Skip to main content
Category

Joe Cillo

Joe
Cillo

Threats and Rewards

By Joe Cillo

I hadn’t been to a live performance in a theater in over a year.  Since I am totally vaxed and masked and meet the guidelines set by The Marsh, I decided to attend Marga Gomez’s Spanking Machine last night. Everyone obeyed the safety protocols throughout the performance.

Gomez is the perfect act to open at the Marsh to a live audience in over 18 months.

 

I’ve been following Ms. Gomez’ performances for decades.  I believe I saw one of her earliest performances at Theater Rhinoceros.  Even then, I thought she was unique and very funny.  Also poignant and very physical in portraying various characters.  Last time I saw her was at the Central Works theater in Berkeley.  She was acting in King of Cuba by Cristina García, a full-length play in which she appeared as Fidel Castro.  Since I hadn’t seen her in years, I wondered if I would recognize her.  However, as soon as she came on stage in typical Castro military garb, I knew it was her.  She has said that Spanking Machine would be her last solo performance.  She wants to write for other actors.  Hopefully she will appear in other people’s plays.  Whatever she does, I’m sure she’ll be a huge success.

 

In Spanking Machine, Gomez as Gomez talks about friendship with Scotty the boy in the third grade of her Catholic school who became her best friend and the first boy she ever kissed which made them realize that they were both gay even at that young age.  She knew it, but he didn’t- then.  She relates their friendship as being very sweet, poignant and devilish in that they were bent on pranking big people.  Spitting on them. Shooting them with water guns in subways, and doing other mean things children cook up to harass adults.  They, of course, as kids, think they’re hysterically funny.  However, if you misbehaved in class, you were threatened to be sent to the principal’s office to face the spanking machine.  The children didn’t exactly know what this machine did but all feared it.  Anyone who came back from suffering its effects did not want to talk about it for fear they would be sent back to face it again.  It was a threat that hung over them all through their school years.  Upstage on the set is a cardboard box with a black block letters on it that read: Spanking Machine.  We think that we are going to actually see this device.  But, of course, we don’t; however not seeing it, we can only imagine it as the traumatized children can.

She and Scotty lost contact with each other for 40 years until one day, she gets an email from him.  Gomez, as Scotty, types out his email, verbalizing the text in the raspy asthmatic Cuban-accented voice she gives him.

Gomez creates her characters not so much physically- well, that too- but relies more on voice.  He tells her he lives in Miami and invites her down for a visit.  She somehow gets the impression that he’s very wealthy.  Turns out differently as we find out during her stay in Miami.   He now lives with his wife and mother-in-law- a Cuban thing- who do not appear in the piece.  However, Margo gives us glimpses of their characters through her vocal delivery.  To indicate different situations and physical locations, she announces a costume change and will change to a tropical blouse for her Miami visit, a bomber jacket when she becomes truly comfortable as- what she comes to realize- a dyke.

Gomez doesn’t shy away from speaking about the sexual abuse that she suffered not only from men but from women as well.  She gives anecdotes about responding to an interesting man’s invitation and visits him in his apartment to see his collection of tropical fish only to hear him lock all the doors in his apartment. After managing to escape, she came away with a water-filled plastic bag of guppies when she was promised exotic tropical fish- one of the reason she agreed to visit him.  One of her male abusers has an extensive ceramic collection which in a wonderful depiction she doesn’t hesitate to destroy in order to get him to release her.  At one point she relates graphically how she was sexually abused. Thankfully, the necessary revelations about other bad stuff- sadistic treatment of brown kids by Irish nuns: Sister Kevin McGillicuddy (?) for one, for instance, are scattered among humorous anecdotes.  Her only props are a table, a tall stool,a chair and a shopping bag containing a few items. Through her verbal delivery alone she allows us to magically see the scene.

Spanking Machine does not run smoothly.  It has stops and starts. It as though she takes time to gather herself to talk about the trauma she has undergone throughout her life as a gay, dark-skinned Cuban, Catholic girl growing up in New York, whose only friend in the third grade was Scotty the first boy she ever kissed.

Marga Gomez’s one woman show Spanking Machine, is at The Marsh in San Francisco on Valencia Street between 21st and 22nd through October 23.  Tickets and information can be found at the Marsh web site: TheMarsh.org

 

 

 

Best of Enemies — Film Review

By Joe Cillo

Best of Enemies

Directed by Robert Gordon and Morgan Neville

 

 

This is a rehash of the 1968 political conventions and the debates between William F. Buckley Jr. and Gore Vidal that were aired as part of ABC’s alleged news coverage.  I vaguely remember watching some of these when I was about fourteen years old.  These debates varied in length between about 8 and 22 minutes.  They were not very long.  I am quite sure I did not watch all of them, but I did watch the famous ninth debate when Buckley lost his temper and threatened to sock Gore Vidal in the face.  I don’t remember too much else about this and at the time I was ignorant and had a very limited perspective on the country and what was happening to us as a nation.  I remember checking Buckley’s book, Up From Liberalism, out of the library and carrying it around for some time.  I didn’t read the whole thing.  I started it, but Buckley is pompous and rather boring.  I didn’t warm to Gore Vidal either.  Vidal represented an iconoclasm and counterculture to which I had no exposure growing up in a small, backward, conservative town in Ohio.  I like him much better now that I have become an iconoclast and counterculture figure myself.  What I say here is not what I recall or influenced in any way by my own very vague memories of these events.  It is based strictly on what was presented in the film.

This film is interesting and presents a clash of two strong intellectual personalities.  They were both members of the east coast elite.  Buckley was well-to-do and educated in his early years in England.  Vidal’s family was military and political.  I wish the film was a little better than it was.  These two men had a deep visceral hatred for one another that lasted their entire lives.  They represented polar opposites in values, lifestyle, and vision for the country.  I didn’t really grasp the source of this rancorous hatred.  I understand they are different, they have different points of view, etc.  But difference does not entail that they must hate each other with such implacable animosity.  They seemed to need each other as enemies.  There was a peculiar bond of rivalry that they seemed to revel in.  I think there was some mutual jealousy as well as morbid fascination.  There was no foundation of good will or mutual respect.

Buckley was a grandiose, well defended person who hid behind this pose of intellectual superiority.  Vidal detested this.  He could see Buckley for what he was, namely, an authoritarian, narcissistic bigot, and he knew how to needle him.  He knew how to get under his skin and expose that ugly, violent, spite and disdain for those he considered beneath himself, which was almost everybody.  Vidal was not intimidated by Buckley’s intellect.  In fact, he mocked it.  Buckley wasn’t used to being challenged on his own turf, especially by someone for whom he had little more than contempt.  The fact that Vidal was able to bring Buckley to the point where he completely lost it in a public forum was deeply wounding to him and he never recovered from it.  But Vidal had been wounded long before, and throughout his life, by the narrow minded prejudices and righteous exclusion that Buckley embodied.  However, Vidal was accustomed to being insulted and disdained for what he was and was much better prepared for the attacks from Buckley.

