March 27, 2024.

Not a rant, but some thoughts on Theatre Criticism:

There seems to be a lot of confused talk about theatre critics and theatre criticism lately, mostly by those who don’t actually know what the point and purpose is of theatre criticism. There is an effort to make it a ‘them (the artist) vs. us (the critics)’ situation, when in fact it is an us (both together) for the artform of ‘theatre.’  Let me try and help clarify what a review is; who it’s for; and why reviews are important, for those who are confused.  I’m only speaking for myself, as I always do.

I have some experience here for context: I studied theatre history and theatre criticism at York University in a four-year undergraduate honours program, History, Theory and Criticism of Theatre. The basis of the program was the European tradition of theatre, the roots in this case. And from that background one can broaden one’s focus. But also added to that basis were many courses of “Non-traditional Theatre”, which led to studying the Noh and Kabuki Theatre of Japan, which led to Chinese Opera, which lead to South Asian Theatre, puppetry and mask from Indonesia, works from South Africa and Kenya, which led to South America. European theatre was the beginning that led to other cultures.

I took theatre courses in other areas of theatre for a grounding: design, stage management work etc. No desire or talent in that. I learned in a high school production I can’t act. Don’t want to. Moving on. I took courses in other artforms for context (dance history in my case).  I was lucky to have such a wealth of available knowledge in my education. And I discovered my calling of theatre criticism when we had to write an analysis of a character in a play and what the set would look like, in second year. That was enough. I found my passion.

The beauty of a solid, broad-reaching theatre/life education is that we learn the basics of the craft and art, taught by caring, rigorous teachers who then challenge our ideas to see that they are well founded and supported. A critical or positive comment without example is just blather. Further to this comment, in my Theatre Criticism Course we had to write weekly reviews for marking and comment. I recall one in particular: I got the review back marked, with comments. Over the first four paragraphs my Theatre Criticism Professor wrote the word “drivel.” I remember blushing and being embarrassed at the comment. Then I took a breath and looked carefully at the four paragraphs to see what he was talking about. And he was right. It was drivel, self-indulgent, waffly and lacking in the proper rigor needed. Fortunately, I learned life skills to cope with criticism, harsh comments, and learn from it to be a better critic. Life skills—they are important to help one cope with life in all its variations.

I was smitten with the theatre at 12 and have been going steadily to the theatre ever since.  My reviews have been published in various publications since 1972. I did reviews on CBC Radio’s Here and Now for 10 years and since 2011 have done reviews weekly on CIUT.fm, first for CIUT Friday Morning and now Critics Circle. I also publish my own theatre blog The Slotkin Letter that contains my reviews of what I see in Toronto, environs, New York, London, and elsewhere.  

I find that writing reviews is the best way of spreading my enthusiasm for theatre. It’s also the best way of informing the reader, and one hopes to create a better, more observant audience. A better, more discerning audience improves the artform.

What is a theatre review?

Ideally, the critic tries to move toward an objective, arm’s length evaluation about a piece of theatre that has affected the critic subjectively. Again, that objectivity should be based on their training and the nature of the work. We all have likes and dislikes. The trick is not to let personal feelings, friendships or animosity get in the way of being fair in the assessment. That’s what I mean by objective.  I review on the basis of merit, not taste. If I have a bias, I say so. How the play affected me emotionally is not what a rigorous review is about. I think of E.B. White’s wonderful poem “THE CRITIC” as the example:

                                    The Critic leaves at curtain fall

                                    To find in starting to review it,

                                    He scarcely saw the play at all

                                    For watching his reaction to it.

Exactly.  

The opinions vary according to the critic’s background in the art of theatre, knowledge of theatre history, theory, life experience, theatre-going experience, education, gender, age etc. When watching the work, we try and figure out the intention of the playwright and director (putting ourselves in their shoes, but at a remove) and then assessing if it worked or not in terms of the play.

The opinion is based on sound background in the art of theatre and how to make an assessment about the work based on that background. And a critical assessment of the work is imperative in a review—I don’t mean the opinion has to be negative; I mean the work has to be assessed with rigor to come to an evaluation of the work.

We listen to the playwright tell their story from their point of view, their background etc., but we  hear the story from our point of view, how it references our background, no matter how different, how we apply their story to our experiences. That’s how so many different stories bridge the gap of our differences and join us in our similarities.

Mixed into this is education, life experience, ability to analyze and making comment about the positive aspects of the work followed by constructive suggestions on how to improve or make the work stronger, if necessary. These aren’t complaints, these should be sound constructive criticism. I see my role as telling the truth about the evaluation of the event in a fair-minded, respectful, entertaining way so that the quality, flavour, story, artistry and the many other elements of a show are conveyed to the reader. A review without rigor helps nobody.

The theatre has survived and thrived for 2500 years because of the rigor from the creators and the commentators. To do less and expect less is an invitation to mediocrity.

Involved initially is the story: what is the play about? This does not mean a whole repetition of the play’s events. It’s more a precis, first to get the reader to continue reading the review, but without giving any surprises away. Ideally the review should be the impetus to get the reader to buy a ticket to see the show for themselves, if they haven’t already seen it.

