Mary Wuonola
KCACTF
1.28.09
451 Review.
No one wants to be part of a flock, a herd of animals, right? Well, picture this: you wake up tomorrow morning, only to find your world has been replaced by a series of phenomena, wholly unfamiliar to you, in which televisions on walls are part of the family, and everyone takes pills just to live their lives from day to day…and all these things are condoned, if not required, by the government. A crowd of people, walking and talking and singing and marching, in unison, clad in dark costumes, all of whom awoke and followed the same routine as the person behind them, the same routine they followed the day before, march onward.
It is a peculiar world in which a fireman, Montag, does not put a stop to fires—he instead initiates them. He burns what was formerly known as classic literature; novels everyone could not only identify, but could often quote, even. Peter Strand, clad in a Nazi style fireman’s uniform, complete with an armband, was plundering though homes to find books, to destroy knowledge and private thought, and burning the record of its existence. Montag’s role as a fireman is opposite of what a man with the same title would do in the here and now. Well, if you were to wake up there, you must have awoken sometime in the future. Perhaps in some version of Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, conceivably Robert Lawson’s musical rendition as a play, one I saw performed by Franklin Pierce University. This world filled with the ashes of books and flame-throwers came to life on January 28th, 2009, in the Dukakis Theater in Fitchburg, as the audience was sprung into this peculiar version of the future at 8 o’clock.
The actors, students from Franklin Pierce, put very much energy into showing the audience what could become of our very own world in the future. The energy, however, was directed a bit too much toward the music, which often times took away from the dialogue or the message the play held. Music aside, at one point a woman announced the beginning of chapters two, three, and seven, but no additional chapters, and this was both confusing and distracting. Furthermore, I was distracted by the use of a metronome, which did not seem to keep time, but served no true purpose. Montag was constantly being upstaged, which irritated me initially, yet the continuous use of this tactic altered my opinion; I now think this ploy may have been used as a directorial choice, illustrating Montag’s progressive less-than-conformity with the world which surrounds and controls him. If we as a race were to let the future take hold of us, and develop further and further into some unfamiliar universe, we would be horrified. For this is a universe so very abstract that the question “are you happy?” cannot be answered, for no one knows. A horrifying place where books are burned so as to burn the ideas of a man, in essence, to burn the man himself.
The truths and the purpose of living is a lost cause, if those in authority over us believe that “the only way for everyone to be happy is for everyone to be alike.” But no matter the efforts, there will inevitably be those who go against mass conformity. As Clarisse says to Montag, “You’re not like the others. When I say something to you, you look at me.” And though the first time she said it to him, the thought seemed farfetched, he kept remembering her, and her words, and eventually he, too, wanted to break the system. He realizes that though “we have everything we need to be happy, we’re not”.
In one scene, that took place in the past, a character grabbed a book from another and said “isn’t this what you want?” The book was then destroyed, and nothing but ashes were remaining on the ground. “Ashes, ashes, we all fall down.” The fall of mankind in this way, with the ashes of books, of knowledge, provokes thoughts such as “control!” “communism!” “government” and “wrong”. But this play is just one version of the future, continuously reminding each of us how much we take the way that we live for granted. If you woke up in 451, and found yourself in this disturbing, controlled scenario, would you not wonder why your world was so fascist, so very limited? Books burning, knowledge and ideas dying, along with those who came up with them, their heart and soul becoming their work, and transferring to it when they died, be it a book, or an object, or a child… Perhaps the place after the end of the world is the only place we will be safe from those who may try to control us, but at least the people there hold safe the real burden of keeping the soul of another person safe, for years to come.
Mary Wuonola
KCACTF
1.29.09
An Ideal Husband Review.
Truth versus deceit, good versus evil, happy versus sad, trust versus mistrust: these are all polar opposites, inevitable parts of our lives each day. And though truth is better than deceit, good better than evil, and so forth, often even the most righteous of individuals falter. Miss Mabel complimented Lord Goring, saying, “I delight in your bad qualities; I wouldn’t change one of them”. However, some qualities of this performance might well be altered.
A talented, professional cast, from Bridgewater State College brought eccentricity and liveliness to the stage of Weston Auditorium in Fitchburg. The actors used overzealous yet particular accents, which distracted from the overall performance even from scene one. The production, adapted from its original arena, maintained qualities of the round; the circular dancing, for example, was an excellent tactic, but it became overdone as we saw it time and time again. Additionally, the set was well-adapted, and no part of it did not serve a purpose.
The show began at 8 o’clock on January 29, 2009, and though the performance was enjoyable, it moved forward at a rather sluggish pace. Characters and their affairs were discussed very in depth, and many conversations may well have been eliminated. The costuming was well done and applicable to the time period. The wigs used, however, seemed as though the actresses had not rehearsed adequately while wearing them, and thus did not feel as though the wigs were a part of themselves. Despite the uncomfortable qualities of these wigs, the cast remained in character quite well, especially when the spotlight was drawn to other conversation.