These so-called debates reflected a cultural and political divide in the United States that existed at the time, but which has deepened and intensified ever since.  The election of 1968, and particularly the Democratic Convention in Chicago of that year, can be seen as the beginning of a long downward spiral in the United States, politically, culturally, economically, philosophically, and in terms of the media’s role in informing and educating the public.  We are now living in the shadow of that long process of cultural and political degeneration.  We have gone from William F. Buckley to Donald Trump.  Gore Vidal is all but forgotten.

The subject of this film, I think, is rather difficult, because these two men were primarily writers, who expressed their ideas in books and long essays and arguments.   A film does not and cannot capture all that has been laid down in pages and pages of print.  So the portrait of these two men and their rivalry is somewhat truncated.  Buckley, however, also had a presence in television and for that reason is probably better known.  It takes a lot more effort to read a book, and I think Vidal’s reputation and legacy has been hampered by that, in contrast to Buckley.

The film is a good, intriguing introduction.  I come away from it feeling more curious than informed.  I think I might read Myra Breckenridge.  It might give me better insight into Gore Vidal, who for me is the more remote of these two characters.  Buckley is a much better known quantity, although the film gave me some curiosity about his later years, particularly the despair and depression he expressed in his late interview with Charlie Rose.

I wish the film had shown more of the debates themselves.  The early debates were shown and the ninth debate, where the uproar occurred.  But the tenth debate was skirted with only scant mention.  It would have been interesting to see how they rebounded after that inglorious spectacle.  I think this film will be of special interest to those who are preoccupied with politics or who are interested in journalism and the information media.  Personally, I never watch television, except when I visit my dad.  And I am always shocked at the degradation that has occurred both in news coverage and in the popular culture.  This film is a measuring stick of that process of decline, like returning to the wilderness and seeing how much the glaciers have melted after many years.  It does what it does about as well as it could, but I think it is necessary to read in order to understand who these two men were and what this confrontation of personalities was really all about.

Two Trains Running – Multi Ethnic Theatre

By Joe Cillo

The Multi Ethnic Theatre in association with Custom Made Theatre presents August Wilson’s “Two Trains Running.”

“Two Trains Running,” which premiered in 1990, is set in the 1960s. It is one in a series of Wilson’s plays for each decade from the 1900s through the 1990s called the “Pittsburgh Cycle.” The plays are about Black lives in America.   Opening night at Custom Made Theatre there was a lighting glitch so someone offstage verbalized the lighting cues. Nevertheless, it was not a problem.

“Trains,” takes place in 1969 over a few days; it was directed by Lewis Campbell (who also designed the set).   Wilson, like other 20th Century playwrights, such as Eugene O’Neill, wrote plays that unfold slowly, asking the audience’s patience as the characters take their time telling their stories. There is a lot of talk and very little action. The dialogue throughout concerns Black’s relationship to the white man, much of it tracks with the current white-cops-shooting-innocent-Blacks milieu. A major character in Wilson’s “Pittsburgh Cycle” is Aunt Esther, mentioned, but never seen. In earlier plays, she is 285 years old. In “Trains” she is 322. She is known as the “washer of souls”. All believe that if you visit Aunt Esther and do as she says, your wish will come true. Yet she is rarely home or is “sleeping.”

With the audience on three sides of the realistic set, depicting a typical diner complete with booths, a jukebox, and pass-through window to the kitchen, we felt we were patrons in Memphis Lee’s (an excellent Bennie Lewis, whose scowl almost outdoes the late Toshiro Mifune’s) diner in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, along with his regulars. Prices written on a blackboard for fried chicken with dumplings, beans and corn bread, and steak and potatoes range from 65 cents to $2.35; and coffee is a nickel.

Sleek, catlike, well-dressed Fabian Herd plays 40s-something Wolf, a numbers-runner. Old man owner Memphis Lee, who comes off angry most of the time, railing at cook/waitress Risa (played with quiet introspection by Beverly McGriff), warns Wolf about using the diner’s payphone for his business. The city wants to buy his building cheap and tear it down, part of the gentrification of the city, forcing out black communities. He holds out for a higher price. A heavy-set, older man, Holloway (Stuart Elwyn Hall) sprawls in his booth, doing what looks like crossword puzzles, or studying racing forms; he often interjects philosophical comments. Keep an eye on the actor to catch his facial expressions as he listens to the others. For most of the first act we hear about West, the undertaker- black suit, black hat, black gloves. When we finally meet him (Vernan Medearis ), we are surprised. He appears to have once been a much larger man. Sporting a gray goatee, he comes in for his cuppa, always reminding Risa to bring the sugar packets. He talks about the man he’s burying for whom a crowd of mourners line the block for a last look, and the treasure the dead man is bringing into the afterlife. He boasts that he will never go out of business. People are always dying. Opening night, Anthony Pride replaced Geoffrey Grier as the believable, pathetic character of Hambone. Hambone is obviously mentally ill. Seems he was duped into painting a fence and never got paid what was promised. Other regulars want him to shut up, and some sympathize, especially Risa.

Sterling (a stocky, handsome Keita Jones), a newcomer, appears. He is a young ex-con who brings to the diner the current events of the time about which the others seem uninterested or cynical, and a stack of flyers for a Malcolm X rally which is building up outside. He wants a girlfriend and courts Risa. Risa has mystery behind her, which is obvious physically, but doesn’t speak about it, leaving us to wonder what she is all about. The play ends with Sterling rushing in with Hambone’s payment. There’s an explosion offstage and sirens.

I encourage you to see this play which runs through August 30.

Go to www.wehavemet.org for information and tickets.

In August 2016, Multi Ethnic Theatre will present Wilson’s last play, “Radio Golf” (August in August) at the Gough Street Playhouse.

“Don Quixote” – Marin Shakespeare Company

By Joe Cillo

Ron Campbell as Don Quixote

The tale of the Knight of the Woeful Countenance has been transformed from the written word into many forms from plays, to operas, to movies, even television specials.  Written, allegedly, by Miguel de Cervantes from a found Arabic text, “Don Quixote de La Mancha”  is considered the to be the first modern novel.  Playwrights Peter Anderson and Colin Heath certainly had a lot to work with in adapting the novel for its United States premiere at the Marin Shakespeare Company’s 2015 Season.  In a preview talk, Canadian Anderson admitted that the work was difficult and that they had to cut it down to make it meet his and Heath’s vision of how they saw the completed production – as Commedia d’ell Arte theatre.

