www.vulture.com: It always seems a touch sentimental to call a show a “gift” (not to mention dubious — most theater is far from free), but in the case of On Beckett, the oversize shoe simply fits. The brilliant clown Bill Irwin has brought his utterly delightful almost-solo show to the Irish Rep, and his astute, inquisitive engagement with the work of the existentialist titan feels like an act of professional generosity.
2 comments:
In the case of Beckett, I'm glad someone understands what is going on. I've never really been a fan of him (that's not to say Beckett isn't good or engaging) because every version of one of his shows always seemed dead. There may have been some comedy, or any other number of good details, but I never could get into the plot because I always found it, well, boring. Based on this review, Irwin seems to be finding the joy in Beckett, and really bringing his works to life on stage. That's something that's always been missing in my English classes or high school renditions. The life. Irwin talked about the personal connections he felt between himself and Beckett, saying that it "sounds...like people I've known all my life." I think it's remarkable at how Irwin has interpreted the texts (though he is not a scholar) and translated it to be expressed not only through his words, but his body. He is truly bringing these works to life, letting them inhabit him. At the very end of the article, the reviewer talked about what it would be like if high schoolers, forced to read Godot and other works, were able to see these stories translated in an engaging manner, rather than on cold pages in a stuffy classroom. I have never related to anything more. Go Bill Irwin.
When I read this article, everything about the description just clicked and made sense and I fell totally in love with the concept of this piece. In my limited experience with them, I have found that absurdist, existentialist plays are some of my favorites to read but often some of the most difficult to watch on stage. Also especially with these kinds of conceptual, psychological shows, I’ve found that directorial, casting, and acting choices can significantly alter the message and audience experience. Discomfort, impatience, and minimalism to different degrees are more often goals than problems than absurdist theatre, which I personally eat right up. But for the average or even above average audience member, Irwin’s piece seems to be the most palatable yet authentic portrayal of Beckett’s work that I’ve heard of thus far. I am also a huge fan of Irwin’s choice to focus on Beckett’s style and overarching themes rather than attempting to weave distinct storylines and characters, which would further complicate what could have been a very complicated show.
Post a Comment