The review states where the play is in the context of the playwright’s work? How does the work reflect the world of the play and the world we live in? What’s the point of the play? Was it worth doing? All these assessments take time, rigor, education (in my case at least), frequent theatre going, and love of the form, endless love, even when disappointed and huge celebration when it’s terrific.

A review is a record of the theatrical event citing all the details of the play, performance and creative aspects of it. A heart emoji or the word “Awesome” on a tweet just doesn’t cover the attention a work of theatre deserves. People worked hard in creating the work. It deserves diligence and fairmindedness in the assessment. It’s possible to nurture the creators and still be constructively praising and critical.

Who is the review for?

It’s for the audience.

The audience—seemingly the most maligned, disparaged, disrespected, insulted, forgotten group in the theatre these days. Someone has to speak for them. For me, that’s the critic. As an example, the audience shows up ready to be attentive to the work and often an artist comes into the audience’s safe space without asking consent. Consent applies to the audience as much as it does to individuals in other instances.   

The review is not to explain the theory and analysis to the playwright, director or any of the creatives, of their story, ritual, ceremony, celebration, culture, ethnicity or any other thing that get confused in the review. It’s for the audience. That’s where the critic/reviewer is sitting, ‘imbedded’ if you will. And for me, sitting in the audience is the only place the critic should be imbedded. (If the critic is observing from anywhere else and close to the creative process of the playmakers for example, then it’s more like “in-bedded” or even “in-breded”). The critic conveys what it was/is like to be in the audience observing the play; to explain the meaning/point of the play from their point of view; who’s in it and how successful everybody was in their respective parts.

Understood, is that the review should serve the artform. Or at least should be understood, since so many seem to forget that.  

How to prepare.

Ideally the critic has the education of theatre history as background. I try and read the text of the play if it’s available. I research the playwright, director, history of the play, context, actors, and the theatre it’s in.

I’m finding that some companies want to ‘educate’ the critic by having us go to a lecture on the background of the play; the context of its creation; the story behind the creation; the culture of the playwright. This is very well intentioned and totally inappropriate, and a conflict of interest, to say the least.  In these instances, one is being told the intention of the creators instead of discovering them, without influence, on one’s own, by watching the play. If the play can’t convey all that was intended by the creators, then they have failed. If I can help it, I don’t go to talk-backs for the same reason (unless trapped in the row and the talk-back happens immediately after the show without letting people leave). The audience might want to know the creators/playwright’s/actors’ intention, but for the critic, that is the job of the play. And if I can’t figure out the intension of the playwright by watching the play, I should say so.

Advice from theatre makers:

When I was a student I interviewed actors/theatre makers etc. on their opinions of critics and criticism. It was a great education. Here are the questions and answers of Sada Thompson, theatre/tv actress, doing a show on tour at the Royal Alexandra Theatre in the 1970s. It still stands up after all these years.

1. Do you read reviews?

“I do not read reviews when they first come out. Usually after the show closes. Tho I did read a good many on the road. I’m inclined to believe descriptions of what you do, how you look etc. make most actors self-conscious”.

• Do you have a favourite critic?

“I have no favorite (She was American) contemporary critics—since I don’t know the bulk of any critic’s work—who is writing today. I love to read criticism of the past—Hazlitt, Shaw, Beerbohm, Stark Young, Agate, Henry James.”

• What’s the critic’s purpose?

“The critic’s purpose generally is to encourage or discourage people about seeing a play or performance or both. But there are critics who not only discuss immediate impressions—but have a sense of where creative work stands in its own time and in relation to the past and to the future. Who know something about all the arts and can appreciate and discuss how they are used in theatre.”

• What’s the critic’s responsibility?

“The responsibility of the critic is to tell the truth, to give the work they judge their full attention, to try to be fair as far and they are able, to ignore fashion. To have a love of the theatre and some vision about its possibilities. To find the art in themselves and not themselves in the art.”

• Final words of advice.

Educate yourself. Read about and see as much theatre as you can. And if you get jaded by it all, quit.”

Sound advice to this day.

Happy World Theatre Day.

Lynn

NOTE: Respectful comments are accepted on this site as long as they are accompanied by a verifiable name and a verifiable e-mail address. Posts that are slanderous, libelous or personally derogatory will not be approved.

{ 3 comments }

Live and in person at the Yonge Centre for the Performing Arts, a Soulpepper and Obsidian Theatre Co-production. Plays until March 24, 2024.

www.soulpepper.ca

Written by Inua Ellams

After Chekhov

Directed by Mumbi Tindyebwa Otu

Set by Joanna Yu

Costume by Ming Wong

Lighting by Andre du Toit

Sound design and composition by John Gzowski

Vocal music coach and arrangement, additional composition, Adekunle Olorundare (Kunle)

Movement director, Esie Mensah

Cast: Akosua Amo-Adem

Virgilia Griffith

Daren A. Herbert

Sterling Jarvis

JD Leslie

Tawiah M’Carthy

Ngabo Nabea

Oyin Oladejo

Makambe K Simamba

Odena Stephens-Thompson

Amaka Umeh

Matthew G. Brown

A powerful re-imagining of Chekhov’s play set around the Biafra Civil War with familial complications driving the action. A terrific production of a bristling play.

