Friday, November 20, 2009

Diverse responses



As an example of subjective responses to the same production, read the split comments on Charles Isherwood's review of Sarah Ruhl's In the Next Room, or, The Vibrator Play.
I haven't read or seen the play, so can't judge. But based on the review and 16 (so far) comments, it's hard to tell what's going on here. I'm a Ruhl fan, so fingers crossed.
Responses seem to divide (please tell me what you think) along the lines of "It's just a one-joke sex comedy" to "No, it's that and also an examination of sexual politics and other such issues."

Labels: ,

Thursday, March 19, 2009

A stimulating play


Vibrators on Broadway! Sarah Ruhl's *In the Next Room (or, The Vibrator Play)* just finished a run at the Berkeley Rep and is headed to Broadway in November.

Ruhl's premise: At a spa in New York state in the 1890s (and with the use electricity just becoming widespread), what better way to treat women diagnosed with "hysteria" than to provide a little stimulus (of a kind other than economic, if you know what I mean)? It all makes for an obstetrician who becomes very popular with the local housewives.
Ruhl apparently aims to get past the "I'm coming!" jokes to an examination of gender relations and marital miscommunication. Can the premise (and her "hysterical" women) achieve, um, fulfillment?

[ photo: Maria Dizzia, left, and Hannah Cabell in Sarah Ruhl’s “In the Next Room (or the vibrator play)” in Berkeley, Calif.
2/18/09 New York Times, article by Charles Isherwood ]

Labels: , , , ,

Friday, October 03, 2008

Eurydice in Portland


(photo is from a production at Philadelphia's Wilma Theater)
Bobo was sort of disappointed by Sarah Ruhl’s Eurydice (at Artists Rep). Where the off-beat quirkiness of Dead Man’s Cell Phone and The Clean House are more rooted in the everyday, Eurydice starts with self-consciously eccentric elements and remains stuck there. (I came across one headline that read, ""Ruhl ruins Eurydice with whimsy.")
At the same time, director Randall Stuart’s production teaches viewers about specifically theatrical effects -- what theater can do that movies or books don’t or can’t.
The play has a killer finish -- Eurydice is separated from her father by death; then she isn’t; then she is, forever -- but there’s avant-garde that produces new ways of seeing things, and then there’s avant-garde that’s just “What the fuck?”
Too much of the latter.
But the staging! Numerous cubes rolled into all kinds of configurations. Eurydice swinging gleefully from the rafters on a swing made of brightly colored cloth, and then contorting and falling and striking joyful poses. A chorus of three otherworldly stones. A room made out of string. A glass elevator that wasn’t filled with rain (as in other proudctions) but just with sound effects -- though a couple of the cubes surprisingly filled in for the Lethe River with actual water. A touching conclusion: wishes for happiness from the dead.
One of the best sound designs I’ve ever heard in a theater, and for a play that takes music seriously.
The Orpheus, a kind of lesser Antonio Banderas, was not good: Despite the character’s obsession with music, he couldn’t sing, didn’t seem passionate. But he delivered half his speeches while hanging upside down from the rafters. Warm father/Eurydice relationship. The Nasty-Interesting Man, also Lord of the Underworld, played by the same hefty, resonant-voiced actor who imitated Orson Welles in Orson’s Shadow at this same theater a year ago.
Ruhl knows how to evoke love and joy and sorrow using techniques that work best in live performance; they’re ritualistic.
Then, to complete the evening’s festivities, Bobo pulled into a Motel 6 in Salem, where he proceeded to sleep the sleep of the dead.
Bobo: a regular one-man moveable party.

Labels: , , ,

Saturday, March 01, 2008

opening-weekend review of *The Clean House*

at Spokane Interplayers Ensemble through March 15

Sarah Ruhl's *The Clean House* is about messiness (both literal and emotional) and about living fully and living in denial. Full of jokes about death and sad ruminations about human foolishness, it's a play stocked with dreamy/quirky/absurd situations. It's a play that lurches from silliness to the sublime and back again, and it often requires exaggeration, hysteria and surrealism in its performers.

It's too bad, then, that the cleanup crew of director Karen Kalensky's cast in the current Interplayers production (through March 15) misses quite a few spots. While the actors frequently aren't up to Ruhl's subtle tonal changes, however, they do manage to accumulate several polished sequences along the way.

