Bed and Breakfast at The Blyth Festival – A Review

Bed and Breakfast by Mark Crawford, a plea for tolerance wrapped in a deceptively simple (and quite funny) comedy, is packing them in at the Blyth Festival prior to a whirlwind tour of British Columbia.

Brett (Crawford himself) and Drew (Paul Dunn), two Torontonians in a committed relationship that has yet to blossom into marriage, are struggling to move from their small condo into a house. The real estate market conspires against them, however, adding to the stress of their unsatisfactory jobs as a designer (Brett) and an assistant manager in a hotel (Drew). Then Brett’s favorite aunt Maggie dies in the small touristy lakeside town where Brett spent his summers while growing up and bequeaths her large house to Brett. At the same time Drew loses out on an expected promotion. So the two decide to leave Toronto, fix the place up, and flip it to finance their Toronto dream home. When they realize how much they loathed their Toronto jobs, they decide to transform the house into a B&B.

That premise might suggest the play is about the humorous adventures of rehab with colorful local workmen and the foibles of oddball B&B guests — a sort of A Year in Provence meets Fawlty Towers. There’s all that, of course, but the play turns into much more. Brett and Drew are at first apprehensive about being the only gay people in town, but matters take an ominous turn when they experience some homophobic slurs and major anti-gay vandalism during the Christmas season. As it happens, the majority of the townspeople are quite supportive and Brett and Drew are not the only gay people in town. As the play progresses, we learn that while Brett and Drew may be “out,” there are a lot of things hidden away in both their family closets.

The “mystery” at the heart of the play may not be entirely new — indeed, it’s a plot device that goes back to Shakespeare and the ancients — but Crawford handles it beautifully as both playwright and actor and when the truth was revealed a tear came to my eye. The play also offers a subtle commentary on generational changes within the gay community. Brett and Drew seem to pride themselves on being “just-like-you-but-gay;” some of their Toronto friends seem to revel in their more flamboyant, old-school gayness; while the younger generation, on the other hand, seems to reject easy labels in favor of a more fluid definition of sexuality.

Bed and Breakfast has twenty-two characters, all of them performed by two actors. Crawford positions the play as a story being told to us by Brett and Drew, which makes that concept work quite well and seem considerably less arch. A great part of the enjoyment of the piece is watching Crawford and Dunn switch effortlessly from character to character, often with a little jump and a spin. I especially enjoyed Crawford’s renditions of both Alison, a lesbian who runs the town’s hippest coffee shop, and Dustin, a shy teenager who loves to bake and is gay but doesn’t know it. Dunn’s portrait of Brett’s teenage nephew, who answers every question with “I dunno,” is equally deft.

One thing that makes the conceit work so well is Ashlie Corcoran’s deft direction. Crawford and Dunn mime all the props and wear clothes in a muted palette of greys, which they change unobtrusively and only occasionally. Designer Dana Osborne, in addition to doing the costumes, has provided a malleable set, also in muted tones, that borders on the abstract but becomes quite believable as bedrooms and store counters. John Gzowski’s uncannily pinpoint sound design and Rebecca Picherack’s equally spot-on lighting add immeasurably to the illusion. All of this focuses the audience’s attention on the acting, which is quite wonderful.

As I noted, Bed and Breakfast is, on one level, a plea for tolerance. It seems to ask the question, “Can gay people be accepted as members of the community in small towns that are, sort of by definition, far less tolerant than big cities like Toronto?” Well, Blyth is a small rural town and if the standing ovation accorded the show by the mostly middle-aged and elderly audience with whom I saw the play is anything to go by, the answer would seem to be a resounding “Yes!” Even so, Bed and Breakfast, under all the laughter, has a message well worth hearing. I fear it will be quite some time before audiences come away from this play thinking, “How dated!”

Bed and Breakfast runs through September 28, 2019.

Blyth Festival
423 Queen Street
Blyth, ON N0M 1H0
(877) 862-5984

Victory at The Shaw Festival – A Review

Howard Barker is the bad boy of British theatre. He revels in filth, flatulence, four-letter words, and fornication displayed on stage with all the verisimilitude that the law allows in plays set for the most part in past eras and other countries — for the “distancing effect” he says.

“A good play puts the audience through a certain ordeal,” he once told The Guardian. “I’m not interested in entertainment.”

Victory, his 1983 historical drama being offered up by the Shaw Festival in the intimate confines of the Studio Theatre, makes good on that promise — or is it a threat?

Set during the restoration of the English monarchy in the 1660s, the play follows the trials of Mary Bradshaw (Martha Burns), widow of John Bradshaw, one of those who had signed the death warrant for Charles I. Bradshaw was dead when Charles II returned in triumph to England, but he was nonetheless charged with treason, exhumed, hung, drawn, and quartered. His widow attempts to gather the decaying pieces of his body, which have been put on public display around London, so she can bury them. It doesn’t go well.

Along the way, she meets King Charles II (Tom McCamus), his mistresses Nell Gwynn (Deborah Hay) and Devonshire (Sara Topham), and Ball, a randy cavalier (Tom Rooney) whose mission of avenging the overthrow and execution of Charles I seemed to involve raping every Cromwellian woman he could lay his hands on.

