Skip to main content

A laughable The 39 Steps at Hillbarn Theatre

By Kedar K. Adour

The 39 Steps: Mystery/Comedy. From the novel by John Buchan. Adapted by Patrick Barlow. From an original concept by Simon Corble and Nobby Dimon. Directed by Hunt Burdick. Hillbarn Theatre, 1285 E Hillsdale Blvd, Foster City, CA (650) 349-6411 or www.hillbarntheatre.org. October 16-November 2, 2014

A laughable The 39 Steps at Hillbarn Theatre. [rating:2]

John Buchan wrote the novel “The 39 Steps” almost 100 years ago and it spawned a number of plays using the basic plot before the 1935Alfred Hitchcock movie was made. Patrick Barlow adapted the present play The 39 Steps from the Alfred Hitchcock movie, It initially opened in the hinterlands of England in 1995 before reaching Broadway in 2008 where it won or was nominated for multiple Tony Awards. After its closure in 2010 there has been a professional road tour before being released for regional theatres. Locally, TheatreWorks (2011 ) and Center Rep (2013) mounted brilliant productions.

A cast of four actors portray 100 plus roles and the character of Richard Hannay (Brad Satterwhite) is the only actor not playing multiple double roles.  Richard Hannay is the protagonist with an ensemble of Elspeth Noble, Russell Ward, and Ross Neuenfeldt to play the other 99 or more roles. The cast is sporadically hilarious, adept with quick costume (Mae Heagerty-Matos) changes with a plethora of slapstick actions with props (Rosita Issel) doubling, quadrupling to fit the sets (Steve Nyberg) as needed to take Hannay on his journey from London to Scotland and back again.

Richard Hannay is a stiff upper lip bachelor Brit complete with tweeds and pipe. He picks up a shady-lady (Noble) with a secret and a German accent in a local theatre and brings her to his flat. Bad idea, since she is murdered with a knife (think the movie Psycho). He has to flee since he is accused of the murder. We hear the phrase “39 Steps” early in the first act and the remainder of the evening is devoted to finding out the meaning of the phrase. He picks up a love interest, sort of, along the way and Satterwhite  and Noble milk their “bed room” scene while handcuffed together for all its worth.

There are many scenes and music that are direct steals from Hitchcock movie including a plane crash scene behind a scrim that brings a modicum of laughter. You will recognize references from, Strangers on a Train, Rear Window, North by Northwest and others.

Russell Ward, and Ross Neuenfeldt carry most of the action and are ably assisted by Noble. Director Burdick uses a relatively empty theatre set that allows the action to flow but he must share that credit with the production team. He does not have control of his cast especially Ward who shouts his lines with severe overacting that unbalances the ensemble effect.  The English and Scottish dialects are very variable to the point of being distracting or undecipherable.

Although there are many laughs throughout the play it becomes tedious before the end of act one and continues on until the final curtain.  Running time 2 hours and 20 minutes with an intermission.

CAST: Brad Satterwhite as Richard Hannay. Ensemble: Elspeth Noble, Russell Ward, and Ross Neuenfeldt.

CREATIVE TEAM: Director Hunt Burdick; Scenic designer Steve Nyberg; Costume designer Mae Heagerty-Matos; Sound designer Alan Chang; Hair and makeup designer Dee Morrissey; Properties designer Rosita Issel.

Kedar K. Adour, MD

Courtesy of www.theatreworldinternetmagazine.com

Hillbarn takes ‘The 39 Steps’

By Judy Richter

A bored Canadian’s decision to go to the theater during a visit toLondon in 1935 sets off a wild chase that unfolds in “The 39 Steps” at Hillbarn Theatre.

Patrick Barlow adapted this comedy from the film by Alfred Hitchcock and a novel by John Buchan.

This minimalist production uses only four actors. Brad Satterwhite plays the debonair hero, Richard Hannay, while Elspeth Noble plays three female characters. The dozens of other characters are played by Ross Neuenfeldt and Russell Ward, called Clowns 1 and 2.

As Richard watches the show from a box, a mysterious woman joins him before shots ring out. They flee to his flat, where she tells him that a spy plot threatens the country. She gives him some basic details before being stabbed.

Suspected of her murder and eager to save the country, Richard heads for the master spy’s home in Scotland. Along the way, he barely eludes an assortment of police and acquires an unwitting travel companion and eventual love interest, Pamela (Noble).

Directed by Hunt Burdick, this production has numerous hilarious moments. Many of them come from quick character changes — some with only a switch of hats — by the Clowns, aided by costumer Mae Heagerty-Matos.

Steve Nyberg’s set (lit by Matthew Johns) uses few stage pieces, many on wheels, to facilitate scene changes. On the other hand, the sound design by Alan Chang sometimes covers dialogue. This is especially problematic with the Clowns when the action moves toScotland, where the thick accents are already hard to understand.

Overall, though, it’s a fun show. Satterwhite and Noble are standouts in the cast.

Hillbarn patrons will be pleased to know that construction has begun to expand the restrooms and upgrade the offices and lobby. Dan Demers, executive artistic director, said in his pre-curtain speech that this work is expected to be completed in about two weeks. That would be well before the next show, “White Christmas,” begins Dec. 4.

