|
|
|
|
|
|
Stars explained: * A production of no real merit
with failings in all areas. ** A production showing evidence of not
enough time or effort, or even talent, and which never breathes any real
life into the piece – or a show lumbered with a terrible script. *** A
good enjoyable show which might have some small flaws but has largely
achieved what it set out to do.**** An excellent show which shows a
great deal of work and stage craft with no noticeable or major
flaws.***** A four star show which has found that extra bit of magic
which lifts theatre to another plane. |
|
|
A marriage of convenience Boston Marriage
Highbury Theatre Centre Studio
Sutton Coldfield
*** BOSTON marriage is a three-handed play,
with an all -female cast from the pen of American writer and film
director David Mamet. It was written in 1999 but is set a century
earlier, the title being a euphemism, said to have been in use in New
England in the decades spanning the late 19th and early 20th centuries,
to describe two women living together, independent of financial support
from a man. The place is assumed to be Boston, New England. The term Boston marriage became associated
with Henry James's The Bostonians (1886), a novel involving a
long-term co-habiting relationship between two unmarried women. Although
James himself never used the term, his sister Alice, who lived in such a
relationship with another woman, Katherine Loring, was among his sources
. Plays about, or featuring, gay men are not
uncommon, those featuring lesbian relationships less so. However
acceptance of women living together in ambiguous circumstances has been
more socially accepted over the years than men doing likewise. The plot is modest, the script verbose, making it
a challenging play for a director. If it is played as a niche lesbian
drama it narrows its audience, if played as a straight parlour play its
raison d’etre is lost, if sexed up, the border between comedy and
vulgarity can be fine. Director Sandra Haynes aims for subtle, rather
than vulgar, comedy, and implied, rather than overt sexuality. Alison Cahill is the stay-at-home Anna, mistress
to a wealthy man who maintains her lavish, kept lifestyle, while her
lover Claire (Joanne Richards) has met an innocent young woman whom she
hopes to bring to Anna’s house to seduce. Although pivotal to the plot, we never physically
meet the intended prey. Anna is waspish and overbearing, Claire is all
aloof social refinement mixed with carnal lust. Both principals handled
their word heavy, demanding roles, admirably, although I read more
sexual chemistry and tension in the play than is portrayed here. The
soft New England American accent, only a twist on English pronunciation,
was well held by both. Between the two lovers is the put-upon Scottish
maid Catherine (Jen Godbehere) , whom Anna calls with equal indifference
Mary, and any other name that comes to mind. Catherine’s quick wit, sly
disobedience and cheeky subversion are nicely played, and Godbehere’s
confidence in the part grew as the play progressed. The cruel bullying
by Anna of Catherine is explained by her desire for her, as evidenced by
her proposition, mirroring Claire’s desires for a younger woman too. The badinage is witty and quick-fire, designed to
shock in that the outwardly refined can be so filthy of thought and
bedroom desire. Curiously the language uses frequent anachronisms (“Go
tell it to the marines”) combined with obscure and arcane words and
phrases a century old, all delivered in iambic pentameter making it a
demanding piece for the actors to learn. The studio performance was particularly apt for
this single set production, a parlour play performed in a parlour. To
14-03-15 Gary Longden
09-03-15 |
|
|
|