There’s not much of a plot. Plot was not one of Barker’s major concerns. Given the politics of the era, one might expect some sort of political message. But “I have contempt for messages in the theatre,” Barker once proclaimed. Bradshaw’s widow is the only character who evolves significantly during the course of the play and given the human quirk of pareidolia, which causes us to see images in clouds and other random patterns, I decided the “message” was that the secret to survival in times of upheaval is to accommodate yourself as best you can to the new dispensation. At play’s end Bradshaw’s widow is married to the cavalier who raped her, caring for his child, and still carrying a burlap sack filled with the bits of her dead husband.

Otherwise the play seems rather random, a succession of short scenes that seek to epater les bourgeois. At one point, I was reminded of the New Yorker humor piece about new warning signs in the theatre — “Warning: This play contains nudity. However it doesn’t involve the actor you would prefer to see naked.” Barker succeeds fairly well in shocking us, so well in fact that a fair number of the bourgeois in the audience epater-ed themselves right out of the theatre at intermission.

I’m not sure whether this was Barker’s idea or an inspiration of the director, but for the final scene of the first act the entire audience was forced to leave the theatre and either descend a long flight of stairs or cram into a tiny elevator to reach a windowless room with too few chairs to accommodate everyone. It was a pointless exercise, which given the advanced age of many of the audience members was also rather cruel.

For all its insistence on repelling its audience, Victory is now “an acknowledged masterpiece” and I have that on no less authority than the playwright himself, who tells us that in a program note. Well, maybe.

If I’ve been a little hard on Mr. Barker it’s only because his pompous self-regard makes it irresistible to snipe. To give him his due, the play is never boring even if it is never truly involving. A fair amount of credit must be given to director Tim Carroll, who has wisely decided to stage the play on a completely bare stage, which brings a refreshing feeling of space to the Studio’s small theatre-in-the-round playing area. Rachel Forbes’ terrific costumes along with the occasional chair or table and Kevin Lamotte’s sensitive lighting are all the scenery needed.

Carroll has also elicited excellent performances from his principal actors. Tom McCamus seems to be specializing in deranged English monarchs and he does it very well. Sara Topham manages to maintain her dignity even when she is waving a semen-besmirched hand in search of a napkin. When Deborah Hay doubles as a doddering old courtier she makes one forget the inanity of much of the random gender swapping that goes on these days. Finally, Martha Burns brings a deep sense of humanity and realism to widow Bradshaw, no matter how improbable the path the text requires her to tread.

In a program note, Tim Carroll says, “Discovering Howard Barker blew my mind wide open.” Fair enough, but why is Shaw doing this play? I think theatre people are drawn to this sort of “transgressive” material in much the same way that comedians gather from time to time to drink copious amounts of alcohol and compete to see who can tell the filthiest jokes. There’s something liberating in breaking down barriers of propriety and taste. Maybe the exercise gives actors access to darker realms of the imagination and helps them go on to create more compelling characters in other plays. There’s definitely a place for this kind of exploration. But at Shaw?

Perhaps there’s an unlit basement room with not enough chairs to accommodate the audience somewhere in Toronto.

Victory continues in repertory at the Shaw Festival’s Jackie Maxwell Studio Theatre through October 12, 2019.

The Shaw Festival
(800) 511-7429
(905) 468-2172

More Reviews

To access the complete archive of reviews click here. Then scroll down to read the reviews in reverse chronological order.

Man and Superman at The Shaw Festival – A Review

The Shaw Festival has entrusted the staging of George Bernard Shaw’s monumental Man and Superman on the expansive Festival Theatre stage to the relative tyro director Kimberley Rampersad, whose only previous directorial credit at Shaw was the one-act O’Flaherty, VC last season. It was a risk and I am pleased to report that by and large it paid off.

Man and Superman is a sprawling monster of play. Presented here with the often-omitted dream sequence, Don Juan in Hell, it clocks in at some six-and-a-half hours, including a 70-minute lunch break. It is one part light drawing room comedy of manners, one part philosophical discourse, one part political harangue, and 100% Shaw. As such, it is a challenge for director, cast, and audience, even when whittled down to size by an ardent editor.

The play revolves around the trials, tribulations, and tirades of Jack Tanner (Gray Powell), a self-proclaimed “revolutionist” but every inch the idly rich English gentleman, who rails against the antediluvian mores of the age, which insist that he must marry. He’s having none of it. His ward Ann Whitefield (Sara Topham), however, wants it all. Add to the mix Violet Robinson (Courtney Ch’ng Lancaster), who has committed the unpardonable sin. No, she’s not pregnant out of wedlock. It’s far worse. She’s secretly married to one who must remain nameless. Toss in Henry Straker (Sanjay Talwar), the cockney auto mechanic who chauffeurs Tanner’s newfangled motor car (it’s 1905, remember) and knows his Beaumarchais from his Voltaire; Hector Malone (Jeff Irving), a visiting American chap who has his own speedy motor car and who has taken a fancy to Violet; and crusty old Roebuck Ramsden (David Adams) to whom Tanner’s bohemian pretenses are anathema and you have plenty of room for comedic complications.

When the group takes off on a sort of road rally to the Mediterranean, they are waylaid by a bunch of anarchists and social democrats in Spain’s Sierra Nevada under the leadership of one Mendoza (Martha Burns), a former waiter at the Savoy Hotel in London. Between bouts of political disputation they rob travelers. Mendoza and Tanner hit it off. “I am a brigand. I steal from the rich,” says she. “I am a gentleman. I steal from the poor,” replies Tanner.