In the meantime, Hillbarn has set up five portable toilets plus washing stations and canopies in the courtyard. Patrons may enter the facility from the back parking lot.

“The 39 Steps” will continue at Hillbarn Theatre, 1285 E. Hillsdale Blvd., Foster City, through Nov. 2. For tickets and information, call (650) 349-6411 or visit www.hillbarntheatre.org.

 

Post-its help writer vent, amuse and flaunt ignorance

By Woody Weingarten

Post-its ring Woody Weingarten’s iMac.

I’m an itsy-bitsy old-fashioned: I’d rather use a Post-it than an iPhone.

So I ring my iMac with instant reminders, to-do lists and quick- or slow-witted brainstorms — as I’ve been doing forever (no, none of them date back 20 years).

The yellow stickies also sit on my desk in three piles (do-it-now, do-it-asap, and fergettaboudit!).

And I usually have a pad in my pants pocket, in case.

Though the mini-notes don’t define my universe or my San Anselmo homestead, they do let me prioritize them.

They also frequently offer pleasure or amusement.

Such as a verbal bon-bon from Nancy Fox, my wife, I reproduced: “I’m counting my blessings — and you’re a lot of them.”

From a source I can’t remember: “Hyperventilation is proof we’re still breathing.”

Sometimes the notes are edgy:

“Overheard geezer telling companion in San Anselmo Library, ‘My wife accuses me of being a pochemuchka, which is a Russian word for someone who asks too many questions.’”

“Friend bemoans steady San Francisco Opera diet of Italian offerings: ‘It’s pasta, pasta, pasta all the time,’ he complains.”

In contrast, some Post-its merely give me a chance to vent:

“Recent 5-4 right-wing rulings o f the U.S. Supreme Court don’t pass my personal stink test.”

“With tech support being what it is — outsourced and understaffed — I spend way too much time on hold with the Philippines or India.”

Sometimes I question the so-called evolution of our society: “When did ‘a learning experience’ get replaced with ‘a teaching moment’? And why?”

Or ponder what just happened: “Was standing in our backyard when gray squirrel mistook me for a tree and ran up my pants leg, then my arm. I brushed it off, then shook as, watching it scamper up a real trunk, I realized it might be rabid.”

Because I’m so fond of word play, I’ve enjoyed glancing at this one: “Overheard, from moped-walking young woman on the Parkade in Fairfax — ‘He makes so many mistakes his life is a reign of error.’”

Perfect for a musician? “Nobody knows the treble I’ve seen.”

Perfect for a difficult non-musician? “He’s not hard of hearing, he’s hard of listening.”

More than a handful of stickies are personal.

“Because I often write about my songwriter-wife, she’s threatened that she may start creating songs about my foibles.”

Or, in a moment of 117 percent syrupiness, “Nancy’s so charming and persuasive she could make The Devil don a halo.”

But then comes the moment I flaunt my ignorance:

“I didn’t even know vaulting existed as a sport until Hannah, my seven-year-old granddaughter who apparently can grow taller while I’m standing there talking to her, climbed onto a horse’s back and blew me away by doing the gymnastic exercises.”

After scrutinizing a gossip website a few weeks ago, I jotted down, “Just found tidbits about Mya, Ciara and Kesha, three one-name singers I’ve never heard — or heard of.”

Some Post-its are whimsical:

“How do you really feel about kohlrabi?”

“Hannah the other day stupefied her mother by saying, ‘Mommy, I’m stupefied.’”

And some are wholly unencumbered phrases or words I might someday use in a column (not unlike this one):

“A mental gulag.”

“Critter-sitter.”

“My inner cubmaster.”

“Puleeeze.”

“Donna Quixote.”

And then there are scads of items I don’t know quite know what to do with:

“’I-spy’ moment causes me to question what I saw — red-haired guy jogging barefoot, and bare everything else, on Fourth Street sidewalk toward downtown San Rafael.”

“Random notion: How’d I feel if I told an actor to ‘break a leg’ and he/she did?”

“War — does it have three letters or is it a four-letter word?”

“Kick-the-bucket-list: Things to postpone until after I’m dead.”

But, if forced at gunpoint to choose, the stickie I relate to best is a summation:

“I’m an addict. Dependencies, in order of import, include my wife and kids and grandkids, my iMac (incongruously combined with being a Luddite), Diet Pepsi Wild Cherry, High-Tech burritos, films, jazz, taking digital photos and inserting prints into old-fashioned albums, and binge-watching ‘Law & Order’ re-reruns.”

Oh, I forgot: And Post-its.

Contact Woody Weingarten at voodee@sbcglobal.net

 

‘Sweeney Todd’ reveals Sondheim’s genius

By Judy Richter

For proof of Stephen Sondheim’s genius, look no further than TheatreWorks’ production of his brilliant “Sweeney Todd.”

Composer-lyricist Sondheim and book writer Hugh Wheeler have crafted an alternately chilling, lyrical and amusing musical, subtitled “The Demon Barber of Fleet Street.”

