Theater: Ibsen's A Doll's House
Henrik Ibsen's A Doll's House is famous as an early (1879) statement of women's liberation. In it, Nora progresses from a stereotyped "doll"-like daughter and wife into a woman willing to forge her own role in the world. Boldly for the 19th century, she walks out on her husband and two children, without any stated plan or sign of conscience about the consequences on her family. Its easy to see why the play was a shocking hit of its time, but also why Ibsen's younger rival August Strindberg found the play too much about the concluding shock effect, and not terribly realistic (The acerbic Strindberg asked: what is Nora going to do on her departure, without skills or training in the trades? Prostitution?).
Seeing it in Brooklyn in 2016, the play is less shocking, but requires a nuanced Nora who makes the transition from doll to independent woman convincingly. Such was not the case at this production by The Theater for a New Audience, directed by Arin Arbus and starring Maggie Lacy (Nora) and John Douglas Thompson (Thorwald Helmer, her husband). Ms. Lacy's performance lacked subtlety, and expressed too much of a Jekyll-Hyde (or doll-to-modern woman) dichotomy. Since her transition occurs joltingly in the very last scene, this meant three acts of a fairly monochrome "doll". I wished Ms. Lacy had shown more darkness behind the doll, an earlier demonstration of repressed misery behind the initial superficial wifely role playing. Actually, I found most of her performance hyper-manic and tiresome, rather like the wired portions of a Gena Rowlands performance in a Cassevetes film (for example, this clip from A Woman under the Influence where the manic-depressive Gena dances Swan Lake, compared to A Doll's House in which Nora dances the tarantella). When Nora's transition to "the modern woman" finally arrived, the scene therefore seemed too forced, as if a completely different character was now onstage. This made Nora more unsympathetic than I think Ibsen intended, a result emphasized all the more by having her two kids melodramatically come onstage to join their shocked father after Nora slams the door on the way out (this dramatic addition was apparently an add-on in the Thornton Wilder edition performed). The original ending stays more focused on the couple:
Helmer. Nora--can I never be anything more than a stranger to you?
Nora [taking her bag]. Ah, Torvald, the most wonderful thing of all would have to happen.
Helmer. Tell me what that would be!
Nora. Both you and I would have to be so changed that--. Oh, Torvald, I don't believe any longer in wonderful things happening.
Helmer. But I will believe in it. Tell me! So changed that--?
Nora. That our life together would be a real wedlock. Goodbye. [She goes out through the hall.]
Helmer [sinks down on a chair at the door and buries his face in his hands]. Nora! Nora! [Looks round, and rises.] Empty. She is gone. [A hope flashes across his mind.] The most wonderful thing of all--?
[The sound of a door shutting is heard from below.] ).
Mr. Thompson achieved far more nuance in a frequently-stereotyped role as a rigid Norwegian husband...in the end he seemed capable of change to meet Nora halfway, while still limited by his upbringing and the oppressive culture that maintained a rigid heirarchy of male over female.
I think this play still has much to say to us about what a marriage is or is not, and about male female roles, but a more complex treatment of the protagonist was needed than was provided here. I will write more in an upcoming blog about the evolving way Scandinavian authors (e.g. Ibsen, Bergman, van Trier) portray womens' liberation.
Note: this production made use of color-blind casting in a play about the Norwegian middle class (e.g. the husband and kids were not white), an evolving trend in theater and opera, but not yet in many movies. It was something I noticed for about 10 minutes, then forgot about it. Funny how the mind works!
Seeing it in Brooklyn in 2016, the play is less shocking, but requires a nuanced Nora who makes the transition from doll to independent woman convincingly. Such was not the case at this production by The Theater for a New Audience, directed by Arin Arbus and starring Maggie Lacy (Nora) and John Douglas Thompson (Thorwald Helmer, her husband). Ms. Lacy's performance lacked subtlety, and expressed too much of a Jekyll-Hyde (or doll-to-modern woman) dichotomy. Since her transition occurs joltingly in the very last scene, this meant three acts of a fairly monochrome "doll". I wished Ms. Lacy had shown more darkness behind the doll, an earlier demonstration of repressed misery behind the initial superficial wifely role playing. Actually, I found most of her performance hyper-manic and tiresome, rather like the wired portions of a Gena Rowlands performance in a Cassevetes film (for example, this clip from A Woman under the Influence where the manic-depressive Gena dances Swan Lake, compared to A Doll's House in which Nora dances the tarantella). When Nora's transition to "the modern woman" finally arrived, the scene therefore seemed too forced, as if a completely different character was now onstage. This made Nora more unsympathetic than I think Ibsen intended, a result emphasized all the more by having her two kids melodramatically come onstage to join their shocked father after Nora slams the door on the way out (this dramatic addition was apparently an add-on in the Thornton Wilder edition performed). The original ending stays more focused on the couple:
Helmer. Nora--can I never be anything more than a stranger to you?
Nora [taking her bag]. Ah, Torvald, the most wonderful thing of all would have to happen.
Helmer. Tell me what that would be!
Nora. Both you and I would have to be so changed that--. Oh, Torvald, I don't believe any longer in wonderful things happening.
Helmer. But I will believe in it. Tell me! So changed that--?
Nora. That our life together would be a real wedlock. Goodbye. [She goes out through the hall.]
Helmer [sinks down on a chair at the door and buries his face in his hands]. Nora! Nora! [Looks round, and rises.] Empty. She is gone. [A hope flashes across his mind.] The most wonderful thing of all--?
[The sound of a door shutting is heard from below.] ).
Mr. Thompson achieved far more nuance in a frequently-stereotyped role as a rigid Norwegian husband...in the end he seemed capable of change to meet Nora halfway, while still limited by his upbringing and the oppressive culture that maintained a rigid heirarchy of male over female.
I think this play still has much to say to us about what a marriage is or is not, and about male female roles, but a more complex treatment of the protagonist was needed than was provided here. I will write more in an upcoming blog about the evolving way Scandinavian authors (e.g. Ibsen, Bergman, van Trier) portray womens' liberation.
Note: this production made use of color-blind casting in a play about the Norwegian middle class (e.g. the husband and kids were not white), an evolving trend in theater and opera, but not yet in many movies. It was something I noticed for about 10 minutes, then forgot about it. Funny how the mind works!
Comments
Post a Comment