The Arts in New York City

I remember watching Pinocchio when I was a child. He frightened me because he was wooden, but still acted like a human being.  These days I laugh whenever I recall being frightened by him. But this time when I recalled that memory I realized that he’s helping me.

After watching Ivo Van Hove’s adaptation of “The Little Foxes” by Lillian Hellman, I remembered Pinocchio because he helped me realize an important aspect. So let’s say Lillian Hellman is the puppet maker who designs the marionettes and Ivo Van Hove is the puppeteer who manipulates the marionettes. He is the person, after seeing the marionettes, who decides how to present them in a performance. If he wants to change their designs, he can’t because he isn’t a puppet maker. What Ivo Van Hove can do is have the marionettes move according to his directions, but at the same time he has to work with them or else the strings may tangle. He has to interpret the play differently.  In other words, the director is, first and foremost, a reader. He is a reader who peruses through the play and envisions it. What makes him different from any other readers, such as us? And what makes him a director? Well, I don’t exactly know, but I can attest to it.

This brings me back to the point of my first blog, “What makes a classic?” or rather, “What defines a classic?” In terms of theatre performance, I believe one characteristic to be the fact that the play can be manipulated from its original script and be reborn into a new generation. Ivo Van Hove did this. He took Lillian Hellman’s play that was set in the early 1900s and transformed it into a play that can relate to the current time period. Although he kept the actors’ lines the same (for the most part), there is a reason for it. We have to realize that language is powerful and packed. “Nigger” is one of those words that is jam-packed with history and emotions. The way that word is used in the play has a derogatory meaning. To put it in today’s standards would not be too difficult because depending on the context, tone, and situation the word could either be negative or positive, but it still has that lingering deprecating feel whenever it’s spoken.

Another thing that Ivo Van Hove does is “strip the play to its bare essentials,” as Professor Healey mentioned in class. He places the characters in a rectangular room lined with purple walls. There is no furniture set up, except for the staircase, an upright electrical piano to the left of the stage and a short, small table in the front of center stage. There was use for two chairs, a coffee set, and a few other items. That’s it. By keeping the set “clean,” the audience is exposed to all the details such as the actions and positions of the actors and actresses. We aren’t distracted by extravagant beauty as Peter Brook mentions in his book, The Empty Space. Did you notice how the actors and actresses circled the staircase at times? I did and I felt that they were vultures gliding through the air waiting for the moment to feast on another animal’s kill. The same happens in the play because Oscar, Ben, and Regina are focused on gaining money at the expense of the people. They will go out of their way just to exploit them. Horace does it in a different manner. He does it to try and ruin the sibling’s plan because he realizes that it’s cruel and unethical. In addition, Birdie’s dress and clothing were red. It clashed against the purple walls. The same goes with her personality because it was child-like and pastoral. Her views of living “the life” were more rural and less extravagant than those of the siblings.

One more important aspect was the interaction the actors and actresses had with the audience. It is the role of the director to help them grow and inspire us. That’s what Ivo Van Hove did. The tone of Horace’s voice was child-like at times. It felt that his eyes were opened after being up North for 5 months, but at the same time it had a serious aspect to it. Horace had a job to do: expose Alexandra to the truth. Also, Birdie’s interaction with the audience, to me, was the greatest. The way she acted with her laughter and sadness swayed me. I laughed when she laughed became hurt and sad when she did. Her presence wasn’t overwhelming at the same time. It worked with the others. No one person had full command of the audience, especially with the L.E.D. screen overhead.

All this work and detail shows Ivo Van Hove’s great insight towards the play in relation to today. He was able to help the cast move and affect the audience. This is what makes him standout as a reader and makes him a director. His interpretation was able to relate to present-day New Yorkers. He startled us. He made us think. He made us remember.  And personally, he made me remember my memory of Pinocchio.

Truth to be told, I did not want to travel all the way to Manhattan to watch a play; Sunday nights are better spent in bed. Even though it was dark and rainy, I dragged myself to the subway station and arrived at the New York Theatre Workshop for a surprisingly entertaining night.

After the audience received a welcoming from a representative of NYTW, the lights flashed on and eerie music began to play. The first thing I noticed was the LED screen in the middle of the stage and immediately I recognized that it was hanging above a staircase. At the same time, I noticed a female walking to the front of the stage to stare at the screen. Since we weren’t supposed to look up anything about this play, I thought that it would be something set in the modern times.  However, after the entrance of Cal and Addie, both servants to the Hubbard family, I realized that something was definitely weird. The way that Cal and Addie spoke and the way that they were treated reminded me of the way many Blacks were treated way back in time. The use of the “n” word was the clearest indicator that this play was not set in modern times. Although people still use that word today, it is definitely not used in the manner that was portrayed in the play. The use of this word may have offended many people, but I feel that the director was right to include this in the play since it is such a clear indication of the setting.