Director Robert Kelley, who also directed the company’s 1992 production, has moved the setting from its traditional Victorian London to 1940 during the German Blitzkrieg. The action takes place in an abandoned factory (set by Andrea Bechert with lighting by Steven B. Mannshardt) leading to a subway station, which served as a shelter during the relentless bombing (sound by Jeff Mockus).

Sweeney Todd (David Studwell) is a barber whom a judge banished to Australia on a trumped up charge 15 years ago. Judge Turpin (Lee Strawn) apparently wanted Sweeney out of the way in order to seduce his pretty young wife.

The story opens 15 years later as Sweeney sails back to London to find his wife and daughter. He visits the pie shop of his former landlady, Mrs. Lovett (Tory Ross), who has a vacant room upstairs and has saved his razors for him.

Now he can go back to work as a barber. Along the way, he kills the fraudulent Pirelli (Noel Anthony). To dispose of the body, Sweeney and Mrs. Lovett cook up the idea of using it for her meat pies.  Sweeney wants to get rid of the judge the same way.

In the meantime, a handsome young sailor, Anthony (Jack Mosbacher), who befriended Sweeney on their voyage to London, immediately falls in love with Sweeney’s daughter, Johanna (Mindy Lym), who is a virtual prisoner in Judge Turpin’s home. He has taken her in as his ward and wants to marry her.

Complications ensue. Not everyone survives.

Director Kelley uses a relatively small cast with most of the named characters serving as the chorus. Musical director William Liberatore conducts the scaled down orchestra from the keyboard.

The production is blessed with outstanding singers who deliver Sondheim’s songs with the appropriate emotions. And what songs they are — one highlight after another.

Perhaps the most beautiful song is the haunting “Johanna,” sung by Mosbacher as Anthony after he hears Lym singing Johanna’s “Green Finch and Linnet Bird” in a high, lilting soprano.

Ross as Mrs. Lovett has the show’s most amusing songs: “The Worst Pies in London,” “A Little Priest” (sung with Sweeney) and “By the Sea.” Ross has terrific comic timing and sings well. Playing Tobias Ragg, who becomes Mrs. Lovett’s young assistant, Spencer Kiely sings the sweet “Not While I’m Around” to and with Mrs. Lovett.

Then of course there’s the show’s anthem, “The Ballad of Sweeney Todd,” sung by the company at the beginning and several times thereafter. The powerful “Mea Culpa” sung by the judge, is eliminated in this production, as it has been in some others.

Besides those already named, other characters are played by Mia Fryvecind Gimenez as the Beggar Woman and Martin Rojas Dietrich as Beadle Bamford, Judge Turpin’s sidekick.

Although Studwell makes a menacing Sweeney, he sometimes strays slightly off pitch, as in “My Friends” and “Epiphany.”

Taken as a whole, though, this is an outstanding production. People seeing it for the first time were bowled over on opening night, while those who have seen it several times before found it as stirringly impressive and exciting as ever. It’s a major landmark in American musical theater.

“Sweeney Todd” will continue at the Mountain ViewCenter for the Performing Arts, Castro and Mercy streets, Mountain View, through Nov. 2. For tickets and information, call (650) 463-1960 or visit www.theatreworks.org.

 

Actors switch duties in Dragon’s ghostly ‘Woman in Black’

By Judy Richter

There’s nothing quite like a good ghost story around Halloween. Dragon Theatre has such a story in “The Woman in Black,” which Stephen Mallatratt adapted from a book by Susan Hill.

The plot features an older man, Arthur Kipps (Kevin Kirby), who hires a younger actor (Tasi Alabastro) to help him exorcise a ghost, the Woman in Black (Lessa Bouchard in this nonspeaking role), that he encountered many years ago.

When he was a young solicitor, Kipps’ boss sent him to a remote village north of London to attend the funeral of a client, a reclusive widow, and go through her personal papers.

Upon arriving in the village, Kipps finds people reluctant to talk about the late Mrs. Drablow and her house, Eel Marsh, reachable only a low tide. At the funeral and again at the house, Kipps sees a mysterious woman in black with a wasted face.

Over time, he learns her chilling story and later falls victim to her curse.

Director Meredith Hagedorn has made the unusual choice of having Kipps rather than the Actor re-enact Kipps’ story, while the Actor plays most of the characters that Kipps encounters. In other productions, the Actor plays the younger Kipps, while the older Kipps plays the other characters.

Hence, there is some confusion about who’s who in the early scenes, but the director’s choice is more suited to her two actors.

Kirby as Kipps believably navigates the character’s emotional journey from relative nonchalance to abject terror. Alabastro as the Actor seems less versatile. He’s also misdirected in some scenes, especially when he portrays Kipps’ pipe-smoking, lip-smacking boss.

The story unfolds on the stage of a Victorian theater in London. Set designer Janny Coté furnishes it with a steamer trunk, a chair and two coat racks. Imagination and the characters’ ingenuity provide almost everything else, except for lighting by Jeff Swan, sound by Lance Huntley and costumes by Erin Haney.

“The Woman in Black” has been running inLondon’sWest Endsince 1989, making it the district’s second-longest non-musical play, second only to Agatha Christie’s “The Mousetrap.”

Despite some shortcomings, this production helps to show why the play remains so popular.

