The Crucible @ GRADS
Mon, 6 July 1998, 02:35 pmGrant Malcolm3 posts in thread
The Crucible @ GRADS
Mon, 6 July 1998, 02:35 pmMiller's play continues to thrill. 40 years on, John Proctor's desperate struggle to keep his personal honour in the face of an inescapable doom still maintains its appeal although the tyrannous spectre of McCarthyism has apparently faded. That this long, emotionally draining and profoundly political work can still draw full houses is testimony to the enduring quality of Miller's writing and the remarkable kinship we feel for the characters.The Graduate Dramatic Society bravely undertook to perform the play in its entirety. I recently saw a production that excised considerable portions from the text. The cuts were neatly done with a clear understanding of the structure of the play, but I would be curious to know if the author had been consulted. The ultimate effect was a little like a Readers Digest version - tantalising rather than fulfilling.At a little under three hours in length - a bit more with an interval - a company needs to tread a fine line between judicious pace and alowing the text to breathe. In the skilled hands of director Celia Turk the cast delivered a measured performance that never faltered and drew the audience along.The very sparse setting showed its limitations. A sense of place was not always immediately apparent. The attic bedroom of the first act may only have been apparent to those with prior knowledge of the play. The large Dolphin stage was very bare. Entrances were often difficult and sometimes awkwardly placed. A large set of rafters suspended over the stage, reminiscent of Pat Stroud's 1986 interpretation in the same venue, were used effectively in each act to convey a range of different settings and moods.Ian Bolgia and Katherine English delivered fine and moving performances as John and Elizabeth Proctor. At first glance, Ian might have appeared unusual casting for the role of Proctor, but his commanding performance swept aside any potential misgivings. Ian's slightly understated start developed beautifully in the last two acts. Likewise Katherine delivered a controlled performance, all the more powerful when she finally breaks in the last act.Reverand Parris started hesitantly and was occasionally a little stiff, but warmed as the play progressed. Governor Danforth gave a truly nasty performance in what is undoubtedly the most callous and malicious role in the play. Reverand Hale never quite realised the potential of this difficult role.There was strong support from many of the minor characters. Abigail Williams captured the capriciousness of a jilted teenager and the desperate clinging to a lost infatuation. Mary Warren, Rebecca Nurse and Thomas Putnam were particularly memorable and Giles Corey was an absolute delight.
Grant MalcolmMon, 6 July 1998, 02:35 pm
Miller's play continues to thrill. 40 years on, John Proctor's desperate struggle to keep his personal honour in the face of an inescapable doom still maintains its appeal although the tyrannous spectre of McCarthyism has apparently faded. That this long, emotionally draining and profoundly political work can still draw full houses is testimony to the enduring quality of Miller's writing and the remarkable kinship we feel for the characters.The Graduate Dramatic Society bravely undertook to perform the play in its entirety. I recently saw a production that excised considerable portions from the text. The cuts were neatly done with a clear understanding of the structure of the play, but I would be curious to know if the author had been consulted. The ultimate effect was a little like a Readers Digest version - tantalising rather than fulfilling.At a little under three hours in length - a bit more with an interval - a company needs to tread a fine line between judicious pace and alowing the text to breathe. In the skilled hands of director Celia Turk the cast delivered a measured performance that never faltered and drew the audience along.The very sparse setting showed its limitations. A sense of place was not always immediately apparent. The attic bedroom of the first act may only have been apparent to those with prior knowledge of the play. The large Dolphin stage was very bare. Entrances were often difficult and sometimes awkwardly placed. A large set of rafters suspended over the stage, reminiscent of Pat Stroud's 1986 interpretation in the same venue, were used effectively in each act to convey a range of different settings and moods.Ian Bolgia and Katherine English delivered fine and moving performances as John and Elizabeth Proctor. At first glance, Ian might have appeared unusual casting for the role of Proctor, but his commanding performance swept aside any potential misgivings. Ian's slightly understated start developed beautifully in the last two acts. Likewise Katherine delivered a controlled performance, all the more powerful when she finally breaks in the last act.Reverand Parris started hesitantly and was occasionally a little stiff, but warmed as the play progressed. Governor Danforth gave a truly nasty performance in what is undoubtedly the most callous and malicious role in the play. Reverand Hale never quite realised the potential of this difficult role.There was strong support from many of the minor characters. Abigail Williams captured the capriciousness of a jilted teenager and the desperate clinging to a lost infatuation. Mary Warren, Rebecca Nurse and Thomas Putnam were particularly memorable and Giles Corey was an absolute delight.
KimberleyMon, 6 July 1998, 02:52 pm
Re: The Crucible @ GRADS
Interesting Grant !Agree with you on nearly everything except for Rev Hale, whom I thought was really strong - a strength I had not seen in any of the previous ( 3 or 4 ) productions I have seen.My review will appear in Aug Stage Whispers.One thing I couldn't put in the review ( lack of space ) was some unease about the staging in act 3. I was disappointed that on the large stage we couldn't see Elizabeth and John and Abigail at the same time, when Elizabeth is questioned about John's faithfulness. Felt we lost a lot there. Couldn't really place this statement in a review for a general audience who did not see the show, when you really need to picture the stage to know what I mean.Did anyone else feel this way ???Kimberley.
Grant MalcolmMon, 6 July 1998, 04:01 pm
Re: The Crucible @ GRADS
> Interesting Grant !hehehe ditto!> Agree with you on nearly everything except for Rev Hale, whom> I thought was really strong - a strength I had not seen in any of> the previous ( 3 or 4 ) productions I have seen.hmmm... there was no doubting the strength of the actor playing Hale - played with assurance - but i was concerned at his understanding of the role.Hale stresses during Act 3 that he has never trusted Abigail Williams, but rather has always believed Proctor to be an honest man. This was not apparent with the Hale in this production. He seemed aloof, cynical and distrustful of Proctor throughout Acts 1 & 2. His determination in Act 3 to "denounce these proceedings and quit this court" apparently only arose from events occuring during this scene. I saw no suggestion of his previous doubts in Acts 1 & 2. Hale's impression of John Proctor in Act 1 closely parallels our own. John is down to earth with a healthy scepticism of the supernatural, a position which Hale doesn't share, but he is not entirely unsympathetic.In the final act, Hale returns at great personal risk to convince the condemned to confess. He has fallen foul of the court and the governor, and is suspected of inciting rebellion, but he returns determined and defiant. This act which calls for tremendous courage, strength and conviction was played in whispers with lashings of self-pity.Ultimately, Hale is second only to Proctor in the depth to which his character is drawn. He is compassionate, caring and ruthlessly honest - like Proctor. He makes a remarkable journey during the play. From the niave bridegroom going to his beloved, to the worldly man sacrificing himself for "damnation's doubled on a priest that counsels men to lie". I felt this Hale failed to realise a number of these signposts and subtleties.> My review will appear in Aug Stage Whispers.> One thing I couldn't put in the review ( lack of space ) was> some unease about the staging in act 3. I was disappointed that on> the large stage we couldn't see Elizabeth and John and Abigail at> the same time, when Elizabeth is questioned about John's faithfulness.> Felt we lost a lot there. Couldn't really place this statement in> a review for a general audience who did not see the show, when you> really need to picture the stage to know what I mean.mmm... yes, could probably have been better staged - an ideal might have been Proctor and Abigail in opposite down stage corners and Elizabeth and Danforth facing each other across the upstage centre area. Tricky....CheersGrant