ARTS

Theater aimed high with Cherry Orchard

by Rumaan Alam

Considering that it is nearly 100 years old, Anton Chekhov's The Cherry Orchard resonates clearly today. Look at the work of Woody Allen, a clear disciple of Chekhov's. In his middle period work, substantial films like Manhattan and Hannah and Her Sisters, audiences encounter some staple Chekhovian tricks. There are characters with real problems - not famine and war, but problems more personal and human. People speak but do not listen, talking over one another endlessly in non sequiturs and random witticisms.

How little people have changed, it seems. Considering that the chosen material is not only thematically and representationally contemporary, but also a genuinely wonderful script, one wishes that the theater and dance department's Winter Term production of The Cherry Orchard had been a little more substantial.

The production, directed by Associate Professor of Theater Paul Moser, was not without its strong points. But for a script as powerful and engaging, the production simply should not have been so unpardonably boring.

Visually, maintaining the status quo set by most productions at Hall, the production was wonderful. The delightful, if not terribly innovative, set designed by Michael Grube was perfect for the tone of the play. It was stately and opulent, a row of french doors set upstage from the columns of one room in Lyubov Ranyevskaya's family home. And the elegant costumes designed by the resident costumer Chris Flaharty helped the production to feel all the more polished.

The show had the technical refinement which most audiences in Hall probably take for granted. Aside from the sets and costumes, the lighting, designed by Jen Groseth, was well done, considering some major technical difficulties just prior to the show's opening. The bright winter light at the play's opening and the soft evening light out of doors during the summer were two of the more noticeable effects. The sound, designed by senior Zachary Williamson, was similarly effective. The mournful sound of axes being taken to the beloved orchard lingered longer than any other moment in the play's second act.

The play tells the story of Lyubov and her brother Leonid, who live in fruitless extravagance on their familial estate. The estate and the family are running out of money, despite the efforts of Varya, Lyubov's adopted daughter, who tries to keep the whole thing running and attempts to scale down the extravagance of her family.

As the play opens, Lyubov, played by senior Diana Zumas, has just returned from a five year sojurn in Paris, where she was trying to recover from the loss of her young son. Zumas stole the show, playing the silly yet somehow tragic woman as complexly as Chekhov rendered the character. From the moment she strode on stage imperiously, doling out kisses and extolling the virtues of coffee, it was clear that Zumas was the star of the show. It is not simply the overblown nature of some of her character's scenes that allowed Zumas to shine, though she did excel when twittering on about money or breaking into sobs when reminded of her late son. Her presence was enough to take the entire stage over, but it was the way she looked off into the distance distractedly when others spoke, the way she was heartbreakingly funny and flirtatious that made Zumas shine.

Another strong and conisistent performance came from senior Hannah Cabell, who played the chilly and efficient Varya with dead-on accuracy. Varya is a wonderful counter to her frivolous relatives, a voice of reason. Cabell's iciness when scolding Lyubov for her extravagance was chilling, but her affection for her sister Anya was convincing. When Varya broke down into tears at the close of the play, it was the only truly affecting moment at a point when almost everything occuring is meant to be overwhelming and comically tragic.

Leonid, Lyubov's brother, was played by senior Morgan Dowsett with comic stodginess. Dowsett was delightful as the inept and ludicrous uncle, and his final scene with his sister was far more heart warming than most of the action in the second act.

As Anya, first-year Jennifer Dominguez looked delightful, though her portrayl seemed more that of a seven-year old than a seventeen year old. She could not quite keep up in her scenes with her mother, her uncle and her sister. A subplot focusing on her relationship with her late brother's tutor Trofimov, played by senior David Ellis, seemed ludicrous. It was hard to imagine a deep relationship between a too-young girl who worships the intellect and idealism embodied by Trofimov, who came across as neither intellectual nor idealistic. A character whose daydreams of revolution are supposed to seem silly but perhaps noble, Ellis's portrayal made the character seem only ludicrous. He is supposed to feel young and vibrant, if misguided, but felt nothing but distracting.

One of the tricks of this script is the number of characters involved in the action of the play whose roles are never quite explained. The actors really had to fend for themselves to make any sort of an impression. There were good performances from sophomore Jaime Currier as the silly maid Dunyasha and first-year Nicholas Junkerman as the smarmy valet, Yasha. Their doomed love affair was not as comic as it might have been in the hands of less capable performers. Yepikhodov, the unneccesary accountant, was played with delightful comedic presence by senior Jeremy Ellison-Gladstone. Carlotta, the governess, was memorably portrayed by sophomore Jessie Marshall, who worked well with a character who has almost nothing to do with the action of the play.

Unfortunately, some characters more central to the play's success were not as directed as Marshall and Ellison-Gladstone. Notably, Lopakhin, the man who ultimately buys and destroys the cherry orchard, played by junior Nicholas Sweeney, never quite established himself. Lopakhin is a tad on the tacky side, the nouveau riche businessman whose family once belonged to Lyubov's family.

There was simply nothing very touching about his performance, in a role which had the potential to overshadow all others. Lopakhin tries in vain to help the family, but ultimately must help himself, and betray the family. It should be heartbreaking that he buys the orchard. It should be terrible that he does not marry Varya. But as the family filed out of the house there was no sense that Lopakhin had helped bring about this turn of events. He simply never seemed like a character capable of accomplishing anything.

Another performance which never quite panned out was senior Rajiv Punja as the elderly butler Firs. Firs is another character who has little to do with the plot of the play, but is rather a symbol of the old guard in Russia. Firs is the last character onstage in the show, but the moment was lost as Punja was simply too young to portray such an old character. It was unfortunate, since it's a relatively minor role in which a non-student performer could easily have been cast.

Despite the fact that there were strong performances, the production suffered from some of the casting decisions. In the exhaustive program notes Moser offered the audience, he explained that his directorial approach was to allow the actors to dictate the tone of the show by working on their own interpretations of the text and their characters. This worked for some performers, but not for the show as a whole. There were some moments when the pacing felt off, and the entire second act felt simultaneously rushed and too slow. It's a shame since there are a number of emotionally charged moments in the text which simply did not translate into the performance.

Ultimately it is saddening that theater at this school seems to focus on scripts to provide students with a strong pre-professional repertoire, rather than on picking scripts to which students could do more justice. Chekhov is tough stuff for even the most capable actors. It's unclear what the solution should be. Less ambitious texts? Smaller casts? Outside performers? Theater and Dance productions continue to struggle with the dilemma.


Photo:
Cherry Orchard: Lyubov and Lopahkin share a word in last weekend's performance of Chekhov's masterpiece. (photo by John Seyfried, courtesy Theater and Dance)

 

Back // Arts Contents \\ Next

T H E   O B E R L I N   R E V I E W

Copyright © 1999, The Oberlin Review.
Volume 127, Number 13, February 12, 1999

Contact us with your comments and suggestions.