloyd Webber, and Waiting for Godot – though the one thing that seems immune from a potential ban are new plays.

Most of Shakespeare's detractors here (and I exempt Gardner from this specifically, who seems to have been more peeved by inept productions than by the plays themselves) have it in for Shakespeare's language, his racism, his sexism (these latter two – well, all three, I suppose – from a contemporary perspective); and I wonder how much of it too stems from anxiety. No dramatist worth his or her salt picks up a pen without a deep familiarity with Shakespeare's work. Though Shakespeare wrote his plays more than four centuries ago, the English-language theatre has yet to produce a playwright more aware of the full spectrum of possibilities of the kinds of human experience that can be presented through language on a bare stage. Contemporary playwrights like Sarah Kane might write impossible stage directions like "Rats carry off his limbs," but Shakespeare was here first too: The Winter's Tale alone contains within its text "Exit, pursued by a bear" and "The statue comes to life," which, though they may not necessarily be Shakespeare's, are now a part of these texts for the life of the race. I'm sure Kane knew this, her dialogue proves it, but I can't say as much for some contemporary writers. (And how humbling it might be to discover that a territory had been covered four centuries before you got there; the anxiety surfaces.) To ignore or place a stage moratorium on Shakespeare or any of the other Elizabethan and Jacobean dramatists is to cut out the stage's tongue, and to replace it with a jabber which starts from scratch, abhorring not only history but the human experience which uniquely pulses through this work.

Well, if some wouldn't have Shakespeare on the stage, we can always have his work in books. The second, revised edition of The Norton Shakespeare, a new complete works volume definitive for our generation, was published in January of this year; this new edition explores recent developments in Shakespeare criticism and features revised introductions to the individual plays. At a list price of $68.75, it's still a bargain; the best series of individual plays, the Arden Shakespeare and the New Cambridge Shakespeare, while each play comes with a monograph-length introduction, a comprehensive textual history and important graphics and photographs, will run you substantially more. Though, ideally, you should have two editions: the Norton for reference, and a series of individual plays for deeper reading and study. All told these might run you close to $800.00, but this cost disbursed over the creative lifetime of a dramatist is miniscule. The rewards of these plays, both as art and as exemplar, are beyond the measure of a dollar.

Any of these will get you through a year or two without the Bard.

Posted at 8.36 am in /Books

Permanent link to this story