Quantcast

Opinionist: Woyzeck

EdwardHogg.jpgWhen the young Georg Buchner died in 1837, he left behind his unfinished working class tragedy Woyzeck, which was inspired by the real-life story of convicted criminal J.C. Woyzeck, a soldier who had become unemployed, homeless and hallucinatory. Before being sentenced to death for the murder of his lover, the medical examiner dismissed Woyzeck's mental illness as mere social deviancy.

Buchner’s play was revolutionary in that it sympathized with the miserable life of a common soldier – whose existence in the Prussian army was akin to slavery – and sought to demonstrate how this systematic, brutal exploitation could help destroy a man’s psyche.

Unfortunately, a systematic, ham-fisted acting style destroys the Woyzeck currently running at St. Ann’s Warehouse and only makes the play’s didacticism harder to sit through. Billed with great fanfare as a “high-octane, rock and roll” production, this Woyzeck was a critical darling in London, where it premiered in 2004 in a much smaller space than the capacious DUMBO warehouse.

The story, as assembled by director Daniel Kramer, follows Woyzeck (Edward Hogg), the poor, overworked grunt, as he rushes to fulfill his seemingly endless obligations as assistant to the army captain, medical guinea pig, firewood gatherer and all around underpaid peon. His one ray of light is his lover Marie (Myriam Acharki), who falls prey to the alpha-male charisma of the strapping Drum Major (David Harewood). The knowledge of their affair proves too much for the anemic Woyzeck to bear, and his already fragile psyche shatters, leaving Marie dead from his many, many stab wounds.

Although the octane is indeed high during the interludes between scenes, when Woyzeck races frantically from job to job to the tunes of Presley and Parton, the show's engine sputters as soon as the rock and roll stops and the over-acting begins.

The army Doctor (Tony Guilfoyle) and Captain (Fred Pearson), in particular, are reduced to caricatures by grandiloquence of the highest order, in the much-lampooned British stage tradition of loud, broad and ENUNCIATED. Since the skilled cast is clearly capable of modulating a performance to a director’s whims, I can only suppose that this over-the-top style was a deliberate choice by Daniel Kramer. As such, the conceit achieves nothing but a grinding tedium; the performances are too broad to be funny as parody or compelling as tragedy.

Edward Hogg, as Woyzeck, is riveting during the first scene, when his haunted manner seems to suggest a barely contained inner tempest. But for the next two (plus) hours, he unravels in a nervous breakdown that worked this audience member to exhaustion. Like the other members of the ensemble, any empathy we might feel for his character is finally deflected by a great gnashing of teeth. In fact, the production’s most noteworthy feat is the sheer amount of scenery-chewing achieved on such a sparsely decorated stage.

Which brings us to the one great redeeming virtue of the evening’s 140 intermission-less minutes: From a design standpoint, Woyzeck is absolutely stunning. (Neil Irish did the set and costumes; David Howe designed the lighting.) A rich autumnal desolation, suggestive of Woyzeck’s isolated inner-landscape, is evoked by vivid lighting and just a few symbolic set pieces: a huge clock, a cross, a line of trees, fallen leaves, a window frame, a jukebox. And then there’s St. Ann’s cavernous empty space, which is used to full effect when the cartoonish performances occasionally yield to a visually arresting stillness.

One such moment occurs near the end, when Woyzeck slowly pedals his ridiculous tricycle all the way to the back of the massive warehouse with Marie standing behind him on the back, holding his shoulders. There is a rich silence as they linger there, and the audience is free to savor the chilling dichotomy between the vast space separating us and the sudden intimacy of their performance. It’s just too bad that such sublime moments are the exception, not the norm, in this overwrought production.

Woyzeck runs through December 3rd at St. Ann’s Warehouse, located at 38 Water St., Brooklyn. There will be a post-performance panel discussion at 5 p.m. today featuring Daniel Kramer and two other directors: Alex Timbers (Les Freres Corbusier) and Grzegorz Jarzyna (TR Warszawa).

Contact the author of this article or email tips@gothamist.com with further questions, comments or tips.

Comments [rss]

  • dude

    i totally agree. the ideas were impressive, but there was no story, yet i felt as if the director left no questions unanswered for the audience. with a piece such as this, a blank slate, as it popularly called, there are a few choices of what to do with it: the most popular ones being:

    root the story OR add a lot of extravagance on top of things, take the holes that exist and exploit them, rather than honor them and make them part of the characters and the spine of what the play is about. i felt at times as if the director didn't take the play seriously, and thought he needed to make it "cooler" in order to get the audience to understand it, thus not giving us any credit to be anything other than pop-culture whores.

    to play my own devil's advocate, it was well worth 35 dollars production-wise, the acting was fine, and it certainly kept my attention; i am also a big advocate of making huge bold choices and then falling down on your arse for it.

    the beauty of live theatre is that it isn't perfect on opening night and by closing, it is still rarely perfect.

  • javster

    For a moment, I wondered "What the hell is Jude Law doing on a tricycle..."

  • chris

    I agree with mithras. The only overacting that bothered me initially was the quiver in Hogg's voice, but after seeing it again, I understand it is a character choice for a man losing his mind. The doctor, captain and drum major all play over the top roles, but it effectively conveyed the character.

    I found brilliance in the use of space, the transitions, and the use of the over the top stereotypes. And the ending is visually fantastic.

    If anyone is looking for a good, visually interesting, and entertaining show, I would recommend it. But of course, I'm no critic.

  • mithras

    I have to disagree. Hogg was magnificent throughout, and the Doctor and Captain, while obviously played "over the top", I felt they had subtle nuance that was highly effective. De gustibus non est disputandum, I guess.

blog comments powered by Disqus

send a tip

tips@gothamist.com