It will continue at Dragon Theatre, 2120 Broadway St., Redwood City, through Nov. 2. For tickets and information, call (650) 493-2006 or visit www.dragonproductions.net.

 

Scheherazade by Haruki Murakami — Review

By Joe Cillo

Scheherazade

By Haruki Murakami

The New Yorker, October 13, 2014, pp. 100-109.

Translated from the Japanese by Ted Goossen.

In Haruki Murakami’s revisitation of this ancient classic, a woman the narrator calls ‘Scheherazade’ tells stories to her lover, Habara, “because she wants to.”  She seems to need to talk.  Nothing is at stake, certainly not her life.  Habara was enthralled by the stories because he was “able to forget the reality that surrounded him, if only for a moment.”  They “eased [him] of worries and unpleasant memories,” and he needed this more than anything else.

The lovers don’t call each other by their names.  He doesn’t know hers, and she doesn’t use his.  “She barely spoke during their lovemaking, performing each act as if completing an assignment.”  She would leave at 4:30 to prepare dinner for her family, and Habara would be left to dine alone.  He watched DVDs and read long books.

There wasn’t much else to do.  He had no one to talk to.  No one to phone.  With no computer, he had no way of accessing the internet.  No newspaper was delivered, and he never watched television.  (There was a good reason for that.)  It went without saying that he couldn’t go outside.  Should Scheherazade’s visits come to a halt for some reason, he would be left all alone.

It is a little hard to figure out what this relationship is all about — that is, why it even exists.

Habara had met Scheherazade for the first time four months earlier.  He had been transported to this house, in a provincial city north of Tokyo, and she had been assigned to him as his “support liaison.”  Since he couldn’t go outside, her role was to buy food and other items he required and bring them to the house.

  Apparently, having sex with him was part of her assignment as well.

no vow, no implicit understanding — held them together.  Theirs was a chance relationship created by someone else, and might be terminated on that person’s whim.

So there seems to be some large, mysterious institutional force governing their lives and defining their roles and their functioning within this rather choreographed relationship.  It sounds like he might be under some sort of house arrest, or perhaps he has some disability or injury that he is recovering from.  It is never clear why these two people meet frequently and what motivates them, or why Habara has such a sense of confinement.  It is also unclear why they could not continue to meet even if this nameless, faceless force decided to terminate their “liaison.”

I think this ambiguity, this absence of internal motivations, is important.  Perhaps it is a comment on Japanese society.  I haven’t lived in Japan, so I cannot speak authoritatively on this, but from casual observation, it seems that many Japanese people live very structured lives that are defined by external forces, social expectations, that are a pervasive, overarching presence in their lives.  Thus, much of what they do and how they live is done in order to fulfill these imagined requirements and obligations, rather than from a deeply personal sense of purpose.  People don’t know why they are doing what they are doing, but they know they are supposed to do it — so they do.  What is the “reality that surrounds” Habara that he is so eager to forget, and thus so readily loses himself in Scheherazade’s narratives?  Japanese society.

I once met a young Japanese woman who had freshly arrived in the United States.  I asked her, “Why did you come to America?”  She replied simply, “Freedom.”  I was a little taken aback by that blunt response and all that must have been behind it, but I think it is not an uncommon sentiment among young Japanese women.  Japanese society can be burdensome and confining for young people and this relationship between Habara and Scheherazade, defined and controlled by a powerful unseen force, evokes that sense of invisible boundaries and sweeping tides.

There is nothing resembling spontaneity in this whole story, with the possible exception of their conversations.  The conversations after sex seem to be the only place in their lives where they can interact of their own volition  and participate in life as themselves.

Their sex was not exactly obligatory, but neither could it be said that their hearts were entirely in it. . . Yet, while the lovemaking was not what you’d call passionate, it wasn’t entirely businesslike either. . . to what extent did Scheherazade see their sexual relationship as one of her duties, and how much did it belong to the sphere of her personal life?  He couldn’t tell.

After this ambiguous set up of the relationship between Habara and Scheherazade, the story shifts focus and is taken over by a reminiscence Scheherazade relates from her adolescence that dominates the remainder.  Habara and Scheherazade, the couple, retreat and Scheherazade herself steps forward to claim center stage, specifically, a relationship — or, rather, an obsession — she had in her teens, which impelled her to break into houses — not to steal things, but to satisfy a psychological compulsion.  So it becomes a story within a story, or rather, a substory taking over what had been the main thread.

Scheherazade was obsessed with a boy in her high school class.  She broke into his house (rather easily through the front door with a key hidden under the doormat), and proceeded to go through his things, lie in his bed, smell his clothes, take a couple of innocuous souvenirs, and — very importantly, leave some small mementos of herself behind in inconspicuous places.  She is a rather aggressive girl, but in a very indirect way.  She never approaches the boy himself.  She tries to get close to him through the things he uses and lives with: by occupying the space he occupies, but when he is not there.

she began thinking about what to leave behind.  Her panties seemed like the best choice.  They were of an ordinary sort, simple, relatively new, and fresh that morning.  She could hide them at the very back of his closet.  Could there be anything more appropriate to leave in exchange?  But when she took them off, the crotch was damp.  I guess this comes from desire, too, she thought.  It would hardly do to leave something tainted by lust in his room.  She would only be degrading herself.  She slipped them back on and began to think about what else to leave.

