A Christmas Carol may be the most told story in the English-speaking world these days, better known even than the well-known stories of the Bible or Greek mythology. Charles Dickens had, shall we say, a timeless classic on his hands when he wrote it.
One reason why, of course, is that there is an unfulfilled need for ghosts to go abroad and scare the bejeezus out of rich and stingy people.
But if A Christmas Carol were just about the rich getting a scare and changing their ways, it probably would have had its moment in the sun and then faded into obscurity.
The reason it endures is that it is about all of us. It is about the ways we casually dehumanize others - particularly the impoverished. Think about our own actions when it comes to the unhoused, or refugees from “shithole countries,” or addicts, or other marginalized and all too often invisible people on the fringes of our society.
Scrooge, after all, was no billionaire. He was just a landlord and above-average rich guy. There is no indication that he had any significant political pull, and it is not mentioned that he used it. He went one better than today’s Republicans by dutifully paying his taxes for the support of the poor without trying to end the safety need that existed at the time.
Rather, the problem was that he refused human connection, refused generosity, refused even to accept the love of others. The story is…complicated.
If all we saw was the equivalent of Elon Musk, or the Orange Fascist, we would likely feel furious at Scrooge’s redemption. Instead, we recognize ourselves in him, and have our hearts warmed by the idea that even a hardened, bitter, lonely old man can be redeemed - and so can we.
I have read the book many times, both for myself and with my kids. Every year, we watch The Muppet Christmas Carol together. It is a story that never grows old.
Thus, I was intrigued to see what Ron Warren would do to tell the story. Plus, The Empty Space tends to do good work with a limited budget, and just seeing the creativity would be worth the modest cost.
Warren made some interesting decisions in telling the story. First, he did not use a narrator. Many stage adaptations do, which, as Warren said in our discussion after the play, adds an extra layer of insulation between the story and the audience. It is a story about other people, not a portrayal that might implicate all of us.
I loved this particular approach. The other thing that I really loved was that Warren preserved much of Dickens’ actual dialogue word for word, rather than “update” it. One of the reasons I love reading Dickens is that his language is delicious, perfectly chosen, and almost as musical as that of Shakespeare. Also, there are some wonderful pointed lines in the play that are all too often omitted. Warren respected his audience enough to give us the real thing, not a watered down version.
The cast included some of the usual suspects, but also a number of children, and a large ensemble covering various parts, real and metaphorical.
As for the main ones, here are my thoughts.
I hadn’t seen Luis Velez in anything since before the pandemic. Everyone’s take on Scrooge is different, and his was both comical and human. Sure, he was an old sourpuss at first, but there was more softness in his character from the beginning, in its own way making the transformation less jarring.
This character is the most difficult to play in the entire story, not just because we all imagine our own Scrooge in our minds, but because there have been so very many movies made, with actors famous and otherwise playing the iconic part. To take the character and make it your own is a challenge, and I will give props to Velez for a very personal take that was convincing and sympathetic.
Alex Mitts, always reliable as an Everyman, was the natural choice for Bob Cratchit, down-to-earth, loving to his family, and eternally patient. Victoria Olmos played the Missus.
David Guillen played Fred, and Sophia Bertram, his wife.
Nick Ono channelled Jack Sparrow as Jacob Marley - one of the most humorous performances, with proper mastication of the scenery.
Most interesting from the staging point of view was how the ghosts were handled. Matthew Brown was the Ghost of Christmas Present - and I found his interpretation to be more nuanced than some. Sure, he is jovial and full of good will. But he also has an edge of menace. This version included the child characters of “Ignorance” and “Want” - with which the ghost mocks Scrooge for his dawning realization that he bears responsibility.
This is where it is clear that Dickens isn’t just talking about individual greed. The very systems that we live in create ignorance and want, create poverty and inequality. It takes more than “workhouses” and prisons - it takes genuine reform, something Dickens preached about throughout his career.
For the other ghosts, Matt Borton was the puppeteer. The Ghost of Christmas Past was an ethereal spirit, complete with pocket fog machine. Kelsey Morrow provided the voice for the character.
For the Ghost of Christmas Future, Borton wore a rather terrifying costume. I am not sure if it was an actual character mask, or just a rodent-inspired horror. Whatever it was, it was creepy. Particularly delicious were the long skeleton fingers, which the ghost clicked at key moments.
Considering the small stage, limited budget, and the need to do everything using real people and things, not CGI, the ghosts were superb. Great vision and execution.
Unfortunately, the holiday is upon us, and the theater is dark for this week. More interesting productions are on schedule for next year, though, starting with Radium Girls, the directorial debut of our longtime family friend, Marina Gradowitz, which we are definitely planning to see.
esonline.org for more information and tickets.
No comments:
Post a Comment