People are Talking About…Uncle Vanya
Submitted by Sara Billmann on March 24, 2010 – 5:46 pm38 Comments
The Maly Drama Theater’s production of Uncle Vanya will run through Sunday. If you leave a comment, come back to see if others respond to it over the course of the weekend.
What did you think about the production? We’ve been talking a lot about Uncle Vanya at UMS — here are some questions that we’ve had:
- Is it better to be awakened to “reality”, or leave illusions intact?
- Which character has the best “grip” on reality and why?
- Is anyone better off at the end?
- Is it right to work only for work’s sake?
- Is our/their only hope in the afterlife? Is it too late to change the present?
- Are there any characters in the play who are content with life as it is?
- Which character (or characters) do you admire or feel sympathy for?
- Which character is the least admirable?
- Is Vanya more upset with himself or more upset with the egotistical professor?
- Sonya, who works hard to maintain the failing estate, seems a commendable young lady. Why does Dr. Astrov reject her? Why doesn’t she strike out on her own?
- Did Vanya really mean to murder the professor, or did he deliberately botch the attempt?
- How is Uncle Vanya still relevant in 2010?
Categories: People Are Talking!, Theater, Theater & Dance
![People Are Talking [and Video Booth]: Einstein on the Beach at Power Center](http://umslobby.org/wp-content/themes/arthemia-premium-old/scripts/timthumb.php?src=/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/EOB-5-by-T-Charles-Erickson1.jpg&w=80&h=80&zc=1)
We attended the play on Thursday night. Reviews warned about the length and leisurely pace. The play and cast were completely captivating and deserving of the standing ovation.
I did enjoy the play a lot. Great articts! Pure joy!
Really impressive acting. I had read the play before but hadn't realized anything about it was funny–they made humor come through! The doctor also became a much more interesting character to me than he had been on the page.
The poor quality of communicating English translation by the great height of super-titles to much of the audience in otherwise excellent seats for viewing the stage distracted significantly from the performance of this wonderful play. In addition, the English translation provided by ground-level screens utilized much too small text. My wife and I unfortunately found it necessary to depart at intermission. I suspect this general issue accounted for a significant part of those audience members who also departed early.
The entire production reminded me of the famous painting of "The Gleaners" by Jean-François Millet . The haystakes, the lighting, the costume designs and color choices really seemed to have been inspired by this painting.
As a director I found it interesting how the production was a mixture of realism and suggestive realism throughout. The rain on the window, very real, the limited use of 6 chairs, 1 table and random doorways was not pure realism. I was intrigued by these choices.
I brought 10 acting students who have read the play and have performed scenes from it as a class project. We were all excited by the acting and the quality of the actors. We also loved the humor that was displayed.
All in all a very enjoyable night of top-notch theatre.
I am sorry but this sounds to me as a pretty snobbish remark: the costumes were typical for the time period, the haystakes were symbolic of the estate/farm… I do not believe that Russian intellectuals are devoid of any creativity and own vision and interpretation of Chekhov that they would need Millet's expressionism and inspiration in order to set the stage.
Hello, Sara Billmann from UMS here. DJK, I didn't read JWR's comment as snobbish or critical at all — rather, just a comment about what the design and atmosphere evoked for him/her. Artists are constantly inspired, consciously or unconsciously, by things that they see or experience. I don't think JWR was suggesting that the designer "copied" the painting to produce the set.
Here's a link to the painting that JWR referred to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Millet_Gleaners…
What do others think of the comparison?
I agree with Sara. I actually read the comment as a complement. One which simply placed the Maly's stage picture in the context of the visual arts of the relative period. It seems that DJK thought that JWR was trying to say that it was derivative — the ultimate put down — when, in fact, JWR was just trying to come up with a shared pointed of reference. I find this technique very helpful especially when trying to talk about the visual arts and design.
You should read more attentively: there is no hint of "copying" but "inspiration".
Dada daDA…, to avoid confusion with Russian: Tristan Tzara.
PP
I was talking to another UMS intern about the symbolism of the haystacks; I found them incredibly intriguing throughout the performance It was strange, because the haystacks hung above them the whole time, and then, when they lowered, it felt somehow expected and yet completely unexpected.
I feel that, in lieu of Sonya's conversation about finding salvation in the afterlife, it made me feel like they were finally going to reach that peace in the end; maybe, instead of the seeing it as the haystacks lowering, we could imagine the floor rising up to the level of the haystacks? Yet, at the same time, the haystacks symbolize all their work–perhaps it means they will need to keep working when they die, just as they continue writing even as the haystacks come to meet them?
Either way, I think it was effective, because it DEFINITELY got me thinking!
Anyone else have thoughts about the significance of the haystacks?
I thought the set was one of the best thins about the play – it was so beautiful in its minimalist way – just the empty chairs on the floor at one moment was a piece of art in itself. And the rain outside. One thing I didn't understand was a clacking noise – was this someone outside? or the sound of fate? it seemed a bit random. But this was a truly marvelous performance.
Thank you for asking about the clacking sound…I didn't get it at all. What was it ??? !!!
