Quickly Crazy — THE HOUSE OF BLUE LEAVES at HPU
by Guest Contributor
Lindsay Timmington
McGahan
John Guare’s The House of Blue Leaves takes place on
October 4, 1965 (or the day the Pope came to New York) and features Artie
Shaughnessy (Rob Duval), a zookeeper who lives in a shabby apartment in
Sunnyside, Queens and dreams of becoming a famous Hollywood songwriter. Problem
is—he’s no good. Problem is—he’s saddled with a schizophrenic wife (Bananas)
and an overzealous girlfriend (Bunny) who’s obsessed with all things celebrity,
including the Pope. Bunny (Lisa Barnes) wants Artie to dump Bananas (Stacy Ray)
at the mental institution, “The House of Blue Leaves,” on their way out to
Hollywood to meet up with Billy Einhorn, Artie’s childhood friend who is a big
time Hollywood director. Artie will also leave behind his son Ronny (Jason
Kaye), who has been drafted to Vietnam but is plotting his own shot at stardom
with a plan skillfully hidden from his parents.
Blue Leaves is a darkly comic, almost absurd look at dreams, politics, religion, and our overwhelming obsession with celebrity. Director Joyce Maltby’s production seems to focus on the farcical aspects of the script, as the small theatre was engulfed with a burst of energy from the actors at the beginning that ran, unfaltering, for the entire two hours of the production. While the cast deserves nothing short of kudos for the energy, dedication, and hard work evident in this piece of theatre, for me, there was something missing.
Life’s missed opportunities, aging, and the reality of family and obligations as a dead weight to achieving our dreams, these are all important themes in Guare’s play. Yet this production seems to focus more on finding the comedy of the absurd situations Artie and company find themselves in. Stacy Ray stands out in her portrayal of Bananas—a woman in a drug induced haze, pleading, ironically perhaps, that she “just wants to feel.” Ray avoided the most common ‘mad-woman’ stereotypes, and was consistent in her execution of the role. The performances from the rest of the cast were also solid, but there seemed to be a depth and complexity to the characters that was lost in the broader search for laughs.
This was most apparent in the love triangle of Artie, Bunny, and Bananas. The two women acted and were dressed more like Artie’s mothers than his lovers and the connection between the three was lacking an unidentifiable… something. A fire, a chemistry, a spark. The three of them were easy to laugh at, but failed to warrant any kind of sympathy on the part of the audience.
This production seems to live halfway between realism and surrealism in its execution. Characters address the audience, though never with enough clarity for us to accept either that we are part of this world or simply observers; a trio of nuns climbs in through the window; and at one point the action appears to be nothing but a madcap race around the apartment. Perhaps the production would have been better served if Maltby had clearly defined the parameters of the theatrical experience, deciding whether to frame the play as farce, realistic comedy, surrealistic tragicomedy, or something altogether different. As a result, I often found myself questioning whether the choices in performance, design and overall execution of the production were intentional or an oversight on the part of the director or actor, instead of buying into the world of the play presented.
The set, designed by H. Bart McGeehon, indeed gives us the interior of a shabby apartment in Queens, but again, what appears to be predominantly realistic often hints at surrealism, but shies away from a full commitment. Sheet music neatly adorns the trim of the walls and the appliances that one expects to be practical in a kitchen sink type play are in fact, not. At one point, Artie makes his way to the sink to wet tea bags—to a sink that does not work—and mimes turning the faucet on while clearly dipping the tea bags into a pre-set bowl of water. Now, understandably, having practical, working appliances often requires a bigger budget than most theatres have, however this moment presents a perfect opportunity to play with the absurdity of the play and not strive for realism. Yet it appeared that the audience is meant to accept this as reality and not a theatrical choice.
Duncan Dalzell, the props designer, handled his prop design with a serious and focused realism that highlights the period and adds to the production immensely. Sound Designer Kevin Kraven was spot on with his selection of tunes that frame the show, letting us know immediately that the world of the play is some time in the 1960’s. Overall, this adds to the energy and atmosphere of the experience in a very positive way.