The playwrights and director Lesley Schisgall Currier couldn’t have cast a more perfect Quixote than movement and solo artist Ron Campbell and, as his co-star, the equally outstanding John R. Lewis as Sancho Panza.  Ron Campbell’s skills as a movement artist are evident in portraying Quixote’s physical fluidity and dance-like actions.  The leads were enhanced by an ensemble of five actors in various supporting roles: Cassidy Brown, Rick Eldridge, Lee Fitzpatrick, Monica  Ho, and Jed Parsario.  Adding to the wonderment of this fantastic production were the twenty five or more half-masks hand-crafted especially for this production by multi-talented, David Poznanter, who is also an actor, circus performer, and acrobat.  He spent a year in Italy learning mask-making from a famous mask-maker, Matteo Destro.

The ensemble: (Not in order) Rick Eldridge, Cassidy Brown, Lee Fitzpatrick, Monica Ho, and Jed Parsario, with Ron Campbell.

Poznanter’s masks enable an actor to change  and embody the character, which is significantly recognized in all the actors.

Quixote, having steeped himself in a library full of books on knights and chivalry, claimed the mantle of a knight, bent on saving damsels in distress, and putting to rights social and political wrongs.  Yes, he was delusional; believing things were what they were not – an inn, a castle; a bucket on a broom handle – his horse, Rosenante.  A barmaid, a princess.

 

Ron Campbell as Don Quixote and John R. Lewis as Sancho Panza

I read Book One of “Don Quixote” and wondered how the playwrights would handle some of his most difficult adventures: the windmills which Quixote insisted were giants; the scene with the chain-gang; the flock of sheep, etc.  But they did so, beautifully; assisted by all whose efforts went into making a truly inventive, memorable production.

Don Quixote plays Friday nights and weekends through  August 30 at  Forest Meadows Amphitheatre on the Domincan University campus in San Rafael.  Go to www.marinshakespeare.org for more information.

 

 

Photos by Steven Underwood

Earthquake Storms — Book Review

By Joe Cillo

Earthquake Storms:  The Fascinating History and Volatile Future of the San Andreas Fault.  By John Dvorak.  New York:  Pegasus Books.  2014.

 

 

 

Earthquake Storms is indeed a fascinating history, not only of the San Andreas Fault that runs along the western edge of California, but also of the State of California itself, the cities of San Francisco and Los Angeles, the building of the Golden Gate Bridge, the California Gold Rush, the development of the oil industry in California, the growth of the science of geology, the increasing understanding of earthquakes, the development of the Richter scale, the Trojan War, paleoseismology, as well as the future of the San Andreas Fault and the prospects of predicting earthquakes, in addition to many other interesting side roads.  The book is well written, well researched and has depth as well as breadth.  It is a stimulating panorama that includes colorful depictions of the personalities whose curiosity and dogged persistence made the breakthroughs that moved our understanding of earthquakes forward.   Dvorak makes interesting connections between personal peculiarities and psychological needs of individuals and the influence it had on their work as a researchers and scientists.

Until the latter half of the twentieth century earthquakes were mysterious, apparently random events, that could be enormously destructive.  But people had no clue why they occurred when and where they did and what caused them.  The destructive potential of earthquakes has grown with the growth of civilization and the construction of large cities on or near the faults in the earth where earthquakes occur, and this in turn has stimulated the study of earthquakes and their causes.  Earthquake Storms documents this growing interest and understanding of earthquakes beginning in the nineteenth century with dramatic strides forward in the twentieth.  However, this understanding has not reached a point where earthquakes can be foreseen with the kind of accuracy that has come to forecasting the weather.  Dvorak cites a 2008 report by the Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities that asserts a 31% probability of a magnitude 6.8 or stronger quake along the Hayward Fault, which runs along the eastern side of San Francisco Bay from Richmond, through Berkeley, Oakland, Hayward and Fremont, within the next thirty years. (p. 235)  Not exactly something you can make plans around, but it does emphasize the need to strengthen buildings and infrastructure for the inevitable traumas that will be visited upon them.

While this book is well thought out, well organized, and coherently written, it does have one major drawback, and that is a dearth of maps, drawings, diagrams, and illustrations that would make some of these concepts and descriptions a lot easier to grasp.  Dvorak does include eight pages of black and white photographs that are very interesting and helpful, but the book needs a lot more.  I would recommend another fifty pages of maps and illustrations.  I’ll give you an example.

When the North American plate began to drift over the Farallon-Pacific’s spreading central region, a transform fault formed, and then a peculiar feature developed at either end of that fault.  The feature, known as a triple junction, is a place where the boundaries of three tectonic plates meet.  In this case, two of the plates are the North American and Pacific plates; the third, which is actually what remains of the Farallon plate, has been given a different name depending on whether it is north or south of the transform fault.  At the north end, the surviving part of the Farallon plate is now known as the Gorda plate and the point where the three plates meet is the Mendocino triple junction, because the point is currently located near Cape Mendocino.  At the south end is the Cocos plate — a remnant of the Farallon plate — and the Rivera triple junction.  What is important here is that, because of the directions in which the various plates are moving, neither the Mendocino nor the Rivera triple junction is stationary; both migrate.  And they migrate in opposite directions, the Mendocino triple junction to the north and the Rivera to the south.  As time progresses, the transform boundary between the Pacific and North American plates lengthens.  And that brings us back to the San Francisquito-Fenner-Clemens Well Fault.  (p. 211)

Can you visualize that all right?  Maybe you don’t really need a map.  It should be no problem to anyone who is steeped in the geology and geography of California.   But how many people would that be?  This book is written, supposedly, for a wide audience.   But doesn’t Dvorak know that Americans are among the most geographically illiterate people in the developed world?  According to National Geographic and Roper surveys:

About 11 percent of young citizens of the U.S. couldn’t even locate the U.S. on a map.  The Pacific Ocean’s location was a mystery to 29 percent; Japan, to 58 percent; France, to 65 percent; and the United Kingdom, to 69 percent.1

If people cannot even find the Pacific Ocean on a map, how are they going to visualize the Mendocino and Rivera triple junctions that are moving in opposite directions?   Dvorak does this all through the book.  He is very good at verbal descriptions, but he expects his reader to have encyclopedic knowledge of geography and a vivid imagination for the movements of large objects, how they interact, the stresses they create, and the outcome of these colliding forces that would be worthy of an experienced civil engineer.  It may be bad news to the publisher, but his book needs illustrations and photographs on nearly every other page, perhaps another hundred.  There are so many things that Dvorak describes very well in words, but they cry out for a picture that would simplify the cumbersome description.

