Scapin and Moliere

I saw Scapin at the local, professional theatre company last night. Some time back I wrote a blog objecting to this play, though I had not yet seen it. I had heard that there was gender reversal of the main roles, and indeed, that was true. It was a bit glaring at times, and over-all I didn't see any reason for it.

Mostly I just thought the play was poorly done.

Commedia dell'arte is not understood much today, and if one is going to attempt it, then they need to do so with full gusto! But they should also research what the period and style mean. It is not slapstick. It is not simply wearing your hair in strange configurations. It is not simply adding a chase scene and a juggling scene, though all of these might indeed be included.

There were gems in the performance. The two fathers were well played and even looked every bit like a masked caricature (though they were not masked).

The costumes were mostly remarkable (though I would expect nothing less from my friend Janis).

And, for me, the highlight was the young lover, Jaycinth. His mere presence was enough to have me chuckle, and when he spoke I was often in stitches. If they could have found a way to have him on stage the entire show, I'm sure I would have left enjoying it much more.

The biggest problem (aside from not really understanding the manner of commedia dell'arte), was the lead character of 'Scapin' himself (or, in this case, HERself).

The play Scapin requires a strong, commanding actor to carry the lead role and to make us mostly forget the trite plot with convenient happenstance. The young lady they had playing the part was not such an actor.

Under the title of the play on the marquee outside the theatre was a sub-title, "or, The Con-Artist." There was absolutely no indication of this characterization in the performance I saw. The young woman played the part as though she were "tough" but not sly or wiley. This had the added negative effect when she was supposed to be afraid of her master. Why was someone "tough" suddenly afraid?

The worst scene of the play was the "beating" sequence, when Scapin tricks her master in to hiding in a bag so she can pummel him with a "stick" (she actually refers to it as a stick, though it certainly resembles a large sausage). In the hands of a proper Scapin, this should be a hilarious routine as we watch a master con artist trick the master in to the bag and assault him as a variety of different characters. Instead, the scene was tedious and boring, and it was obvious that this Scapin was simply performing what she'd been directed to do. Commedia dell'arte is about improvisation! The strong, proper actor should rely on his/her own skills of improvisation and beat the poor, sacked man in a different way each night -- or at the very least, make us believe s/he is doing so.

I was actrually embarassed for this Scapin. She was not funny, and the scene looked cruel and took away any charm that she might have given to the character earlier. (Goose-stepping Germans? Sorry, wrong era. Could have been funny if it came out of the performer naturally, but not as a directed bit.)

And totally miscast was a young actress, Jill Underwood. I have generally felt that she is the best actress they have at this company, but perhaps raucous comedy is not her "thing." There was absolutely no sense of who her character is or was. This is commedia! Stock characters are all the rage! Perhaps this was another instance of the gender reversal not working out as well as hoped.

Obviously I was disappointed in this show. I was thrilled to see a Moliere play on their season list, but I guess if it's Moliere done badly, then better to not do Moliere at all.

(You know, it was Harold Pinter's 75th birthday on Monday [Oct 10] -- why wasn't there one of HIS plays on their season subscription?)