The Story. Playwright Inua Ellams took Chekhov’s play, Three Sistersand reshaped it for his own purposes, but still keeping the form of the original.

In Chekhov’s play three sisters reminisce and lament moving from Moscow with their commander-soldier father to a small outpost. They have been there for 11 years. The father has since died and while they are celebrating the birthday of the youngest sister and guests come to wish her happy birthday, the sisters long to go back to Moscow.

As the press information states for the Inua Ellams’s version of Three Sisters:

“A year has passed since their father died but the three sisters – Lolo, Nne Chukwu and Udo – are still grappling with his loss.

 What’s more, they’re stuck in a small village in Owerri, Nigeria and are longing to return to the cosmopolitan city of their birth, Lagos.

What they don’t know is that the Biafran Civil War is about to erupt and change their lives and their country.

Chekhov’s classic play is reimagined to explore the devastation of colonialism and a fight for emancipation through the lens of a family and love.”  

The Production and comment. Inua Ellams has set the play in 1967 Nigeria beginning three months before the Biafran Civil War when the Igbo people wanted to break away from Nigeria and form their own territory called Biafra. Nigeria was predominantly Yoruba speaking and also a separate ethnicity from Igbo. Nigeria didn’t want the separation and so civil war resulted with the Nigerian forces surrounding Biafra and starving them and killing them until they crushed them.

So while the structure of Ellams’ play follows that of Chekhov in the relationships etc. Ellams has made the Biafran War and the politics that brought it about, the centre of everybody’s concern. And he’s made Lolo (Akosua Amo-Adem) the voice of reason when it comes to clearly elucidating the powerful effect of the British over Nigeria.

Nigeria won independence from the British in 1960. But the perceptive and politically astute Lolo knows that the British still controlled Nigeria from afar, and subtly.  The country was financially beholding to Britain. I certainly appreciated Ellam’s new take while still maintaining the characters and their relationships.

To clarify and illuminate those relationships in Inua Ellams’ version we begin with the three sisters.

Udo (a lively Makembe K. Simamba), the youngest sister is pursued by two young men, one is a hot-headed soldier and the other is a thoughtful man. She doesn’t love either, but feels she can love the thoughtful man.  This enrages the hot-headed soldier with serious results.

Nne Chukwu, (Virgilia Griffith) the middle sister is frustrated because she is married to a dull man but charmed by the married commanding officer of the troop that is in the town.

And Lolo (Akosua Amo-Adem), the eldest daughter is a school teacher, dedicated to teaching but frustrated by the out of date and inaccurate publications she has to use. Lolo is the most politically astute.

The sisters have a brother Dimgba (Tony Ofori) who was a promising scholar but lost his way. He is in love with Abosede (Oyin Oladejo), an awkward young woman who is looked down on by the sisters. Abosede is Yaruban which also makes her feel out of place.

These characters and their relationships, echo those in Chekhov only they have Russian names. There are servants and other hangers on, also echoed in Chekhov. Three Sistersis based on Chekhov but this Three Sisters is definitely Inua Ellams’ creation.

 Inua Ellams’ play works beautifully in this political sense.  History is full of animosity in secession. It’s about the effect of colonial power.  The animosity of one ethnicity/language over another again is something we know about in our own world. So while Inua Ellams is making a specific reference to Nigeria, we bring out own perspective to the play to broaden it to mean whatever situation and language we want to focus on. Inua Ellams’ dialogue is bracing, gripping and at times even poetic (Ellams is also a poet along with being a playwright).

The argument of Lolo’s in explaining the diabolical hold the British had over Nigeria, is chilling. The impassioned way that actor Akosua Amo-Adem as Lolo gives the speech is compelling. Usually, Lolo is the quiet voice of reason, thanks to Akosua Amo-Adem’s understated, calm playing of her. She is watchful and knowing.

The production is terrific in almost every single way. The three sisters are impressive, starting with Akosua Amo-Adem as Lolo, as I already said. Virgilia Griffith plays Nne Chukwu, the middle sister unhappily married to a dull, but good man. She is bored, frustrated and unhappy until she meets Ikemba, the commanding officer of the garrison played by Daren A. Herbert who is always compelling in whoever he plays. Then Nne Chukwu seems to live in his presence, she is alive, curious and even flirty.

The youngest sister is Udo played with effervescence and a youthfulness by Makame K. Simamba. Her emotions are on the surface. She loathes the volatile soldier Igwe (Amaka Umeh), and feels sorry for the other suitor, Nmeri Ora (Ngabo Nabea).

The character of Abosede (Oyin Oladejo) is fascinating—she is the brother’s (Dimgba) girlfriend and then his wife. Initially she is awkward—her clothes clash with various patterns and don’t fit properly. She slumps so her posture is bad. But when she marries, she assumes a confidence bordering on entitlement. She has put herself as the head of the household, giving orders to the three sisters. And she uses that power to cement her place in that family. They make her feel awkward and left out, but she fights to claim her position. It’s a wonderful performance. The production is directed with a sure hand and a keen eye for detail by Mumbi Tindyebwa Otu. It’s a funny, emotional, gripping production with a powerhouse cast. There are such wonderful touches to the production, from ‘kissing the teeth’ to suggest contempt, to an over reaction when a sister hears something startling.