Murakami does not write very well about sex.  He does not seem to understand it.  What I mean is he is detached from visceral passion.  Lust.  He doesn’t want to let himself or any of his characters feel it.  Neither Habara nor Scheherazade feel lust or strong passion in their relationship, and the above passage repudiates lust as a motivating force in Scheherazade’s behavior as a young girl toward the boy in her dreams.  It sanitizes her obsession with the boy.  It desexualizes her smelling his shirt and taking it home, lying in his bed, looking at his hidden pornography.  It makes the girl seem unreal and discredits her obsession with the boy.  If she had stuffed her wet panties under the boy’s pillow and approached him with a dripping cunt that was eager to fuck, it would have given her character more credibility.  She would have to do it in a Japanese way, of course.  Murakami could figure that out.  But Murakami cannot write the story that way.  He wouldn’t know what to do with a girl like that.  Believe me, there are plenty of Japanese girls who are not afraid of lust.

Scheherazade actually has more interaction with the boy’s mother than she does with the boy.  In fact, it seems likely that the boy never became aware of Scheherazade’s interest in him, although it is very clear that his mother did — and she put the kibosh on it.

When my break-ins stopped, my passion for him began to cool.  It was gradual, like the tide ebbing from a long, sloping beach.

The subsiding of Scheherazade’s interest in the boy is as amorphous and inexplicable as her obsession.  But it was the mother’s actions that locked the door and made the house inaccessible to her.  The boy himself was still readily available.  Scheherazade mentions watching him in classes at school and watching him on the soccer field.  She could have approached him in any number of ways.  It leads me to think that this obsession was more about the mother than it was about the boy.  Nothing she did had any impact on the boy, or even reached his awareness.  But the mother knew everything, or at least would soon discover everything, and Scheherazade knew this.  Still she pressed forward in defiant provocation.  It was an attempt at asserting independence — from the mother — through sex.  But it was quashed.  And it appears she never recovered.

Habara and Scheherazade have one more lovemaking session, at Scheherazade’s suggestion, and then she dresses and leaves.  It is not clear why Habara is left ruminating about the possibility — or rather, the certainty — of losing Scheherazade, and the greater specter of losing connection to all women.  Being “deprived of his freedom entirely” was the way he put it.  The invisible puppetmaster that pulls the strings on all of their lives and limits them to a very narrow range of possibilities, seems destined to pull the plug on his tenuous connection to humanity and leave him completely desolate.  This is his greatest worry.  There is nothing in the story to substantiate this fear, any more than there is anything in the story that explains why this affair is even taking place.

In the world Murakami creates these invisible forces that shape and define and limit our lives are both capricious and malevolent.  We can’t see them or influence them, yet we are always under their shadow.  Scheherazade gave a hint to the nature of that unseen, but all powerful governing force: the all knowing and all intrusive Mother, who locks doors and hides keys and crushes all free spirited love and passion.

One can look at this story in two ways as a commentary on the outward forces in Japanese society that define and structure and limit the lives of people, but it also represents a depiction of internal, unconscious forces within the self that restrict and crush the individual spirit.

The original story of Scheherazade was, perhaps, the earliest literary representation of a serial killer.  It remains paradigmatic.  An all powerful king who had felt betrayed and abandoned by one lover takes his revenge on all women thereafter.  Every day he marries a virgin and has sex with her.  The next day he beheads her and marries another.  This continues indefinitely, and endless stream of murdered, slaughtered virgins.  It is a tale of unbounded cruelty and hostility toward women from an original injury by one.  The king is so insecure and so lacking in his own sense of loveability that he feels he must kill each new woman or she will surely betray and abandon him.  This original insecurity and sense of being unloveable did not start with the lover who betrayed him, but rather, started with his mother who was never able to make him feel loved and secure in her love.  His rage was so extreme that he had to kill every woman he came in contact with.  It was the only way he could relate to women.  The betrayal of the first woman who touched off the spree was only the spark that lit a tinderbox that had been waiting for many years.  The injury that she inflamed had been inflicted many years prior, and indeed, goes back to the cradle.  Killing women was palliative, but not curative.  It assuaged his rage temporarily, like a valve letting off steam, but it did not begin to heal the original injury of neglect and abandonment that continued to fester and give rise to new waves of rage that demanded appeasement.  This is why serial killers need to keep on killing.  The mere venting of rage is not a cure.  Sex alone is also not a cure.  Scheherazade had the right idea.

Habara feels that abandonment by Scheherazade is inevitable.  It is only a matter of time.  This expectation was present before he ever met her.  It had nothing to do with anything she did or said.  His fear of being deprived of his freedom entirely is not a fear of external forces — there are no external forces — but rather of internal anxieties and insecurities that might cripple and disable his ability to connect on any level with women.  Scheherazade’s stories eased him of “worries and unpleasant memories” — most likely in relation to women.  He very likely had many of them starting way back with a mother who could not love or make him feel loved, and perhaps abandoned him.  Lust and passion are way too dangerous for a man this fragile.  Deep attachment is the utmost danger, because from an early age he learned that strong attachment leads to devastating disappointment — over and over again.  This is what the story is about.

