Waiting For Godot at the Guthrie Theater - A Review

     The thing about theater is there is no denying the necessary social component of it as an art. (I argue this is true of all Art - a very German conception- mostly to no avail, but....) a production of a play has to have not only the script and actors, it also has to have an audience and direction. The production additionally occurs in a specific time and references a different place and/or time. The interaction between actors, playwright, director and audience produces a conversation and the possibility of a meaningful effect on all those involved. For this reason alone I encourage people to go to their local theater and support the arts. As we see a major assault on the arts and theaters occurring right now in the United States, it should be easy enough to understand why. When we share stories (through images, paintings plays, books, ballets, music) we connect and interact with each other. We think about what is important in life, about others, and about their ways of seeing/ hearing/ understanding the world. We become better people. Please support your local arts.

     As a preview subscriber, I get a week to think about the Guthrie's new productions before the official reviews launch. It is a good sign when I find myself still thinking about a production a whole week later and the Guthrie's Godot has given me ample material to consider. I offer some thoughts here for others. I hope readers will do the same.

     Those who have read my reviews know that I am extremely picky and critical, so let me start therefore by saying that this is a very good production that warrants seeing. David Strathairn is excellent (as is expected) and handles the weighty role of Vladimir believably and with apparent ease. This no small feat given he is speaking a good 40% of the time. This is a lot to memorize and render believably, especially when there is no solid chronology of events to help kickstart the memory. Playing a character who is at a loss for meaning and topics of conversation is (in my opinion) akin to the Herculean task of capturing the hind of Menelaus. ( I was going to say 'cleaning the Augean stable' but I guess part of the play's point is that the stable will not or perhaps cannot be cleaned). Strathairn carries the role of "Didi" almost faultlessly and keeps the play moving along in the way that it should. (No, not smoothly; haltingly, but with a modicum of beauty.) Jimmy Kieffer does a nice job with the more yokal Estragon. He has the right amount of naivete, and goofiness, although at times is a bit too self-effacing.  I am also in awe of Jim Lichtscheidl in his physical representation of "Lucky"and his ability to memorize utter nonsense and spew it rapidly without faltering. 

     I think one of the big problems for people staging Godot is that as written, the second act drags. As Vivian Mercer, critic and scholar, noted in The Irish Times in 1956 "..since the second act is a subtly different reprise of the first, [Beckett] has written a play in which nothing happens, twice." This is somewhat untrue, but does speak to the problem of presenting a play whose subject matter is the emptiness and absurdity of human life.

     This, of course, is where the expertise of the director comes in. A good director manipulates  the pace and the message, knowing how to pull an audience just beyond its comfort zone, without completely alienating or estranging it. One may want to point out the utter vacuousness of existence, but one doesn't want mass suicides after the end of the production.

     ...And that being said, Joseph Haj's is one of the least depressing visions of "Godot" that I have ever seen. I confess, I dreaded seeing the play again after so many years, which I remembered as bleak and un compromising, but this time I left the theater in reflection, but not despondent. One of the directorial choices made by Haj to speed up the second act, seems to be the heightening of the comic absurd. He does this by giving free rein to William Sturdivant in his portrayal of the obnoxious, over-privileged character of Pozzo. I sometimes have mixed feelings about Sturdivant's performances, but he has grown by leaps and bounds as an actor over his years on the Guthrie stage and one must always grant that whatever he does, he does with full commitment. Pozzo is so excessive and ludicrous in his self-indulgence, that the audience laughs at him and is pulled through the slower parts of the play. He annoyed me, but also kept me from getting bored. Sturdivant's performances make me think.

     In earlier years, I had understood the relationship of Pozzo and his "menial" Lucky as one that showed the inconstancy of the wheel of fortune. In the first act, Lucky enters with a long rope around his neck carrying the bags of his master Pozzo. Pozzo follows barking authoritarian commands rope in hand. In the second act, Pozzo enters blind, led in by Lucky, but the rope is shorter and the mighty has fallen (literally). To me, it was a question of who was leading, of who had control. This reappearance is apparently only a day later, but when Didi and Gogo ask about how Pozzo became blind and the timeline, Pozzo, (who after all has lost his watch) does not grasp their sense of "time". "One day, is that not enough for you," he cries, "One day he went dumb, one day I went blind,  one day we'll go deaf, one day we were born, one day we shall die, the same day, the same second, is that not enough for you?"  But of course it is not enough for any of us.

