30 years of Shakespeare! And if that were not enough, St. Louis
Shakespeare this year has completed the canon, including the questionable and
hardly ever performed Edward III. And
the last play to complete the cycle - Henry VI, parts 1, 2 and 3! This series
of 3 plays is also not often performed in the US. This is not too terribly surprising
considering that the history that is covered is very foreign to most Americans,
not to mention the length. A company
like St. Louis Shakespeare only does 3 to 4 plays a year and to mount all three
parts would not be very prudent. So,
what do to? Well, combine the plays into
a single evening of theater, of course! And so I
had the great pleasure of experiencing this version of Henry VI, all 3 parts
combined into one play. Frankly it made
for a long evening, 3 and a half hours with two intermissions. It also turns out to be a bit of a slog
through the 50 years of the reign of Henry VI in which there are endless
battles, political posturing and betrayal all while the kindly, peace-loving
and religious Henry VI completely looses control and falls apart.
I cannot criticize the company for deciding to do these 3 plays as one,
but I think it would have been better to make it into two plays, as many scenes
had to be very shortened and important characters dropped completely (like John
of Bedford, Henry V’s practical and competent brother who was the regent of
France). It made it a little hard to
follow the myriad historical events, and I have an advantage as I have spent a
lot of time studying all of that. (Note - The "Hollow Crown" series of the BBC has announced they will in fact be filming Henry VI as two parts. The cast will include Benedict Cumberbach as Richard III).
However, better one play than none. Perhaps listing the cast of characters in
order of appearance (and thus in historical order) or including a list of
events covered in the program might have helped. But be that as it may, despite the operatic
scope of this version it was a delight and a joy to get to see this work performed
on the stage. I had seen it once before
in a live stream from the Barnet battlefield where the Globe Theater on tour
was performing all three plays back to back – a 7 hour marathon in the pouring
rain! Watching last night I was reminded
that this (these?) play(s) include some of Shakespeare’s most powerful
and beautiful scenes and also some most interesting characters. The “paper crown” scene is an incredibly
powerful scene, Young Clifford’s murder of Edmund Rutland, the trial and
punishment of the Duchess of Gloucester and then the amazing scene where
Shakespeare juxtaposes a son who has killed his father and a father who has
killed his son in the idiotic violence of the War of Roses are scenes that are unique and emotionally gripping. And not only that but how often do we hear
actresses complain (justifiably) about the dearth of good female
roles in Shakespeare. Well, they should
immediately start advocating for more performances of the Henry VI cycle which
contains several incredible women: Joan of Arc (Joan la Pucelle), Eleanor, The Duchess of
Gloucester and the tour de force role of Margaret of Anjou along with several
interesting smaller roles: Elizabeth Woodville (here known as Lady Gray) and
Margret Jourdain the Medium.
Three and a half hours of Shakespeare history
could have easily become interminable if it weren’t for the inventive and fast
paced production and the excellent acting.
I really enjoyed this performance and thought the cast did a great job,
across the board. They are, I believe, a
mixture of students, amateurs and semi-pros (if I am wrong about that I
apologize) – but there was nothing amateurish about this performance. The fighting was well practiced and effective
and the characterizations very profound from the leading characters even
extending to some of the smaller roles.
Shannon Lampkin, for example, was very effective as the medium Margret
Jourdain, quite beguiling as Lady Gray and then pathetic as the palsied
Lord Say. I cannot possibly name
everyone, but I hate to leave anyone out so let me say that I felt that there
was nary a weak link in the cast. There
were standouts though and at the top of the list has to be Jeff Lloyd who took
on the role of King Henry VI, a man who was as unsuited for kingship
as any in the history of England. By the
end, when Henry has unraveled and witnesses the above mentioned scene between
the son and father Jeff’s emotional engagement was very moving. Maggie Winniger was quite effective as the
almost equally unhinged Margaret of Anjou - her complete lack of empathy at the
bloody evidence of the murder of the child Rutland, her pathological delight in
cruelly taunting York in the paper crown scene and then her bitter despair as
she is forced to watch her own son murdered before her eyes were some of the most powerful scenes in this production.
I also really enjoyed the work of Tim
Callahan as Talbot and the boys Alex Bollini and Dan Haller who played several
different roles. The drive for vengeance of the Young Clifford of Michael
Pierce and the unreasonable hate and power lust of Maxwell Knocke were also
notable. Katie Warnusz-Steckel was outstanding
as Joan la Pucelle as Shakespeare gives us a rather questionable character of
dubious motivation and morality – of course, considering who he was writing
for. It is in this character that
Shakespeare drifts far afield of actual historical fact. Oh, along with his depiction of Richard, Duke
of Gloucester – the future Richard III – who becomes a complete villain in this
play and the following Richard III – also not supported by historical
fact. But who cares, it makes for great
theater. Andrew Bayer almost made me
wish they had continued into Richard III - ah, almost – it was 11:30 PM by then and
I had an hour and a half drive home. But
he captured wonderfully the evil of this Shakespearean creation. And I enjoyed his delivering the opening sentence
of the Richard III – “Now is the winter of our discontent.” It worked well to wrap up the long evening
and point us ahead.
I have to mention the creative casting of
Teresa Doggett as the Earl of Warwick, the Kingmaker. At first, before the play began I wondered
if they were going to make the character a woman, which I don’t think would
have worked. No, she played the character
as male and she was outstanding. I
noticed at first because of the pitch of her voice, but after about 3 minutes I
completely forgot and it no longer mattered.
She was very effective in this role.
One little quibble – I am not sure why the
director chose to keep the Bishop of Winchester (played very effectively by Charles Heuvelman) in his liturgical robes for the
duration of his extensive role. But I
found that distracting. It was certainly
appropriate for scene 1 at the funeral of Henry V, but he should have changed
to a cardinal’s cassock. No cleric goes
around wearing liturgical vestments all the time, they are only worn during
worship and liturgical functions. I should also mention the object of the good Bishop's hate: Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, the youngest son of Henry Bolingbrook and brother to Henry Monmouth, played wonderfully by Jared Sanz-Agero. I loved his scenes with Margeau Baue Steinau, they were very moving and beautifully performed.
To conclude I want to say that I really
enjoyed this performance. Well done to
all the cast and I will be anxious to see where you go now in the next 30
years!
No comments:
Post a Comment