Oscar Wilde’s show spins the audience ‘round and ‘round questions about honesty, and themes about morals. Sir Robert Chiltern encounters an internal dilemma much like Hamlet, with his mind running sixty-five miles per hour, saying, “to be honest, or not to be honest—that is the question”. Sir Robert worries his wife’s love for him will cease, as a result of an act of dishonesty he partook in near 20 years prior. This fear that the origin of his wealth might be unveiled is displayed very passionately, as Sir Robert becomes fidgety and uncomfortable in his skin as the conflict within him wraps tighter and tighter around his heart. The entire interaction between Robert and Mrs. Cheveley leaves the audience with a somewhat unsettling feeling.
Truth, then, is known to be a very complex entity. Mrs. Cheveley’s incredible desire to tear down the reputations of those around her is not to put down the truth. Instead, it is a twisted yearning to be the voice of truth, and to be honored for it. She takes Sir Robert by the collar, holding her cards close and betting so very high, for the sake of a misdemeanor conducted many years ago. Yes, honesty should be a trait practiced for not only the sake of one’s good name, but for one’s conscience, and not so as to produce scandal. Yet somehow, scandal, thievery, and corrupt interactions were put aside, as Sir Robert realizes the importance of being earnest, and “what a wonderful thing [it is] to be safe”.
Truths, good, happiness, trust: all these bring man closer to the power he craves. One of these such men of power, Lord Goring, brought and held onto a strong personality, as this play held to a strong message. However, Rob Rota’s outstanding performance as Lord Goring might have put him on an even loftier pedestal than Lady Chiltern had placed her husband Robert on. Though Sir Robert was a politician and Mrs. Cheveley was a philanthropist, neither politics nor philanthropy drew me to this performance. An Ideal Husband left me satisfied and was more than, as Lord Caversham said, “a lot of damn nobodies talking about nothing”.
Mary Wuonola
KCACTF
1.30.2009
Matchmaker.
Foolish people, exotic colors, deception, money, and marriage. Well. That sounds like Las Vegas, to me. So, let us risk this, and—showtime. We walk into a casino with a wad of hundreds. A wad, that is of possibility. What might we win tonight? Or what might we lose. The concepts listed above were present, even from the bare beginnings of Matchmaker, as riches, class, and marriage were thrown around the stage like poker chips in a well-lit casino. Additionally, as ninety-nine percent of the people in Las Vegas are so often fools, Horace Vandergelder believes ninety-nine percent of the people in this world are fools. So the metaphor stands.
The actors of Keene State clearly felt more than profit and pleasure as they put on this show for the audience of the Dukakis Center in Fitchburg at 8 o’clock on January 30th, 2009. The charming nature of each member of the cast beyond doubt drew the audience in. From the scantily clad poster-girl, Rosie Wojtas, to Minnie Fay, portrayed brilliantly by Allie Lee Relihan, even to Dan Patterson who played the brief part of Joe Scanlon, each actor undoubtedly knew his place in the show and portrayed it superbly, truly morphing into the part.
The show was superb. This, I credit to the artistic license taken, with unique tactics such as the poster-girl running across the apron between scenes, flirting with the audience, and the barbershop quartet’s melodic sound while the curtain concealed scene-changes. The use of these openly display the director and the cast’s willingness to “risk a little security for a certain amount of adventure”.
Risk, yes, this is something we all experience, something we feel as we step into a casino with a few hundreds tucked in our belt… Yet do we not all take such risks, time and time again? Do we not spend that few hundred, unsure whether we will waste it, and leave a few hours later with nothing? The risk of such things as a marriage proposal, bribes, running away, or even falling in love… we do not know what the outcomes of such risks will be, yet still we take them. As the play moves onward, risks continue to unfold. Mrs. Levi puts together a conniving plan so as to bring herself into the riches of Mr. Vandergelder, lying to him about “Miss Simple”. Cornelius and Barnaby take a risk, bombing the shop with tomatoes and leaving to venture to New York. Such risks are brought forth throughout the adventurous show, as a risk is dealt in each five-card hand.
At a casino in Las Vegas, the questions are not always answered. The problems are not always solved. But the dealer at the poker table loves to know what is going on, in each player’s hand, just as the matchmaker does in this show. She is in on every card dealt, knows where every couple or group is, knows the secrets, wants, and needs of each. The dealer, Mrs. Levi, cares not that she leaves those around her wondering what cards the others hold. Are the runaway young boys dishonest scoundrels? Is Ermengarde going to run off with Ambrose? Does Cornelius have the riches Mrs. Levi told Mrs. Molloy he had?
“You are now without clerks, without niece, without bride, without purse! Will you marry me now?” pleads a desperate Mrs. Levi to Mr. Vandergelder. And when he says no, one can feel the disappointment this “wannabe” matchmaker must feel. But “that’s what life is—disappointment”, and though life does not solely consist of disappointment, it is most certainly an emotion we can relate to. Adventure, some call it, and as Barnaby says, what is life without adventure? For when you are in the middle of it, you would rather be at home. And when you are at home, you would rather be out, partaking in some adventure. But is it not worth it, risking a little security for that adventure? Leaving the casino, after taking part in that risk, sharing the adventure… One may be a little drunk and have no money, and yes, that is disappointment. But in Vegas and everywhere else, disappointment is a part of living, of thrill seeking… a part of adventure.
Chatboard (0)