      Under Haj's direction the play is less about the fact that any of us could be in the situation of any of the characters and is more about what we choose to do with the time we have here. Pozzo, like other authoritarians abuses those he governs and experiences no compassion when he finds himself blind and in a less privileged position. This is contrasted with the kindness with which Vladimir treats his less mentally capable friend Estragon. He cares for his swollen feet, feeds him, and soothes him when he has nightmares. Perhaps there is a message there about the blindness of the powerful to their own complicity in their downfall, but it doesn't seem to matter to Didi, to Gogo or even to Godot.

     My quibble with the direction of this version of Godot is that by picking up the pace, it also at times, misses the other important answer to the plays' question. No, the question is not what we are waiting for. (We are waiting for Godot.) The question as we see above is "How are we waiting?" One way, is by showing compassion to our friends. Another is art, by interacting with others in words. Didi and Gogo entertain themselves with conversations and acting and even dance. But there is also an overarching theme of how we in the audience are connected by the words of the playwright. There is a lovely, lyrical passage in the play where Didi and Gogo make conversation alternating their descriptions of "All the dead voices. They make a noise like wings. Like leaves. Like Sand. Like leaves, etc." I wish the audience had been given more time to absorb the beauty of this passage as the two characters play with the words. 

     In the same vein, I wish that Vladimir's final speech (before the boy appears at the end) had also had more space and gravity. Although we know not to expect a definitive meaning to the play, it is one of Didi's longest commentaries and it feels important to me. Vladimir says, "Was I sleeping, while the others suffered? Am I sleeping now? Tomorrow, when I wake, or think I do, what shall I say of today? That with Estragon my friend, at this place, until the fall of night, I waited for Godot? That Pozzo passed, with his carrier, and that he spoke to us? Probably. But in all that what truth will there be?..." Vladamir's questions speak to his humanity, which is after all, what this play is about. And they emphasize the importance of questioning itself and of words. We in the audience all know that Godot is unlikely to ever show up for Didi and Gogo, but we also know that the only connection Vladimir may have with the mysterious Godot is the message he gives to the boy. "tell him you saw me."

What can we do for the arts in our world today? There is much forgetting in the play. In fact Didi is desperate at the end for the boy to remember that he has seen him; to know that he exists. Go to the Guthrie and see the play. Then keep the arts alive; tell everyone you saw it. Well,.....What are you waiting for?

Saturday and Sunday at Stitches Midwest 2013

I'm so far behind in my blogging and things are getting busier and busier! I want to finish my Stitches experience and also go back to finish up my trip to Germany. First I'll do Stitches Midwest 2013.

Our third day we were signed up for two classes fromMyra Wood. The first class wasn't that good because we had several people in the class who didn't have the basic knitting skills needed for the class.  The Short Rows class started off on a bad foot, because there was no video projector in the room and when it finally arrived, Myra didn't have the cable she needed to connect it. She was extremely composed and taught as if nothing at all was wrong, but when the other side of the room started asking less than brilliant questions, we quickly fell behind. (Evidently they were having problems with passing a stitch from one needle to the other.)

Anyway, I can't sing the praises of this particular class, but I don't think it was Myra's fault. (One might argue that a teacher needs to have a class under control, but having been in those kinds of situations - I have to sympathize and say that it can be really hard to balance bothersome students with the needs of the other students and it is not always easy to figure out the right way to handle things.)

