“Monster” The Atlantic Stage 2 Reviewed by David Roberts on Friday July 13 at 7:30 p.m.
“Monster, “Neal Bell’s reimagining of Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein,” was commissioned by the La Jolla Playhouse in 2002 and produced that same year by the Classic Stage Company in New York. Its most recent incarnation is part of PTP/NYC’s 2012 Season at Atlantic Stage 2.
This current production, carefully and tenderly directed by Jim Petosa, serves Bell’s script well; in fact, this production manages to successfully explore many of the nuances and psychosexual themes inherent in the script. This review will focus on a psychosexual “reading” of the production, specifically from a gay point of view.
Traditional Queer Theory interpretations of Shelley’s “Frankenstein” are well established and some of these are relevant to a deeper understanding of Bell’s “Monster.” These include the possibility that Victor has unconscious homoerotic desires that he tries to fulfill in his creation of his creature. In Shelley’s “Frankenstein,” the Creature, aware of his not being wanted, runs away to find himself and the bifurcated personality is never united. In “Monster,” once made visceral, this desire becomes abhorrent: Victor does not have the ego strength to allow himself to accept who he is in the face of the homophobia surrounding him so he “banishes” the Creature, leaving him to fend for himself in the hopes he will perish in the woods. In either imagining, the conflict between true self and societal expectation is apparent. Bell’s retelling, as staged by PTP/NYC, is far more powerful and this attempt to deny the self is resolved at the end of the play.
Consciously or unconsciously, the brilliant PTP/NYC production of Neal Bell’s “Monster” richly explores a psychosexual “reading” of the text. The performances bristle with sensuality and skillfully explore the psychological crevices of the script. Early in the performance, Clervall recounts to Victor a recent dream in which Victor kisses him. Victor quickly approaches Clervall, deeply kisses him and says, “Don’t waste a dream on what you can have!” In this scene, as in all others, Joe Varca (Victor) and Christo Grabowski (Clervall) exhibit a level of craft rarely seen on stage today: they are not afraid of their characters; they are not afraid of what their characters need to say or do; they are not afraid to do whatever they as actors need to do to bring their characters’ conflicts to life.
The predominate trope in “Monster” is the extended metaphor of the dream. Victor dreams of accepting himself and creates a Creature to fulfill that dream. Dreams have lives of their own and the Creature eventually sorts out his own dream which at times is in conflict with the dream of his creator (think any significant creation myth). Victor asserts that “dreams want to live,” but are often “made and abandoned.” In the course of the performance, Victor’s dream and his Creature’s dream become one: neither ever truly gives up on “winning” the love of the other. John Zdrojeski’s portrayal of the Creature’s longing to be loved by Victor is haunting and a performance this critic will not soon forget. When Zdrojeski’s Creature asks, “Why am I alive,” and “Why did he give me a cock,” he expresses humanity’s attempt to comprehend the very purpose of creation itself.
There are components of the heteronormative construct of society that support the recognition and acceptance of one’s gay sexual status. These components are found in the rich character of Justine who is aware that her employment status is “at will” and she can be dismissed at any time. She knows that she, like the Creature (Victor’s sexual status), is an outcast in society. Therefore Justine can “tease” both creator and creature into mutual acceptance. Paula Langton’s portrayal of Mother is serviceable; however her performance as Justine is electric! Langton knows precisely who Justine is and the sacrifices Justine needs to make so Victor can finally dream his dream. It is instructive to see what happens when the crafts of teaching and acting collide brilliantly in stage performance. The classroom and stage experience of Paula Langton and her fellow academic Ken Cheeseman counterpoint powerfully with the established and developing craft of their younger cast members. Whether Cheeseman is portraying Father or Foster, he generously allows his fellow actors the space they need to shine.
At “Monster’s” end, Victor and the Creature (the self and the denial of self) conspire at first to destroy themselves and their angst. The choice to destroy fails at first because “the spark won’t last.” Finally, however, the inspiration (spark) to move beyond dreaming it to just doing it wins out: the spark ignites the fuel and Victor and the Creature burst into flame (kudos to lighting designer Mark Evancho!). Self and denial of self immolate not to be destroyed but, Phoenix-like, to be re-born, recreated as a healthy and whole person fully accepting Victor’s sexual status. Joe Varca and John Zdrojeski play this scene with perfection, cuddling and huddling together ready to experience the pangs of their new birth.
There seems to be only one concern with this production of “Monster” and that lies in the character of Elizabeth as understood and portrayed by Britian Seibert. Elizabeth is the ultimate antagonist for Victor. Just as Justine’s sexually charged antics tease Victor to self-acceptance, Seibert’s Elizabeth should aggressively challenge Victor’s status. This seems to be the only place where Petosa’s direction and Seibert’s performance do not support the overall production. Perhaps both director and actor need to re-examine their choices here. Elizabeth, after all, is constantly challenging Victor’s lack of interest in her. This character is a metaphor for all of those societal challenges which aggressively – often abusively – assault the gay individual’s authentic sexual status. These traits of aggressiveness and abusiveness are character traits missing from Seibert’s understanding of her character.
This aside, the cast, including Seibert, otherwise brilliantly maneuver their way through Neal Bell’s challenging and provocative script. My partner’s review below will continue to encourage you to visit this outstanding production before it moves on.
Production and performance information will follow Joseph's review below.
Permalink | Posted by David Roberts on Sunday, July 15, 2012
CEOExpress