It is during this sojourn that the famous dream sequence occurs, when Tanner beds down for the night. Shaw was canny enough to make sure it could easily be excised without ruining the play that surrounds it and, truth be told, when performed it is a bit like Dicken’s undigested piece of beef, so different is it in tone and content. In the morning, the group winds up in Granada, where Hector’s father (Tom McCamus) appears and all is set to rights.

While the bones of the main plot seem lifted from Wilde the dialog is vintage Shaw, most of it devoted to Shaw’s ideas about the parlous relationship between men and women. For Shaw, women represent “the Life Force” whose role in the grand scheme of things is to perpetuate the race, which they do by entrapping men into marriage all the while allowing men, the poor saps, to believe that they are the pursuers not the prey. It is a point of view that, I dare say, many men in the audience will find familiar. Women, on the other hand . . . well, far be it from me to speak for what used to be called the gentler sex.

Shaw assigns most of the heavy didactic lifting to his logorrheic protagonist (and stand-in), Jack Tanner. And my but he do go on! Tanner is apparently the longest role in the English-speaking theatre and it is to Gray Powell’s credit that he pulls it off with aplomb. Shaw is wise enough to sprinkle the play with snide references to Tanner’s prolixity. At one point, his chauffeur, Straker, says, “If my motorcar went as fast as your mouth . . .” It’s a ploy that nips one of the most obvious complaints about the play in the bud.

In the Don Juan sequence (it has been established, but not really explained, that Tanner is a descendant of the Spanish rake) Shaw shifts from comedy of manners to metaphysical disquisition in which he, through Tanner, expounds on his theory, borrowed from Nietzsche, that human evolution is inexorably producing the “superman,” with women choosing just the right mates to bring this apotheosis to fruition. He borrows from Mozart’s opera, Don Giovanni to stage a debate among Don Juan, Doña Ana, Satan, and Il Commendatore (Doña Ana’s father, killed in a duel by Don Juan, whose funereal statue comes to life in the opera).

Traditionally, these parts are played by the actors who portray Tanner, Ann Whitefield, Roebuck Ramsden, and Mendoza respectively, and therein lies one of the hiccups in this production — casting Martha Burns as Mendoza. Mendoza tells of a passionate, but unrequited, love affair with a woman who happens to be Straker’s sister. Introducing a lesbian love affair in a play that is all about the essence of heterosexual politics makes little sense. On the other hand, given the nefarious role played by women in the eternal battle of the sexes (Shaw’s view, not mine!) depicting Satan as a woman seems apt, and Burns is terrific in the role. Plus, it should be noted that, as Shaw presents it, Hell is where the cool kinds hang out; Heaven is unspeakably dull.

Rampersad made some other odd choices. She begins the play rather pointlessly by bringing all the characters on stage in a sort of line up where they present their cards to Ramsden’s butler. Then when the first scene begins, it is sung for a minute or so in recitative, an apparent nod to the operatic inspiration of the Don Juan sequence and an unfortunate example of a director calling attention to herself. After that, thank God, she settles down to business.

A major theatrical event like this deserves a sumptuous physical production. I have fond memories of the Shaw’s 1977 production, which featured a magnificent Rolls Royce (along with Ian Richardson and Carole Shelley). Camellia Koo’s set, however, looks chintzy, a series of flat walls depicting a vast library, which slowly deconstructs as the play progresses. I struggled to fathom the symbolism ­— the sheer volume of Tanner’s dialog? ­— and ultimately failed. Perhaps this was exactly what the director wanted; or perhaps, given that there are only 17 performances, it was felt that they couldn’t afford a lavish set; or perhaps the incredible set for The Ladykillers used up the last loonie in the set budget. Whatever the reason, it was a missed opportunity. Koo redeems herself with some smashing costumes, and Kevin Lamotte’s lighting is effective, too.

But ultimately, the production’s many virtues far outweigh any minor carps. The play places tremendous demands on the cast and they all rise to the challenge. Shaw’s speechifying can be deadly in the wrong hands, but Gray Powell, as noted, tackles a veritable mountain of dialog and makes it fresh and compelling and a joy to listen to. A fair amount of the credit for that belongs to the director. Sara Topham is delightful as “the Life Force.” The moment when she has finally conquered Tanner and falls into his arms is positively delicious. Few actors can depict the ecstasies of pure love better than Ms. Topham. Kyle Blair is nigh-on perfect as Octavius Robinson, the hopelessly dopey romantic smitten with Ann. Courtney Ch’ng Lancaster and Jeff Irving work well as the secondary love interests, and Tom McCamus, as the elder Malone, illustrates the benefit of casting a major actor in a minor role.

Given the infrequent productions of the full monty version of Man and Superman, I was surprised and more than a little upset to note that there were a fair number of empty seats at the performance I saw. Let’s hope that changes in the few remaining performances.

Man and Superman continues in repertory at the Festival Theatre through October 5, 2019

The Shaw Festival
(800) 511-7429
(905) 468-2172

More Reviews

To access the complete archive of reviews click here. Then scroll down to read the reviews in reverse chronological order.

The Crucible at The Stratford Festival – A Review

Powered by three amazing star performances, Arthur Miller’s searing drama, The Crucible, is receiving a towering production in the Stratford Festival’s Avon Theatre under the direction of actor Jonathan Goad.