This was a fantastic performance. The acting was masterful and the minimal set was also very effective. I'm tempted to go again if I can find the time. My only complaint is that the audience started clapping too soon at the end! The ending would have been much stronger had the audience allowed a fade into silence as I'm sure the director intended. (Also, as usual, there were numerous audience members with nagging coughs. I know it's terrible to be sick, but if you have a cough, you need to stay home!).
Please bring back the Maly Drama Theater!
I really enjoyed both the verbal and non-verbal humor. I also liked the fact that actors/actresses were bringing/changing the furniture for every act themselves, during the play, which was very unique and fun.
Even though this play was written in 1899, the concepts are still very true in 2010. Most people don’t know what they want from life and one day they find that it is too late.
The character I liked the least was the professor. The play intentionally gave him a materialistic and non-caring personality. This softened down somewhat while he was talking to Elena alone. The best analyzed character in the play was Vanya, and no, I don’t think he ever intended to actually kill the professor.
Absolutely riveting. Wonderful acting and directing.
My wife and I attended on Wednesday night and we eventually moved from our "good" seats to so-called "bad" seats to view the subtitles a little better as well. To be honest, it didn't completely distract from the performance, but it was still simpler to view from the balcony. I hope this can be improved on in the future for the sake of other audiences because after seeing Chekov in Russian, I don't think I want to see it any other way.
That being said, I enjoyed the show a great deal! The performances were fantastic and not having read or seen the show before coming in, I found it particularly engaging. It must be a difficult task as a director to strike the perfect balance between "boring" scenes which are so entertaining with "boring" scenes meant to convey the absolute boredom of the country life. My wife and I both enjoyed it very much and I would love to see further shows from the Maly Drama Theater.
As an admirer of Chekhov, plays as well as stories, I found this very disappointing. The very slow pacing lost all of his concision, but seemed intended to induce an empathetic depression in the audience. The character Elena as played had little in common with the character as written, and her lack of evident cool beauty made the behavior of Astrov and Vanya incredible. Many Russian speakers were in the audience, but the failure of the cast to make any effort to project their voices was very disappointing; Vanya and Astrov were occasional exceptions to this criticism. On the whole, I think Chekhov would have been very disappointed in this production.
We just loved seeing UNCLE VANYA in Russian with a brilliant cast. We felt very privileged to have this opportunity.
Every character in the play is vivid and can be found in the real life.
The theme of the play is where the real art lies:how to find meaning in the common life? Only suffering?
The play shows the hope of life is really important.
As a life long lover of Russian literature and onetime student of Russian language, I was very excited to see for the first time a Chekhov play in the original language.
I thought that the Maly players conveyed that tremulous balance in Chekhov between the comic and the tragic very well, although in a few instances the action tipped into the overly comedic. In fact, I was actually startled by the audience's laughter at first, perhaps because previous Chekhov plays I had seen were probably too oriented toward the tragic.
I thought that this production brought out the humanity of each character, even the most minor. The Professor, who is usually the villain, was portrayed with sympathy in his fear of aging and death. Vanya, with his conviction that his life has been fruitless, Sonya, with her disappointed love and future prospect of spinsterhood, Astrov, in thrall to his own idealism and altruism, who will probably drink himself to death–all reveal aspects of our own human condition. Even the beautiful Ilena, who has to fight off the men right and left, sees herself only as a "minor character" in life.
The staging was well done with the minimum of props. But I found the furry haystacks on skis that loomed over the stage rather off-putting. It was only at the end that their purpose was revealed as they were lowered to imprison in the countryside those left behind to carry on their work on the estate. A bit over the top, I thought.
All in all, I enjoyed it immensely. Thank you UMS for the great privilege of seeing Uncle Vanya in the beautiful Russian language.
The beauty of the Russian language in the hands of a master (Chekhov) combined with the superb and engaging performances of the actors made this a wonderful experience for me. I do not speak the Russian language and found I did not really need to translations to follow what was happening in the play and the interactions and complex interactions among the characters. Such a joy to be able to experience this classic in the language it was written in. Again the translations into English made little difference to me. In regard to the length of the play, something that struck me was the sheer physical commitment and emotional energy of the performers and how exhausted they looked at the end – they gave it everything they had and were certainly deserving of a standing ovation. Thank you UMS and all involved for bringing this great Russian theater company to Ann Arbor.
My husband and I totally enjoyed the play as did our friends. The play really communicated to me – I felt I really knew the characters and appreciated the minimalist scenery. I would encourage those who don't have tickets to take advantage of this opportunity to enjoy first rate theater.
Incredible. Full review here: http://nanarama.wordpress.com/
Great review…everyone should read it. Thanks Nanarama…!!
Amazing what people manage to see or not see in hay stacks! But never mind.
I do have a comment on audience response. Even a small number of people sprinkled throughout the auditorium, who seem to be looking for things in the text that could remotely justify laughter, is disturbing. To say, as the notes in the program do, that this play is tragicomic is to set it apart from TV comedies. I suppose a sense of absurdity attaches to the way in which these pitiable characters dwell on their paralysis and their losses, and Chekhov surely meant to comment SMILINGLY on the pathos. But smiling is not the same as guffawing! Primarily, the situation of Vanya and Elena and the others calls for compassion from humane viewers, not derision. Only AFTER one has appreciated the objective misery of their lives can one respond to the comic side. By contrast, the compulsive laughter heard around me had short-circuited compassion and plunged rather directly and heartlessly into thigh-slapping laughter.
