a streetcar a little too much on track
by Douglas Messerli
Tennessee Williams A Streetcar Named Desire
/ Dance on Productions at the Odyssey Theatre / the performance I saw was with
Thérèse Bachand On May 25, 2019
Surely they know that with legendary figures such as Marlon Brando,
Jessica Tandy, Vivien Leigh, Kim Hunter, and others having literally defined
their roles, that any revival can only compared in the minds of a mature
audience. And the actors and director here actually gave homage, in part, to
these figures, as well as the great original director of both the stage play
and film Elia Kazan.
If
the actor Williams can never quite hope to match the sort of humorous lowlife
of Brando’s Stanley, he certainly looks better with his buff body than the more
feminine-looking Brando. In this case, you can truly comprehend why Stella has
stayed with him; he’s like a stupid-minded body that you can’t keep your eyes
off. Stella, in this production is obviously addicted, just as her sister, to
sex—without any of the good-girl Mississippi pretensions.
If
Blanche, at heart, is all about desire, Stella with Stanley make such desires
obviously apparent. And while I’ve always thought Kim Hunter’s Stella’s was a
little slow-minded, Sullivan’s portrayal represents a lusty, level-headedness
that demonstrates how she might be a good lover and mother for the rest of her
life.
In
the movie, the sparks flew simply because of the completely different acting
styles of Brando and Leigh, the New School and traditional British
character-acting traditions. And Heller attempts to repeat that, despite the
fact that the former ice-hockey Canadian Williams has probably never been in
the halls of such an acting school.
Indeed, this production has all the hallmarks of Kazan’s style. But in
the process of paying homage, it misses much of the point of the playwright
himself. Rumor has it that in the original Broadway production, the playwright
sat in the back rows sniggering through the whole production. I believe it, but
even if it weren’t true, it should be. For A
Streetcar Named Desire is really a very funny play, with the “dumb Pollack”
Stanley, with his ridiculous pretensions of the paternalistic Napoleonic Law squaring
off with a totally delusional “whore” (she has, after all, lured even a 17 year
old male student into her bedroom and perhaps has slept with every passing
soldier and salesman that every passed through Laurel, Mississippi, all of this
after, in her youth, having mistakenly married a handsome homosexual boy whose
death she triggered) who now demands that the hard-working momma’s boy, Mitch,
attend to her with chivalrous demeanor of a knight-in-waiting. She wants magic,
while Stanley wants realism. It’s a truly hilarious dance, with poor Stella,
the star come down to earth, caught in between.
And that is the problem with this production. This Streetcar plays out as a kind of dirge for a woman terrified—after
an entire life of desire—of death in almost a Wagnerian fashion. But that isn’t
Williams really. Anyone who could write lines such “The blind leading the
blind,” or, even better, “I have always depended upon the kindness of
strangers,” is also suggesting a kind of pre-Sontag notion of camp. Blanche is
one of the campiest figures who has ever been put upon the stage, I’d argue.
And this company makes it all so very, very serious, the way Kazan perceived
it.
At
least Heller doesn’t make poor Stella run with her baby up the stairs to her
neighbor’s apartment. Instead, as Blanche meets the people from the insane
asylum, this director sort of shuffles Stella and her neighbor off to the side,
apparently on the street. But why cut the truly beautiful last encounter
between her rapist husband and his wife which appears in Williams’ original
version, which almost redeems both of them as human beings?: “Now, honey. Now,
love. Now, now, love. Now, now love. Now, love....” This is perhaps the most
tender moment that Stanley has in the entire play.
The
standing-room audience loved the production, applauding the company’s opening
night with a standing ovation—perhaps as they should have. I may just be, in
the end, a grumpy critic who has seen too many productions of this work and
can’t get the comparisons out of my head.
Yet, I won’t stop attending to this work and many other such iconic
plays, hoping to find a production that makes me completely forget what came
before it. Memory can be a dangerous thing, as well as a blessing; how I would
love to see these works afresh; but that, of course, is impossible.
Reprinted from USTheater, Opera,
and Performance (May 2019).