The Crucible is set during the Salem, Massachusetts, witch trials of the late seventeenth century and the plot hews closely to the historical facts. But no one who saw the original production in 1953 could fail to see the parallels between the play and the contemporary witch hunt being pursued by the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) in Washington, DC. Just in case, Miller included narration (absent from the Stratford version) that connected the dots for them. It was the dawn of the Cold War and with Russia having joined the nuclear club, the “Red Scare” was in full bloom.

American intellectuals, especially writers, were being hauled before the HUAC to confess their past leftist leanings and “name names” of others they knew to have been once members of the Communist Party. Those named and those who refused to cooperate had their careers destroyed. It is said that Miller began work on The Crucible after his good friend, the film director, Elia Kazan, told him that he would indeed name names in his appearance before the committee. A few years after The Crucible opened, Miller’s life imitated his art. He was called before the committee, refused to name names, and was convicted of contempt, fined, and blacklisted.

In the play, John Proctor, a hardscrabble farmer, is caught up in the hysteria surrounding witchcraft in Salem. The Reverend Parris, a dour Harvard-trained churchman, sees a group of girls dancing in the woods with the Barbadian slave Tituba. The girls claim they were merely dancing, not engaging in any satanic behavior. In fact, at the instigation of their ringleader, Abigail Williams, a former servant in the Proctor household, they were attempting to put a curse on Proctor’s wife Elizabeth. It seems that Abigail and Proctor had had a brief affair, of which Proctor quickly repented. Elizabeth Proctor knew of the affair and banished Abigail from the house. Abigail believes Proctor still has feelings for her and hopes to win him back.

Rev. Parris summons Rev. Hale, a young churchman wise in the ways of the occult, to investigate and things quickly spiral out of control. As accusations of witchcraft mount, Deputy Governor Danforth, a fire-breathing religious extremist, arrives to rid Massachusetts, which was essentially a theocratic state, of this evil. Miller paints a vivid and terrifying picture of a society gone mad and in Danforth he has created a villain of mythic proportions.

Goad’s direction of a uniformly superb cast creates a level of tension and terror that becomes almost unbearable as the play progresses inexorably to its tragic end. Tim Campbell is the very model of the rock-hard frontiersman who may not be particularly devout but who has an unerring sense of right and wrong. His struggle to stay true to himself while protecting his wife is heart-rending. As his wife, Shannon Taylor provides a portrait of a love that survives the greatest possible strain.

However, it is Wayne Best’s terrifying portrait of Danforth that provides the thematic center of the play and offers the clearest warning of the dangers of religious fanaticism. Best has done yeoman’s service for the Festival for many seasons, typically taking on secondary roles. It is gratifying to see him in a role that showcases his manifest talents so brilliantly. His Danforth may be the single best performance of the Stratford season.

Solid support comes from Rylan Wilkie as Hale, who comes to realize that there is no substance to the many charges of witchcraft and pleads to stem the bloodletting. Scott Wentworth is equally good in showing how Rev. Parris unravels as the witch madness comes ever closer to home, leaving him bankrupt and subject to death threats.

Like Shakespeare, Miller had an ability to create small roles that allow good actors to create fully rounded characters and make a mark on the audience. Ijeoma Emesowum as Tituba, John Dolan as Giles Corey, and Maria Vacratsis as Rebecca Nurse make the most of the opportunity given them. And a word must be said of the director’s nine-year-old daughter, Aviva Goad, who is quite scary as Rev. Parris’ daughter Betty, who may or may not be bewitched.

The performances are so strong that it’s easy to overlook the physical production, but Michael Gianfrancesco (sets and costumes) and Bonnie Beecher (lights) have provided a stripped down and functional environment that brings the acting front and center.

The Crucible is Miller’s most-produced play. I’ve seen a few of those productions but never one as powerful and emotionally shattering at this one.

The Crucible continues in repertory at the Avon Theatre until October 25, 2019. If there’s any justice in this world, it will be extended.

Stratford Festival
(800) 567-1600

The Front Page at The Stratford Festival – A Review

In 1928, The Front Page was a huge Broadway hit for the legendary writing team of Ben Hecht and Charles MacArthur. Set in the Press Room of a Chicago courthouse, it tells the story of how rapacious newspaper editor Walter Burns tries to retain the services of his star reporter, Hildy Johnson, who perversely has decided to get married and go to New York to work in advertising. All this against the background of the unfolding story of the pending execution of the hapless Earl Williams, accused of the murder of a black cop on the eve of an election in which the corrupt Chicago political machine desperately needs the black vote. Hildy’s plans are sabotaged when Williams mysteriously escapes and the Chicago police department goes nuts trying to find him. Needless to say, it’s a comedy.

The play is a sprawling ensemble piece (the current production boasts a cast of 23).  That may be why it is seldom revived, but it makes it an ideal choice for the Festival Theatre’s thrust stage. In addition to the colorful assortment of hack reporters, including one given to fastidiousness and poetry, there is the corrupt mayor and the incompetent buffoon of a sheriff; the condemned man, Earl Williams, and Mollie Malone, the shopworn prostitute who has befriended him; Hildy’s betrothed and her starchy mother; and a Runyonesque criminal whom Burns uses to do the dirty work.