At one juncture in Act Two, for example, Kalensky's actors collectively create the kind of absurdist, funny/sad hysteria that Ruhl's script expects. Charles (Gary Pierce) strips down to his bathing trunks, chasing after the happiness that his mistress represents. Selena Schopfer (as Charles' proper physician-wife, Lane, forever weariug a white lab coat in her gleaming white-on-white home) crumples onto a sofa, sobbing over her straying husband. A Portuguese woman in black (Silvia Lazo as Matilde, Lane's non-cleaning cleaning woman) paces around, trying to coin the perfect joke. And Lane's sister Virginia (Anne Selcoe) charges around the living room, wielding a vacuum cleaner aimed at the heart of all the dirt and grime that has accumulated in her sister's living room and in both their personalities. Sequences like this -- full of frantic movement, both funny and sad, with characters reacting seriously to others' absurdities and while some make fun of others' misfortunes -- live up to the script's promise.

Too bad the energy/absurdity meter is running so low for so much of this show. In a serio-comic show with surreal sequences (Matilde walks into Lane's dreams, Matilde's dead parents somehow merge with Lane's husband and his mistress), actors need to plunge into the freakiness with heads held high. As the mistress, Jackie Davis shows the way with head held high during a couple of key moments. Lying down like a patient etherized upon a table -- and with Pierce methodically, lovingly "sewing up" the woman he loves after an operation -- Davis rises in mid-operation to recount the course of true love. It's a bizarre episode, but played with dignity and for the high stakes that it demands. Similarly, the entire cast endows the evening's concluding death with signs that are both dignified and absurd.

Yet for too much of the evening, there's the sense that Ruhl's delicate poem is being recited haltingly, unevenly. Often I found myself silently urging actresses just to go for it -- play the scene to the fullest, not by treating extreme situations with calm seriousness, but with the kind of ranting hysteria they demand. Lane confronting the absurdity of a cleaning woman who won't clean; Virginia extolling Charles's charisma even as she finds herself fondling his dirty underwear; Matilde portraying her parents' goofiness in the context of their deaths -- episodes as exaggerated as these could do with more in way of exaggerated acting.

In Tony Kushner's *Angels in America,* the dead speak to the living and prophets explode through the ceiling -- and two brief but comic Alaska episodes in Ruhl's play feel almost like homages. I bring up the parallel because in *Angels,* characters are playing for high stakes, laughing and crying simultaneously over the dual plagues of AIDS and homophobia. Ruhl's characters confront adultery, emotional repression, disease and mortality, agoraphobia, regret. And they cast off the shackles and learn how to laugh -- and then willingly put on the shackles again, if only because we're all chained to our mortality. The difference between the accomplished TV and stage performances of *Angels* that I've seen and the performances in the Interplayers *Clean House* is the difference between playing hysterically because the circumstances are themselves hysterical and playing a scene in a restrained manner so as to point out the distinction between the restrained acting and the highly charged emotions. The first is event-centered; the second is actor-centered. Sometimes you've just gotta scream, you know?
The people in our dreams act in histrionic, high-stakes ways, and Ruhl's play is like a dream. Or should be.

Gesticulating with her gangly arms and wiggling her butt while needlessly dusting an already-been-dusted lamp, Lazo occasionally catches Matilda's free spirit. An opening joke fell flat, probably because it's told in Portuguese (though other, later jokes, because they were told more demonstratively, did manage to cross the language barrier and bounce right into the land of humor). Lazo overdoes the quizzical, scrunched-face bit when confronted with others' strange behaviors, but she excels at floppy-limbed intrusions into others' emotional crises, butting in with "Do you wanna hear a joke?" just when people are taking themselves most seriously.

Kalensky directs effectively, moving Selcoe around the stage's perimeter as Schopfer tails after her in a sisterly squabble, and allowing Selcoe's clean-freak Virginia to revel by letting go of her cleanliness obsession in a brief outburst.

"If I don't laugh for a week, I feel dirty," says Matilde. We all have a lot of crap encrusted around our souls. We should clean them out. We should ignore the voice mail's blinking light, ignore the looming specter of our mortality. What we should do is, we should tell more jokes. The Interplayers version of *The Clean House* doesn't deliver all of Ruhl's humor and pathos, but it gets some of the punch lines right.

Labels: , , , ,