Joanna Yu’s set of the outside of the house in some scenes and the well appointed inside of the house, suggest that this is a place that welcomes visitors and company. It’s neatly kept. And generally I thought Ming Wong’s costumes spoke volumes about those sisters. Initially the three sisters dress in clothes closer to European styling than traditional Nigerian. That makes sense since they long for the days of Lagos with its cosmopolitan ways. Towards the end of the play the design of the material of the clothes seems to echo Nigeria but it still looks European. I thought a more decisiveness was in order here.

But I have a concern about Ming Wong’s costume designs regarding the character of Abosede—the brother’s wife. She first appears with clashing patterns of her clothes and perhaps the fit seems inappropriate.

As Abosede gets more confident her clothes get more and more flamboyant but not in a traditional Nigerian way, but in a European way. I think that’s a missed opportunity. Abosede is a proud Nigerian who flaunts her ethnicity to the sisters. Since her Yoruba people won the conflict I would have thought that her clothes would represent the winning side and in a way flaunt the success by dressing in traditional Nigerian clothes and designs. I thought it a missed opportunity to make a point. That’s my concern. Not earth shattering.

It’s still a terrific production. 

A Soulpepper & Obsidian Theatre Co-production:

Runs until March 24, 2024

www.soulpepper.ca

{ 0 comments }

Live and in person at Young People’s Theatre, Toronto, Ont. Plays until Feb. 23, 2024.

www.youngpeoplestheatre.org

Written by Kanika Ambrose

Based on the novel “The Gospel Truth” by Caroline Pignat

Directed by Sabryn Rock

Set and costumes by Shannon Lea Doyle

Lighting by Shawn Henry

Sound by Thomas Ryder Payne

Cast: Wade Bogert-O’Brien

Jasmine Case

Chiamaka Glory

Dante Jemmott

Dominique LeBlanc

Jeff Miller

Micah Woods

NOTE: Recommended fir /ages 10+ /grades 5+

A moving piece of theatre about hope and tenacity in the face of despair and confinement.

The Story. It’s 1858 on a tobacco plantation in Virginia. Phoebe is 16, Black, is a slave who works on the plantation owned by Master Duncan.  Phoebe has not spoken since Master Duncan sold her mother who was then taken to another state three years ago. Phoebe adored her mother and the shock of losing her rendered her mute. Phoebe loves another slave named Shad. Shad’s brother, Will attempts to run away frequently but is caught and whipped. Then Dr. Bergman appears wanting to go birdwatching and Phoebe becomes his guide and her world changes.

The Production. Director Sabryn Rock has directed a sensitive, thought-provoking production of Kanika Ambrose’s emotion-charged play. We see and hear of the horrors of that life from Phoebe’s point of view. As Phoebe, Jasmine Case is silent but observant. She is curious and knowing. It was dangerous for a slave to learn how to read and write but Phoebe learned. There are tender scenes with Chiamaka Glory in the dual parts of Bea and Ruth. Phoebe would sit in the hollow of a tree, cocooned by Chiamaka Glory, book in hand, writing in her journal.

Phoebe is spirited in the scenes with Shad (a sweet performance by Dante Jemmott). There is such respect and love between them.

Master Duncan, played by a strict, commanding Jeff Miller has a complicated relationship with Phoebe, that becomes clear. Master Duncan is a brute relishing whipping Will (Micah Woods). Master Duncan’s arrogant humour is carried on by his brat-daughter, Tessa, giving a no-holds-barred performance by Dominique LeBlanc. What those slaves endured from these mean-spirited ‘owners’ is soul-crushing.

But miraculously, Kanika Ambrose’s play Truth is more about resilience, tenacity and the belief in hope, especially when Dr. Bergman (Wade Bogert-O’Brien) arrives from “The North.” It’s not just bird-watching that he’s interested in. It’s more important and Phoebe realizes how important instantly.

The production of Truth is vital in telling and retelling a story that needs to be told, often, and not just in Black History Month.

Comment. I love coming to Young People’s Theatre during student matinees to see how students engage with the subject matter. The audience I was in seemed engaged with the gripping story. But if anything gets the “ewwww” factor from kids of a certain age it’s public displays of affection. In a scene when Phoebe and Shad kissed, those kids were convulsed with “eeeeewwwwwwwwww”. I thought that was kind of sweet and funny. Most important, they ‘got’ the play.

Young People’s Theatre Presents:

Plays until Feb. 23, 2024.

Running time: 70 minutes (no intermission)

www.youngpeoplestheatre.org

{ 0 comments }

Heads Up for the Week of Feb. 5-11, 2024

Feb. 5-11, 2024

Rockaby

Factory Theatre.