Most people today are familiar with the story thanks to the rollicking 1940 film adaptation, His Girl Friday (on which Hecht collaborated). The film starred Cary Grant as Burns and Rosalind Russell as a gender-swapped Hildy. The current Stratford Festival production is an adaptation by Michael Healey of the original stage play in which the genders are switched once again. This time around, Hildy Johnson reverts to his male persona, while Walter Burns becomes Penelope “Cookie” Burns, Walter’s widow.

Healey has also brought the racial dynamics into the foreground. According to the program notes, the character of Alderman Willoughby, a black politician, that was eliminated before the original play opened, has been “reconstructed” in the present version. It works well as Abernathy turns up the pressure on the mayor by threatening another race riot if Earl Williams isn’t executed on schedule. There is also a black reporter in the Press Room who maintains his dignity amidst the casual racism of his peers (and, yes, the n-word is spoken).

Those who tremble when they hear that a great classic play has been “updated” or “adapted” (I am one of them) can relax. The sturdy bones of the story are intact and Healy proves himself to be a comic writer with whom Hecht and MacArthur would have been happy to get drunk. The plot remains a magnificent Rube Goldberg device that, once set in motion, careens wildly and improbably to its conclusion.

The play has been given a perfect period feel by set designer Lorenzo Savoini and costume designer Dana Osborne. Kimberly Purtell’s lighting and John Gzowski’s sound design are appropriately unobtrusive.

Of course, material like this can fall flat unless it is carried off by an impeccable cast and that is where this production, under the astute eye of actor-turned-director Graham Abbey, excels. (Abbey, not so incidentally, is delivering a star turn as Ford in The Merry Wives of Windsor this season.)

Although Hildy Johnson is considered the co-lead in the play, and Stratford veteran Ben Carlson is rock solid in the role, Hildy is pretty much the straight man in the play, the fixed center around which the comedy swirls. The real star part belongs to Cookie Burns and Maev Beaty is nothing short of incandescent in the role. Hers is easily the funniest performance at Stratford this season, and she has some stiff competition. Her flat Chicago accent is as impeccable as her comic timing. Her takes and asides are mini master classes in the art of comedy. In fact, the only thing wrong with Beaty’s performance is that it doesn’t begin until the second act.

What makes the play and this production a total joy are the performances of the featured players. As Mollie Malone, Sarah Dodd is heartbreaking, while Johnathan Sousa brings an original take to the small role of the condemned man. Mike Shara hams it up shamelessly (and perfectly) as the bumbling sheriff while Juan Chioran is majestically slimy as the dressed-to-the-nines mayor. Michael Blake is impeccable as the flashy crook Diamond Louis; he is an actor who seems to be able to change voices as easily as he changes costumes. Amelia Sargisson and Rosemary Dunsmore are perfect as, respectively, Hildy’s fiancée and her mother. Of the gang of reporters, Michael Spencer-Davis is first among equals as the prissy Bensinger.

The Front Page is a solid hit for the Festival, one which I can wholeheartedly recommend.

The Front Page  will play in repertory at the Festival Theatre through October 25, 2109.

Stratford Festival
(800) 567-1600

Birds of a Kind at the Stratford Festival – A Review

This season, the Stratford Festival’s Studio Theatre is home to two plays set in the Holy Land, both of them dealing with issues if identity and religious tolerance. They also share most of the same actors, so seeing them both makes for an instructive exercise. Nathan the Wise was written in the eighteenth century and set during the Crusades, while Birds of a Kind is a 2017 play set in the troubled present. Nathan is the better play, but Birds is by far the better production.

Wajdi Mouawad’s Birds of a Kind (translated from the French by Linda Gaboriau) is the result of a commission from Stratford’s artistic director, Antoni Cimolino, who also directs this production. The play is inspired by Natalie Zemon Davis’ book Trickster Travels about al-Hasan ibn Muhammad al-Wazzan, a sixteenth century Moroccan diplomat captured by Christian pirates who, impressed by his obvious erudition, presented him to Pope Leo X as a sort of trophy. He converted to Christianity and became known as Leo Africanus. He went on to write a number of scholarly works including what would become the standard work on Africa until the age of modern exploration. Eventually, he returned to the Maghreb and was lost to history.

Mouawad’s play is not about al-Wazzan himself (although he appears as a dream character). Taking its inspiration from a tale told by al-Wazzan about a bird who is able to live both with its own kind and in the sea with the fishes, moving between the two realms at will, the play asks whether people who exist across a seemingly unbridgeable ethnic, religious, and political divide can coexist. Is it possible to move from one of these worlds to the other as easily as birds fly over walls built out of fear and hatred? Or to exist in both? The answer would seem to be no.

Eitan is a young man studying genetics in New York. His parents, Norah and David, live in Berlin. Norah, is a German Jew; David was born in Israel, came to Berlin as a teen, and now considers himself German. His grandfather, Etgar, is a Holocaust survivor who emigrated to Israel where he married Leah (whose origins are unclear). Wahida is a Moroccan student writing her PhD thesis on al-Wazzan. Eitan and Wahida meet cute in the library at Columbia University and fall in love. Eitan’s parents, David and Norah, are less than enthused by this development (Wahida’s parents are both dead). Eitan’s grandfather Etgar, now estranged from his wife Leah, feels that love is love and is more supportive. After an explosive confrontation at a seder dinner, Eitan is convinced he can’t be related to people like this and, in one of the play’s least plausible devices, spirits away the silverware to do a little DNA analysis.

