A poignant, moving play. One of the best of the season. I teared up. I laughed. Wiest plays Winnie with an edge that straddles grief and joy. And with Wiest, it's always joy that wins. She finds the moments in her constricted life that give her pleasure -- and oh, they make for a happy day. Winnie.
2
Critics see many---probably too many---productions of plays that are popular enough to keep getting produced. So it's understandable that critics might encourage directors to grab the reins from the playwright, and to at least toy with heading in directions the playwright did not intend. But when your job is to review plays for a public readership, a large percentage of which has likely not yet seen even one production of the play, then, for the sake of your readership, you should demand a production's fidelity to the playwright's intent, and praise that fidelity when you find it, no matter how fed up you, personally, may be with having to sit through the same old thing.
5
A woefully sophomoric debut review by Mr Green.
The play and performance are heartbreaking.
The play and performance are heartbreaking.
9
Based on his past reviews for other publications, it's not going to get any better for Green, the Times or us poor readers.
1
I just got back from the play, and I think Green nailed the review! I like his writing, and style.
"Happy Days," by Samuel Beckett, reviewed by Jesse Green, May 4, 2017.
I am delighted that director Bundy has not taken liberties with Beckett's stage
and set directions. Beckett's oft-repeated plea to directors, "It's my play; present it asI wrote it," must be taken seriously. A set designer who changes Beckett's sets or a director his text is changing Beckett's meaning.
I read Diane Weist's answers to a reporter's questions after her last performance at Yale, last spring. They told me how deeply she immersed
herself in Winnie's words and actions in "Happy Days" so she could get closest to Beckett's textual intentions. Which bring me to ask: Just who is Winnie?
Winnie, in my opinion, is the archetype of the universal woman condemned
to solitude and suffering. Her speech is monologue; she is her own listener.
Strong, resourceful, humorous, witty, and loving, she never lapses into
weepy sentimentality or undignified bickering. However, Beckett makes us
sense that behind her seemingly jovial ways, there's pain, deep pain, which she stoically hides. Winnie is, quite clearly, Beckett's tribute to women, including his own mother. When I asked him about his memories of his mother, the question struck him with a force that embarrassed me. I apologized but did not fail to notice tears welling up in his eyes.
A biographer once wondered if Winnie was inspired by Dante's images
of sinful women sinking into sand in "The Divine Comedy." Winnie sinful!
Give me a break.
I am delighted that director Bundy has not taken liberties with Beckett's stage
and set directions. Beckett's oft-repeated plea to directors, "It's my play; present it asI wrote it," must be taken seriously. A set designer who changes Beckett's sets or a director his text is changing Beckett's meaning.
I read Diane Weist's answers to a reporter's questions after her last performance at Yale, last spring. They told me how deeply she immersed
herself in Winnie's words and actions in "Happy Days" so she could get closest to Beckett's textual intentions. Which bring me to ask: Just who is Winnie?
Winnie, in my opinion, is the archetype of the universal woman condemned
to solitude and suffering. Her speech is monologue; she is her own listener.
Strong, resourceful, humorous, witty, and loving, she never lapses into
weepy sentimentality or undignified bickering. However, Beckett makes us
sense that behind her seemingly jovial ways, there's pain, deep pain, which she stoically hides. Winnie is, quite clearly, Beckett's tribute to women, including his own mother. When I asked him about his memories of his mother, the question struck him with a force that embarrassed me. I apologized but did not fail to notice tears welling up in his eyes.
A biographer once wondered if Winnie was inspired by Dante's images
of sinful women sinking into sand in "The Divine Comedy." Winnie sinful!
Give me a break.
9
I caught Happy Days in Brooklyn last week and found it one of the best stagings of Beckett I have ever seen. Wiest's performance was marvelous and nuanced. What's excruciating (another commenter's word) is not the play itself, but the vapid comments of the playgoers, who clearly know nothing of Beckett save maybe Godot, one of Beckett's least interesting plays, and could be heard saying things like "she's in great shape," and "boy it's hot in here," while they laughed too hard in the first act to camouflage their emotional discomfort. And now the drama critic of the New York Times rehearses the old saw about the Beckett estate stifling creativity and thinks Happy Days is "an extended metaphor for the irrational optimism of mankind." Lord help us. Never mind that Beckett explicitly rejects metaphor. No attention is paid by the critic to Winnie's recollection of herself as a child with the doll, which is crucial for understanding the play. No mention is made of Winnie's obsession with being watched or gazed at (an obsession which Beckett shared; see Film), and the play's frequent meditations on theatricality itself: Winnie's reflections on "Shower" or "Cooker" and his wife are truly haunting. I'm really unhappy with the review. Then again, nothing is funnier than unhappiness, I'll grant you that...
11
It is so good to have your thoughtful insights at the NYT.
6
Having read some earlier overtly snarky digs at this new TIMES theater reviewer, Jesse Green, from the less prestigious than THE NEW YORKER, if nearly always a storehouse of wise observation from a wide array of reporters in deeper pockets of all the boroughs rather than literary aspirants over at NEW YORK MAGAZINE let me second this JBC affirmation and appreciation of the reviewer.
I hope that like Diane Wiest's interpretation of Winnie, JBC is not being sarcastic or snarky. These reader comments, including the one from an apparent friend or acquaintance of author Beckett may be critical of this review, but I welcome Jesse Green's straightforward and casual observations. If I could afford to live in or even visit NYC I'd want to see this production for myself, of a play I did not so fully appreciate in a Queens College production of my youth, nor in an East Village production back in those mists.