Another example would be his descriptions of rocks and mineral specimens.

I draw attention to this particular component of the conglomerate because it is easy to identify.  About one out of every ten boulders, cobbles, or pebbles in the conglomerate is this purple rock peppered with pink flecks of feldspar crystals, which adds to its attractiveness and ease of identification.  (p. 205)

A picture would do a much better job of fixing the image of this mineral in the mind, and I think it would also make the point he is trying to get across more accessible as well.  In this subject material, which is very visual to begin with, descriptions of the movements of land masses and geographical features almost require pictures and illustrations.  He really needs to do a second edition, updated and improved with lots of visual imagery.

One lesson that you can’t help but take away from this book is that earthquakes are inevitable and the San Andreas fault, as well as many other faults all throughout California, are ticking time bombs that will certainly go off as major seismic events in the foreseeable future, with powerful and terrible effect.  The title of the book, Earthquake Storms, refers to another realization, first argued for by Amos Nur in the 1990s, that earthquakes tend to occur in clusters, or as Dvorak calls them, storms.  Once you have a major earthquake, the chance of having another one of equal or stronger magnitude is actually greater  than it was before the first event.   He likened a fault’s slippage to the opening of a zipper that catches on successive teeth as it slides down the chain.  Amos Nur has suggested that such a series of successive earthquakes over a period of decades may have contributed to the end of the Bronze Age 3300 years ago. (pp. 226-28)  Dvorak points out several examples of successive major quakes along fault lines within relatively short spans of time, including along the San Andreas.

It is also worth mentioning, Kathryn Schulz’s recent, excellent article in the New Yorker  that describes a much more monumental disaster waiting to happen on the Cascadia fault off the Pacific Northwest.  The Cascadia Fault, has been quiet for over three hundred years, in contrast to the San Andreas, which has been quite active in recent times.  In other words, the Cascadia Fault, while not considered overdue in a statistical sense, has been ominously quiet for a very long time, and when it does give way, could prove cataclysmic for the Pacific Northwest.  Schulz points out that faults have a maximum magnitude in the strength of earthquake they can produce that is based on the length and width of the fault and the amount that the fault can slip.  She does not discuss the science of this in any detail and Dvorak does not mention the earthquake magnitude potential of faults at all.  But for the San Andreas Fault, Schulz claims that 8.2 is the maximum magnitude it can generate — which is a pretty good shake that will wreak a lot of havoc.  But it pales in comparison to the potential awaiting in the Cascadia Fault off the Pacific Northwest coast.   If the Cascadia gives way in a really big way the result could be anywhere from 8.0 to 9.2, which would leave much of the Pacific Northwest, which is profoundly unprepared for such an event, in rubble.

Generally, I would heartily recommend this book, especially to well educated people who live in California.  But it could be equally relevant and illuminating for people all around the world who live in earthquake zones were it to be revised and expanded to include illustrations that would make the text much easier to follow and the conceptual arguments easier to visualize.

 

 

Notes

 

1.  National Geographic News, October 28, 2010.   http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/11/1120_021120_GeoRoperSurvey.html

See also the National Geographic/ Roper study from 2006 on Geographic Literacy.

Click to access FINALReport2006GeogLitsurvey.pdf

2.  The Really Big One.  By Kathryn Schulz.  The New Yorker, July 20, 2015, pp. 52-59.

Unaccustomed Earth by Jhumpa Lahiri– Book Review

By Joe Cillo

Unaccustomed Earth.  By Jhumpa Lahiri.  New York:  Vintage/Random House.  2009.

 

 

 

This is a collection of eight elegantly written stories that depict the adjustment and maladjustment of immigrants and their families to life in the United States.   In this case, the country of origin is India, but the challenges and personal issues that Lahiri writes about will be familiar to anyone who has come to this country from a foreign shore, and particularly to anyone born in this country whose parents grew up in a different culture.

The title and lead story in the volume is my favorite.  It is a benign story, told with exquisite sensitivity, about a mixed marriage (Indian female, American male), and the issues facing an immigrant family struggling with life in the United States.  The protagonist’s mother has died, and her father, now seventy, is savoring life as newly single after a long marriage:  traveling, visiting his daughter, Ruma, and her family, and carrying on a secret relationship with a new woman that he met on one of his trips.  Lahiri shows a perceptive eye on every page drawing the contrasting cultures and grasping the implications of small details in behavior and expression in her characters.

Her characters are ordinary middle class people, usually on the affluent side: students struggling with parents and school, professionals, corporate types, with very common middle class anxieties, concerns, and assumptions. This very mundaneness of her characters makes her writing relevant and accessible to a wide audience of both immigrants and native born Americans.

She’s a very insecure woman when it comes to her social status and educational achievement.  She often goes out of her way to make allusions to literary works, esoteric foods, and scientific ideas, as if she wants to establish her own sophistication and educational credentials.  Her characters are always attending or are connected in some way to expensive, prestigious east coast universities. Sometimes I wonder if she thinks her audience is a bunch of graduate students studying humanities.  I guess in many social climbing immigrant families such as hers one can never get enough education.  She is most in your face about it in Going Ashore, the final story in the volume.  In almost every line she is trying to remind us of how educated, worldly and sophisticated she is, especially in the food she eats.  We know you’ve been to school and read a few books, Jhumpa.

Lahiri shows an unflinching commitment to monogamous heterosexual marriage as the definitive lifestyle for human beings throughout her work, even though it never works very well in most of her stories, the possible exception being A Choice of Accommodations.  She seems to blame the men for this, and in a way she is right.  Men are not well suited to monogamous marriage and the growing heavy handedness with which it has been promoted and imposed upon men in America over the last 170 or so years has not been good for men or for women or for society.  I think we can declare it an experiment that has failed.  Nevertheless, a great many American middle class women, such as Lahiri, still believe in it and cling to it as an ideal for their lives, in spite of the fact that it leads to so much disappointment and tragedy.