The tests show that while Eitan is indeed David and Norah’s son, Etgar is not David’s father. With Wahida in tow, Eitan travels to Israel to confront his grandmother and unravel the mystery. Thanks to a terrorist bombing that sends Eitan, comatose, to the hospital, the entire family is reunited in Jerusalem. Wahida, meanwhile, is confronted with the unpleasant reality of being a Muslim in an uneasy Israel. Eventually, the mystery is solved with devastating consequences.

Mouawad has created a gallery of wonderfully vivid characters, each with their own distinct voice, and director Cimolino has elicited terrific performances from all of them. As noted, most of the cast members also appear in Nathan the Wise, but to much less effect. What a difference a great director can make!

Much of the play is given to passionate speechifying by the main characters and while the writing is very good indeed, almost poetic in places, the play is often in danger of collapsing under the weight of its own earnestness. One of Mouawad’s more successful conceits is to have characters speak in Hebrew, German, and Arabic at times; it might seem a bit arch, but thanks to projected subtitles it works beautifully.

Birds of a Kind may prove to be one of the more controversial productions Stratford has ever mounted. Mouawad does not paint a particularly flattering portrait of modern day Israel. One character goes into an extended anti-Arab rant that is chilling in its resemblance to both Nazi rhetoric and the bloviations of present-day “nationalists.” While the politics of the play, such as they are, reflect the consensus of what is loosely considered “the left” in the West, I can see that doctrinaire Zionists, who feel that any criticism of Israel is tantamount to antisemitism, might take offense. Time will tell.

What is less in dispute is the quality of the physical production that Cimolino has given the play. It is the best I can remember seeing in The Studio, a space that imposes definite restrictions on designers. Francesca Callow’s ingenious set, which cleverly includes a perfect place on which to project the translations of the play’s many languages, solves all the problems the space creates, and the simple device that opens the play is magical. Michael Walton’s lighting, Adam Harendorf’s sound design, and Jamie Nesbitt’s projections work together to create one stunning effect after another.

I hesitate to single out individual actors because they are all so good, but I was especially impressed by Sarah Orenstein’s fiery Norah, Alon Nashman’s tortured David, and Jakob Ehman’s effusive Eitan. I hope the Festival will find leading roles for Orenstein in future seasons and that both Nashman and Ehman will be invited back.

Birds of a Kind is not easy theatre — it runs just over three hours for starters — but it will reward the thoughtful theatregoer, especially if seen together with Nathan the Wise. If only Stratford had a good Middle Eastern restaurant where we could gather over meze and mint tea to discuss it all.

Birds of a Kind continues in repertory at the Stratford Festival through October 13, 2019.

Studio Theatre
Stratford Festival
(800) 567-1600

In the Wake of Wettlaufer at The Blyth Festival – A Review

Between 2007 and 2016, Elizabeth Wettlaufer, a registered nurse in Ontario, murdered eight elderly patients under her care and attempted to kill six others. Her weapon was lethal doses of insulin. Astonishingly enough, her crimes were never detected by the institutions and agencies for which she worked. It was only when she entered a drug rehabilitation program and confessed that they came to light. The case sent shock waves through the province and resulted in a prolonged inquiry that produced damning evidence of a criminally dysfunctional health care system. Wettlaufer is currently serving a life sentence with no chance of parole for twenty-five years. Ontario is still dealing with the repercussions.

The Blyth Festival has a history of creating dramatic works that address headline grabbing events in the province. The Pigeon King (2017), for example, was based on a $70 million ponzi scheme involving breeding phony “racing” pigeons. In the Wake of Wettlaufer continues the tradition. But whereas The Pigeon King told the story of how Arlan Galbraith bilked hundreds of farmers, Wettlaufer takes a different tack, one that is devastatingly effective.

Co-authors Gil Garratt and Kelly McIntosh focus not on the criminal and her modus operandi but on the human toll the scandal takes on a single fictional family of four siblings, three daughters and a son, dealing with the dementia of their father and his eventual placement in a long-term care facility. Wettlaufer isn’t even mentioned until almost an hour into the play, when their father is dead and buried. Like everyone else affected by the revelation of Wettlaufer’s confession the siblings learn of the case, not from the nursing home, not from the health authorities, but from the evening news.

The family struggles through settling their father’s estate, which strains their relationships to the breaking point, as details of the failures of the long-term care industry are revealed. The play uses actual recordings from news reports, statements by the Justice of the Court of Appeal who conducted the Public Inquiry, and even the testimony of a survivor of one of Wettlaufer’s attempted murders. It’s powerful stuff.

The siblings in the cast, Caroline Gillis, Nathan Howe, Rachel Jones, and Jane Spidell, are uniformly excellent. I would single out Ms. Spidell only because she was a late addition to the company. Robert King offers a moving and scarily accurate portrait of a man descending into the hell of dementia. Garratt has directed them well on the minimalist set which he also designed. Rebecca Picherack’s lighting does a nice job of easing the transitions between scenes.

By focusing on a single family, Garratt and McIntosh avoid the sensationalism and righteous anger that the topic might suggest or even seem to demand. The Public Inquiry ended with a result guaranteed to please no one who had been affected. No individuals were cited for censure, let alone punishment; rather the broken system was held responsible and recommendations for corrective action laid down. For many of the families whose loved ones were directly affected or who were in long-term care there seemed no sense of closure.

