'Scenes From An Execution' review or 'Bloody brilliant building blocks'
'Scenes
from an Execution', Howard Barker
Lyttelton
Theatre, National Theatre, Thursday October 4th 2012
Whenever
I'm asked to recommend plays, my choices invariably come with a
caveat; 'It's slick if not earth-shattering', 'It's funny though
pretty slight' or 'The play's a bore but the performances are
brilliant.' No such caveats here. Howard Barker's 1984 play,
originally written for the radio, is a theatrical treat. It is a
strange, surprising, energetic, lucid, complex and hugely stimulating
work. It's utterly original too, written by an artist who is
incapable of mimicking others or pandering to his audience – or,
indeed, his critics.
Which
is all rather relevant, since this is a play about a passionate
artist – living in 16th
Century Venice – who comes into the conflict with the state when
she refuses to commemorate a recent battle in a suitably celebratory
manner. The Venetian leaders and Church regard the recent, brutal
battle of Lepanto as a glorious victory. Galactia, a hesitantly
revered local artist, sees it as a tapestry of horror, limbs and
bloody bums.
The
first glimpse we get of the battle and its effects is with the
arrival of Prodo, a solider turned freak show. With an arrow poking
out of his head and his bowels threatening to tumble out his jacket,
this is a man who has turned his misery into moolah. Fiona Shaw, as
Galactia, insists at getting to the guts of his real experience.
Soon, the poor man is frozen in horror. Galactia might be sympathetic
to the soldiers' plight - and wish to honour their sacrifices by
exposing their pain – but she is perfectly happy to scare the
soldiers silly in the process. Galactia is not our typical
compassionate artist. She is merely an honest one.
In
fact, Barker's only attempt to engage us sympathetically with the
artist is in his depiction of the sheer effort required of Galactia.
She has been commissioned to draw a 100 ft canvas and her attention
to every tiny patch of detail is extraordinary. She studies the
soldiers so carefully that she learns to mimic their rigid, even
comical march. She invites people to sit for the tiniest of
characters on her canvas. She wonders whether there is enough colour
to match the umpteen shades of brutality she has witnessed; 'I've
gotta find a new red for all that blood.'
Shaw's
Galactia is a woman who is willing to interact with humanity, only in
respect to and for her painting. When a person sits to be sketched,
they are Galactia's whole world. Yet as soon as they stand, they
become invisible. And that goes for her poor, upwardly mobile
daughters too. What's really interesting is the ambiguity that
Galactia's skewed emphasis opens up. Are these people who 'sit' for
Galactia real or has the force of her imagination simply made them
so? There's a coolness to the performances of these sitters that
allows these ambiguities to throb nicely and director Cairns is
careful to let these questions linger. This is a production that is
brilliant at holding two, three possibilities simultaneously; the
sign of a brilliant and humble director and a beautifully flexible
play.
Although
there are many lucid arguments in here about the responsibility of
the artist – to her work, her subject, her family, colleagues and
reputation – it's actually in the space around the words that the
most interesting points are made. Hildegard Bechtler's set adds
superbly to the debate. The production opens with a speech from the
'Sketchbook'; readings from Galactia's research notes voiced by a
chap who looks a lot like Jay Jopling. This character voices his (or
her) artistic theories from a bright white cube that stands above the
stage. It's a pertinent location for this 'character', which suggests
that what we think or theorise about art still remains a great
distance away from the final product.
As
the play progresses and Galactia stubbornly pursues her own agenda –
regardless of the rumblings from those in authority – the
'Sketchbook' character moves about more freely. Perhaps Galactia's
theories are now interfering with or even obstructing her art? What's
intriguing is how cleanly all these inside and outside voices
interact; the possibly imagined musings of Galactia with her sitters,
her writings in her sketchbook, the response of the visiting art
critic – all these voices come from such different domains, real
and surreal, yet they all inform the final painting. A finer
representation of the complexity of voices that inform great art (and
the conflict between those voices) has rarely been contrived.
The
positioning of the characters on stage accentuates the debate but so
too does its physical design. Whenever the canvas is 'revealed' we
are shown only a massive grid of squares, which stretches across the
stage. It reminds one of those grids that artists construct to work
out their proportions and suggests a lady at risk of losing her own
sense of perspective. Indeed, when Galactia is sent to jail, it is
the grid – this grounding device for all artists – that she is
locked behind.
As
the production develops and the resistance towards Galactia's art
work builds, the set starts to subtly resemble a piece of modern art.
Massive colour blocks are dumped – almost with a perverse disregard
for aesthetics – around the stage. It's as if art itself has
persistently and quietly moved on, despite the forces that threaten
to prohibit its growth. In the final moments, when Galactia is
brought back into the world and her work's shocking impulse pacified
by a clever critic, the crowd observing her work is frozen in a
beautiful vignette. It's one of those perfectly open moments;
Galactia's strangely casual return to the fold (she even accepts an
invitation to dine with the very people that shut her away) is hard
to take. It's seems a bizarrely passive ending to such a combative
play. But the image that remains is that of the crowd frozen in front
of her painting, their reactions creating something beautiful that
not even Galactia could've imagined.
Comments
Post a Comment