In addition to the screen and the staircase, I also noticed the purple carpet looking walls and floor. Actually, I don’t recall if the floor was purple but I do know that the walls were! I actually thought that the room looked really tacky but over time it grew on me. There was a small keyboard off to the left, a bottle of wine on a small tray in the center front of the stage, and small light fixtures hanging from the ceiling at multiple points. Besides those things, the stage was clear and furniture was very minimal. I actually thought that the set design worked for the play. The same room was used throughout the play and I thought that it was brilliant. It wasn’t necessary to change scenes because everything seemed to be centered on the events that happened inside the house. Actually, the more I think of it, the more I view the room as a cage that held all the conflict inside.

Now let us move on to the clothes. That was another thing that confused me. If the play is set in the 1900’s, why are the clothes so common looking to a girl from 2010? All the men were dressed in suits while the females were dressed in cocktail dresses. Way too modern for the times. Although it might’ve helped to see the characters wear the “correct” clothes, I’d like to admit that I’m glad they did not. I’m sure that the director chose wisely to not incorporate period clothes since I was able to understand the setting and the conflicts of the time all without watching the actors parade around in funny looking garments.

Last but not least, I’d like to comment on the actors. I didn’t really enjoy the acting in the first 10-15 minutes but then I realized that it wasn’t the actors/actresses that were fake, it was the characters. Overall, my favorite character was Alexandra. She was the least corrupt and the one that grew throughout the play. I thought that the actress fit the role of Alexandra almost perfectly. I give her props for falling off the staircase in one of the last scenes. It seemed to hurt. Her Aunt Birdie was my second favorite because she represented a repressed woman that wants so badly to escape the life that she was granted. I almost wanted her to have the life that she wished to have. The way that her husband, Oscar Hubbard, treated her was very crude but sadly the way that many women were treated back then. Oscar, Benjamin, and Leo as the men of the Hubbard family wanted to profit so badly from the people of their neighborhood. The way that they manipulated Regina and Horace (parents of Alexandra) almost made me shudder at how mean people could be. The scenes between Regina and her brothers were usually playful and also hostile. I thought that the tension in those scenes was very interesting and representative of sibling quarrels. The part with Regina and Horace, however, drove me crazy. I didn’t understand where all the love went. ): Whatever to that though.

If you were to ask me to watch the play again, I would say yes. I wasn’t at my most attentive and I’m sure that I missed a few points here and there. The plot was attractive to me and the acting wasn’t bad at all. I’d say bring on the weirdness again.

“This play better be good.” That was the thought I had in my head and the thought I posted on Facebook as I was getting ready to leave. As we were headed towards the city, by train and subway from Long Island, I hoped more and more that this play would keep me entertained. Thank the Lord, it did that and much more.

I have to admit when the play first began it took me a little while to get warmed up to it. I thought the acting was a bit overdone and fake but afterwards as I realized the true intentions of the characters it made sense that they were overdoing it because their characters were putting on a facade. Overall I was really impressed with the actors, especially the woman who played Alexandra and the woman who played Addie. They really did a splendid job. Which also goes to show that there really are no small parts because Addie was one of my favorite characters with her sassy attitude.

When the play first opens up all you notice is purple and big empty stage? What in the world?? Well I have to say I believe the director really made a great choice with the set design. As I surfed youtube on other productions of “Little Foxes” I hated it when they used a very intricate setting. It looked as if someone threw up antiques all over the stage just to fill it up. I preferred the big emptiness much more. I came to the conclusion that the reason they did this was because, as you looked at the stage you could tell that they were wealthy and that they lived in a big house through simple objects, like the chandeliers, and through the way the characters presented themselves. But to make the stage empty just went to show how even though they had so much more than the average joe they felt as though it was not enough and they needed more. I also think it symbolizes the fact that due to their constant search for more material objects, each character ends up “empty” and alone in the end.

Colors really played a big role in this play. Notice how my blog is purple?(kind of…Haha) So I became really curious about the color usage and I decided to go online and research colors. I found some very interesting things. Purple  stands for royalty(as if you didn’t know already) and another interesting thing is that it also stands for being artificial because it is rare in nature. Just like Regina who was wealthy but fake at the same time. Her whole life was fake. She never really showed her true self to anyone until the very end when she made all her needs known. All Regina wants is power, and lots of it. She and her brothers are all very ambitious. When Regina first comes out she is wearing all black which denotes strength and authority. She came off all powerful from the very beginning. On the contrary, Birdie is wearing red which is the color of fire and blood. It stands for passion, desire and love as well as war, danger, power and determination which is why Oscar and Ben were wearing them as well. Oscar and Ben though were wearing a darker red which actually stands for malice, wrath and leadership. Going back to Birdie I believe that her character was actually very strong. She might have started out as weak but as time went on she became stronger. You could especially tell this when Oscar is beating her up and she keeps getting up and walking towards him confidently. I felt that this was sending the strong message that you can keep hitting me but you will never bring me down.