Written by Joanna Murray-Smith

Directed by Rob Kempson

Sidney can feel her career slipping down the drain. No one loves a pop star when she’s past forty. Unless she wants to join the ranks of the has-beens on the casino circuit, she needs to reinvent herself – and quick. But what if she regains her former glory and still feels that something is missing? 

In its Canadian premiere, ROCKABYE offers a satirical and dark portrait of our self-involved, celebrity-obsessed culture.

Factory Theatre, 125 Bathurst St  in Toronto.

BUY TICKETS

Feb. 5-23, 2024.

TRUTH

Young People’s Theatre.

By Kanika Ambrose
Based on the novel “The Gospel Truth” by Caroline Pignat
Directed by Sabryn Rock

RECOMMENDED FOR AGES 10+ | GRADES 5+

BUY NOW (Public)

It’s 1858 on a Virginian tobacco plantation. Deep in a forest, a young Black girl named Phoebe sits in the hollow of a tree, a notebook in her pocket and a harrowing choice ahead. Truth is adapted from the Governor General’s Award-winning novel “The Gospel Truth”, and tells the story of a courageous 16-year-old, the arrival of a stranger from the north, and a trail of secrets that could change everything. From the American South to St. Catharines, Ontario, Truth chronicles the fierce strength and resilience of a community as it struggles to find freedom.

Feb. 5-25, 2024

Uncle Vanya

Written by Anton Chekhov

Adapted by Liisa Repo-Martell

Directed by Chris Abraham

At the CAA Theatre, 651 Yonge St. Toronto.

ADVISORY

Gunfire and use of haze. Recommended for ages 12+.

In the waning days of Czarist Russia, Ivan “Vanya” Voinitsky, and his niece, Sonya, toil ceaselessly to run their family estate. After retiring, Sonya’s father, a celebrated professor, returns to the estate with his young, glamorous wife. When he announces his plans to sell the land and evict them all, passions explode and lives come undone.

A remounting of the 2022 production originally presented in the round at Crow’s Theatre, this time presented in the CAA  proscenium theatre.

Feb. 6-18, 2024.

De Profundis: Oscar Wilde in Jail

At The Young Centre for the Performing Arts

Adapted by Gregory Prest

Original music and lyrics by Mike Ross and Sarah Wilson

BUY TICKETS

De Profundis: Oscar Wilde in Jail is a musical fantasy based on the letter Oscar Wilde wrote while incarcerated for two years at Reading Gaol, to his love Lord Alfred Douglas. The letter was written a page a day over a period of three months, collected at the end of each day, and handed over to Wilde on his release from prison. 

Feb. 6 -March 3, 2024

DION

At Coal Mine Theatre

By Ted Dykstra and Steven Mayoff

Directed by Peter Hinton-Davis
Musical Director: Bob Foster

Dion: A Rock Opera is a fully sung rock opera based on Euripedes’ The Bacchae.

Pentheus, the conservative right-wing leader of a city-state “somewhere in time” on this earth, arrives home from a trip to learn that all the disenfranchised people in his kingdom have taken to the hills, following a non-binary and self-proclaimed Demi-God named Dion. The runaways from society, rumour has it, are drinking a strange brew, and are often seen running through the hills naked in states of ecstasy. The runaways include almost all of society’s women, including his own mother Agave and his uncle Cadmus.

Please be advised this production uses strobe lights and theatrical haze.

 

BUY TICKETS

Feb. 7- 25, 2024.

The Other Side of the Sea

At the Theatre Centre

Two strangers meet on a lonely beach, not knowing that their futures depend on this encounter. A fisherman with no name and a civil servant at her office desk oscillate between loneliness, memory, and reality on a journey towards human connection and renewal. This powerful, minimalist drama celebrates courage, conviction, and life itself.

Book Your Tickets Now!

Feb. 8-10, 2024

Deciphers

At Harbourfront Centre, as part of the Torque 2023-24 dance series.

Deciphers, performed and choreographed by independent dancemakers Naishi Wang and Jean Abreu, on stage February 8–10, 2024 at 7:30pm at Harbourfront Centre Theatre, as part of its 2023/24 international contemporary dance series, Torque. This contemporary duet is an intensely physical cultural exchange between dancers, investigating post-colonial histories, the migrant experience and the transcendent nature of human identity.

To purchase tickets and for more information about Deciphers and the complete Torque 2023/24 season, please visit HarbourfrontCentre.com

February 8th – 24th, 2024

Macbeth “A Tale Told By An Idiot”

At the Haunted Red Sandcastle Theatre, 922 Queen St. E.

By William Shakespeare
Conceived & performed by Eric Woolfe
Directed by Dylan Trowbridge

“MacBeth is a weird, and involuntary soothsayer. The Weird Sisters inevitably await him, knowing that he is, in part, their kin.” – Harold Bloom

Shakespeare’s blood-soaked king, weird witches, viscera-sopped murders, nightmares of madness, and terrifying occult prophecies crash head on with our ghoulishly giddy bag of timorous trickery! Performed by a solo actor using a diverse range of multi-sized puppets, masks, and parlour magic, cosmic horror, and lowbrow pop, this Mad Mackers is a production like no other! Coinciding with the 400th Anniversary of the play’s premiere, and bound to amaze, horrify and delight you.

www.eldritchtheatre.ca

{ 0 comments }

Live and in person at the Streetcar Crowsnest, Produced by Crow’s Theatre, Toronto, Ont.

