AUDIENCE REVIEW:
The Taming of the Shrew
by William Shakespeare
Oct. 7 - Nov. 6
Tickets $12 - $35
An email from an audience member (Nov. 5):
Dear Harlequin Theatre,
I write to commend you on the production (unfortunately ending its run now) of “Taming of the Shrew.”
I have seen over a hundred plays (many Shakespeare) and certainly this has been among the very best of them all.
When it comes to Shakespeare I am rather of a traditionalist and somewhat of a purist when it comes to faithfulness to the text, so I approached this adaptation (well-named such) a little skeptically. I was most pleasantly surprised.
From beginning to end I was caught up in the sheer energy of the experience; I started to say the ‘performance’ but ‘twas more than that. In the hands of this cast and the director, we were taken to the time, place, outlooks, conflicts, feelings, scheming, and laughter---even the dimension---of another existence . . . Shakespeare’s vehicle came believably to life---and even taught us things about life---and important things they be.
These characters were just that: who they were supposed to be; with but minor exceptions, we did not think of them as actors, so much did they take us with them, ushering us through the portal of this play to another plane.
And such a trip it was (or is, for the effects far o’er run the experience) . . . the music itself was like unto another dimension of this production. In dozens of Shakespeare plays I have seen this one easily made the best use of music. It was appropriate throughout, never distracting but enhancing the rest of the magic.
We also immensely enjoyed the non-vocal music---apropos to both Shakespeare (his characters and this play in particular), and the Old West. Each of the three themes enriched the other. The choreographed vignettes (seamlessly woven into the fabric of the drama) were exceptionally well done, too; I would like to have seen more of them.
Special recognition is due to Petruchio, whose talented rendition of those well-selected songs carried this play to new highs. In addition, he was an accomplished actor---a Petruchio alternately confident, patient, stern, determined, insightful, overbearing at times, open, flexible, caring, affectionate, etc.---all things he was to be, melded together into a fascinating portrayal of the only kind of man who could ever win the heart of Katherina (for that was the inner meaning of the taming of a shrew).
As with all the other dramatis personae, Tranio was ever who he should be. We appreciated the range of his emotions, quick speech when needed, the quizzical glances, persuasive finesse, ‘I’ve-got-an-idea’ moments, and his infinite adaptability. He did far more than do lines well; he exuded his character (and his character within the character) with ev’ry gesture, inflection, and reaction. He added a depth and an extra touch of class to this already outstanding production.
While minor points to be sure, I wanted to mention a couple of things that I did not think worked quite so well. One was the woman-playing-a-man business (Curtis); while the actress did a good job, it was unnecessary and a bit distracting, undercutting the grant of plausibility that the audience grants a dramatic production---and represented an aesthetic dissonance in a play about how a man and woman relate to one another.
The play had---as it should---its laughable moments (and this production added many to it---from a spittin’ handshake to horse manure on the boots to the ripping of a dress to the “Awfus” and many more) and they worked well and added to the enjoyment and even the thematic development of this adaptation. One bit that I thought went too far (and thus called attention to a ‘performance’ rather that the encounter with the otherness of what a play should be) was the obviously fake tumbleweed and the cattle skull being dragged across the back of the stage. Many in the audience laughed at it but it was at something dehors the play; for a few seconds we were reminded that what we were seeing was not real. But alas, we quickly came back to the real thing---these enthralling and believable characters in the Tombstone Territory of the 1880’s U.S.A.
At its root “Taming of the Shrew” is a moving love story; it not only moves the audience (and other characters in the play) it also moved its central protagonists. Petruchio went from a cocky confidence to the subtler, more complex challenge of an energetic, determined, intelligent, unconventional gutsy, spirited woman; he had to learn along the way. He did well, so, in retrospect, his confidence was merited---but he could not have known that at the beginning for, whatever his efforts (no matter how masterful, insightful, risky, and well-intentioned), it all depended on Kate.
She (more than most) saw Petruchio as he was---and was meant to be; vice versa for him toward her, too. They saw each other as few (or maybe none) others could have. Katherina responded (and ultimately submitted) to Petruchio, as herself: an energetic, determined, intelligent, unconventional, gutsy, spirited woman. ‘Tis she who says, in the last scene, “What is your will, sir, that you send for me?” and later “In token of which duty, if he please / My hand is ready; may it do him ease.”
It was a battle of wills to be sure, which he won---and won her---
by force of character but not by force,
by perseverance that outlasted obstinacy,
by testing and testing, which she did pass indeed and well,
by daring to care when others would not,
by learning to love---when she was the teacher for both of them.
In acknowledging those who see “Taming of the Shrew” as somehow misogynist, methinks the Director’s Notebook gave a bit more play (pun intended) to that pseudo-intellectual, parochial view than it deserves; there is no need to be defensive in the least about the play, the character, or the viewpoint with which it concludes.
Katherina became a better woman for the choice she made (zigging and zagging to get there though she did.)---and in changing for Petruchio, she also changed for herself---and changed him. They both emerged happier, more complete, fulfilled human beings, one as a woman and one as a man, synergized by the relationship they chose---and the play leaves no doubt Kate chose it.
While their way may not be the way for every couple in the world, who should blame them for telling others (in the last scene) their formula for success? And it was Kate who did the talking---eloquently, persuasively, movingly---in a way only a woman who knows could do.
One sensed that Petruchio knew that he has done much more than tamed a shrew; he had found a prize, a princess if you will, who with her decision made him a king and herself a queen.
Kate was thus the sine qua non to the success of these two---and more than any other, made the play what it is. We saw her volatile surliness, suspicion, misanthropy, and truculence; we also saw her strength, wisdom, adaptability, and perseverance. We also saw her vulnerability, sensitivity, affection, delight, and resolve. We saw it all in this profound character portrayed by this gifted actress.
There was no scene more expressive than when Kate first laid eyes on Petruchio---her face, her body language, and the just-right musical accompaniment all converged to introduce us to the eclectic complexity and the metamorphosis of Katherina that is at the core of the play.
We felt her sense of abandonment and imminent emptiness in Act III, Scene 2---when she says “No shame but mine . . .” and speaks of “Who wooed in haste and means to wed at leisure.” We felt that, and her bitterness and pathos, as she sang, up on that balcony, lonely in her wedding dress, bereft (we thought) of a groom. I found her rendition of that song, in that context, particularly moving; when we saw it, there was not a round of applause---and I think it was because she had so powerfully and affectingly taken us into herself that there was something akin to a rapt silence in the audience.
We noticed as she warmed up to Petruchio, expressing an affection (as well as an emerging submission) that was fully real and fully her. Her submission was chosen and earned, rather than imposed and granted as a right. She benefitted her husband in ways that he began to know---and that knowledge, and that appreciation, grew (and continued growing) at play’s end. It was with pride and anticipation (perhaps even some gratitude) that he says “Why, there’s a wench! Come on and kiss me, Kate.” And she did---assertively, convincingly, and unambiguously. She knew her place---in his heart---and she found a place in ours as well. Lucky Petruchio, lucky us.
It was also a fitting and revealing touch (many in this production, where small things say much) that at the curtain call, when Petruchio hesitates about which way to turn in his exit upstage, Kate tugs at him---and the master is smart enough to follow.
These are not only first-time impressions. I had the same feelings the third time we saw this production.
And so forsooth do I these thoughts convey
About the Harlequin’s triumphant play---
And be it moon or e’en now that sun--
Too short indeed has been this drama’s run.
Sincerely,
Jim Boldt
[11-5-10]
|
