Don Carlos is a bit of a Marmite production. There are those that
love it and what Tom Burke is trying to create with his new theatre company,
and then there are those who hate it “bombastic and punishingly dull,” The Times.
Having heard Tom Burke promise a new way of looking at theatre, to
watch something stripped back to the text and not reliant on fancy costume or theatre
sets, I was excited to watch Don Carlos. I was especially pleased that the
MacDonald translation had been chosen, as I have picked up various versions of
Schiller’s work and find the MacDonald translations beautifully written.
I was travelling 250 miles to watch this play, so I decided I would
watch its progression over the course of a week. (Only three evenings, but that
gave me sufficient material to see what worked and what didn’t – not that I’m a
professional critic – I’m just a theatre lover.)
Don Carlos is originally a five act play by Friedrich Schiller and
set in 16th Century Spain around the time of the insidious Spanish
Inquisition. The play is loosely based on historical events under the reign of
King Phillip II of Spain. The heir to the throne, Don Carlos, was once
betrothed to his childhood friend Elizabeth of Valois and he is still deeply in
love with her, however, following her political marriage to Phillip she has
become his stepmother!
During Phillip’s rein, the Inquisition persecuted all suspected
heretics. Rebellions were suppressed, especially in the Low Countries, and the
menacing presence of the Catholic Church was felt all around. In Schiller’s
version of events, Don Carlos feels imprisoned between his unrequited love for
his stepmother and his hatred for his father, so to help bring him out of his melancholy,
he entrusts his closest friend, Rodrigo, Marquis of Posa, with his secret about
his love for Elizabeth. Rodrigo has just returned from Flanders, and whilst Carlos
wants him to set up a meeting with his mother so he can proclaim his love for
her, Rodrigo sees this as an opportunity to conjure up a rebellion against
Phillip’s tyrannical regime.
The set is minimalist. Exposed black brick walls, a black stage,
black furniture and spotlights set up either end of the stage like chess pieces
ready to commence in battle. In this sinister dark chamber, black clad
courtiers wearing dark shades feel like the arrival of the mafia. The dark, shadowy
recesses are imposing and create an air of foreboding from the start. The only
splash of colour in the whole play is the regal red carpet – which had its own
staring role as it seemed to be another living/breathing entity when it kept
rucking up under the actors feet – and the red lining of the King and Queen’s coats.
(I was a little sad that this theme was not continued throughout all the regal
apparel – a red button or stitching on the jackets or shirts would have tied it
all together.)
Don Carlos could be considered a superficial play about one man,
so caught up with his own problems, that he lacks the foresight to see the
world around him. But this isn’t just a family tragedy panning out. Schiller
has looked at history and man’s struggle against the oppression of religion and
the need for tolerance and humanity. When you consider the current troubles in
Syria and across the globe, the message is still one that is relevant today.
“You want your garden to flower eternally! But the seed you sow is
death”. Marquis of Posa
Samuel Valentine plays the titular role, but it is Tom Burke as
Roderigo, Marquis of Posa who stands out. Posa is the prominent character, the
man who has a disregard for the court, a close bond with the Prince, the
friendship and loyalty of the Queen, and following Burke’s brilliantly
delivered speech in a critical scene in the play, he obtains the ear of the King to become his right-hand
man.
Darrell D’Silva gives a strong performance and a gravitas to King
Phillip. We recoil as he refuses to reconcile with his son who has begged on
hands and knees for his father to consider the bigger picture, to send him to
Flanders to establish peace in the land. Phillip's desire for destruction is clear as
he sends the Duke of Alba, a bloodthirsty general, to Flanders instead and Posa’s
plan for a brighter future is threatened. But it is the final scene, when Tom
Burke arrives back on stage as the blind and aged Cardinal Grand Inquisitor, that
we witness the power of the church, and the King as a broken pawn in this game
of political chess.
The play leaves you thinking how each man’s desires and selfishness have blinded
themselves from a brighter, better future...bar Posa, the man who had a vision and tried his hardest to bring it to fruition.
 |
| Tom Burke as Roderigo at Exeter Northcott Theatre. Photo: The Other Richard |
I thoroughly enjoyed this first production from Tom Burke and Gadi
Roll’s new production company, Ara. It was a bold choice to open with and
showed Ara’s commitment to showing non-naturalistic versions of classic plays.