Playing until Oct. 15, 2023.

www.crowstheatre.com

Written by Michael Healey

Based on “Sideways: The City Google Couldn’t Buy” by Josh O’Kane

Directed by Chris Abraham

Set and props by Joshua Quinlan

Costumes by Ming Wong

Lighting by Kimberly Purtell

Sound by Thomas Ryder Payne

Video Design by Amelia Scott

Cast: Christopher Allen

Ben Carlson

Phillipa Domville

Peter Fernandes

Tara Nicodemo

Yanna McIntosh

Mike Shara

Stellar in every single way.

The Story. The Master Plan is a kind of political-thriller-David vs Goliath comedy drama involving slick operators from New York City backed by Google, vs the hard-working, by-the-book civil servants who try to keep up with the shenanigans.

Larry Page was one of the young creators of Google—a monster of a search engine. What Page dreamed of was to create the perfect self-sufficient city using high tech to create automated vehicles, efficient waste management, sidewalks that don’t need shoveling because they would be heated to melt the snow and an efficient rapid transit system—that’s not an oxymoron. 

A subsidiary of Google was formed called Sidewalk Labs to work on this project. Sidewalk Labs was headed by Dan Doctoroff, a slick operator from New York City.

In 2017, Waterfront Toronto, which was the Toronto organization responsible for the development of the waterfront, approached Sidewalk Labs to develop 12 acres of underdeveloped waterfront to fulfill the experiment.

Dan Doctoroff came to Toronto with his shined shoes, smart suit and $50 million to get things rolling. It was thought that the scheme for Toronto could then be marketed to other cities around the world and Sidewalk Labs would rake in the money.

But after three years of squabbling, misunderstanding on the part of Sidewalk Labs about how Waterfront Toronto works, miscommunication, mishandling of details, and secret backroom deals, it fell apart in 2020.

Globe and Mail reporter, Josh O’Kane wrote about the details of the scheme and the eventual debacle for two years. It resulted in his book “SIDEWAYS, THE CITY GOOGLE COULDN’T BUY.”

Playwright Michael Healey was commissioned by Chris Abraham, the Artistic Director of Crow’s Theatre to adapt the book into a play and the result is The Master Plan now at Crow’s Theatre.

The Production. The audience sits on four sides of the playing area designed by Joshua Quinlan, who also designed the props. When the audience enters there is an expansive model of wood configurations on a large table. One assumes this is the model of the ideal city. Eventually the model is removed and characters sit at the table with their laptops, cell phones and other necessities. The floor of the stage is composed of octagonal shaped pieces that fit together and can be easily removed if one of the pieces wears away.

Suspended above the playing area is a frame on which is projected information, facts, headlines, timelines, meetings, maps, the area of the waterfront at stake and other areas that Sidewalk Labs wanted. There is also a running tally of the many and various people on boards, in jobs and positions that are constantly shifting. One name is crossed out and another name takes its place. The use of tech is impressive.  At every turn you are bombarded with projected stuff. Kudos to Amelia Scott, the video designer for amassing such an array of videos.

Cast members in costume mingle with the audience as they file in, sometimes chatting them up in their seats. No one came near me so I don’t know if it’s the actor engaging with the audience or the character. It’s interesting watching them interact with the audience before the actual production ‘begins.’

The play is loaded with dates, meetings, facts, figures, reports, information and lots and lots of people being ignored while the folks in charge are running roughshod over everybody. I think director Chris Abraham does a brilliant job of realizing the dense, dizzying accumulation of facts, fiction and misinformation that went on over that time.  He has directed his stellar cast to deliver the information with conviction, urgency and a sense of absolute importance.

The cast that is always on the move, lobbing information at us as well. The acting company is superb. SUPERB!!!

Mike Shara plays Dan Doctoroff, the CEO of Sidewalk Labs. Doctoroff never met a back room he didn’t like for his secret deals and it never involved a slice of wedding cake for him to get what he wanted.  Mike Shara plays Dan Doctoroff in a tailored suit, shined shoes and the most understated polka dot socks. Doctoroff was a slick New Yorker. He could not understand the Canadians with their adherence to rules, public town halls for the public’s input and process. He just cut through stuff, ignored people who got in his way and bulldozed through. Mike Shara plays him with charm and a penchant for thinking quickly on his feet.

He is matched by Ben Carlson as Will Fleissig, of Waterfront Toronto who remembered exactly what was said and not. Fleissig’s control of information and the facts are always at odds with the seat of your pants thinking of Dan Doctoroff. Ben Carlson illuminates Fleissig’s frustration, exhaustion at the going’s on and disappointment with he gets bad news he doesn’t expect. Ben Carlson plays Will Fleissig as tempered, contained and anxious to be accommodating.