In the Wake of Wettlaufer attempts to provide some semblance of closure and comfort to the Ontario community Blyth serves — and it’s safe to say that virtually everyone who will see this play at Blyth has been affected to a greater or lesser degree by the tragedy. The play ends with a messenger from a higher realm bearing a message of hope and reconciliation. The ancient Greeks used to do this sort of thing and it is from them that we get the word for what Garratt and McIntosh have given us — catharsis.

In the Wake of Wettlaufer plays through September 6, 2019 in repertory with other productions.

Blyth Festival
423 Queen Street
Blyth, ON N0M 1H0
(877) 862-5984

The Team on the Hill at The Blyth Festival – A Review

When it comes to life on the farm, Dan Needles knows whereof he speaks. Needles, the scion of Canadian theatre royalty and something of a national treasure, is best known as the creator of Wingfield Farm, a series of wryly humorous tales of rural life in Ontario. They started as newspaper pieces and evolved into seven one-man shows that have become something of a sinecure for Stratford Festival veteran Rod Beattie. They are all on DVD and well worth seeking out.

Needles has also written a number of actual plays and the Blyth Festival is reviving his 2013 The Team on the Hill in a spirited production under the steady direction of Severn Thompson, Blyth’s Associate Artistic Director. If the audience reaction at the last preview, which I saw, is any indication it will be a major hit — and deservedly so.

The Ransier family is at a crossroads. The farm, which has a magnificent view of Lake Huron, has come through a bruising period of debt and near disaster thanks to some poor decisions by grandpa Austin, whose love of farming often outstripped his business sense. His son Ray had fled the farm to work on the ships plying the Great Lakes, but he came home to rescue his father from ruin. His many years of hard work have paid off — barely — but the strain has taken its toll. He is angry and bitter and sorely tempted to sell the place to a developer who wants to turn it into a golf course.

As the play begins, son Larry, fresh out of Ag school, returns with his girlfriend Leanne. He loves farming as much as his grandfather and wants to come back and set the farm to rights with his newfound knowledge of the benefits of soy bean cultivation (the play is set in 1970). Grandpa, meanwhile, has started down the slippery slope of dementia and spends his time on the porch seeing things that aren’t there.

This might sound like the kind of scenario that John Steinbeck would turn into an operatic spectacle of despair. Needles doesn’t turn away from the very real pressures his characters face, but he unfailingly finds humour in their travails and reveals the deep and abiding love that ties the family together even when they are having screaming fights and breaking things in their fury. The result is a heartfelt and heartwarming comedy that provides plenty of laughs and, yes, a tear or two.

In Austin, the family patriarch, Needles has created the kind of rich comic character who, like Falstaff in the Elizabethan era, leaves audiences wanting more of his company. He is the heart and soul of the play and Layne Coleman gives him the kind of bravura performance that for once makes the standing ovation at the curtain call perfectly appropriate.

Coleman’s performance alone would warrant a trip to Blyth, but Thompson has surrounded him with lovely performances by Julie Tamiko Manning as Marion, Ray’s loving, long-suffering wife, Tony Munch as Ray, and Kurtis Leon Baker as Larry. Lucy Meanwell, as the girlfriend, has little to do but look adorable and she pulls that off nicely.

Kelly Wolf has provided a clever set with a revolving farmhouse, Noah Feaver has lit it sensitively, and sound designer Heidi Chan has provided unobtrusive music to fit the period.

Then again, as someone once said, the play’s the thing, and Needles has created a loving portrait of the world of Ontario farming and the special breed of people who inhabit it. It was clear to me, who wouldn’t know a soy bean if I fell over it, that the audience had a deep connection with the world on stage. Indeed, The Team on the Hill represents the epitome of Blyth’s mandate, to produce new Canadian work on rural themes and in a rural setting. Once again I find myself urging my fellow Americans to come north to enjoy the kind of terrific theatre that will probably never be seen south of the Poutine Curtain.

The Team on the Hill plays through September 5, 2019 in repertory with other productions.

Blyth Festival
423 Queen Street
Blyth, ON N0M 1H0
(877) 862-5984

Twelve Angry Men at Drayton Entertainment – A Review

Reginald Rose’s reliable workhorse, Twelve Angry Men, is receiving a stunning, Broadway-quality production from Drayton Entertainment, whose repertory typically leans more to Disney musicals and British farces than to searing drama. Seeing a dramatic piece of this quality in the modest but comfortable confines of Drayton’s Huron Country Playhouse II near the shores of Lake Huron just outside Grand Bend, Ontario, simply proves that great theatre is everywhere if we only seek it out.

Twelve Angry Men began life in 1954 as a live television drama (boy, those were the days!), which became a hit Broadway show a year later. The 1957 film version became a classic. It tells the story of a New York jury deciding the fate of a 16-year-old minority kid (the play never specifies his ethnicity) accused of the first-degree murder of his father. The jurors, cannily identified by Rose only by their jury numbers, are a cross-section of white, male New York. In the initial vote, eleven are in favor of finding the defendant guilty. Only Juror #8 has “reasonable doubt.”

As their deliberations continue, tempers flare, lines are drawn, and prejudices revealed in sometimes ugly ways as the men’s true natures are inexorably laid bare. Rose handles all this beautifully, making it all the more startling for a present-day audience to believe that this was the sort of thing people could once see on the “idiot box.” Despite its 1950s setting, nothing in it seems dated. The only “updating” I detected was that no one smokes.

