Macbeth: Sliced to the Core. Minimalist setting, minimalist message.

Sonja Block

During the meeting with Simon Rae (a director) and David Keller after the performance, Rae was asked why such a decision was made. I got the impression that "Macbeth" was created on the wave of success of their previous one-man production - "Hamlet". For me, "Hamlet" probably had a chance of success because it was a production on a much bigger scale - with music, lighting, setting. It somehow makes up for a definite lack of actors on stage. In Rae's "Macbeth" there is nothing - one actor, couple of props, couple of chairs. No music, no particular setting (despite maybe a big chair that pretended to be a throne), almost no costumes. This lack of anything on stage seems to indicate that Shakespeare's text should be enough, but when it is also shortened, there's nothing left at all. This minimalism was explained by the director with aspiration to be able to perform anywhere and anytime. It's understandable and appreciable that they want to be available for broader audiences, but this "anywhere and anytime" led to "anyhow". Keller is talented and experienced, it can be seen in better moments of the play. But he wasn't able to carry it all. It was too much for him to be Lady Macbeth, though I liked his Macbeth. His Three Witches are funny, but he doesn't pay any attention to servants. I could go on like this, but then the review would become as chaotic as the play was. Lady Macbeth was so horrible, and I cannot forgive this one, because it's absolutely one of the best female characters in drama ever! But at least David Keller admitted it after the performance and said - "Lady Macbeth is terrible. She's impossible." It was hard to watch her parts in this interpretation. Keller clearly does not understand rotten female nature.

Photo by Paweł Jóźwiak

Simon Rae said something quite accurate about his concept of minimalism in the play - that he wanted to explore a roar, bankrupt theatre, where it becomes clear that all the acting is a delusion. Watching the play I immediately got the idea, because the whole story was becoming more and more surreal to me. So Keller and Rae achieved an interesting effect - reminding us that it's only a drama and all that we attach to it emerges from our heads, it has nothing to do with reality. If an actor doesn't have costumes, we can clothe him and if he has no setting around him, we can build it for ourselves. This is an interesting thing to explore - what will a spectator add to the play in his mind if you leave him space for it. They got rid of things surrounding characters, so the audience had to imagine and create something instead of only passively observe it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aOVpgk3rME

Press conference with Simon Rae and David Keller. Problems with playback? try here.

What I observed despite the above, was this modern touch in props, elements of costumes that didn't quite fit in. Does everything in drama nowadays and modern interpretations of old pieces have to be modern? Why don't we leave Macbeth in armour and cloak? Is it necessary for him to wear a trench coat and military vest? This desire to appeal to modern audiences with the things they perceive as contemporary is incomprehensible for me. Maybe we should update the text a little bit and change the Three Witches into Harry Potter and set it in Hollywood studio instead of Dunsinane Castle?

Well, maybe it was too chaotic, too minimalistic and too indefinite. But once more quoting the director of "Macbeth: Sliced to the Core": You always fail. It's about failing better.

Macbeth:Sliced to the Core, XV Festiwal Szekspirowski, Foto: Paweł Jóźwiak

Macbeth: Sliced to the Core, Top Edge Productions, adapted and directed by Simon Rae, cast: David Keller, time: 1h 10min.

Więcej o teatrze w na stronie www.pomorzekultury.pl