In A Choice of Accommodations, we see a marriage that actually seems to be working, more or less.  It is an action packed story about a married couple, Amit and Megan, who attend a wedding at Amit’s old boarding school. (Once again we see school as a looming presence.)  They leave their kids with Megan’s parents and go off by themselves for a wild weekend.  At the wedding dinner they decide to call and check on their kids, but Amit had left his cell phone in the hotel room.  He decides to walk back to the hotel room to retrieve it, leaving Megan alone at the wedding party.  He finds the cell phone, but cannot remember his in laws phone number, so having had a few drinks he falls asleep on the bed and doesn’t return to the party.  In the morning he wakes up and finds his wife pissed off that he stranded her and fell asleep drunk on their wild weekend away from the kids.  So they walk around the campus going through some of the buildings and end up making love in a deserted dormitory room.  The end.  It is a rare story where something gets resolved favorably and the couple reestablishes some equilibrium.   Lahiri gets forty-three pages out of this.  You’ll have to read it to see all the exciting parts I have left out.  But notice, it is the man’s irresponsibility that precipitates a problem in the marriage.  This is a motif that will recur throughout the volume.

Males are the destroyers in Lahiri’s world.  In every story it is the moral failings or character flaws in the men that destroy families and relationships.  Women are the hapless victims swept along by the destructiveness of the males that they are unable to tame and unable to save from themselves.  The destructiveness is always inexplicable.  It seems to happen almost arbitrarily.  One seldom sees a cause and effect relationship between anything else in the story and the hand grenades dropped by the males.

In Hell-Heaven Pranab Kaku leaves his American wife of twenty-three years to marry a Bengali woman, after the whole story presents a picture of the two of them in a long, successful marriage.  No hint of dissatisfaction or conflict is offered.  He was also the one who, apparently without realizing it, nearly drove Usha’s mother to suicide with a love she never expressed.  And on the very last page in the very last sentence of this same story Usha’s heart is broken by a man she had hoped to marry.  All this disappointment around marriage, yet Lahiri never questions marriage itself, and she is never able to see marriage from an American male’s point of view.  I think she understands the Indian male’s attitude somewhat better.  In Nobody’s Business Indian men who have never met her and don’t even know her cold call Sang and ask her to marry them.   It is impossible to imagine an American man doing such a thing.

In Going Ashore she describes an alternative to the American way of courtship in Hema’s relationship with Navin, the man to whom she would eventually be betrothed.

They wandered chastely around Boston, going to museums and movies and concerts and dinners, and then beginning on the second weekend, he kissed Hema goodnight at the door of her home and slept at a friend’s.  He admitted to her that he’d had lovers in the past, but he was old fashioned when it came to a future wife.  And it touched her to be treated, at thirty-seven, like a teenaged girl.  She had not had a boyfriend until she was in graduate school, and by then she was too old for such measured advances from men.  (p. 297)

I felt a shudder when I read that paragraph.  It felt ominous to me, that these two people are going to get married.  They both seem woefully unprepared.  The man, Navin, does not seem real, like many of Lahiri’s male characters.  He is the fantasy of a naive, young girl.  If he is real, then his behavior and attitude toward this woman, coupled with her world of illusions does not bode well.  Can they possibly adjust to one another?  Or maybe it will be the kind of marriage where each lives a parallel life and they will share only a small circumscribed relationship in common.  Maybe they will approach the marriage with low expectations and make few demands on one another.  I suppose those kinds of arrangements can work, depending what you mean by ‘work.’  Perhaps in a different kind of society with different assumptions and a different social system.  But in modern America, a couple of this sort faces a daunting rock climb.  I feared for them even before I turned the page.  For all her sophistication in food and the culture of universities, Lahiri is very childlike and ignorant in her understanding of men.

There is never a hint of same sex interest in any of her characters.  No triangles, except clandestine.  Everybody is deceiving each other or living in a world of their own very conventional illusions.  She does seem to have some acquaintance with casual sex, but again, without understanding, especially from the male point of view.  Her eye is always on marriage.

The story of the development of Rahul’s alcoholism from childhood in Only Goodness on puts Lahiri’s superb observational gifts on display to supreme advantage.  She clearly knows something about the developmental line of alcoholism and the various behavioral patterns that accompany it.  But once again it lacks psychological insight.   She gets a lot of the dots, but she doesn’t connect them.  The appearance of alcoholism in an adolescent indicates serious problems within the family as a whole, and particularly in the marriage of the parents.  Lahiri focuses the story on the relationship between the troubled younger son, Rahul, and the older sister, Sudha, almost implying that Sudha is responsible for Rahul’s alcoholism, but avoids looking at the parents’ marriage in any great depth.  Sudha introduced Rahul to alcohol, and helped him sneak booze into their parents’ house and hide it from them.  She facilitated and participated in his early experiments with drinking, but it is profoundly mistaken to think that this led to his later problems.   One has to look at the parents and the onerous pressures they put on their son, their lack of understanding of his emotional needs, and his ultimate rebellion against all of them by destroying himself.  Lahiri puts way too much emphasis on Sudha.

When Rahul expressed a wish to be left alone with his infant nephew while Sudha and Roger go out to a movie, Sudha was worried and did not trust her brother alone with her young son.  When they returned home and found Rahul drunk and passed out on the bed and the infant left perilously alone in a tub of water, there is no explanation for the incident.  It was not unexpected, in fact it was foreshadowed, and Sudha had an palpable worry of such a possibility.  But no understanding is offered.  No insight into Rahul’s murderous rage against his sister is put forward.   Alcoholics are, of course, full of rage and envy, with a will to destroy themselves and those around them.  Lahiri understands this and observes its manifestations very accurately with her exquisitely sensitive eye.  But she doesn’t connect events with their antecedents.  Throughout the book Lahiri’s men seem to go off on destructive tangents after long years of stability and apparent sanguinity.   Lahiri seems genuinely puzzled by men.  Maybe she thinks they are inherently defective or inclined toward destruction.  It seems to be the best she can come up with.  But at the same time she never allows a full blown tragedy to occur.   There are no murders, violence, tragic deaths in her stories.  Even at their most destructive, her men are still under control.

In Nobody’s Business it is Farouk who is the destructive male villain, carrying on simultaneous love affairs with two different women and deceiving both.  Yet both women remain resolutely attached to this very unattractive man.  There is no explanation for why these two women are so attached to Farouk.  He has absolutely nothing to recommend himself.  He treats both women badly and appears to mock their expectation of his monogamy.  Paul is the most problematic character in this story.   He is a roommate of Sang and the story is told through his eyes. He is definitely interested in Sang, he knows a lot about her private life, yet he is at great pains to remain as neutral and nonparticipating as possible.  He is even privy to crucial information that would be of keen interest to Sang.  But he withholds it and does not tell her, allowing the situation to play itself out as if he were watching an experiment on laboratory rats.  No wonder Sang never takes an interest in him.  Deidre also provides an opening for him, which he roundly spurns.  Paul has no sex life or social life of his own.  He is the consummate academic monk.  But it is not quite believable.  We never really see who this guy is from the inside.  He is sort of a place holder.  His function is strictly narrative.  He does not participate in the story line any more than he absolutely has to — despite his inclinations.  He is a kind of living, breathing nonentity.  I think Lahiri could have done without him.  He is a man without a soul, whose only function is to narrate, but the story functions very well without him.

