Wednesday night I attended a performance of “The Tempest” at Chicago’s Steppenwolf Theatre. The show opens officially on April 5.
Scholars generally accept “The Tempest” as the final play Shakespeare wrote alone — a valedictory capping a career of two decades and nearly 40 plays. There is in the work a nostalgic tone, mixed with autobiographic references, therapeutic disgorgement, final statements.
I am no Shakespeare scholar (nor was meant to be). I am not a credentialed critic. With but poor power to add to or detract from accumulated commentary, I present these few notes on things that struck me specially:
My ears perked up at Trinculo’s remark (in Act II, Scene 2) about the eagerness of Englishmen to pay good money to see strange and awesome creatures brought back from distant travels. The Jester notes how eagerly English purses open for foreign entertainment (“they [the English] will lay out ten [coins] to see a dead Indian”) and he contrasts this with their disregard for a grotesque situation on their very own doorstep, namely, legions of destitute fellow countryment (“they will not give a doit [small coin] to relieve a lame beggar”). With this cutting observation, I sensed Shakespeare was chastising many of us in the audience — people who happily paid to watch the playright’s show of “strange beasts,” while outside the theater, needs go unobserved, un-almsed.
Striking to me also was Prospero’s passionate warning (in Act IV, Scene 1) to the young lovers Miranda and Ferdinand against premarital sex, lest it poison their marriage. Listening to this extended outburst (“[Do not] break her virgin-knot before all sanctimonious ceremonies may with full and holy rite be minister’d”) I wondered if Shakespeare was recollecting his own quick forced nuptials with a pregnant Anne Hathaway. (Historians note that “the couple may have arranged the ceremony in some haste, since the Worcester chancellor allowed the marriage banns to be read once instead of the usual three times”). Is Shakespeare blaming his own unhappy marriage on its flawed beginning?
At the play’s end Prospero’s relationship with his brother Antonio is not repaired, an exception to the otherwise universal reconciliation.
Isn’t it unfair to reward the faithful Ariel merely with release from servitude? That’s no reward at all. Ariel deserves to be granted some grander thing, such as — would it be possible? — the gift of being made human.
The totally satisfying trajectory of the plot.
Actors must find it wonderful to inhabit the role of Prospero. You are allowed to be not only a fully-dimensioned fictional creation, but also a stand-in for Shakespeare himself, the sum of his life experiences and thoughts. In other words, you get to be Everyman.
I wonder if Gonzalo’s vision (in Act II, Scene 1) of an alternative, and better, world (with his key imaginings of “no sovereignty;” “nature [bringing forth] all abundance to feed my innocent people;” “all things in common”) was the inspiration for John Lennon’s “Imagine” (with its similar vision of “no countries;” “no need for greed or hunger;” “sharing all the world”).
______
Quick comments on the Steppenwolf’s bold and satisfying production of “The Tempest” (bear in mind that what I saw was a preview performance four days before the official opening):
The music composed for the pageantry of the play deserves high praise. It is much more than “incidental” music.
The production design for this quintessentially timeless play was generally superb, save for the insertion of certain era-specific props into what is otherwise a stripped-down, “universal” stage design. I mean the Apple laptop Ariel uses to compose and direct his high jinks. (I hope Steppenwolf’s attorneys negotiated a hefty endorsement fee from Apple; a winning ad campaign could be developed upon the theme, “Capture Your Inner Ariel with an Apple”). I also mean the retractable dog leash. And the “timeless” aura would have been served better if Gonzalo had sat in a generic wheelchair device, not the one of contemporary design and engineering that the prop folks got from a 21st century medical supplies firm.
The actors were superb across the boards (as well as through the air). One caveat: the wobbly Italian accent issuing from Stephano could use realignment. [But see a reader’s comment below (added 04/06/2009)]
I was surprised at the stinginess of the audience’s reaction: only polite unsustained clapping. No one stood to applaud. No calling back the actors for further well-deserved appreciation. Is this a Chicago tradition? Is it typical of a Steppenwolf audience?
_______
In the play’s lyrical, smiling Epilogue, Shakespeare directs Prospero to inform all of us who have absorbed his tale:
“My project . . . was to please.”
This production very much pleases. I for one was overwhelmed.
*
UPDATE (04-05-2009) – A first review, generally positive, from Chicago Tribune critic, Chris Jones, in “The Theater Loop”: http://leisureblogs.chicagotribune.com/the_theater_loop/2009/04/steppenwolfs-mystery-island-is-up-for-grabs-in-this-tempest.html also available at http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/lifestyle/chi-0406-tempest-steppenwolf-ovnapr06,0,7681846.story
UPDATE (04-06-2009) – A blogger who was enchanted is Venus Zarris: http://www.steadstylechicago.com/tempest.htm
One who was not is Nina Metz: http://newcitystage.com/2009/04/06/review-the-tempeststeppenwolf-theatre/
J. Scott Hill offers an ecstatic review: http://www.chicagostagereview.com/?p=3550,
As does Hedy Weiss of the Sun-Times: http://www.suntimes.com/entertainment/weiss/1512481,CST-FTR-Weiss06.article
Rob Kozlowski liked the show except for some stage elements and the rap song: http://chicago.decider.com/articles/stage-review-the-tempest,26212/