The original story of Scheherazade ends optimistically, even triumphantly.  Murakami’s contemporary reworking is less optimistic, but has some promising trends.  The original story is a story of healing, through, perhaps, sated rage, coupled with satisfying sex, coupled with a continuing narrative whereby the wounded ruler becomes invested in the future.  Being able to see a way forward that is not an abyss of abandonment and devastation is a very important aspect of the healing process.  That is what Scheherazade’s narratives were able to do for the murderous king.  He was eventually able to fall in love with Scheherazade and make her his Queen.  A decisively optimistic outcome.

In Murakami’s story there is less healing and less optimism.   Murakami’s story ends with gloom and foreboding.  What is positive in Murakami’s tale is that Scheherazade and Habara were able to connect with one another in genuine communication from the heart through the stories she told after sex.  Sex was not the primary avenue of communication for this couple.  Their sex was obligatory and somewhat perfunctory.  The real action between them occurred afterward, when she told him stories of her past.  He took a genuine interest in her life and she found a receptive audience for things she needed to reveal.  This very positive connection aroused Habara’s anxieties of abandonment.  There has not been enough time to effect a healing of his underlying vulnerabilities and injuries, but if they continue, perhaps for A Thousand and One Afternoons, they might achieve a similar outcome to the original tale.

 

THE WHALE is theatre at its best at MTC.

By Kedar K. Adour

The Whale: Drama by Samuel D. Hunter. Directed by Jasson Minadakis. Marin Theatre Company (MTC), 397 Miller Avenue, Mill Valley, CA 415-388-5208 or www.marintheatre.org. October 2-26, 2014.

THE WHALE is theatre at its best at MTC. [rating:5]

Marin Theatre Company’s New Play Program has become the Bay Area blue-chip showcase for new American plays. They have again earned that honor with the West Coast premiere of Samuel D. Hunter’s stunning drama The Whale, which won the 2011 Sky Cooper New American Play Prize. It has earned honors in its previous outings at the Denver Center Theatre, Off Broadway’s Playwrights Horizons, South Coast Repertory Theatre and Chicago’s Victory Garden Theatre. MTC’s production is riveting and gut wrenching and will keep you transfixed for 110 minutes without an intermission.

Significant plays dealing with medical disabilities include Joe Egg (cerebral spasticity), Angels in America and The Normal Heart (HIV-AIDS), Wit (Cancer), The Elephant Man (Neurofibromatosis) and most recently the Tony wining musical Next to Normal (bipolar disorder). Hunter explores morbid obesity creating Charlie (Nicholas Pelczar) a man with a beautiful sensitive interior and a 600 pound body. Hunter not only focuses on Charlie’s pain but the pain that cripples those around him. Every character in the play, and they do many times over, state “I’m sorry” and they have good reason to be sorry.

The protagonist Charlie has been eating junk food for years and is now in a horrible physical state with heart disease and respiratory problems. Hunter does not dwell on the physical disabilities caused by obesity but on the chain of events that led this particular individual getting to his present state. In short scenes interspersed with blackouts and the sound of wind and ocean waves filling the void, he bookends the play with one of the characters reading aloud an essay on “Moby Dick” and the relationship of whalers to the whales. Hunter’s interest in formal religion is well documented as noted in his play A Bright New Boise produced at the Aurora Theatre last year. This would partially explain his use of Jonah and the whale as symbolic for a stunning explanation of his unexpected denouement.

The play takes place in Northern Idaho where Hunter was raised and is pertinent to reactions of the inhabitants of small towns with strong Mormon attachments. Without giving away the storyline there are cogent data to be regarded. Charlie is a writing instructor who communicates with his students via computers. He is practically immobile and spends most of his time on a broken down sofa supported by cement blocks. Encased in his fat suit Pelczar wheezes and grunts as he uses his walker to move from the sofa to the bathroom.

Charlie is gay and we learn has had a love affair that ended disastrously with one of his students 14 years ago. He was married at that time to Mary (Michelle Maxson) and had a two year old daughter Ellie. He has not seen or heard from either of them in the intervening years. Liz (Liz Sklar) a local nurse has been looking after Charlie since he became incapacitated and confined to the house and couch. Into this strange milieu stumbles young Elder Thomas (Adam Magill) ostensible doing his required Mormon mission. As Charlie tries to reconnect with his now 17 year old rebellious daughter Ellie(Christina Oeschger) who frequently tells him “You’re disgusting” the interactions become more intense but gradual fit together like a like complicate jig-saw puzzle only to end explosively.

                                      Charlie (Nicholas Pelczar) tries to comfort his nurse and best friend Liz (Liz Sklar)

Nicholas Pelczar gives a prizewinning performance. Liz Sklar  as Liz displays strong acting conveying palpable concern burdened down by anger. Christina Oeschger as Ellie projects the qualities that even disgust her mother. Michelle Maxson’s short time on stage as Ellie’s mother gives depth to her relationship with Charlie and Ellie.

This is a do not miss production. Running time 110 minutes without intermission.

