Fragements of Beckett directed by Brook

Legendary director Peter Brook directed a few selections by Samuel Beckett recently. The original production was in French and now there is a tour of an English version. Historically controversial, Brook was expected to do something interesting and challenging in this project.

For those unfamiliar with the theatrical works of Beckett, he is explicit about the settings, the words, and the gestures of the performers. Productions of his plays that do not adhere to the text in staging (including by changing the gender of a character/performer) have been shut down by the estate. It is not uncommon for discussions of his work to be focused on seemingly minute details because Beckett managed to strip away all the unessential elements for performance. Unfortunately, this means there is little in the text or staging to protect a production that does not thoroughly understand the essential nature of the included components.

This production included four theatre pieces and one prose piece. The arrangement of pieces shifted between the two men and the woman alone with the final piece including all three performers. The pieces with the men involved extensive physical performance, particularly Act Without Words II in which there are no words spoken. The woman performed Rockaby and the prose piece. The final performance of Come and Go defied Beckett's instructions and used this mixed-gender cast in women's dress.

Overall, the most impressive thing about this production was the execution of comedy without playing for comedic effect. The performers were clearly well-trained in clowning, but they didn't let their abilities impede upon the other layers of the text. Yes, Beckett enjoyed music hall and the physical performances of Charlie Chaplin and Buster Keaton. But it was wonderful to see the darker elements of Rough for Theatre I exist in an occasionally odd union with the humorous moments. It was measured without feeling restrained and affectionate without being overly reverent. The entire performance finished in under one hour, as advertised, and there was a palpable pleasure in the audience members both for what was seen and in the fading wish there had been more.

Peter Brook was there for the performance. I found it difficult to not observe him in part because he was so unobtrusive. He seemed intent to maintain a low-profile. When I was at the Stag's Head later, I had a wonderful conversation with a gentleman who also saw the performance and who proudly noted he shook hands with Brook. It's amazing how such a small thing can at once be accepted as relatively insignificant while still being worth cherishing. Perhaps that was the theme for the evening.