For some of the audience it was a step too far on the visionary highway,
however I thought it was outstanding work from the entire cast to keep me
enthralled for 3 hours on those theatre seats. (Now this is where people will
say, but you’re a Tom Burke fan, you’re not going to be critical of him.) Well,
to the naysayers, I bought a ticket for my partner on the last night of my
holibobs. He didn’t know the story, is not particularly a fan of Tom, nor a fan
of theatre. He enjoyed it and could see what Tom and Gadi were trying to achieve
and was astounded at the bad reviews the so called professional critics were
giving the production. His rating…7/10.
There were issues with the sound. I understand what Gadi was
trying to achieve with the characters speaking quickly at one another like
rapid machine-gun fire, but the acoustics of the theatre did not allow the idea
to work as imagined. I found the staging intimate, and quickly realised that having
to actively listen meant I engaged more with the characters and the story. This
was certainly a play I didn’t drift off thinking about what to make for dinner
the next day. I’m not sure whether my ears tuned in quicker when I saw it for a
second time, but I did find it easier to follow, with only two characters being inaudible for me (and that was only when they had their backs to me.) I think the speed of speech had been tweaked a little, and so it’s
possible the combination of speed and having seen it before allowed me to
ignore the sound issues until the rude and unnecessary interruption of a member of
the public at the interval (see footnote). A few elements needed polishing, but
I found the night an intimate, interesting and modern take on the passion, politics
and power of the Royal Court.
Having read some of the reviews, I felt like it wasn’t just the actors on stage wearing sunglasses,
but also some of the theatre critics and audience members. Their judgements
were clouded by not wanting to see the bigger picture, to not want to get
involved by having to put a bit of effort in for themselves. They wanted the
actors to do all the work, so they could sit back and be spoon fed the story as
though they were watching some daytime TV drama.
I enjoyed feeling slightly confused, unsure and uncomfortable as characters
faced-off one another. It’s not a realistic drama, Schiller took dramatic licence
with the story of the royal family (he even brought forward the defeat of the
Spanish Armada and the decline of Phillip’s empire) and therefore I hold with
the idea that it doesn’t need to be a naturalistic production either. Dramatic
licence can be used in all its forms.
And I find it interesting that Schiller felt the need to answer
his critics in a series of letters explaining his play. I hope the same does
not happen to Tom Burke and Gadi Roll. I hope they don’t feel that they must
answer their audiences, but instead that they enjoy and are proud of their
achievements instead.
I’m going to see the production again as it draws to a close at
Kingston, however, I’m now waiting with bated breath to see what Tom and Gadi
have in store for their audiences in their next classic production.
Footnote to Wednesday 17th
October production.
On Monday night, having watched the play
and then sat by the front door waiting for my taxi, Tom appeared, said hello and
we started chatting. I told him I’d enjoyed the play, but there were times I couldn’t
hear a thing…and I was sitting on the front row! I wasn’t sure how the problem
could be cured, but something needed doing as that was the main criticism I
heard from people around me.
Tom explained that if they had the
audience on both sides of the stage (the stage running down the middle) the
actors would be more audible to the audience, but they couldn’t do this seating
arrangement in this theatre.
On Wednesday, during the interval, just
before the actors took to the stage, a man appeared and asked for a show of
hands as to who couldn’t hear. At first I thought he was a member of staff –
then I realised it was someone who wanted their little moment of glory.
After his outburst, Tom Burke came out and
addressed the audience – a brave move, and one I was proud of him for. He
explained that they had cut 60 pages of text from the play and it was still 3
hours long at the quick pace the show runs at. If they slowed down the delivery,
the play would take longer than King Lear to get through. I was glad that he
was able to defend the play and the directorial choices that had been employed,
but also allowing the man – a paying consumer- to have his opinion.
I have immense respect for the cast coming
out after hearing the outburst and right of reply. They continued to perform
the play to the best of their ability knowing the hostile view of some of the
audience. At the end several people gave a standing ovation, a show of
solidarity amongst those who had enjoyed an evening of contemporary drama. I believe
if the play had been slowed down it would have lost its dramatic impact,
however, I thought it had been reined in ever so slightly from the Monday
night, as I noticed it was a lot clearer. (Either that or my ears had tuned into
the different style of theatre I was viewing!)