We had originally signed up for this one, since we had not made it into the Swing Knitting class. Myra had many things planned for us, but we got through only the basic wrap and turn short row. Myra had lots of samples for us to drool over. So we did get some great ideas from the class (which for me is the main thing), but it would have been nice to have more time to execute them

Since we took both the Swing class and Myra's short row class, I thought I would explain the difference. Swing knitting is based on a specific way of doing German short rows (where you use a so-called "double stitch") For German short rows you always have a trough between your unusual short-row shapes called a furrow (basically a section of stockinette) and the shape is done in garter.

Swing knitting has a system involving a sequence of numbers (called a melody or stanza) in the Swing version and a method of setting dark and light markers allows you to be sure you don't pucker your fabric.

 Myra's more general short row class basically taught the wrap and turn method with her variation. Myra counts the edge rows to be sure you are even at the end (although I worry a little about making the middle rows even with the edges - but with a little laying flat of the work you can probably keep that pretty straight.

We got two side wedges done, but I did not manage to do the bubble yet for my sample. Myra's method allows for more play in the stitch patterns (although we were also encouraged to experiment in the Swing class  only this would be called using German short rows and not Swing Knitting.)

Our afternoon class with Myra was how to modify the Pi shawl (by Elizabeth Zimmermann) for crazy lace.  

This class is pretty straight forward. It covers EZ's formula and walked us through some deviations (like more than circular shawls and half Pi shawls.) Here are some of the samples we got to see in class.

Of course Saturday evening is Student fashion show and banquet evening. I have been a little short on cash this year, so we opted not to do either Fashion show, but I always try to find Lily Chin to see what fabulous costume she will come up with (always entirely knit). This year she was adorable as a girl scout.

I also check in with my friend Roberta, who almost always wins an editor's choice prize. This year was no exception. She designed a stunning jacket with slits in the sleeves and a beautiful black lace dress.

The jacket, she is quick to point out looks marvelous over jeans, (but also I think has) real elegance over her black dress. The beauty of both of these pieces is lost in the unimaginative photography, alas.

Here is the dress by itself.

Sunday was the long awaited Swing Class.  The teacher Brigitte Elliott is very sweet and I learned a lot form this class.  Swing knitting is very regimented and so there is a short row class for every student. Myra's for the very independent minded and Brigitte's for those that like to have clear directions and knit along definite principles. I suppose my favorite short row class would be Gwen Bortner's that we took last year, because we got to experiment with a whole variety of short row techniques and decide which we liked the best.

Brigitte was very generous and provided us with yarn and needles - but of course that meant a predesigned piece that we would be knitting.  I was provided with the materials for this scarf above, but switched my white yarn for red (which I think caused some concern later when two of the colors left over were not the "matched set". (I'm just such a trouble maker!) I don't have a picture of my swatch yet, but will post it when I get the shot out of the camera.  Here are some examples of creative ways to use this approach.

This shawl was one of the most impressive pieces we saw.  Very subtle and pretty!

Brigitte showed us slides of some of the kinds of things that can be done with this technique.

 While the furrows may be changed, you can see that garter is pretty central to the Swing method for the shapes.

Originally the technique was used for landscape imagery. This uses an extremely long transition variegated yarn.

This was a pillow taht Brigitte brought to show us.

Unfortunately I didn't get a good shot of Brigitte, but here she is showing us a shawl.

 As you can see, even with all the rules, the technique is pretty versatile.

Because it was Sunday and several people wanted to leave early, we had the bulk of our learning in the morning class and we sat and knitted in the afternoon class. For this reason I think that maybe a 6 hour class was unnecessary, but nonetheless, I am very glad we were able to get into the class and that I now understand the nature of the technique.  I have a bunch of new ideas for projects and am rearin' to go!

"End of the Rainbow" at the Guthrie (Short Review)

If you have the chance, head over to the Guthrie theater and see Tracie Bennett channeling the (almost always) late, but amazing Judy Garland. Terry Johnson does a tremendous job of directing the story of Mrs. Judy (Frances Gumm) Garland Rose Minelli Luft Herrons Deans as she reaches the end of her life. The show is a musical tour de force when it comes to embodying the manic and explosive dancing and singing of la Belle Dame Americaine sans Merci. While Bennett does not have the facial structure of Mrs. Norman Maine, (above all she lacks Garland's big eyes), everything else is perfect! Ms. Bennett has the absolutely right size and body build for the role and she produces the energy, mannerisms and bombast to a T.



