| Moscow saw the fourth Chekhov performance by Peter Stein In honor of its 120th anniversary, the Riga Russian Drama Theater invited Peter Stein, a longtime favorite of Russian audiences, to perform. Having first come to us in 1990 with “Three Sisters,” he later brought “The Cherry Orchard” (both productions of “Schaubühne am Leniner Platz”) and “Uncle Vanya,” made in Italy. In Riga, Peter Stein staged “The Seagull”; six months after the premiere, the people of Riga showed the performance in Moscow, on the stage of the Theater. Vakhtangov. Stein, it seems, was not with them - he did not come out for the applause.
Today, directors are increasingly less likely to see a living organism in a play. Few people will say “my brainchild” - rather, they treat the performance as a product, the post-premiere fate of which, in general, is of little concern to the manufacturer. First of all, this applies to guest directors, one of whom was Peter Stein. The transformation of a “brainchild” into a “product” is far from just a change in sentimental tone to a more business-like and tough one. This is a sign of very serious changes in all theatrical practice.
Stein came to Riga with artist Ferdinand Vogerbauer (theaters remember him from Uncle Vanya) and costume designer Anna Maria Heinreich. With them, two months before the Riga premiere, the director released “The Seagull” by order of the Edinburgh Festival. If you believe the booklet, on the cover of which it is written “world director Peter Stein”, etc. (“directing star” is also something new), the people of Riga are even proud of it: oh, how interesting, two versions of the play, and who said that we are worse than Edinburgh. In my opinion, there is nothing to be proud of, even if Wogerbauer and Heinreich came up with something new for the Riga theater, and did not just copy the August production (the second is more plausible). Stein certainly couldn’t stage two “The Seagulls” in a row, filling them with different semantic content. He hardly flirts when he talks about himself: “I don’t consider myself an independent artist. /.../ I in no way consider myself entitled to change or add anything to the author’s intentions.” It’s hard to believe that at the premiere in Edinburgh it dawned on him: Chekhov had completely different intentions!..
Therefore, before us is a stencil drawing. Simultaneous game session. Any chess player will tell you: at such sessions and at tournaments the same grandmaster (and Stein is still a grandmaster) plays completely different chess. Guess for yourself where inspiration is needed, and where a good memory and knowledge of standard positions are needed.
I really don’t want to write this, but “The Seagull” is the worst of the four Chekhov performances Peter Stein came to Moscow. Although, of course, it’s not at all the worst of the “Seagulls” I’ve seen in my life.
The theater, for which Stein’s “The Seagull” still remains the most important event in today’s rather difficult life, I kindly ask you not to be offended by my words. I myself am offended, especially since Stein invited three Moscow artists to participate in the play: Elena Starodub from the Modern Theater plays Arkadina, Ivan Shibanov (Gogol Theater) - Trepleva, Anatoly Lobotsky (Mayakovsky Theater) - Trigorin. We can say that they found a common language with the residents of Riga; we can call the game an ensemble one. I can't say that I like this ensemble.
The general tone set by the director is best conveyed by the words of Dr. Dorn: “How nervous everyone is!” - and to this we must add that Leonid Lenz plays Dorn as an elderly and smug fop. Indeed, everyone is nervous, except for Dorn himself and, perhaps, Sorin (Yuri Safronov, who speaks in a normal voice for three actions, and in the fourth begins to imitate a rattling senile falsetto). The gestures are harsh, the voices are loud, Arkadina is generally on the verge of hysteria almost all the time. It is impossible to believe that Trigorin - twitchy and endowed with an unpleasant croaking voice (we are, of course, not talking about the actor, but about the sharp portrayal of the role) - is a good writer. And even then: “If you ever need my life, then come and take it” - this is the same ersatz romanticism as Treplev’s “Pale face framed by dark hair”, who, before committing suicide, slowly and manneredly tears up manuscripts, and then for some reason he dumps all the books under the table. It must be a symbol.
We are introduced to a world of unsympathetic people doing unsympathetic things. They spoil everything: life, theater, books, and girls. It’s not their fault, they themselves are somehow damaged. They should be pitied. However, one has to feel sorry for everyone, including the angular, stupid Nina Zarechnaya (Veronika Plotnikova, a beauty in her own right).
The only thing that people cannot ruin yet is nature. Ferdinand Wogerbauer installed something like a huge plasma monitor on the stage: in the first act, of course, the moon floats over the lake, in the fourth there is lightning flashing and storm clouds swirling, during Treplev’s suicide the screen turns red (I must say, in Stein’s “The Seagull” it is unusually a lot of platitudes). Nature is completely separated from people, and it’s good that they can’t reach it.
That's how I understand the intent. As for the quality of performance, we must note the excellent work of the costume designer and the very decent Arkadina-Starodub. As for other things, it is tempting to end the article about Stein’s “The Seagull” with the words that Treplev says about Zarechnaya’s stage acting: “...Rough, tasteless, with howls, with sharp gestures. There were moments when she screamed with talent...” This, of course, is cruel, but in general it’s true. Alexander SOKOLYANSKY |
|
