Attending AXIS Theatre last week for the opening of its revival of WASHINGTON SQUARE, a play by company Artistic Director Randy Sharp, I felt I was walking on hallowed ground. The beautifully refurbished and updated scene of Charles Ludlam’s uproarious, revolutionary, and thought-provoking “theatrical crimes against Nature” Ridiculous Theatrical Company had a visceral impact on me, thirtyfive years after his demise.
Acknowledged or not, Charles Ludlam’s disruptive influence is bearing fruit in modern comic performance and Arts activism, and his Ridiculous Theatrical Company, no longer a maverick outlier, is taking its rightful place in theatre history and academic curricula. I was bombarded with memories of his BLUEBEARD, CAMILLE, and SALAAMBO, and was ready to see some Theatre, with a capital ”T.”
AXIS is a long-term resident of this theatre, the company having acquired it in 1998, and has reshaped it to conform to its needs. The madcap, improvisatory, Ludlam performance occasions which took place in a purposely crumbling environment have been replaced by sleek, professional-looking, productions in a flexible, open space. Money has been spent on modernizing both the theatre itself and its public spaces, and spent well.
The lights went up on a very handsome minimalist scene, created by the AXIS resident designers. Lavish costumes by Karl Ruckdeschel and a pair of handsome chairs, courtesy of Properties Designer Lynn Mancinelli, formed the entirety of the unit set - yes, I look at those important costumes as scenery - all sensitively lit by Lighting Designer David Zeffren. Very smart and attractive post-classical/eclectic music by Paul Carbonara, nicely played by cellist Samuel Quiggins, was the periodic soundtrack. The result was a very appealing and glossy visual patina, a suggestive and atmospheric backdrop for the work of the
four devoted actors who comprised the cast of this new, miniaturized, version of Henry James’ story.
Almost immediately, my “A-Ha” moment began, as Dee Pelletier’s meticulous work unfurled. An actor’s actor, debuting at AXIS, she demonstrated rigorous discipline, subtle discrimination, liberal imagination, and bountiful generosity. With apparent ease, Ms. Pelletier encompassed the long arc of Penniman’s character, from flighty sycophancy to self-interested depravity. I did not want to take my eyes off her, since she was making every moment count with the grace, logic, and inevitability of a suite of Baroque dances.
In addition to her mastery of the serious elements of her role, she is a fresh comic voice, and at times side-splittingly funny. Imagine the impossible love child of Cloris Leachman, Glenn Close, Madeline Kahn, Edna May Oliver, and Maria Ouspenskaya. Need I say more…I might just go in pouring rain to hear her read soggy menus retrieved out of a rusted dumpster. That her offstage activities include membership in Michael Miller’s elite Actors Center comes as no surprise. Water proverbially finds its own level.
The cast of four was filled out by three lovely actors, each of whom, unlike debutante Pelletier, has a long association with AXIS.
George Demas (The Doctor), has been invited very often to perform with the company, and one can easily see why. Quite the useful actor, in his portrayal of The Doctor he delivered a classic, easily recognizable, one might say stock, character, all the while humanizing and individuating it. With excellent command of language and accent, his performance of the given material was, I found, quite bulletproof.
Jon McCormick (Morris Townsend) was the picture of a dissipated would-be gigolo, on the verge of going to seed. Polite and courtly to a fault - until he wasn’t – he effectively projected a profound licentiousness that revealed itself more and more fully as his veneer wore increasingly thin.
Britt Genelin (Catherine) brought sensitivity and fine technique to her pivotal role. Her Catherine was an enfant sauvage, a genius idiot, a prisoner of unarticulated desires, never passive, and driven by her need for simple truths.
Henry James has not fared particularly well in adaptation. Even Benjamin Britten’s chamber-scale operatic masterpiece, THE TURN OF THE SCREW, is not without its questionable stretches.