Are there other reasons to see the production? You betcha! The supporting cast is fantastic! Michael Cumpsty dazzles as Anthony, Ms. Garland's gay piano player with a heart of gold and the desire to protect and care for the unraveling fragile star.


He is balanced by Tom Pelphrey playing a far too attractive and likeable Mickey Deans, the kind of younger guy that we can believe that a cougar of a broad would love to sink her teeth into.

The costuming is also very tasty, with Pelphrey in period-perfect bell bottoms and long hair and Bennett in a beaded pant suit that is nearly identical to one worn by Garland near her life's end.




Even the sets are yummy, moving seamlessly from French Provincial gilt hotel furnishings to "The Talk of the Town" club set and back almost without audience notice.

The weakest aspect of the production is the play itself, which while thoroughly entertaining, lacks complexity of structure and doesn't really give the secondary characters enough material. This is easy to understand given the magnitude of the primary character and her downward slide into poverty and drugs. We feel the pain not only of the has-been star, but also of those who care about her and thus want to both protect her, help her succeed and see her rise victorious over substance addiction.The pain is emotional and physical, like Garland herself and thus not nuanced. Alas, it was not to be, but I really think the interesting aspect of the story is not a star going super-nova, but rather the ethical negotiations and the navigation of self-delusions of those that live with an addict. While the play touches on this theme, it reserves far too little time for the animosity between Ms. Garland's possibly exploitative last husband-to-be and her sensitive and over-protective piano player.


Garland bemoans that she doesn't want to be the oldest remaining vaudevillean, so perhaps that means it is okay to leave merely a hint of the difficult decisions that lie beneath the surface. We get tremendous entertainment value from the "End of the Rainbow" and if the ethical dilemmas are hinted at but not fully explored then, the play has at the very least followed that old mantra of vaudeville, "Leave them wanting more."

Review: HMS Pinafore at the Guthrie

Before I comment on the play, I want to express my strong feelings that the Guthrie is an outstanding institution and that we in Minnesota are extremely fortunate to have such a fine theater and hence should do everything we can to support it. If you are not someone who tithes to your favorite religious organization (and even if you are!), then perhaps you would consider tithing to the arts. The arts contribute to public discussions of ideas, personal edification, and they build community. I can recommend any play at the Guthrie as time well spent, whether it has a few rough edges or is an incomparable masterpiece, in any case it will be time well spent.

Review: HMS Pinafore at the Guthrie



My second proviso is that I attend the preview performances. This means the version of the play that I see is incomplete, because adjustments are made after the director has a chance to see how the performance plays before an audience. Plays rarely get worse after previews, so assume that many of my dissatisfactions will have been eradicated by the time the production is ready for prime time.

All that being said, I had a marvelous time at the Saturday, June 18th production of Gilbert and Sullivan's HMS Pinafore. It is a thoroughly silly play and those that brook no infantility would probably not enjoy it, but if you can enter into the production in the spirit it is given, it is a marvelous whirl through an imaginary Victorian kingdom of manly men, miserable matrons, high-minded maidens and merry mix-ups.

Crew rehearsing

At present the production's quality is mixed, some of the musical numbers were still a bit rough while others were joyous and well put together. Peter Thomson's "When I was a Lad" was marvelous, assisted with perfection by "his sisters and his cousins and his aunts". The big tap number near the end is alas, not the stunner that it should be. The choreography there is uninspired and some of the tapping (especially early on in the number) is sloppy and at best tepid. Nonetheless what is missing in accuracy is overcome by personal enthusiasm, and the wanton silliness of the final number with its over-the-top joyousness compensates for the more minor problems. And the tango with Buttercup and Captain Corcoran is wonderful recompense, giving us lovely moves and sterling execution.