This is a production that would be the critical success of the season at the Shaw or Stratford Festival. That’s probably not too surprising considering that many in the superb cast are veterans of those august institutions. The director, Marti Maraden, has acted and directed at Stratford, and for a brief time shared artistic director responsibilities with Des McAnuff and Don Shipley. She has assembled a flawless ensemble cast and directed them with a sure hand.

The play has a few “star” roles. As Juror #8, Skye Brandon does a masterful job of chipping away at the certainty of his fellow jurors. Brad Rudy, Juror #10, is positively volcanic as perhaps the angriest of the bunch; his extended racist rant is harrowing and, alas, just as timely today as it was in the mid-50s. And Benedict Campbell, Juror #3, is absolutely shattering as his real motivation to see this kid “fry” is made painfully clear.

But there is literally not a weak link in the entire cast. Even those who have the fewest lines illustrate the timeless axiom that there are no small parts. So I will simply list the rest of the company in their Juror Number order: Jacob James, Cyrus Lane, Jeffrey Wetsch, Thomas Duplessie, Terry Barna, Kevin Kruchkywich, Keith Dinicol, Neil Barclay, and J. Sean Elliott. All of them are excellent and, as a native New Yorker, I was also impressed by the perfect New York accents.

Allan Wilbee’s clever set perfectly captures the drabness of New York’s halls of justice and Jennifer Wonnacott has provided spot-on costumes.

It also occurred to me that, while a production of this quality might deserve to grace the better-known stages of Stratford and Shaw, it simply could not be mounted at either. The multicultural, gender-balanced nature of their ensembles would make it virtually impossible to field an all-white cast of this size and this is a play that is very much about lily-white 1950s America. Then, too, there would almost certainly be institutional pressure to cast some of the roles (maybe fifty percent?) with women, despite the fact that the toxic masculinity of most of the jurors is very much the point. These days it is becoming increasingly difficult to see a production of a “classic” play that hasn’t undergone at least some revisions dictated by the socio-political winds blowing through the theatre world. Maraden’s reading of Twelve Angry Men is that rarest of theatrical treats, a classic play that hews closely to the original vision of the playwright.

Twelve Angry Men plays at the Huron Country Playhouse II through August 3, 2019. It then moves to the Hamilton Family Theatre in Cambridge from August 7 through August 24, 2019.

Drayton Entertainment
(855) 372-9866

The Russian Play at The Shaw Festival – A Review

A “like-a-joke” is a dismissive term of art in the world of TV sitcoms. It denotes a snippet of dialog that is structured like a joke, that is recognized as a joke, that triggers the laugh track, but that is not actually funny. To my way of thinking Hannah Moscovitch writes like-a-plays. I should temper that nasty crack by admitting that I have only seen two of her plays, The Russian Play and Bunny. Neither seemed to have much of interest to say.

The Russian Play, now playing as a morning one-act in the Royal George Theatre at The Shaw Festival, tells the story of Sonya (Gabriella Sundar Singh), an illiterate peasant girl working as a menial in a Stalin-era flower shop. She falls in love with Piotr (Peter Fernandes), a grave digger, who gets her pregnant and, thoughtfully, gives her an abortion and helps bury the fetus. She discovers that Piotr has a wife in Moscow and to add insult to injury she gets fired for spending so much time with her grave digger. She flees to another city where she becomes the mistress of Kostya (Mike Nadajewski), a kulak, a member of a wealthy peasant class, who has dodged the Stalinist purges of these ”enemies of the people” by cozying up to the secret police. When the affair goes sour, Sonya finds herself in the clutches of the secret police; she is tortured and sent to prison where she reconnects with Piotr who is now kept busy digging graves for the ever growing ranks of state enemies. Piotr tells her that his wife is dead and that she is the only one he loves. She dies in his arms and he buries her. A sad tale, indeed; a peculiarly Russian story as Sonya tells us.

You see Sonya also serves as both narrator and commentator on the action, breaking the fourth wall with some regularity to provide us with regular often amusing bulletins. Another, wordless character, the Violinist (Marie Mahabal) serves as an additional commentator, perhaps meant to symbolize Sonya’s inner self. When Sonya’s heart breaks, the Violinist shakes a box full of fragments of something or other and bangs it on the floor. The cast, for reasons that were unclear to me, speak in thick Russian accents. These devices tend to drain the main action of whatever emotional impact it might otherwise have had.

So what’s the point? That love stinks? Sonya says as much, but the J. Geils Band said it better. That Stalinist Russia was a nightmare? It needs no ghost come from the grave to tell us this. There’s plenty of sound and fury in Moscovitch’s piece and while she is certainly no idiot it winds up signifying very little.

Director Diana Donnelly has given the play a lively production, with a nice design by Gillian Gallow and effective lighting by Michelle Ramsay. Sundar Singh throws herself into the role of Sonya but has trouble navigating the shifts from character to narrator to ironic commentator and back again. She is at her best in the brief moments in which she mimics her cruel boss at the flower shop. Mike Nadajewski turns in his usual assured performance as Kostya but it is too little too late.

The Russian Play was an early effort by Moskovitch, one that established her reputation. It shows promise and I look forward to seeing a later play of hers in which that promise is realized.

The Russian Play runs through October 12, 2019

The Shaw Festival
(800) 511-7429
(905) 468-2172