It’s really a fascinating play, about a black film actress (Vera Stark) in the 1930s, and how one decision affected her life and the future perceptions of her career. The two acts are presented in completely different styles: the first act is almost a screwball comedy about the casting of a Gone With the Wind-type picture, then the second act takes place 40 years later, at a retrospective of Vera’s career. Having the two acts played in completely different styles is a fascinating stylistic choice—it’s as if Nottage is asking us to look at the ideas she’s presenting in different ways, first through the heart and then through the head. As we watch the first act fly by, and we see what everyone is willing to do to get a part in the picture, we laugh and empathize. But when we watch the second act, and hear ‘academics’ talk about the ramifications of what everyone was willing to do, it makes you stop and think.
When you think about intelligent black women purposefully accepting film roles as slaves or servants just so they can work, you can sympathize (the characters glee when they talk about a movie with ‘slaves? WITH LINES??’ is really funny). But then when the women are excoriated for perpetuating stereotypes in film, you wonder—wait, can we blame them for wanting to work? Was it their fault there was nothing else to play? I think Nottage is trying to make so many points in this play that maybe it’s hard to juggle them all, but the play is a great ride nonetheless. Vera has a great line, something like, “So I should’ve turned down those ‘demeaning’ roles and ACTUALLY cleaned toilets for a living? Because I had to make a living.” As usual, Lynn has written terrific dialogue for interesting people with big ideas. Love that.
 |
| photo credit: Sara Krulwich |
The physical production is lovely, though I do think the scene changes added a bit of unnecessary length to the evening. The interspersed film snippets are terrific and Jo Bonney has directed with wit and snap. This is smart smart stuff and so well worth a look.
Last night was my second subscription performance at ABT. They were doing a mixed repertory program, with three premieres and one Tudor ballet from the 70s. I really have a hard time describing and judging these new pieces, since I'm a plot girl and most of these are abstract. I'm guessing most of the subscribers are plot girls, too, because attendance was rather sparse. Certainly not packed like at Don Quixote last weekend. But, anyway, I definitely had an affinity for one piece over the others.
The first, Dumbarton, was by ABT's artist-in-residence, Alexei Ratmansky. The music was by Stravinsky. For me, a little Stravinsky goes a long way, and it was like that in this piece. Ten members of the company (no principals at my performance) danced very attractively. It's very rhythmically intricate, with lots of steps to lots of music notes (oh, I'm such a great critic!)--always moving but there seemed to be little meaning behind the movement. And if it was supposed to be totally abstract, it was a little too realistic. But I admired it, especially the male-male couple's pas de deux.
Next was Benjamin Millepied's Troika, which had three terrific male dancers, seemingly casually (and effortlessly) cavorting around the stage. I liked the stage pictures and thought it was clever that everytime one gent tried to start a solo, the other guys slowly came on stage and joined in. The music was Bach, played by a lone cellist, who was onstage. One gent took a tumble, which I don't think was part of the choreography, but otherwise, it was very well done.
The third piece was Anthony Tudor's Shadowplay, with music by Charles Koechlin. I have to say I didn't really enjoy this one, even though it ostensibly had a 'plot,' a rite of passage for a young man in the jungle. The music was too atonal for me, the choreography a little too on-the-nose, and it seemed pretty long. It was extremely well-danced, though, with Daniil Simkin as the young man and Sarah Lane as his temptress. Their pas de deux was lovely, though I felt so badly for her when a gent from the corps got a little too close to her and knocked her off-pointe. But she recovered nicely. All I can say is, when it was over, I thought to myself, well, I'll never have to see that one again. Sorry.
The last piece was my favorite, Christopher Wheeldon's Thirteen Diversions, with music by Benjamin Britten. Here we had four lead couples, in gorgeous grey silky costumes, supported by eight other couples, in gorgeous black silky costumes. The four lead couples had gorgeous choreography in their pas de deux, and the lighting was actually amazing, almost like another character in the piece. There was one bit of choreography that I'm not quite sure how they accomplished without knocking each other over. Maybe because this piece was the most 'classical' in form is why I liked it. But like it, I did. I wouldn't mind seeing it again.
Oh, and a note on my seat neighbors: the gals sitting next to me talked during the entire performance, but not during the intermissions. I found that odd. And annoying. And the gent behind me made audible 'mmmmmmmmmmmmm' sounds whenever men partnered each other. Since these were contemporary pieces, there was a lot of that. And a lot of 'mmmmmmmmmmmmm' sounds behind me. Why can't people be quiet and let me watch my ballet in peace?!?!?!?! Hee.
In tennis news, Roger looked formidable this morning. Let's hope he keeps it up. :)
No comments:
Post a Comment