Lancaster University Theatre Group
Gregson Centre, Lancaster
Tuesday 8 and Wednesday 9 March 2005

A domestic tragedy and a misjudged disaster

Michael Nunn and John Burkinshaw invite two guests to Lancaster University Theatre Group (LUTG)'s latest offering.

Innovative theatre
A Doll's House was written by the innovative and influential Norwegian dramatist Henrik Ibsen (1828 – 1906) in 1879, which places it historically and emotionally in the heart of the Victorian era in Britain (for more information on the playwright and his work, click here).

Classical in structure but revolutionary in tone, content and message, Ibsen's work was panned by the critics and the establishment but eagerly embraced by the general public. Abigail, one of our two guests for the evening, had read more Ibsen that I have. "Feminism is a strong theme throughout Ibsen's work,' she noted.

This mixed reaction has happened before, particularly with literature about the emancipation of women – think Thomas Hardy's Tess of the D'Urbervilles (1891) and G B Shaw's Mrs Warren's Profession (1898). I cite these two examples in particular because both Shaw and Hardy were stout defenders and disciples of Ibsen's work in this country, as would later be the younger James Joyce.

Value demolition and political impact
Why? Because, perhaps for the first time and certainly to best effect, Ibsen blew apart the self-obsessed Victorian hypocrisies of integrity, morality, prestige and status. He allowed his heroine, Nora Helmer, not only to speak her mind about the loveless sham marriage with her husband Torvald, but also to take a moral stand to preserve her own integrity by leaving home and turning her back on the awful, duplicitous and diseased life they had both been enduring.

This was seriously heady and dangerous stuff in those days; literature isn't supposed to be about that sort of thing (you can almost hear our present-day gutter press baying for blood). The social and political impacts of A Doll's House and other such works would be later evident in the Suffragette and other movements, and in the rise of the Labour Movement both in Britain and abroad.

It is no understatement to maintain that the theatre of Bertolt Brecht simply could not have happened without Ibsen. This all needs saying, because we all too easily take for granted now, post Germaine Greer, The Vagina Monologues, Shopping and F**king and so on.

A well-crafted play
A Doll's House is a finely-wrought piece, based on the three Classical Unities of time, place and action, has a small cast of six and a very tight text. The dialogue is crisp (though John felt the translation "rather too stilted in places") and Ibsen's handling of the plot, particularly regarding dramatic impact and the ever-heightening suspense, is comparable with that of Hitchcock.

"I was gripped by the themes and the overall plot of the play. It's a good thriller,' said Neil at half-time. John, too, was "riveted by the story, and just itching for a good, bloodbath ending.' And with an interesting take on the notion of justice in the play, said, "I reckon the Maid will do for them all. They're all such awful characters.'

He was right – they are, they are all involved with failed relationships, and it is difficult to feel much sympathy for any of them. It's their own fault – but is it? ‘Blame society', as the saying goes. Which is just what Ibsen does. Abigail also noted a strong contemporary note, quite apart from the feminist issue: The hypocrisy of "money, status, sex, respect issues are all still going on today,' she rightly pointed out.

That was the good news …
So that's the play, then, and you are wondering about the production, aren't you? Well, so were we, even as early as the interval. And we still are two days later, I'm afraid to say. It was a disaster. Sure, there were some good moments, some reasonable action, and valiant attempts to continue the momentum of the gripping storyline.

Abigail was disappointed that the play's "highly naturalistic' qualities fell flat because the production "lacked polish'. Neil had noticed that "the blocking wasn't executed to best effect,' and we all felt that the whole was under-rehearsed, ill-learned and too often limped embarrassingly along.

We later found out that there had been problems with this production right through its life. The original plan for Samuel Beckett's Waiting for Godot had to be changed for copyright reasons. Some of the original team suffered from a series of difficulties, and one cast member had been brought in at only three weeks' notice.

Fine, all that can happen to anyone, and we all have runs of bad luck and ill fortune. But … and it is a big ‘but' …

It is a simple, professional matter. The show was advertised to the general public. People who pay to see the usually excellent LUTG, expect and deserve value for their hard-earned cash. We could not in all conscience recommend this production to our readers.

Having now seen fifteen LUTG shows, I have become used to their consistently high standards. All those shows have demonstrated clear, continuing evidence of hard work, strong commitment and great ability. There was no doubt that much hard work etc went into this production too. But when, accustomed as audiences have become to that level of excellence, anything not up to the mark should be cancelled.

Perhaps, despite what Ibsen says about clinging to the wreckage, this was one occasion when an honourable withdrawal, like that of the courageous Nora, would have been the best option for all concerned.

Copyright © 10 March 2005 Michael Nunn,
with grateful acknowledgement to John Burkinshaw, and to Abigail Lumb and Neil McLoughlin of St Martin's College.