I concede that, in comparison with other productions I've seen of this play, this one was, at some points, collusive with this tendency. More's the pity.
I meant Sonya. But Elena also.
Elena?
I couldn't agree with Theater Fan more. I can only imagine how disconcerting the inappropriate laughter must have been to the actors.
Grand existential tragedy (as opposed to a specific tragedy of chance) ALWAYS unleashes the most comic elements…it is the laughing that always carries us through, after all. But for the laughter, we would simply kill ourselves. We don't want to laugh…we NEED to laugh…often times as a way of protecting ourselves from very difficult and grim realities. There are a lot of Professors, Vanyas and Sonyas in Ann Arbor and it doesn't surprise me in the least our audience's need for the protective shield of an easy, laughing response. Laughing only after "appreciating the objective misery" of the character's life would simply be to painful. Great production, by the way.
Somehow disapointing, in spite of the worldwide renown of the company. Most of the actors played correct, pronunication was loud and clear, which is a minimum of delivery in acting. But Stage Manager's vision in setting up the play is NOT an inspired one. In the second act, the climax is Vanya's argue with Professor. That should have transmitted to the audience a lot of emotion, that would make sense when he come to shot Serebriakov. But not in the pale way it was performed…..or better said directed. Vanya and Dr. Astrov are different characters. In this performance, the actors look alike, one may confuse one with the other .Compared with other theater performaces, and I 've seen several of them it barely comes to a "correct" way to play .Very goog in her role, maybe the only on, in this performace, Elena .Costumes were very well made, but the stage set , with minimum objects, as for a performance far away from home. Some trees instead of the haystack , would have been more related to the text. Nick
Somehow disapointing, in spite of the worldwide renown of the company. Most of the actors played correct, pronunication was loud and clear, which is a minimum of delivery in acting. But Stage Manager's vision in setting up the play is NOT an inspired one. In the second act, the climax is Vanya's argue with Professor. That should have transmitted to the audience a lot of emotion, that would make sense when he come to shot Serebriakov. But not in the pale way it was performed…..or better said directed. Vanya and Dr. Astrov are different characters. In this performance, the actors look alike, one may confuse one with the other .Compared with other theater performaces, and I 've seen several of them it barely comes to a "correct" way to play .Very goog in her role, maybe the only on, in this performace, Elena .Costumes were very well made, but the stage set , with minimum objects, as for a performance far away from home. Some trees instead of the haystack , would have been more related to the text. Nick
A very interesting take on the confrontation between the Professor and the rest of the cast when the Professor proposes the sale of the estate – I actually found Vanya's reaction quite poignant. When the Professor finally presents Vanya with the opportunity to leave the estate and forge a new life for himself, Vanya rejects the Professor's proposal and his chance at a fresh start. To me, it seemed the confrontation forced Vanya to recognize that he chose to remain on the estate for all those years, and that he had no one to blame for his lot other than himself. Before that scene I had certainly felt sorry for Vanya, but it wasn't until his reaction in that moment that I found his situation to be truly sad. His attempt to shoot the Professor was just plain irrational, and something that, if successful, would have been just as useless as Vanya's own life up until that point. So I saw a broken Vanya at that point, sitting at rock bottom.
At 47 years old , it's quite difficult to have another fresh start and way back 110 years ago society's rules were quite different than today. Actually the drama consists in being set in the same type of life, day after day until the end, and the dispair that 20 years passed already, on the same wrong path. The stage director should have used the means to convey this message, and not only the text itself. Yuri Kordonsky's (another russian stage director) , managed succesfully to serve better Cechov's text in his performance set, few years ago.Last night audience may have been thrilled, and not just invited to hear a text, or better said to read it from displays….
Such a great debate! For those who found the laughter distracting, you might be interested in reading this interview with Maly's dramaturg (and Lev Dodin's niece) Dina Dodina, who talks about the humor in Uncle Vanya. It was in the "Encore Michigan" newsletter, a web-based publication that focuses on theater in Michigan.
http://www.encoremichigan.com/article.html?articl…
Was anyone else as amazed and impressed as I was with the "stage business" that went on for nearly a half hour between act two and three — after the last word in act two had been spoken? In reading the play that could not have been imagined, but done by two excellent actors it was convincing and expanded the play.
This play on live stage was SO much better than the play in its written form. The acting was brilliant and I could have watched it several more times. I also enjoyed the after-show Silvio's chat — that was a lot of fun and I thought it was a GREAT idea.
Thank you UMS for bringing us another classic Russian play . . . in Russian! I thoroughly enjoyed this performance but not as much as I did the production of "Boris Godunov" which was presented a few years ago. Now THAT was a truly superb production and an experience I'll never forget. Please continue to bring us these wonderful Russian theater companies!
I've posted my comments on the performance at the UMS Students Blog, at the following URL:
http://umsstudents.blogspot.com/2010/03/uncle-van…