THE HEIRESS, the 1947 Ruth and Augustus Goetz play, and the movie it inspired, William Wyler’s sumptuous 1949 film of the same name, are the current torchbearers for the Washington Square story. Each is frequently seen and each remains, to greater or lesser degree, well-respected.
Both the play and film have serious virtues, and even more serious are their flaws. One might suppose that a new version would be more than welcome, and provide an excellent and much-desired chance to penetrate further into the personality factors of the characters who have consistently sustained our interest since 1880, when the book by James was published.
In the absence of a program note from the author/director - a very serious omission - I am forced to conjecture about the raison d’etre of this new version, its aims, and its justification. There is also no indication anywhere that Sharp’s WASHINGTON SQUARE is a work in progress - indeed, all evidence points to the contrary - and so I must regard it as a finished work.
Sharp’s play has inherited many of the flaws of its antecedents, and somehow, unfortunately, it has evaded many of the virtues.
Sharp’s writing is facile. The words are generally consistent in the selected linguistic style, and they appear to trip off the tongue easily enough. This facility is both a pro and a con. Too often in this WASHINGTON SQUARE deep feeling and incisive thought hide out in a disguise of sonorous, if stylistically imitative, wordplay.
What is missing?
Poignancy: the ability to break hearts.
Penetration: the ability to stun.
Power: the ability to climax.
At times this play seems more like a dry commentary on the subject, punctuated with sly inferences, rather than a new, more profound, version of it. There is so much narrative, retelling what has already happened in another place, at another time, that those conversations begin to sound like a group of friends who have gotten together to tell jokes to which they already know the punch line. The onstage action proportionally diminishes in significance and becomes flattened and turgid. There were too many times when crescendo to forte was avoided in favor of continuing in an innocuous mezzopiano.
Writing for reduced forces would seem to demand increased, not lessened, intensity, and would appear to be a golden opportunity for a playwright to write harrowing, soul-searching, monologues which reveal insights into unthought-of aspects of the characters. There were none of these that I could find.
One example of this tepid approach involves the theoretical lead, Catherine. Rather than expanding the range of the character, Sharp has put her in a much smaller box. Vivid colors become tones of beige. The character of Catherine is rooted in Pushkin’s Tatiana. Catherine, like her progenitor, must travel metaphorical “miles barefoot in the snow” to achieve her metamorphosis from timid girl to mature, powerful woman. This play takes her across the street in her comfy Adidas. The scene of her abandonment by Maurice barely existed. This is a baffling and unforgivable evasion of storytelling responsibility. Sharp has worked professionally as a writer, and I would have thought she might have had technique sufficient to dominate, rather than sidestep, the turning point of the story.
Another example: The theme of sexuality. Attraction, sensuality, seduction, manipulation, suggestiveness all are central to the story. They are the hinges on which it turns. All are non-negotiable, but these were treated in a manner so indirect and bland as to render the writing prudish.
Structurally, the lugubrious pace of the erratic plot exposition assumed too much foreknowledge of the viewer. Relationships and situations were not clearly defined until the proceedings were well along. The audience member who was not already acquainted with the story was out of luck, also because there was also no plot synopsis in the program booklet - another serious omission.
Puzzled and in disagreement as I am with the writer/director’s viewpoint and character delineations, I found that the pragmatic traffic direction of the to-and-fro was, if conventionally academic, generally efficient, and the actors appeared fully committed to it. It was good, solid, company work, and what success the evening had was due to these factors, and of course the lovely design, which gave even ”making bricks without straw” a professional sheen.
With the Goetz play and Wyler movie aging, gracefully it is true, but undeniably aging, as their Diamond Jubilee comes and goes, one might think the timing for a new telling of this complex story is already overdue. I have certainly felt the need, and I would welcome one. Sharp’s version of the Washington Square story, sadly, is not the one.
WASHINGTON SQUARE runs now through October 29. Schedule information and ticket orders via the AXIS website: https://axiscompany.org AXIS THEATRE COMPANY