Welcome to downtown Purgatory. A place not unlike the seediest run-down areas of New York; a place where everyone dresses in modern clothes no matter when they were born, and a place where everyone (or at least almost everyone) speaks using an dazzling array of American accents and argot.
Purgatory, we are told, shifts and changes every so often to appear like certain places on earth, and at the moment it is more Bronx or Harlem than anywhere.
We are in a disused and for sale ball-park and we are here to witness an appeal made on behalf of a very important person. The ball-park becomes the courtroom but this is no ordinary courtroom drama, - an appeal has been raised and we are to witness the trial of God v. Judas Iscariot. If Judas Iscariot is regarded as the ultimate sinner, and yet God forgives all those who sin, why has he been condemned to damnation and refused entry into the gates of heaven? It's a good point, and in Stephen Adly Guirgis' contentious writing, we are given reasons for and reasons against; most backed up with pertinent Biblical quotations and references, with some coming from an imagined childhood and youth of Iscariot. (along with his mother, the curiously christian-named Henrietta (Freya De Wild)). It seems that few things these days are theatrically taboo, but religion - in no matter what form it takes - always manages to insight and provoke; and that is exactly what this play intends to do.
The play cross-examines the Gospels but is ultimately about personal hell and individual insensibility. The play is based on the bible and Christian teachings, but in reality it shows human failure, guilt and self-loathing. But nowhere in this version was there a comedic release...
I have never seen the play performed before, however I can't help but think that this version, directed by Jonathan Martin missed out on the comedy elements in the play. It was very long-winded and drawn-out, with a very pedestrian first act, and only slightly swifter second. The text could have sparkled; the witticisms and caustic remarks were there aplenty, and yet they were not allowed to shine, and so many opportunities for bringing about some light-heartedness and laughter into the production were missed. It was a very slow and uninspiring start - but it didn't need to have been. Satan's entrance could have been oh so much more, and indeed the entire characterisation could have oozed with faux-charm and pazzazz - the lines were there, and even Joe Pass, the talented young man who was given the task of playing Satan, seemed to recognise that the character had so much more to give, but sadly he seemed to be continually being held back. This was true of a few other characters too. The only character who really seemed for me to achieve their full potential all evening was the Egyptian Coptic Christian lawyer Yusef El-Fayoumy (Ahmend Elmusrati) whose characterisation was fully-rounded, complete and pitched perfectly.
Harry Mace (Judas) put in a very real performance of 'catatonia' however I was never sure whether we were ever supposed to feel sorry for his plight or not; indeed, he is never given the opportunity to speak for himself, except in flashbacks, which do not paint him in a very good light at all. Zane Burkmar was an enjoyable bailiff whilst Fabiana Aziza Cunningham (Dasy Farrington) was the fiery red-headed part-Irish defence lawyer, making very compelling arguments and working extremely well trying to keep her composure when pitted against slime-ball Fayoumy and a judge (Elizabeth Kentish) whose southern drawl belied her own disaffectedness and disinterestedness to the whole trial process.
It is a very hard play to watch at the best of times, and one really needs to concentrate and listen. However I was thrown into further confusion when both gender-blind and colour-blind casting were brought forward. Again, not knowing the play it is hard for me to know whether or not these decisions had been made by the playwright or by the director. I am aware that there is a fierce modern trend for such things in theatre with Maxine Peake famously tackling Hamlet at the Royal Exchange not that long ago. However, a female Jesus was a step too far even for me. It also seemed rather odd that some of the historical witnesses called upon to give evidence in this trail were realistic or at least recognisable caricatures of the person in question...Ben Bubb's Sigmund Freud or Becky Bowe's Mother Theresa, whilst other historical figures were absolutely nothing like how they in reality were.
It was a large cast - 15 actors - but even then a lot of them played two or even three characters within the play, which again didn't help our understanding or ease of watching. However Noe Sebert's final speech as Butch Honeywell was superbly marked and brought the play out of the realms of religious hypothesis and psychology to a human level which we could all understand and relate to.
It is a confusing and thought-provoking play enough without throwing all kinds of other elements into the mix and it was a long play, full of mixed messages, quite boring, and I left the theatre feeling mentally drained, but sadly not in a particularly good way. The Manchester School Of Theatre has many talented students and I have seen some of this cast in previous productions shine much brighter. My negativity though is not directed at them, far from it. I am unsure still as to my feelings for this play, but tend to think that given a different production team it could have at least been swifter, more sparkling, funnier and more entertaining without losing any of its 'message'.
Reviewer - Matthew Dougall
on - 9/11/18
No comments:
Post a Comment