Theatre Australia

your portal for australian theatre

Gertrude the Cry

Thu, 22 May 2008, 08:22 am
Gordon the Optom2 posts in thread
‘Gertrude the Cry’ by Howard Barker, is a play about sex, death and moral failings. Skylight Theatre Ensemble presents it at the Blue Room, each evening at 8.00 pm until 7th June.  The performance is more than two hours without an interval – be prepared.

This tragedy is the contemporary tale of 42 years old Queen Gertrude, Hamlet’s nymphomaniac mother. Hamlet is puritanical and exceedingly disgusted by his mother's sexual activity.

The ‘Cry’ of the title describes Gertrude’s gasps during a GENUINE orgasm.

 In Elsinore Castle, Queen Gertrude (Julia Perkins), offers up her crotch in ‘damned incest’ to brother-in-law Claudius (Jeremy Mitchell), however to gain her, he must first pour poison into his sleeping brother, King Hamlet’s, ear. He has the Queen whilst she stands naked astride her dead husband. Whilst at her husband's funeral, Gertrude gives Claudius oral sex. She is seen by Hamlet’s grandmother, Isola (Marlene O’Dea) who hates Gertrude, perhaps she sees in this promiscuity her own lost hedonistic youth. She fears that she may lose a second son, Claudius, to her evil daughter-in-law, Gertrude.

The butler and story’s narrator, Cascan (Danielle Taylor) knows everything that is going on in the royal household, as the members seek his advice. A powerful position.

Gertrude and Claudius, who is still genuinely in love with his new wife, for months is unable to raise her Cry. This causes Gertrude to seek new partners, even posing as a prostitute.

When Hamlet’s young school friend, the lovesick Albert, Duke of Mecklenburg (Paul Grabovac), has it off with Gertrude in the garden, they are seen by Claudius who is determined to kill the young Duke.

The ghost of his father advises Hamlet (Kit Sparrow), who wishes to kill his disgusting mother, against such a murder. Hamlet therefore attempts to show his mother the error of her ways. Deep down, does he have an Oedipus complex? Hamlet finds a girlfriend Ragusa (Tara Walker) whom he believes has the same moral standards as himself. She is a beautiful, but horsy girl. On seeing Hamlet’s mother’s behaviour, Ragusa also fancies a life of sexual adventure.
Gertrude gives birth to Claudius’s child, a girl named Jane, who according to Hamlet will be only too happy to be free of Gertrude’s rancid womb.

Years later, Albert returns to try and capture Gertrude’s heart – or some other bodily part.

At the end of the play, there is the inevitable poison chalice. Who will die on drinking from it? Indeed how many of the royal family will still be standing?

Director Serge Tampalini (tackling his second Barker play) describes this dramatic piece as a palimpsest (Barker wrote several). A palimpsest is where the original words have been deleted to make room for new text.

Howard Barker has been described as ‘the most challenging dramatist on the English stage’. This is his reply to Shakespeare’s classic. He has taken us into the ‘Hamlet’ Gertrude - Claudius love affair, that was skimmed over in the original. Shakespeare's moral sense compelled him, in his writings, to ‘characteristically punish indiscretions with a feeling of guilt’. Hence, the Bard’s Gertrude is almost a virginal lady, casually described as a character saddened with shame and regret. Barker's Gertrude, however, is defiant and shameless trollop.

Barker’s plays are renowned for being tortuous and confusing, but his absurd humour and flowing sentence structure beguiles the audience. He has given us an inventive and detailed examination of the depth and spice of Gertrude and Claudius's love affair, and their connection with the Danish royal family. With Serge’s superb direction, this play has had much of the confusion removed and is relatively easy to follow.

Here Barker shows the intimate relationship of sex and death, sin and ecstasy, throughout the ages, where ensnared women have been bound to their partners by the misdirected, or downright squalid, crimes that they commit, e.g. Bonnie and Clyde, and the locally the Birnies.

Many of this wonderfully experienced cast are, or were, Murdoch Post Graduate students of Theatre or English. The actors were totally involved in this demanding show, all gave powerful performances. Kit Sparrow has improved his theatre skills wonderfully over the past two years. Special congratulations to Julia Perkins whose beguiling eyes and expressive face gave depth to the schizophrenic mad woman. Marlene O’Dea was wonderful as the caring, yet still randy, Queen Mother.
Softly, throughout the performance, was just the correct amount of backing music (Michael Workman’s composition) played on violincello by award winning Tristen Parr.
This show is most definitely not for the prudish and is advertised ‘rated R+’ (although MA+, with strong sexual themes could possibly be more accurate). However, it is an exhilarating experience, which pushes back the confines of everyday theatre text. Very many congratulations to producer Jessica Karasinski, all of the cast and crew, for being brave enough to put on such a difficult and demanding play, sincerely and without pulling punches. Tremendous.