As the play went on Regina changed her color scheme toward more beige and brown colors which represent stability and denote masculine qualities. Throughout the play we see that Regina does not like how men in this society are regarded higher than women when she herself could be just like them if not better.

The girl who played Alexandra was simply amazing. She was really into character throughout the whole show and for someone so young I think she showed a lot of potential. After talking with my classmates I seem to have been the only one who actually teared up when she was asking her uncle to stop her mom and dad from fighting (I’m such a baby…I know :p). Another moment that was almost a tear jerker for me was when Birdie was talking about the past with Oscar and she started pounding the wall like a mad woman. I could feel all the pain she went through just by that powerful moment. It was crazy. I also want to comment on Addie because I fell in love with her character. Her attitude was hilarious especially when she was talking about Alexandra getting married and she was like “Over my dead body.” If I were to play any character in that play I think I’d choose Addie.

One last thing…I promise. We discussed in class how many people were shocked that they used the N word. Unfortunately I have to say that I really wasn’t shocked. I guess I kind of expected it because I knew what time period the play took place. I also feel that I’ve been exposed to that word so many times listening to my friends that it doesn’t really shock me anymore. It shocks me if they use it in a bad connotation but I’ve only really been exposed to it in a playful manner.

Lastly here is a funny video i found online on a parody of “Little Foxes.” I’m only going to post part one but if you really like it you can find part 2 on youtube. :p Peace out.

Little Foxes was definitely worth seeing.  It was worth the time in the theater, the time spent traveling, and having to sit in a cool theater with a soaked shirt. It is among the best plays I’ve ever seen.  That may not mean much, considering my extremely limited experience, but it is still true.  It is a great story and was well presented by the actors, director, designers, and everyone else involved.

I was impressed from the beginning because I loved the stage design.  I don’t feel that a large number of props and fancy furniture is necessary.  The purple walls and lack of furniture left me with no idea what to expect.  I had to really pay attention to what was going on.  I thought having the servants bring in the chairs and other props was a good way to slightly change the setting without having to actually stop the scene.  The only exception to the simplicity was the infamous screen.  I found it very interesting.  Though there were very few times that it made a difference, I liked having it there.  It was helpful to see Horace and Regina fighting, and I thought the slaughter of the lamb, though disturbing, was an effective symbol for the way the family exploited the poor townspeople.

The script was well written.  It was compelling and interesting, without a boring moment.  From the beginning of the play I was curious.  Curious to find out what kind of man Horace was, to find out why there was so much tension, and to find out if the plan to buy the mill would work out.  I wondered if Horace would be like the siblings or if, being from a different family, he would be kinder and less greedy.  Horace’s gentler nature, combined with his illness made him much easier to sympathize with.  I wanted him to win, and  my attention was held as his plan to punish his wife unfolded.  His death and failure to execute his plan was crushing.  Though Horace’s failure was upsetting, I enjoyed Regina’s turn around from being powerless due to her gender to being in total control at the end.  The family dynamic was well done.  The playwright did a great job of making it obvious that there had been tension among the family without providing much background information.  All we knew was that the family had money, and it was all given to the sons.  However, the numerous cases of violence and deceit gave us a clear idea of what the relationships between the siblings were like.

The actors did a great job throughout the play, especially in the scenes of explosive anger and violence.  The screaming and hitting did not feel staged, they felt real.  They showed impressive commitment to the play with their willingness to be hit and thrown around.  Their skill was not limited to fight scenes, however.  The actor’s playing the siblings and Leo were convincingly frantic at times when trying to ensure the purchase of the mill would happen.  In the opening scene, the brothers concern that Mr. Marshal would not make a deal with them was clear, and later Leo’s reaction to Cal’s message from Horace felt authentic.  Even the few calm scenes, such as the one featuring just Horace, Bertie, and Alexandra, were convincing.  I could feel the characters’ happiness and relief that they could have time without the rest of the family.

Though the modern clothing made it difficult to determine the time period of the play (all i could figure out was sometime between 1870 and 1965), I felt it helped the play as a whole.  Putting the characters in modern clothing made it easy to use costume to separate the siblings from the rest of the characters.  The siblings dark, business like dress gave them a serious, money-concerned appearance.  The contrast with Bertie’s red clothing, Horace’s disheveled appearance, and Alexandra’s simple clothing made it obvious that the characters were divided.