The National Theatre

At several points, most notably in our meeting with the Manchester Guardian’s theater critic, Michael Billington, we discussed our different preferences

In theater, contrasting the didactic, verbal appeal of, say, LANDSCAPE performed admirably at the Cotesloe (?) stage in the National Theater from the truly astounding, effective, and surprising A MATTER OF … performed in the adjacent, Olivier Theater of the NT. It would be hard to find two such different visions of theater. Joe Penhal crafts a tight, four character play that challenges all of us, not just scientists engaged in developing weaponry, to consider the consequences of our acts. Should, for example, the manufacturer of shoes be governed solely by what sells for the biggest profit, or should he/she use replenishable materials, purchase manufactured products only from places that don’t exploit workers, concentrate on styles which improve posture and don’t damage feet …. (Apply your own ethical challenges.) I think he set up such discussions brilliantly partly because he did not pose great philosophers against each other, but rather traced the origin of the main character’s ethical growth to the clumsy dialogue of his flawed brother. Indeed, as someone in our group, I think it was Rick, said, neither the woman nor Brooks were compelling advocates for their side. They relied, not on social arguments but rather on convenience and barely disguised menace. Incidentally, I found certain physical elements in LANDSCAPE to be particularly good: the gradual physical degradation of the principal and Brooks’ menacing as he entered the scientist’s space, crossed behind him, and pranced around without a belt to his trousers. (Why? What that a wardrobe mishap?) Those of us who prefer such plays, I imagine, view theater as the opportunity to re-explore our own realities – not as entertainment as much as continued learning that burrows into some often hidden recesses of our minds and lives.

On the other hand, we learned in many ways that the state of theater does not solely depend upon intellectual fashion. Economics rules, even in the subsidized confines of the National Theater. Filling seats as well as increasing endowments are what, eventually, allow theaters to experiment. For some, theater provides a particular environment to release thoughts, not only in response to a didactic or language driven play, but also in response to an “event,” the merging of art forms in novel ways. In that sense, A MATTER OF … assaults us with metaphors. There is, of course, the spinning coin which dictates our fate. There is, also, the bumbling conductor who doesn’t always complete his assignment on time. But perhaps the strongest metaphor is our attempt to defy gravity, whether falling out of a plane or climbing moving beds.

Somewhere in the middle lies Equus. Directors have considerable choice in displaying the non-verbal elements of the play. In the production we saw last week, the malleability of the geometric set contrasted with the highly articulated versions of the horses, from reverberating hoofs to architected heads whose eyes hypnotically glowed until they were blinded. Dysart displayed the vulnerability of the analyst, the likelihood that in discovering Alan’s secret he is exposing his own secrets. A number of us commented on the one discordant choice, the beautiful, taller, seductive, and more experienced young woman drawn to Alan. Will she survive in tact? We don’t know.

- Bill