"Words. Words. Words."

Wed, 4 June 2008, 03:10 am
Walter Plinge
"Words. Words. Words." Possibly the most important thing in an actors life. Gertrude the Cry is a sublimely written piece of theatre and given the right circumstances the poetic nature of the words can lift us as an audience as well as drive us into a crushing despair. Skylight Theatre Ensemble's production indeed had moments of this smattered throughout its epic 2 hr and fifteen minute without interval run time. If you would like a detailed synopsis of the play please read Gordon the Optom's review above. I walked into the blue room earlier this evening without much expectation and what might have been a feeling of trepidation. I am glad to say that I walked out satisfied that my return visit to the blue room will be with more anticipation. "Gertrude the Cry" is a wonderful piece of theatre and if you are reading this because you are umming and ahhhing as to whether you should go. GO!!! The set had a nice feel to it with a large neo-victorian couch dominating centre stage. Floors and walls decadent in black and red and perhaps just a nod to the Shakespeare "nuts" in the audience with the walls papered with pages out of old books which inspired the quote above. I also felt that every inch of space on stage was utilised though perhaps the frosted glass at the back was a bit extravagant to only be used once in the entire performance. Lights hanging from the ceiling added an almost cave like atmosphere to the entire set. Which brings me to my next point. Since I have spent a large amount of time working with the theatre of Bertolt Brecht I have come to discover that white light has to be the most fascinating light medium to work with. Tonight's production highlighted and reinforced that point for me. There were some moments where actors stepped into a murky shadow which felt unintended but on the whole it was beautiful. Lighting cues were tight and seamless so congrats must go to Marie-Louise Batenberg for her operation of the rig. The Vioncello as played by Tristen Parr was in a word excellent. Unfortunately, I felt that at some moments of the production it hindered the text rather than supported it and in some moments its volume topped sections of text completely. This is unfortunate because the main strength of the whole play is the text and whilst I did enjoy the music I would have been ineterested to hear the text without backing. The rhythm of the text and the sound of the actors voices alone I feel would have carried the piece. Still, in a world where the general public is so used to the soundtrack in a film that they hear it on an almost subliminal level, perhaps a lack of soundtrack would not encourage the audience to engage with the performance. The performances were at times a bit hit and miss. Where the production really took flight for me was when the actors stopped "acting" and allowed the text to carry their characters and the emotional weight of their speech. I find that when an actor becomes overly self indulgent with emotion we as an audience cease to care. Peter Hall gives an example of this psychology at work in his series of lectures availiable as "Exposed by the Mask" he asks us what tugs at our heart strings more, a child who is crying or a child who is trying not to cry? In the same way who do we care about more the actor who is swallowing his/her text in self indulgent emotion or the actor who is holding back the emotion to communicate the text? Perhaps I am ambling too much into theory but if you're an actor and you're reading this next time you have a chance give this approach a try and allow the text to carry the work for you. So back on to my original point. The text is of the play is poetic and rhythmic to the point that pauses unintended by the author and moments of wallowing in self indulgent grief were a killer on the pace. Having said all of that there was a fabulous example in the performance of this kind of restraint at work. Marlene O'Dea was wonderful. Her dialogue was clear, she carried through with the rhythm of the text and not once did I loose anything she said due to an over indulgence of emotion. Perhaps this is a small tribute to the restraint preached by japanese actors whose dedication to theatrical form and restraint borders on fanaticism. I also particularly enjoyed Marlene's use of her "fan language" something which i'd given hope of seeing outside of Japan. On the other extreme I felt Jeremy Mitchell spent too much time wallowing in his own grief and as such I felt the voice of the playwright was crushed under his "acting". I'm not saying that he was awful but I felt that there was a disregard for the play's heightened language in his performance when he attempted to play the text in a naturalistic style the indicator of this in Perth seems to be the actor doing an excessive amount of touching of his or her own face and putting in a large number of pinter-esque pauses where the script dosen't call for any. Kit Sparrow's boyish enthusiasm was enjoyable to watch and helped to give the audience some much needed relief at crucial times. The rest of the cast were fairly solid but occasionally drifted into being overly emotional rather than letting the words work for them. All in all I had a throughly enjoyable night out at the theatre. I would not recommend this show to those who are easily offended and as the R rating suggests themes and content are probably not appropriate for those under the age of 18 or so years. However if you like a well written play with poetry, sex, violence and a degree of smut thrown in for good measure than this one is for you! Make sure you don't miss out on this show it is probably one of the best that perth will see this season! Yours in theatre, Garreth Bradshaw

Thread (2 posts)

← Back to Theatre Reviews