Just to show how anxious the Canadians are to be accommodating there is Philippa Domville playing Meg Davis (her father was Bill Davis—who knew a thing or two about politics). In her first scenes, all she does is smile and nod in agreement at what Dan Doctoroff is saying. It isn’t unctuous, it is hopeful that this would work, until it doesn’t and then she is fierce.

Peter Fernandes plays Tree (an actual tree, and he’s dandy) and is a narrator. He constantly circles the space offering information in a rapid-fire way that illustrates the urgency and importance. Tara Nicodemo plays Kristina Verner of Waterfront Toronto, who with Meg Davis, tries to keep track of the changing plans and shenanigans brought about by Dan Doctoroff. She is more forthright than the calm Meg Davis. Kristina Verner is more likely to explode in invective than Meg Davis, and that is a thing of beauty. Yanna McIntosh plays Helen Burstyn, the head of Waterfront Toronto and is commanding, devoid of small talk and all business. When she fires someone it’s swift and without sentiment. Yanna McIntosh also plays many and various characters with variation, distinction and nuance.   

I must mention Christopher Allen as Cam Malagaam—there’s a lovely trick about his name that is explained at the end. Cam Malagaam worked for Dan Doctoroff, only he was the genuine deal and not tainted. As Cam, Christopher Allen describes the beauty of the project and how it would be a great creation, helping build a livable city. His description is so quietly intense, so full of conviction it is absolutely moving. You are caught up short by the honesty and humanity of this character as played by this gifted young actor.

Playwright Michael Healey knows how to get to the heart of political issues because he’s done it before in such plays as Generous, Courageousand Proud. More than anything he finds the folly in situations and realizes the humour, perhaps gallows humour, when things go sideways, as this scheme did. Michael Healey knows how to realize the satire from politicians, smooth operators who try to bamboozle people, and even those trying to follow the rules and do a good job. But more than anything, Michael Healey realizes and celebrates the humanity of those who have dedicated their lives to work that is important. His plays are full of that humanity.  

Comment. Is The Master Plan overwhelming with information? If you let it. Don’t let it. Is Google overwhelming? Sure…one screen leads you to two more and then more. I think you get overwhelmed by it and can’t look away. In the case of The Master Plan it’s very tempting to feel overwhelmed by the information. Don’t. Take in the information as it pertains to the larger picture. Be aware of the various players and not so much the details. Be aware that there are people in the scenario who could remember what was said and what wasn’t. That’s one of the beauties of the play and the production. The speed of the info can suck you in—resist.

I loved the production because everyone involved gives the audience credit for having intelligence, common sense, humanity, a sense of humour and an appreciation of wonderful theatre.

Which The Master Planis.

Crow’s Theatre presents the world premier:

Plays until Oct. 15, 2023

Running time: 2 hours, 30 minutes. (1 intermission).

www.crowstheatre.com

{ 0 comments }

 

Bilail Baig
Photo: Tanja Tiziana

 

 

 

 

 

At Theatre Passe Muraille, Mainspace, Toronto, Ont.

Written by Bilal Baig

Directed by Brendan Healy

Set and costumes by Joanna Yu

Lighting by C.J. Astronomo

Sound and music by Richard Feren

Cast: Shelly Antony

Omar Alex Khan

Qasim Khan

Matt Nethersole

Ellora Patnaik

A bold debut play by Bilal Baig about being true to oneself, ones culture and ones religion and balancing all that with the world one lives in.

The Story. Acha Bacha by Bilal Baig is about a gay man named Zaya who tries to be true to his beliefs as a Muslim, his relationship with his lover Salim yet hiding that relationship from his traditional mother.

I wish there was a glossary of Erdu terms such as “Acha Bacha”. I Googled it. It means “good kid.” Zaya has long been told by his mother to be a ‘good kid.’ We surmise from the play that there have been things in his life growing up that might not have earned that phrase.

Zaya and his lover Salim enjoy a loving relationship but there is trouble on the horizon.

Zaya has not been forthcoming about the relationship with his mother, who expects Zaya to marry a woman one day. Salim is a devout Muslim and is leaving Canada on a trip to Pakistan with his mother, a pilgrimage home.  Zaya tries to be observant but he is not as committed as Salim is. It’s Ramadan and Salim is fasting while Zaya is only half-hearted about it.  And there are ghosts from Zaya’s past that he is trying to resolve, so he is one conflicted character.

The Production.  Bilal Baig  is covering a lot of important ground in his play. To quote the press release: “Acha Bacha boldly explores the intersections between queerness, gender identity and Islamic culture in the Pakistani diaspora.”  Part of that boldness is to use both English and Erdu to tell the story. For example, when Salim talks to Zaya, it’s in a mix of English and Erdu but because the dialogue is so clear we get a sense of what is being said in Erdu.

Zaya’s mother talks to him almost totally in Erdu but he replies to her in English so we get what she is saying, from the tone of voice of Ellora Patnaik as Ma. There is sarcasm and very precise body language that lets everybody know what she thinks of her son’s goings on.

And you get a keen sense in the play of the delicate balance that Zaya tries to maintain to keep up appearances, be loving to his partner Salim but still keeping his presence secret, even though Salim is more confident in his own identity. He is a devout Muslim and confident to be who he is—a man who wears makeup and women’s clothing in public. The person with real issues is Zaya—who is he? What does he believe in?