CAST: Adam Magill,  Michelle Maxson, Cristina Oeschger, Nicholas Pelczar, Liz Sklar.

ARTISTIC STAFF: Directed by Jasson Minadakis; Scenic Designer, Michael Locher; Lighting Designer, Kurt Landisman; Costume Designer, Christine Crook; Sound Designer,Chris Houston; Breath and Physicality Coach,Vicki Shaghoian; Stage Manager, Sean McStravick;Properties Artisan, Kirsten Royston; Casting Director, Meg Pearson;Dramaturg,Margot Melon; Assistant Directors, Robby Lutfy, Richard A. Mosqueda; Fat Suit; Construction, CMC & Design

Kedar K. Adour, MD

Courtesy of www.theatreworldinternetmagazine.com

Charlie (Nicholas Pelczar) tries to comfort his nurse and best friend Liz (Liz Sklar) in the Bay Area premiere of Samuel D. Hunter’s The Whale at Marin Theatre Company for a limited engagement through October 26.

“The Whale’ holds audience rapt at Marin Theatre Company

By Judy Richter

Fast-food containers, soda cans and other trash litter the filthy apartment where a nearly 600-pound man spreads over a beat up old couch supported by cinder blocks in the Marin Theatre Company production of Samuel D. Hunter’s “The Whale.”

The man, Charlie (Nicholas Pelczar), makes his living as an online tutor of expository writing for college freshmen. His only friend, and the only person he ever sees in person, is Liz (Liz Sklar).

Even though Liz is a nurse who looks after him and apparently knows better, she brings him his food, such as an entire tub of Kentucky Fried Chicken or two huge hamburgers. She has a love-hate relationship with him. Maybe she indirectly blames him for her brother’s death.

Charlie and her brother, Alan, a Mormon, had been lovers until Alan went to a service at the Mormon church in their small northern Idaho town, came home and stopped eating, thus starving himself to death. That’s when Charlie began to allow his weight to balloon.

Much to her dismay, Liz arrives one day to find Charlie listening to Elder Thomas (Adam Magill), an earnest 19-year-old Mormon missionary who had knocked on his door.

Because of his morbid obesity, Charlie’s health is rapidly declining. He suffers from extremely high blood pressure as well as congestive heart failure. When he realizes that he’s about to die, he reconnects with his 17-year-old daughter, Ellie (Cristina Oeschger), whom he hasn’t seen in 15 years. Ellie is a nasty, hate-filled girl who’s mean to everyone. Charlie bribes her to spend time with him and write for him.

The play’s fifth character is Mary (Michelle Maxson), Charlie’s former wife and Ellie’s mother, who has a relatively short but powerful scene with Charlie.

MTC artistic director Jasson Minadakis directs this Bay Area premiere with skill and sensitivity and elicits multi-layered performances from each actor.

Outfitted in a realistic-looking fat suit (costumes by Christine Crook), Pelczar delivers a tour de force as Charlie, making every move a monumental effort. As Charlie’s condition deteriorates, Pelczar has him wheezing and gasping for every breath as if it might be his last. It’s an incredible feat of acting.

The other four actors are outstanding, too, creating characters with complex motivations.

Playwright Hunter, who recently received a MacArthur Foundation genius grant, makes frequent allusions to “Moby Dick” and the biblical story of Jonah and the whale in this play. Sound designer Chris Houston reinforces this device with sounds of the sea during the blackouts between scenes. The set is by Michael Locher with lighting by Kurt Landisman.

The play runs nearly two hours without intermission, but it holds the audience rapt, thanks both to Hunter’s writing and to Pelczar’s memorable performance, one for the ages.

“The Whale” will continue at Marin Theatre Company, 397 Miller Ave., MillValley, through Oct. 26. For tickets and information, call (415) 388-5208 or visit www.marintheatre.org.

 

Powerful drama in Marin County features ‘best acting job of year’

By Woody Weingarten

[Woody’s [rating: 4.5]

Charlie (Nicholas Pelczar) tries to comfort his caregiver, Liz (Liz Sklar), in “The Whale.” Photo by Kevin Berne.

Charlie slowly has been committing suicide by food.

Ounce by ounce.

He’s now somewhere between 550 and 600 pounds.

Playwright Samuel D. Hunter, 33, just last month was named a $625,000 MacArthur Foundation “genius grant” fellow — in part for creating “unlikely protagonists.”

Charlie, front and center in a new drama at the Marin Theatre Company, certainly fits that category.

He’s not a character I’ll soon forget.

Yet “The Whale” also deals with a mysteriously dead lover; a woman who’s become the protagonist’s friend, nurse and enabler; a missionary seeking to relocate his faith; and a daughter Charlie abandoned when realizing he was gay.

Plus wide-ranging targets: faith, death, parenting, teaching, obesity, truth.

Hunter, of course, has a resume jammed with plotlines that are upsetting, sad and profoundly stuffed with gravitas.

Including the enigmatic, dark and edgy comedy about faith and forgiveness, “A Bright New Boise,” which was produced at the Aurora Theatre in Berkeley last year.

“The Whale,” an intermission-less drama a few minutes short of two hours, is never easy to watch — even with the persistent injection of quirky humor that makes the audience laugh nervously.