The last three stories in the volume form a trilogy about two characters:  Hema and Kaushik.  The first story, Once in a Lifetime, is written in the second person addressed to Kaushik from Hema.  It has a feeling of reproach running through it.  It is the story of a young girl’s crush on an older boy (16) whose family is friends with her family  — sort of.  The “sort of” is the source of the tone of reproach and resentment running through the story.  Kaushik’s family is considerably better off than Hema’s family, but is staying with Hema’s family and living in their residence for an extended time while they resettle into the United States from India.  Hema is forced to give up her room so Kaushik can occupy it during this rather long, temporary stay.  Kaushik’s mother is dying.  That is the reason for the stay and the resettlement from India.

The second story, Year’s End, is also written in the second person, but it feels as if it is in the first person.  The second person pronoun is rarely used.  In contrast to Once in a Lifetime, where the ‘you’ pronoun is used throughout and the story feels like a long letter, this story feels more like a narrative, and it is in Kaushik’s voice addressed to Hema.  However, Lahiri’s Kaushik is completely unconvincing as a male voice.  Kaushik thinks, feels, and acts like a woman.  He is a woman in a man’s clothes with a man’s name.  Reading this story I felt how thoroughly feminine Lahiri is.   Despite her acute sensitivity and observational skills, she is not able to get inside a man’s head.  That is why I didn’t believe the character of Paul in Nobody’s Business and why I felt she failed to understand the character of Rahul and his drinking in Only Goodness.   She’s out of touch with the male mentality in its depths, but I haven’t quite figured out the reason.  It probably has to do with sex, but I don’t want to say that in print.  She observes the surface with the remarkable sensitivity, which makes her writing such a pleasure to read.  Her eye for small details and their emotional meanings is beguiling.  It draws you in and holds your attention page after page, and yet she seems to miss what drives men in the depths of their hearts, why they need women after all anyway.  She doesn’t quite get it.  She gropes around as if searching, trying to grasp the secrets of a man’s heart, but what she comes up with is always through a woman’s lens.  She does better with her older males, the father figures who are married.   Kaushik’s father in Year’s End, Ruma’s father in Unaccustomed Earth, They feel a little more real, a little more tangible, but young men are a world apart from her.  I can see that she is truly puzzled and intimidated by them.

In Year’s End, we see another instance of the demonic male wreaking destruction upon a family.  While his father and his new wife, Chitra, are out to a New Year’s party, Kaushik is alone in the house with Chitra’s two young girls.  He finds them on the floor of their bedroom — which used to be his — sitting on the floor looking at pictures of his dead mother, which they found in the closet.  He explodes in a tantrum as if they had committed some sacrilege, bullying them and shaking them violently.  The whole incident has a surreal quality to it, and it doesn’t make sense.  There is absolutely nothing in the story that prepares one for this outburst of crazed violence.  It is another example of Lahiri’s inability to create a credible male character.  It further evinces her deep fear of men and her perception of them as unpredictable bomb throwers.

This incident in Year’s End and Rahul’s episode of leaving Sudha’s infant alone in the bathtub in Only Goodness present a clear message from Lahiri about men and young children:  you cannot leave young children alone with a male, particularly a young male.  Young males are irresponsible, negligent, unpredictable, and violent.   Children dare not be left alone with them under any circumstances, even for short periods of time.  Only women can be trusted to care for children properly.

The final story in the trilogy, Going Ashore, is a narrative in the third person, except at the very end where we return to Hema’s voice.  It is about Kaushik and his life as a journalistic photographer assigned to the most dangerous and tumultuous parts of the world.  She thus associates Kaushik with everything she hates and fears about males:  war, violence, atrocities, torture, mutilations, brutality, savagery.  But Kaushik himself does not engage in any of the atrocities.  He does not cut off anyone’s penis, he does not blow up any school buses full of young children, he does not machine gun people with their hands tied standing over an open trench.  He is an outsider who only observes and photographs — like Lahiri.  This is as close as Lahiri can get to the abyss of violence and aggression in male souls.

She is correct that violence, brutality, atrocities, unspeakable cruelty, are the near exclusive province of men.  It is one area that of life that women’s equality has not yet penetrated, and probably won’t.  Women are certainly capable of violence, brutality and cruelty.  But it is usually in response to some personal insult or injury.  Male violence can be more generalized, indiscriminate, and extreme.  Lahiri correctly perceives these capabilities in men, but she does not understand them; she deeply fears them, and she does not grasp their necessity, their inevitability, nor their value.  Men are capable of violence, brutality, and savagery for very good reasons, and women have suffered and benefited from it.

Although she loves Kaushik she ultimately repudiates him and sends him off to Thailand, then she goes a step further and actually kills him off in a tsunami, making sure that there is no possibility of a sequel.  She really doesn’t like men very much.  Only emasculated, tame, domesticated men who don’t stir up any strong feelings.  It is those strong passions of lust and hate that Lahiri sees as giving rise to all the ugliness and pain of life.  Lahiri’s world represents the triumph of duty over love, the triumph of arranged marriage over passion, the triumph of routine over adventure, the triumph of cottage cheese over a good Thai restaurant.  She wants men to be responsible drones, working like slaves for years on end to support their families, but without having to interact with them very much.  Lahiri is the patron saint of all bored suburban housewives.

When Kaushik says to Hema on the day before they are to separate, “Come to Hong Kong with me.  Don’t marry him, Hema.[Navin]”  She should have countered.  “Will you marry me then?”  Because if he wasn’t willing to marry her, then her choice would have been clear and his suggestion would have been out of order.  But if he had answered, “Let’s stay in Italy another week and get married here.  Then we’ll go to Hong Kong together.  Tonight there will be no condoms.  We’ll throw them away.”  “Take me, I’m yours!”  Two weeks later Hema sends Navin an e-mail from Hong Kong.  “Dear Navin,  I’m sorry I couldn’t be present for our wedding, but I eloped and married someone else.   Hema.”  That would have been made a much better story, Jhumpa.  Much better than that dreary ending you wrote.  But it is probably too late to revise it.

I like Lahiri as a writer.  I read The Namesake several years ago, and was favorably impressed with some qualifications, as I recall.  I would probably read other things by her.  Stylistically, her femininity and her keen perception draw me in.  She has a good eye for the nuances of cultural assumptions and expectations, the contrasts, the plusses and minuses in both Indian and American cultures, the quandaries of an immigrant’s adjustment, but I find myself turning against her as a woman, because she fails to understand men so utterly, and because she is at such pains to keep reminding us of her education and social status.  This type of insecurity puts me off.  I gave a copy of this book to an Indian woman I know who was not familiar with Lahiri, but I almost wish I hadn’t.  I have very mixed feelings about the book and about Lahiri.