Keep on doing, Jesse Green...
I hope that like Diane Wiest's interpretation of Winnie, JBC is not being sarcastic or snarky. These reader comments, including the one from an apparent friend or acquaintance of author Beckett may be critical of this review, but I welcome Jesse Green's straightforward and casual observations. If I could afford to live in or even visit NYC I'd want to see this production for myself, of a play I did not so fully appreciate in a Queens College production of my youth, nor in an East Village production back in those mists.
Keep on doing, Jesse Green...
This seems like it might be a solid production. Mr. Green could have added Irene Worth to the list of actresses who've played Winnie. Some years ago, under Andrei Serban's direction, Ms. Worth gave the role a deeply sad subtext, exquisitely played but not I think altogether what Bekcett had in mind. Ms. Wiest may come closer to Beckett's intentions since she sounds game-on feisty opposite an unfathomable universe. But indeed interpretations, even for props, abound. Mr. Serban, a Romanian with, one imagines, savage outcomes of WWII seared into his mind, substituted a black luger for the revolver. It's interesting that Mr. Bundy has put that revolver back where Beckett (witness to Irish rebellions) wrote it to be.
3
Dianne Wiest gives a great performance, as does Jarlath Conroy as Willie. Irene Worth's performance was brilliant.
I found it alarming and disheartening that the new co-chief theatre critic advocates altering plays. First of all, that is against copyright laws and second of all, that is why copyright laws were put into place to begin with, so the artist's work couldn't be mangled and transformed beyond the original intent. "Happy Days" is not a museum piece; each production is a new and unique interpretation. If you're tired of it, then don't go see it, but "taking liberties" with the script is not the answer.
11
It's less of a copyright issue than a contractual one. If you want to produce a play, you have to secure the rights to do so from its publisher, who typically also serves as the author's agent in matters of production. In securing those rights you are obliged to sign a contract that explicitly states what you may or may not do with your production. Those contracts have become increasingly stringent over time--you may not change the gender of a character, you may not cast an actor of a different gender than the character, you may not change the intent of the playwright with regards to scenery or staging. Beckett (and his estate) in particular are, well, particular about this, as this article from the NYT concerning JoAnne Akalaitas's production of Endgame indicates. As someone who teaches at a women's college, I am rarely surprised but always disappointed when publishers or playwrights insist upon these sorts of provisions. Shakespeare has survived untold numbers of productions that strayed from the author's intentions (whatever those might be), and some have been better, and some have been worse, but none of them hurt the script. And with the professional theater as self-congratulatory as it is about its open-mindedness, its provincial notions about gender are troubling. Doubtless publishers will be insisting that performers present birth certificates before long.
http://www.nytimes.com/1984/12/20/arts/stage-disputed-endgame-in-debut.html
http://www.nytimes.com/1984/12/20/arts/stage-disputed-endgame-in-debut.html
1
I saw this production last spring at the Yale Rep. Despite Dianne Wiest doing an incredible acting job I found the play excruciating to sit through. Depressing and so repetitive and boring. To me an unwatchable play (although I guess I watched it!). But I really regretted having spent those two hours in that way.
5
Odd comment: "...museum pieces tend to decay."
Yes, everything material decays. But is the critic saying the Mona Lisa, The Starry Night, and Nude Descending a Staircase, No. 2 are wearing thin and losing their impact for hanging in museums?
Theater exactly does not decay because each production, each performance recreates the work anew. Beckett knew this well, and he wanted as much control over his work as possible because his creativity encompassed everything seen on stage. The difference each night lies with the performers and as much direction as needed to realize Beckett's vision.
Yes, everything material decays. But is the critic saying the Mona Lisa, The Starry Night, and Nude Descending a Staircase, No. 2 are wearing thin and losing their impact for hanging in museums?
Theater exactly does not decay because each production, each performance recreates the work anew. Beckett knew this well, and he wanted as much control over his work as possible because his creativity encompassed everything seen on stage. The difference each night lies with the performers and as much direction as needed to realize Beckett's vision.
8
The performances are remarkable and heartbreaking, but this is hardly a "conventional" production. Mr. Bundy's direction is superb here, and I imagine it's crucial to those performances. I have seen conventional productions of this play, and they haven't haunted me for a week like this one has.
9
cant wait to see the uber talented ms weist in this...
pure delight and brilliance alwys mark her shows.
pure delight and brilliance alwys mark her shows.
3
The title of this play, Happy Days, is a misnomer, much as Greenland is not a tropical nature preserve, but was given that name to lure settlers. Having seen H D years ago, and suffered through it, when offered a ticket for this production I gracefully declined. Not a masochist. Sometimes we learn from our mistakes to not repeat them.
1
Having seen a dozen Godot's in my time, culminating in the glorious McKellan/Stewart production of a few years ago, I increasingly feel that Beckett is just now coming into his own as the genius of the age. These days, what is there to say?
Beckett was always about negative space, and Dianne Wiest understands silence as well as any actor alive. He was everything that art should be, and she is everything that acting should be. "Don't Speak!"
Beckett was always about negative space, and Dianne Wiest understands silence as well as any actor alive. He was everything that art should be, and she is everything that acting should be. "Don't Speak!"
14