The New York Times: When we think of Anton Chekhov — doctor, humanist, short story writer, playwright — we don’t often think of a political fire starter. His closely observed, often delicately comic work does deal with revolutions, but the hidden and eternal ones, like the hope that turns, season by slow season, into regret. No regime or attitude has successfully claimed him. In Russia, his work was beloved under the czar; it was beloved by Stalin. And it’s beloved now.
1 comment:
This article highlights how these Chekov shows still resonate to audiences today because of their very human and realistic focus on dissatisfaction and longing. It’s cool that directors seem to be interested in making these shows reflect contemporary anxieties, which is a sign of sustainable original text; this idea is also seen in the article about the several different productions of Antigone happening around New York City. Chekhov’s plays use subtext. There’s never that much action (which is hard for my rotted tiktok brain sometimes). It requires reading between the lines and understanding the character’s inner struggles. I would be interested in hearing a little more about how an audience who is used to being fed spectacle reacts to a production that encourages them to lean into that quiet intensity – I’m sure the adaptations into modern day help. This article was clearly written by someone who is neither new to theatre nor new to Chekov. I want to know what the everyman thinks of these productions.
Post a Comment