 

 

A Poem is a Naked Person — Film Review

By Joe Cillo

A Poem is a Naked Person

Directed by Les Blank

 

 

This is not a documentary despite the film’s pretensions.  This is a video scrapbook or an upscale home movie.  The video clips that have been strung together in this are pretty good quality.  The camera crew that shot them was excellent.   The editing and the conceptualization are amateurish, but each small bit is interesting in itself and the music selections are outstanding.  This film, despite its many limitations, takes hold of you and doesn’t let go.  It is carried strictly by the power of the subject matter and the quality of the music — and there is a lot of music, and a great variety of music.  All the time I was watching the film I was trying to figure out when it was shot.  I recognized a brief cameo of Cass Elliot, so I knew it had to be not later than the early 1970s. It was actually shot by Les Blank in 1972-1974.  (This is not presented in the film.  I had to look it up.)  Most of it was shot in Tulsa, Oklahoma, maybe some of it in Louisiana, I’m not sure.  This film is not a presentation of the facts.  It is a raw, informal portrait of Leon Russell from his peak years as a singer and performer.  The title of the film is a quote from Bob Dylan’s liner notes to his album Bringing It All Back Home (1965).

There are a couple of things this film does well.  The presentation of Leon Russell as a singer, pianist, and performer, work.  I was impressed with what an excellent pianist he is.  There is a wedding scene where he plays Wagner’s “Bridal Chorus” from Lohengrin and Mendelssohn’s “Wedding March” unaccompanied on the piano.  I believe they were his own arrangements very sensitively performed.  He has a very commanding presence on stage.  In front of an audience he was comfortable and unquestionably in charge.  I could also feel a hard, driving ambition in him that was very disciplined and insistent on excellence.  Off stage he was casual and relaxed.  He seemed to tolerate bozos well and there seemed to be a lot of them around him.  But when it came to music and performing before an audience, he took it very seriously, and he must have been demanding of his band mates.  The film did not make a point of this, but I surmised it from the quality of the performances and his demeanor on stage.

The film gives one a good feel for the culture of Oklahoma and the various musical influences absorbed by Leon Russell from middle America and the South.  There is a shot of some rollicking gospel in a black church, Sweet Mary Egan on unaccompanied fiddle, band member Charlie McCoy on harmonica, young Malissa Bates singing Hoyt Axton’s “Joy to the World” unaccompanied,  a very young Willie Nelson doing “Good Hearted Woman,” some native Americans in traditional dress dancing to their native drum music.  The film is rich in the musical culture of the American heartland.

One also gets a feel for the culture and temperament of the people of Oklahoma: provincial, unsophisticated, simple and straight ahead.  There is a clip of a precision parachute jumping competition, another of a controlled demolition of a building in downtown Tulsa, another of a man in a small boat catching a quite large catfish.  Some things you probably couldn’t get away with today, like feeding a small chick to a boa constrictor and watching him kill it and eat it before your eyes.  The man who guzzles down a glass of beer and then bites off the edge of the glass with his teeth and chews it up and swallows it.  That may represent the culture and mentality of the people of Oklahoma, but Leon Russell is a couple of pegs above that.

He is comfortable in that provincial backwater.  It has molded him and shaped him and he has incorporated its varied influences into his own style, and the people see him as one of their own.  But he is able to move beyond that world that gave him birth.  He knows of a bigger world beyond the confines of Oklahoma and he wants to be part of it and be successful in it.  While Leon Russell can fit in with those unvarnished yokels, he is not really one of them.  His mind, his taste, his skill, and his ambition reach far beyond his roots, but he does not repudiate his background, rather he embraces it and embodies it and forges from it a very appealing, unique personal style.  The film does give you that much, although there is much more you will wish it had done.  It is an excellent and interesting introduction to the music and the person of Leon Russell.

 

 

“Cymbeline” – Marin Shakespeare Company

By Joe Cillo

Paul Abbott as Cymbeline, Rod Gnapp as Belarius, with Zack Purdy and Patrick St. John as the Princes with Jed Pirario as Pisanio.

William Shakespeare’s Cymbeline, Marin Shakespeare Company.

Directed and adapted by Robert Currier, with a cast of thousands- no, not really. No one really knows much about Cymbeline, Shakespearse’s convoluted rom-com (in today’s parlance), except that it’s alleged to be one of his last plays.  It is believed to have been written in 16ll and to echo the Bard’s own coming to terms with his family as he approaches his final act. Director Robert Currier has effectively trimmed the play to a manageable couple of hours and still maintain its coherence, continuity and major and minor plot twists.  To his credit as well is his clever incorporation of contemporary tropes, such as Nat Curries’ additional lyrics to Brooks’s and Warner’s “That’s Amore.” Another that elicited delightful laughter from the audience was Rod Gnapp’s (the leader of the uncouth Mountain Folk of Wales, Belarius) deliberate breaking of the fourth wall to clarify the multiple names for his “adopted” sons to help us make sense of the confusion.  The play is upbeat and never loses our interest thanks to the actors who maintain high energy throughout.  Kudos to composer Billie Cox for her musical adaptations from Shakespeare’s lyrics as well as original compositions.  She created lovely musical interludes in the style of the era, everything from romantic ballads, a rock tune played on a ukulele no less; a madrigal, a monologue mimicking Gibert and Sullivan; an Irish dirge and a jaunty woodsman tune.  Cox also designed the sound for the outdoor arena, enabling us to hear every word and song lyric.

Cymbeline is the bellicose King of the Britons, beautifully played by a believable, heavily-bearded Paul Abbott.  Cymbeline ruled when Rome occupied Briton and battles were still being fought over payment of the tribute owed Rome. His daughter and only heir is Imogen (a sweet yet strong and determined Stella Heath).   In order to ensure that she will stop at nothing to attain her goal, she at one point disguises herself as a boy.  Cymbeline’s (nameless) narcissistic and perfidious Queen (Lee Fitzpatrick) had a son (from a previous marriage?), Cloten (Thomas Gorrebeeck).   He is spoiled and self-indulgent, a dandy with shoulder-length blond locks.  He swans about on stage flipping those locks, seeing himself as the proverbial God’s gift, yet cannot understand why he’s rebuffed!

