Shakespeare in The Park

              Last year with The Merchant of Venice, and The Winters Tale a tradition was reborn at The Public Theaters annual Shakespeare in the Park. That tradition was repertory theater. With a few notable exceptions, last summer, one company of actors performed two of Shakespeare's plays in repertory at The Delacorte Theater in Central Park.

              This new again tradition lived on this summer with The Public Theaters productions of Measure for Measure and All's Well That Ends Well. Like Merchant and Winters. These two plays were paired together because the offer an audience an enhanced experience being performed together, and so I've chosen to right about them together so that the intent of each is not lost.

               Measure for Measure concerns a politician who is combating the moral corruption of his constituents while simultaneously being embroiled in his own sexual scandal. Given recent headlines this theme seems quite timely. There are subplots and minor characters, but that is the main storyline.

             Director David Esbjornson has kept the action of the play in the Renaissance period which is when it was originally set. This staging begins with The Duke having what appears to be a horrid nightmare complete with black devils and dismembered bodies. The devils were very effective in giving The Duke reason to abdicate his throne to Antonio, and suggesting a slight mental imbalance from which he must recover. The devils continue to be seen throughout the first act and then disappear in the second act altogether. This makes their use confusing because once they are divorced from the The Dukes mind their practical application is lost.

             Measure presents plot problems early on that Modern audiences will not except, and Mr. Esbjornson has attempted to rectify those problems through clarity of action, and imposing silent staging upon the text. This works quite well for the most part. There are still problems, but you forgive them. This is as wonderful a production of Measure as you are like to find. The performances from all are wonderful.

              All's Well That Ends Well is a tale of love unrequited, a woman scorned, and a wanton youth reigned in. I found this text to be a bit more problematic because neither of the main characters is written to be particularly likable. Annie Parisse fixed this quite well in making her portrayal of Helena extremely likable. Andre Holland as Bertram, unfortunately, does not make you feel an ounce of Sympathy for the character, and perhaps with was a joint decision with director Daniel Sullivan to throw all of the sympathy in Helena's court.

           What you end up with though, is an unbalanced production. What you have is a play that asks you not to take sides, and a production that demands it. This juxtaposition is interesting and effective. Helena traps Bertram into a marriage in which he does not want to be in. Up to this point Bertram has done absolutely nothing to gain the audiences derision, so we do feel bad. We feel bad for both parties though, we feel sorry for Helena being in love with a man who does not return her affections, and also for the fact that she must force him to marry her. We feel sorry for Bertram to be forced into a marriage with a woman he does not love, this sorrow is quickly usurped, however, by Bertram's subsequent actions.

      I find this all to be very interesting, because if the genders were reversed, and it was a woman forced into a marriage with a man she did not love, and she behaved similarly (to a point) would our feelings be the same? Would we feel as badly for the man who lost his wife as we do for the woman who lost her husband? It's an interesting question. There are many wonderful performances in this play as well. The aforementioned Annie Parisse as well as Tonya Pinkins as the countess.

     Now for the true examination, these plays couples together achieve an interesting study of Shakespeare's work. You have two plays that are considered by many to be two if his worst plays. Each has their own set of problems, but they are similar in their structure. Neither is easily classified as either a comedy or a tragedy. They don't quite "fit" into any category. They both end in weddings and contain no deaths, so technically that categorized them as "comedies" in the cannon. However, all of the weddings are unhappy, or at the very least bittersweet. And the action that leads up to these marriages are certainly tinged with unfunny drama.

   Not only are they similar in structure, but they both operate the same device of a "bed trick". That is, a man believes he is going to bed with one woman, but that woman has reached an agreement with another to slip out of bed so that the other woman can trick said man into sleeping with her. These are two of the most interesting, and problematic of each play. It's difficult for modern audiences to believe (as I'm sure it has always been), that even in the throws of passion a man would not be able to tell the difference between two women. I would also gather that this is also seen as being a bit demeaning to women, that they are viewed as sex objects and one is just as good as the next.

   Shakespeare in the Park ends on Sunday. If you live in or around NYC and have the chance to get to the park to see one or either production I highly recommend it. You will witness two of Shakespeare's masterpieces and be treated to something that will surely entertain you, and may perhaps, as it did for me, leave you with much to think about!