Review
NEWHOUSE
University of Calgary
Written by Richard Rose with D.D. Kugler
Directed by Simon Mallett
Runs until February 26
University Theatre
A nameless and terrifying sexually transmitted plague is spreading throughout North America. A coalition government has been formed and a bi-partisan committee has convened to research how best to stop the disease. The prime minister advocates good sense, trust and the courage to have yourself tested, while the opposition, supported by religious fundamentalists, suggests mandatory testing, certification and sex only within the confines of marriage.
In the midst of the paranoia, Newhouse, the son of a high-ranking cabinet member, refuses to live a life of chastity and, instead, engages in a series of risky and increasingly difficult-to-find sexual encounters.
Newhouse, the latest offering from the University of Calgary’s drama department, is directed by Simon Mallet in partial fulfilment of his master’s thesis in directing and, like many such projects, the play comes off as an interesting intellectual exercise that doesn’t quite work onstage. The production suffers from glacial pacing, which could be moved along with even the slightest suggestion of sarcasm and repartee from its characters, who apparently live in a world of sorrowful speeches and overwrought anger.
The script, by Canadian playwright-directors Richard Rose and D.D. Kugler, is written in a difficult, slightly heightened English that the student actors, who on the whole seem ill-at-ease onstage, clearly have trouble with. One of the few exceptions is Fane Tse, who plays Newhouse. A charming and attractive actor, Tse’s performance is quite natural and he doesn’t have any trouble making the language sound plausible. He takes this Casanova, who seduces woman after woman in a time where a careless encounter could end your life, and makes him believable.
However, even his charm begins to wane in the second act as the play stretches towards the two-and-a-half hour mark. The lacklustre script, coupled with the heavy-handed, melodramatic approach to the text, make the two 75-minute acts seem at times to be interminable.
On the technical side, there have clearly been some strong choices made, but a lack of attention to detail in the costuming of the Greek chorus (a perennial university favourite) of parliamentary reporters is disappointing. Dressed in what I can only assume are supposed to be anonymously bureaucratic skirts and blouses, some of these characters seem to belong in a 1940s steno pool while others look like they’ve just wandered off the set of Working Girl.
Furthermore, the incomprehensible lighting design, which sees the stage at times in near darkness and at others lit directly from above, makes it virtually impossible to actually tell what the actors look like or to see how they are reacting emotionally to each other.
Perhaps this play, which was first produced in 1989 at the height of the AIDS hysteria, is meant to shake us out of our complacency, to force us to think about the dangerous diseases that lurk in the future and to evaluate how we would like to see ourselves and the world react to a new threat. But this lengthy, flawed production simply couldn’t hold my attention. I just kept thinking to myself, "Why doesn’t he use a condom?" |
Copyright ©2005 FFWD. All rights reserved.