Foul Play at the Artscape

25 Apr 2010 2 Comments

by Carla Lever in Uncategorized Tags: Artscape, Roy Sargeant

I’m not precious about my Shakespeare. I love imaginative adaptations – contemporary settings are all good in my book and I’m not fussed if the accents aren’t exactly RP.

Whatever the staging decisions though, there’s got to be a reason for them. They’ve got to add to the script, work with it to create something interesting, relevant, above all, smart. They should never become so intrusive that they take centre stage.

Roy Sargeant’s Romeo and Juliet is set in contemporary Cape Town. The Montagues are white streetwise blondes – punk rock kids with more money than class. The Capulets, an affluent black upper class family with a penchant for throwing splashy parties. Everyone seems to like a bit of a skop, but the real foul play takes place off the football pitch.

Sargeant hasn’t shied away from bold modern choices. The prologue is delivered by two rappers, Lady Montague appears to be a cancer patient, all the characters sport cell phones. I can absolutely understand – indeed applaud – the desire to make Shakespearean text resonate with a contemporary young audience. Romeo and Juliet is, after all, the 2010 matric setwork and the performances are geared up to cater to a school audience.

Modern doesn’t have to mean messy, though, and this unfortunately felt more of the latter. Every variety of cultural signifiers were incorporated regardless of their suitability, with bizarre incongruities resulting. Lord Capulet with a sjambok? Why not? Long swords and AK47’s? Go for it. Friar Laurence can’t seem to make up his mind between mediaeval monk’s robes and a besuited dogcollar look, whilst Juliet – dressed as a demure 1920’s lady in the poster – conducts virtually the whole performance in denim hotpants and a bikini top (a notable exception is the balcony scene, where she looks palpably uncomfortable in a sparkling lingerie set, racing through her lines whilst towel drying her weave).

The actors are, for the most part, cruelly shown up in this performance. Hardly any of them has the range, presence or basic technique to hold the demands the script places on them. Juliet – the startlingly beautiful Zondwa Njokweni – certainly captures Juliet’s youthful beauty, but unfortunately little else. She is woefully ill equipped to handle the power, decisiveness and authority the role demands. Her Juliet rushes from scene to scene, alternating between petulant victim and wide-eyed recitation (incidentally, there is a lot of running for the sake of running in this adaptation – perhaps an attempt at presenting a link to a football-fit cast?).

Dean Roberts’ Romeo is more successful, but only just. Whole scenes go past in a blur of rushed lines, delivered with what seemed like permanent anger. Roberts gained strength as the play progressed with some relaxed quips and asides, but the whole performance seemed so difficult, so forced. The lines never felt natural, with the actors seemingly to feel the need to make up for the arcane language by pushing the performances, heightening the emotions and, often, simply shouting the lines.

In general, the Capulets were far stronger performers than the Montagues. Lady Capulet particularly gave a strong performance and Lungi Pinda was wonderfully self-satisfied as the smarmy networking Paris.

Sargeant’s directorial choices seem, frankly, bewildering. The moment of the young soon-to-be lovers’ eyes locking across a crowded room – so crucial to establishing the believability of ‘love at first sight’ – actually occurs stage right while other actors are in spotlit dialogue stage left. By the time we are allowed to focus on their interaction – and hear the glorious opening sonnet exchange – they have already presumably been making small talk for some time.  Indeed, many huge moments pass by in the blink of an eye – opportunities for poignancy and drama carelessly thrown away at the expense of yet another choreographed football scene or modern gimmick. This felt like incidental Shakespeare – in an effort to make the text ‘relevant’ Sargeant has thrown  the baby out with the bathwater. Some of the most beautiful lines and moving exchanges are mangled at the expense of a cheap gag.

In a bizarre choice, it is Benvolio, not the traditional Mercutio, who carries the homoerotic overtones in the play, all textual evidence to the contrary. The nurse, always a firm favourite and wonderful vehicle for bawdy wordplay, is horrendously miscast. Diane Wilson gives a spirited performance, but ultimately failed to really convince as the garrulous and loose servant – no matter what monstrosity of a slapstick laugh-inducing getup she was placed in, she was just too poised, too neatly groomed to (not) be taken seriously.  Sadly, it was a case of more Constantia Village than Constantiaberg.

Special mention must be made of the lighting, particularly the ‘beam from god’ effect of spotlighting the soliloquies with an amber, moody slanting beam. During these moments time freezes, the actor turns to face the audience. It’s dreadfully clunky staging that owes more to low budget 50’s detective thrillers than high tragedy and, ironically, undermines rather than builds the dramatic tension.

The performances were mostly weak. The adaptation was uneven. Choices in interpretation and staging were frequently bizarre.Romeo and Juliet is one of the Western canon’s greatest tragedies. To have it descend into farce is an almost unforgivable act.

‘Romeo and Juliet’ runs at the Artscape until May 1. To book, call 021 410 9800.

Advertisement