Interesting questions.

Director Brendan Healy and designer Joanne Yu have imagined a world that is beautiful,  rich-looking yet simple and mysterious.   Joanna Yu has floor to ceiling browny-orangy drapes that look almost velvet on three sides of the stage that suggest sumptuousness and also mystery.

It’s as if that world is closed off, hiding something—as Zaya is trying to hide his identity and relationship from his mother and others.  It’s beautifully directed with subtlety and simplicity by Brendan Healy. He knows how to establish the most intricate of relationships with clarity.

Qasim Khan plays Zaya with a controlled urgency.  He loves Salim but is desperate to keep his identity secret from his mother, even though Salim has met her.  As Salim, Matt Nethersole is bolder, flamboyant and complex as a devout Muslim.  Nethersole strongly plays the confidence of a man who truly knows who he is and is unafraid to show that confidence.  Qasim Khan and Matt Nethersole give beautiful, measured performances.

Comment. Playwright Bilal Baig has introduced us to a new, strong voice that illuminates a rich culture and navigates the queer world with confidence.

Co-produced by Theatre Passe Muraille and Buddies in Bad Times Theatre.

Opened: Feb. 6, 2018.

Closes: Feb. 18, 2018.

Running Time: 80 minutes, approx.

www.passemuraille.ca

{ 0 comments }

A little taste of some of what I saw in London in July on my summer vacation. I will deal at length with all of these and everything else I saw in London, in my Slotkin Letter for my regular subscribers.

Betty Blue Eyes

At the Novello Theatre. Based on the film, A Private Function. A group of people secretly plan to have a feast to celebrate the marriage of Queen Elizabeth II. The feast is a pig that they are secretly raising, against the rationing rules, until they get caught.

Sweet. The music and lyrics are clever and distinctive. I couldn’t help but think that the story is so small and the music makes it a larger than necessary story. It’s amusing. The mechanical pig is adorable, bodily noises notwithstanding. Unfortunately it did not catch on as it hoped and will close in September.

The Cherry Orchard

At the National Theatre. A fine performance as Lopakhin by the always intriguing Conlith Hill. But a strangely unengaging performance by Zoë Wanamaker as Ranevskaya, which is strange because she’s such a compelling actress. It all seemed flat.

Ghost, the Musical

At the Piccadilly Theatre. Based on the popular movie of the same name. Directed by Matthew Warchus, who never met a popular show he didn’t want to direct. And he’s really successful at it too—Lord of the Rings notwithstanding. This is a musical for people who don’t go to the theatre, but want to see the movie on stage. It has lots of busy animation, projections, flashy lighting, noise, overmiking and everybody bellows the non-descript, unimaginative music. Acting is non-essential. It of course is doing great business and is Broadway-bound. A forgettable night in the theatre.

London Road

At the National Theatre. About the effects on a community of a serial killer who killed prostitutes in Ipswich, England. The dialogue is taken verbatim from interviews and transcripts of the people in Ipswich. And it’s been set to music. The music follows the rhythms of the speech. There is no effort to rhyme because people don’t speak in rhyme. Astonishing theatre.

One Man, Two Guvnors

At the National. An adaptation of Goldoni’s Servant of Two Masters. About a servant, who is always hungry, trying to serve two masters at the same time. It stars the wonderful James Corden. It is directed with exquisite detail by Nicholas Hytner. It transfers to the West End in the fall, then to New York in the Spring. A hugely entertaining, achingly funny production.

Richard III

I actually saw two productions of this. First at the Hampstead Theatre presented by artistic director Edward Hall and his company, Propeller. An all male company. It was inventive, chilling, gripping and so full of imagination that it just went like a bat out of hell. Hall carries on the family theatre business with great style—his father is Sir Peter Hall.

The second production of Richard III was the starry, hyped-to-the-skies Old Vic production starring Kevin Spacey directed by Sam Mendes. Mr. Spacey gave his first line in a clear, tempered voice and bellowed everything else. He put more effort into twisting his body out of shape—if you’ve seen The Usual Suspects then you know what he does with his left leg—than he did with the performance. This is a self-absorbed, selfish actor who barely engages with any other actor on stage. Disgraceful.

Director, Sam Mendes felt he had to announce every scene with a projection telling who the scene is really about: i.e. “Lady Anne”, “Margaret”, “The Public” as if we are too witless to figure it out. The acting of the men is uneven. The women are all strong. The glitzy production goes on tour and plays New York in the Spring. An annoying, unimpressive production, except for the women.

The Wizard of Oz

At the Palladium. Directed by Jeremy Sams. Additional music by Andrew Lloyd Webber.
While Ghost, The Musical tries to recreate the movie on stage, The Wizard of Oz takes the film and makes it a theatrical musical. Jeremy Sams is a stylish, gifted director with oodles of imagination and a true theatrical sense. The tornado scene alone is stunning and worth the price of admission. This musical is for people who love musicals, theatre and a great time. It is beautifully performed, designed and directed.

{ 0 comments }