The music also bothered me a bit. There was a tendency by the nine piece orchestra to modernize the music somewhat providing a loose swing quality that had the same effect on me as muzak. This may be my own little foible, but I much prefer the crisper old-fashioned versions of the songs. This problem was amplified (literally) by the fact that the band often overwhelmed the singers. We do want rousing music, but it should still be crisp, and the singers should be hearable above the jubilation, especially since the lyrics are so deliciously clever. The audience needs to know that the only ship that the Right Honorable Sir Joseph Porter, K.C.B had ever known before his appointment as "ruler of the Queen's Navee" was a partnerSHIP in a law firm. No doubt the volume will be well under control by next week's opening night.


I also have to rave (but with appropriate propriety of course) about the costumes. Fabio Toblini made the production positively shine with his clothing and fabric choices. The navy is suitably nautical and the Right Honorable Sir Joseph Porter, K.C.B is exactly how I imagined him complete with Victorian hat of the admiralty and sumptuous paunch. Buttercup is redolently sleazy in her decolletage and red skirts appropriately tucked up to reveal her super-sensual striped green and black stockings. Best of all were the glittering costumes of the sisters and the cousins and the aunts in shiny satins and with the most luxurious meldings of colors. There is one particular purple, fuchsia and tan dress that gave me goosebumps it was so delectable!

The acting is also uneven, occasionally overstepping the bounds of broad satire into excessive camp, but the two primary actors of the play are the very model of perfection, knowing exactly when to hold back and also when to milk a silly line for everything it is worth. Christina Baldwin positively glows in her performance of poor little Buttercup, the bumboat gal who has an unfortunate and mysterious past. No little maid from school is she - she positively oozes sexuality and experience. Equal to her excellence is her requited, but unavailable love interest played by Robert O. Berdahl (who rocked in an earlier production of The 39 Steps.) His Captain Corcoran is a delicious presentation of a pretentious British Captain. He knows precisely how long to draw out his vowels to offer us the height of British upper class pretension. It is a pleasure to listen to (as well as watch) his puffed up Corcoran as he boasts about his perfect (well, almost perfect) comportment.

Brigitte Norby's publicity photo of Dowling, Baldwin and Berdahl

Just look at the range of foppish pomposity that Berdahl is able to show over the course of just a few minutes in his song about being Captain of the Pinafore (and its even better in his giant nautical mustache!):

The supporting cast is great and the sailors do a good job. Jason Simon is appropriately over the top with his Dick Deadeye and will help the children stay attentive when the song lyrics may be tad too clever for young imaginations.

It was also wonderful to see Barbara Bryne back in a role that she seems almost born to play - the "Very Special Visitor". Her diminutive height and ability to look sternly and thus appear to be six feet tall and in complete control, bring just the right air to this role of a woman who has had to forgo her desires for her duties.



Indeed one of the things that I enjoyed most about the play is that the women are shown to be far more intelligent than their male counterparts. While it is an outwardly silly play, the issue of class inequality is of significant importance and it seems that it is the women who not only suffer the most, but also ask what action can be taken to correct unfortunate situations. Josephine the Captain's daughter looks at the serious repercussions of giving up a well-to-do life to become the wife of a common tar and realizes that it would be nigh impossible to be happy on love alone, but also finds ways to elude the Right Honorable Sir Joseph Porter, K.C.B. and use his own words against him in her suit to marry seaman Ralph Rackstraw. Seri Johnson's cousin Hebe also knows how to step in and take action and eventually is able to make her very distant cousin her own (and Hebe does the role to perfection!) ... And of course it is Buttercup (whose selfless willingness to reveal publicly her horrible error) that saves the day and eventually paves the way for her own and the Captain's happiness. From the beginning of the play we know that love can not level all classes, but by the end we understand that a smart woman can.

Christina Baldwin as Poor Little Buttercup

By the way, for those who wish to take me up on my recommendation to make a donation to the Guthrie, click the link here.

Or click to donate to the MIA or the Walker .

Don't forget the music scene you could contribute to the St Paul Chamber Orchestra, The Minnesota Orchestra or the Minnesota Opera and there are so many others too.