All in all, The House of Blue Leaves at HPU makes for an entertaining night of theatre. The missed opportunity for this play to be more than a silly comedy is all but made up for by the energy, passion, and dedication from the performers.
For more information, visit the event Facebook page.
Blue Leaves is a darkly comic, almost absurd look at dreams, politics, religion, and our overwhelming obsession with celebrity. Director Joyce Maltby’s production seems to focus on the farcical aspects of the script, as the small theatre was engulfed with a burst of energy from the actors at the beginning that ran, unfaltering, for the entire two hours of the production. While the cast deserves nothing short of kudos for the energy, dedication, and hard work evident in this piece of theatre, for me, there was something missing.
Life’s missed opportunities, aging, and the reality of family and obligations as a dead weight to achieving our dreams, these are all important themes in Guare’s play. Yet this production seems to focus more on finding the comedy of the absurd situations Artie and company find themselves in. Stacy Ray stands out in her portrayal of Bananas—a woman in a drug induced haze, pleading, ironically perhaps, that she “just wants to feel.” Ray avoided the most common ‘mad-woman’ stereotypes, and was consistent in her execution of the role. The performances from the rest of the cast were also solid, but there seemed to be a depth and complexity to the characters that was lost in the broader search for laughs.
This was most apparent in the love triangle of Artie, Bunny, and Bananas. The two women acted and were dressed more like Artie’s mothers than his lovers and the connection between the three was lacking an unidentifiable… something. A fire, a chemistry, a spark. The three of them were easy to laugh at, but failed to warrant any kind of sympathy on the part of the audience.
This production seems to live halfway between realism and surrealism in its execution. Characters address the audience, though never with enough clarity for us to accept either that we are part of this world or simply observers; a trio of nuns climbs in through the window; and at one point the action appears to be nothing but a madcap race around the apartment. Perhaps the production would have been better served if Maltby had clearly defined the parameters of the theatrical experience, deciding whether to frame the play as farce, realistic comedy, surrealistic tragicomedy, or something altogether different. As a result, I often found myself questioning whether the choices in performance, design and overall execution of the production were intentional or an oversight on the part of the director or actor, instead of buying into the world of the play presented.
The set, designed by H. Bart McGeehon, indeed gives us the interior of a shabby apartment in Queens, but again, what appears to be predominantly realistic often hints at surrealism, but shies away from a full commitment. Sheet music neatly adorns the trim of the walls and the appliances that one expects to be practical in a kitchen sink type play are in fact, not. At one point, Artie makes his way to the sink to wet tea bags—to a sink that does not work—and mimes turning the faucet on while clearly dipping the tea bags into a pre-set bowl of water. Now, understandably, having practical, working appliances often requires a bigger budget than most theatres have, however this moment presents a perfect opportunity to play with the absurdity of the play and not strive for realism. Yet it appeared that the audience is meant to accept this as reality and not a theatrical choice.
Duncan Dalzell, the props designer, handled his prop design with a serious and focused realism that highlights the period and adds to the production immensely. Sound Designer Kevin Kraven was spot on with his selection of tunes that frame the show, letting us know immediately that the world of the play is some time in the 1960’s. Overall, this adds to the energy and atmosphere of the experience in a very positive way.
All in all, The House of Blue Leaves at HPU makes for an entertaining night of theatre. The missed opportunity for this play to be more than a silly comedy is all but made up for by the energy, passion, and dedication from the performers.
For more information, visit the event Facebook page.
Having worked with this director for years as the theatre manager at HPU I know for a fact that Joyce Maltby never has anyone play for laughs, nor limits the actors by declaring something a farce vs. a drama, or real vs. surreal. This was a play that was brilliantly acted and directed and defies any of those definitions... not unlike life. And theatre is theatre - the movement between the stage and the 4th wall is what makes this show unpredictable and wonderful.
ReplyDeleteInteresting. I saw The House of Blue Leaves 3 times and found the mix between pathos and humor to be the perfect balance. I laughed and CRIED each time I saw it. Nothing was played for laughs at the expense of realism. The play has humor written into it and had just the right amount. This was one of the most solid productions I've seen in Hawaii. Beautifully acted and directed.
ReplyDelete