Jump to content


The Seagull - Headlong - On Tour

Headlong

  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#11 Cardinal Pirelli

Cardinal Pirelli

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 290 posts

Posted 01 June 2013 - 04:58 PM

This translation was served perfectly by the director. There are plenty of other translations if the director wanted a more traditional version but Donnelly's is as straightforward a contemporary take as you could get, no tricks, just three dimensional characters (and just what was David harrower doing for Public Enemy, his is the flattest translation that I've heard in a while). I wouldn't have thought that anyone went to a Headlong show expecting a traditional version (remember the mind blowing Six Characters in Search of an Author!)

As for the characters being irritating, it's what Chekhov wrote, it's why he described it as a comedy, despite the pain.

#12 mallardo

mallardo

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 893 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London

Posted 02 June 2013 - 05:55 AM

I didn't expect a traditional version of the play - I expected an intelligent one.  And, no, the characters in The Seagull should not be "irritating". They are deeply flawed but deeply human and we empathize with all of them - or should do.
Excuse me if I seem jejune
I promise I'll find my marbles soon.

#13 Honoured Guest

Honoured Guest

    Dis Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2531 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 02 June 2013 - 09:42 AM

I'm with the Cardinal here. This production was highly intelligent, focusing on every sinew of Chekhov's play. Surely, "irritation" is in the skin of the irritated, and what irritates one person will be read and understood without irritation by less sensitive souls. Why "should" we empathise with every character? If we do, it taints our understanding of them.

#14 mallardo

mallardo

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 893 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London

Posted 02 June 2013 - 10:48 AM

I don't see how empathy taints understanding in any way.  But let's agree to disagree.
Excuse me if I seem jejune
I promise I'll find my marbles soon.

#15 Nicholas

Nicholas

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 331 posts

Posted 02 June 2013 - 10:05 PM

View Postmallardo, on 02 June 2013 - 05:55 AM, said:

I didn't expect a traditional version of the play - I expected an intelligent one.  And, no, the characters in The Seagull should not be "irritating". They are deeply flawed but deeply human and we empathize with all of them - or should do.

Personally, I didn't find any of the characters irritating other than comic irritation (it is a comedy) and saw deeply flawed but deeply human empathetic people - it sounds like only I saw it, but there we go.  It's the unfussiness that still strikes me - nothing on-stage diverted our focus from the characters and their dialogues and debates.  The effing was naturalistic in a way the tamer "bloody frigging bloody frigging" wasn't in Upton's Cherry Orchard.  I always connect to Chekhov on paper but don't always on stage as sometimes the samovars are more important to the director than characters or subtext, and sometimes the aim to be modern means the original is somewhat discarded.  Here, no such problems.  For me it really worked.

But that said, the people next to me (a group of girls probably in sixth form, I'm bad at telling ages) said of this that it was the dullest thing they'd seen at that theatre (clearly they missed The King's Speech).  But that said, people near me said the same thing at the very traditional Vaudeville Vanya, and the radical Russian Vanya.  So if I'm limping towards a conclusion it's that Chekhov's more challenging than he might seem, and it's likely impossible to find a translation that pleases everyone.





Also tagged with Headlong

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users