But, like the many references to biblical Jonah and fictional “Moby Dick,” that’s no surprise.

The minute I walk into the theater I know what’s ahead could be bleak: The set by Michael Locher forewarns me.

A grungy, overstuffed couch rests on chipped cinder blocks. In front are king-sized food and drink containers. Piled high all around is clutter. A coat of fresh paint wouldn’t help the dingy walls.

Effectively depressing.

Yet nothing could prepare me for the powerful, spot-on performance of Nicholas Pelczar as a lumbering shut-in who’s perpetually apologizing and eating himself to death because he’s grieving for his boyfriend.

For me, it’s unquestionably the best acting job of the year.

Pelczar convinces me, in spite of his average-sized head in a gigantic fat suit, that Charlie’s insatiable appetite is authentic.

How?

By obsessively wolfing down mounds of Kentucky Fried Chicken and chunks of a Subway foot-long while slurping an oversized soda.

Wheezing with every other word.

While struggling to get up so he can shuffle to the bathroom clinging to his walker.

Pelczar makes me believe, too, in Charlie’s rigidity (“I don’t go to hospitals”) even as his blood pressure climbs to a sky-high 238 over 134 and he’s plagued with heart problems and endless other ailments.

He also persuades me to accept the character’s divided persona: an emotional devastation coupled with shameless optimism.

The supporting cast also dazzles.

A 17-year-old novice actor, Christina Oeschger, adroitly captures Charlie’s antisocial, estranged daughter, Ellie, who’s failing her classes and busily posting a “hate blog.”

She spits out her misery: “Just being around you is disgusting,” she tells the dad she hasn’t seen since she was two, a man who’s bribed her to visit.

And in a chorus of pain, Adam Magill aptly flounders as Elder Thomas as Charlie’s caregiver becomes almost too intense to watch because of Liz Sklar’s performance skills.

Michelle Maxson isn’t on stage much as Mary, Charlie’s ex, but when she is, her acting chops are quickly visible.

Jasson Minadakis, the company’s artistic director for nine years, is once again at the helm. His work on this touching play, which ran off-Broadway in 2012, shows how impressively he’s matured.

Try as he may, however, he can’t keep the audience — before it feels compassion — from wincing collectively at the seemingly grotesque main character.

On the other hand, the climax of “The Whale” is so potent the opening night crowd, totally stunned, didn’t applaud for several seconds.

A thunderous tumult then rocked the place.

“The Whale” plays at the Marin Theatre Company, 397 Miller Ave., Mill Valley, through Oct. 26. Performances Tuesdays and Thursdays through Saturdays, 8 p.m.; Wednesdays, 7:30 p.m.; Sundays, 7 p.m. Matinees, Sundays, 1 or 2 p.m. Tickets: $10 to $58, subject to change. Information: (415) 388-5208 or marintheatre.org. 

Drought motivates characters in ‘The Rainmaker’

By Judy Richter

Combine a feel-good plot with an astute staging and what you come up with San Jose Stage Company’s production of “The Rainmaker.”

H. Richard Nash’s romantic comedy opened on Broadway in 1954 and is set during the Depression, but it has a contemporary feel, especially in drought-stricken California.

A western ranching family, the Currys, like many others, is coping with a prolonged drought that is taking a heavy toll on cattle. Then along comes a fast-talking con man who tries to convince them that he can produce rain within the next 24 hours if he’s given $100 in advance. Despite misgivings by two family members, he gets his money.

The family is headed by H.C. Curry (Randall King), an insightful, caring widower with three adult children. The blunt, practical Noah (Will Springhorn Jr.) manages the ranch. Jim (Brandon Leland), the youngest, is a sweet but none-too-bright dreamer. The men keep hoping that Lizzie (Allison F. Rich) will get married, but she sees herself as a plain woman who doesn’t know how to attract a man.

Her brothers and father believe that a good fit for her might be the sheriff’s deputy, File (Joe Estlack). However, File has closed himself off from companionship, even that of the puppy offered by Sheriff Thomas (Michael Bellino).

Bill Starbuck (Johnny Moreno) is indeed a con man, but he helps to bring about changes for the good, starting with Lizzie. He convinces her that she’s not plain, that she’s a beautiful woman.  She, in turn, helps to bring File out of his shell. Her brothers are changed for the better, too.

Director Jessa Brie Moreno(wife of the actor) elicits believable, likable performances from the entire cast, especially Rich as Lizzie and Moreno as Starbuck. The director and actors mine the play’s gentle good humor and allow the characters to develop naturally.

Moreno also keeps the action moving smoothly during the three-act show, done with one intermission. She’s assisted by the design team, led by Giulio Perrone, whose simple set creates a rustic ambience and allows seamless scene changes.

Californians can readily identify with the characters’ almost desperate longing for rain and lots of it, which is what con man Bill Starbuck promises — all logic aside. Perhaps another title for this play could be “Dreaming in a Time of Drought.”

“The Rainmaker” will continue at San Jose Stage Company, 490 S. First St., San Jose, through Oct. 26. For tickets and information, call (408) 283-7142 or visit www.thestage.org.