Thomas Gorrebeeck as Cloten and Lee Fitzpatrick as his mother, the Queen

The plot begins to confuse when it is revealed that Imogen had two brothers who were kidnapped as infants by Belarius, from Cymbeline and their mother.  We meet him and his charges near play’s end.  The boys, Guiderius, known as Polydore (Zack Purdy) and Arviragus, known as Cadwall (Patrick St. John) are now twenty-something strapping mountain dudes in their own right, but innocent of their rightful heritage.  They leap agiley about the mountain set created by set designer Jackson Currier.  Then there’s Posthumus, a poor orphan, raised by Cymbeline.  He’s shy thus non-assertive and hopelessly in love with Imogen. Actor Thomas Gorrebeeck plays both Cloten and Posthumus, two totally different characters.  Unless you followed the cast list, you’d never know this, which attests to the actor’s versatility. A delightful, expressive Jed Parario, who moves about the stage like a dancer, plays Posthumus’s loyal servant, Pisanio.

Imogen and Posthumus    Stella Heath as Imogen and Thomas Gorrebeeck as Posthumus

Others vie for Imogen’s hand.  Davern Wright credibly acts the part of the most aggressive suitor, Iachimo, rightly billed as “a smarmy” Italian.  His cohort played by Zack Purdy is Philario; in the mix is a Frenchman played by Rafael Sebastian.  Glenn Havlan returns to Marin Shakes for a third season after a successful run of “Taming of the Shrew,” by Theater of Others in San Francisco of which Havlan is the founder and director.   In “Cymbeline” he plays a musician as well as a rather thankless rôle as Calius Lucius, the Roman Consul; Xander Ritchey played his Captain. Caius’s soldiers are played by Carolyn Doyle and Isabelle Grimm. Shakespeare most always writes otherworldly characters into his plays.  “Cymbeline” is no exception: Debbie Durst plays Cornelius, a doctor in the ruler’s court.  She is referred to as a witch, carries a wand, and is dressed in a black cowl and flowing gown.  Ms. Durst delivers her portends with commanding, yet wry ominousness.   Lee Fitzpatrick also plays a Goddess (the dead Queen?) and Annika Gullahorn is double-cast as a court gentlewoman and an Otherworldly Mercury.

Costume designer Tammy Berlin deserves praise for her work in this production.  A costume can either make or break the believability of a character. “Cymbeline” will play at Marin Shakespeare’s Forest Meadows Amphitheatre, Dominican University of California in San Rafael, through July 26.  Go to: www.marinshakespeare.org for more information and a schedule of upcoming plays..

The Trojans — San Francisco Opera Performance — Review

By Joe Cillo

The Trojans

By Hector Berlioz

San Francisco Opera Performance

June 20, 2015

 

This is actually two operas and performing them together creates a mammoth production.  The Capture of Troy occupies the first two acts.  Acts three through five make up The Trojans at Carthage.  The two operas are really distinct despite the fact that the composer, Hector Berlioz, conceived of them as a unified whole.  When the opera was first performed at the Theatre Lyrique in Paris, they would only do the second part, The Trojans in Carthage — and they cut it down quite a bit.  Berlioz never saw The Fall of Troy performed.  Thomas May’s offers a lengthy and informative discussion of the history of this opera’s composition and performance in the program.  It is very good and I highly recommend it.  May tells us,

the lack of a definitive full-scale production when Les Troyens was new to the world caused even more long-lasting damage than Berlioz had pessimistically foreseen.   The division and cutting of the work perversely underscored the notion that Berlioz had written a sort of heroic “ruin” that lacked coherence and integral construction. . . Worse, distorted perceptions of Les Troyens encouraged stereotypes of the composer as a washed up Romantic revolutionary who had lost his fire and reverted to a more “conservative” approach.  (p. 39)

I am largely in agreement with this assessment.  This monstrosity is unwieldy and it does lack internal coherence.  What is consistent is that the males end up ignominiously deserting the scene at the end of each opera, and the females end up dead.  There is very little that connects The Fall of Troy to The Trojans in Carthage except that some of the same characters are used.  But it is two very different, very loosely related stories.  Neither opera is very well written and putting them together on the same program subjects the audience to a long, punishing evening.

I always try to say something positive, if I can, and in this opera what is positive is the music.  The music score is outstanding, and it considerably raised my estimation of Berlioz as a composer.  It makes it all the more poignant that this music composer of the first rank had no talent as a dramatist or as a storyteller.  The Trojan War has a vast wealth of dramatic possibilities, and yet the best Berlioz can get out of it is dull, slow moving, repetitious, and interminably long.  He seems to avoid anything truly dramatic on stage and relates the real drama and conflict in the story line through narratives in soliloquies.  The romance between Aeneas and Dido in The Trojans in Carthage is juvenile and melodramatic.  Berlioz knew nothing about love relationships.  The character of Dido is particularly incoherent and ad hoc.  She starts out as a queen beloved by all of her people and ends up this embittered, venomous, vengeful, suicidal woman — nothing like a queen at all.  How could she have ever been a queen, let alone a queen of such capable leadership?  She is a totally cartoonish, unconvincing character.

It doesn’t help that the sets were unimaginative, the lighting was uninteresting, and the costumes were from the nineteenth century.  They had the Trojan soldiers in nineteenth century military uniforms carrying nineteenth century swords.  Some of them were even carrying long rifles and muskets.  Since when did the Trojans carry rifles in 1200 BC?  In Act 5 two soldiers shared a cigarette.  Was it the Trojans’ own brand, or did they import them from Greece?

Act 4 started with a ballet segment that was well conceived and beautifully done.  No vocal music during the ballet, only orchestral accompaniment.  The structure of Act 4 was two ballet segments alternating with two vocal segments.  The ballet segments were very well imagined and well executed and could work as standalone ballet pieces were they to be excised from this opera.  The choreographers, Lynne Page and Gemma Payne did an excellent job along with the dancers, and the orchestral score was very well suited to the dance.   It made me think that this whole idea of the Trojan War could be recast as a ballet, and it would be much leaner and much more interesting than this long, cumbersome opera.  It is unfortunate that Berlioz’s score was crafted for this dreary, undramatic opera.  Maybe there is a creative composer and a choreographer out there who could adapt it into much more dynamic and aesthetically pleasing ballet.

By the middle of the first act I was wondering if I should sit through all five hours of this.  I couldn’t think of a good enough reason not to, such is the state of my life right now, so I stayed and watched the whole thing.  It was akin to long flight on an airplane, where it is mildly uncomfortable and you are looking forward to it ending.  If Berlioz had been able to collaborate with someone who had ability in theatrics he might have produced a great opera.  Unfortunately, this is a mediocre work, but with a first rate sound track.