I don’t often think about blasphemy. Neither do most of you, I’d hazard to guess. But if you see the production of Molière’s Tartuffe now playing at the Shakespeare Theatre Company, you will be forced to think about it. And we should, given that people are being murdered in its name globally, along with the destruction of civilization’s shared treasures.
It’s a relatively recent historical development, to go through your day, your life, without worrying about being accused of it, imprisoned for it, killed for it. There’s a sea change that may sweep that safety away for us, though. For Molière and his 17th-century contemporaries, accusations of blasphemy could be catastrophic – and yet as artists, they still risked all for truth.
This is an important production because it returns that shock of blasphemy to Tartuffe, and to our expectations of Molière. We may forget this was a play censored and re-written several times, its rex ex machina ending an eventual palliative. Director Dominique Serrand’s approach ensures we don’t forget the danger inherent in speaking out against hypocrisy. Molière’s voiceover right at the beginning tells us directly that the playwright is a force for that subversion.
If you think this is going to be just a French farce, a sugary confection, you’re going to choke on that chocolate éclair. That isn’t to say that this isn’t a very funny production, because it certainly is, especially in its first half, which is full of absurdist moments. We have to laugh, and laugh hard, before the shock kicks us in the gut.
A co-production with South Coast Repertory and Berkeley Repertory Theatre, Serrand’s Tartuffe originated at The Moving Company with co-artistic director Steven Epp, who plays the title role, and several other members of the company. This collaborative history gives a strong, cohesive visual and performance aesthetic. With a whip-smart adaptation by David Ball, delivered with crystalline precision by a cast who relish punctuating the rhyming schemes, its impression overall is that of a world-class, innovative company.
Family patriarch Orgon (Luverne Seifert) thinks he’s just a perfectly reasonable, indulgent father, with his children and servants given to disobedience. But he has actually turned his household on its head with his slavish devotion to religious fraud Tartuffe (Stephen Epp), and his inability to see the truth slowly corrodes comedy into tragedy. He separates his daughter Mariane (Lenne Klingaman) from her lover Valere (Christopher Carley) in order to marry her to Tartuffe, insists his wife Elmire (Sofia Jean Gomez) spend as much time as possible with Tartuffe, and ignores the warnings of his servant Dorine (Suzanne Warmanen) and brother-in-law Cleante (Gregory Linnington) of the rising danger and consequences of these acts.
For Tartuffe, as we are told at the beginning in a candlelit scene stripped bare of pretense, is no pious man of God, but a lascivious liar and hypocrite. From the moment he enters from the back of the theater, strutting on down to engage in a little self-flagellation, Epp telegraphs Tartuffe’s true nature. There’s a reptilian grace to this charlatan. He’s a snake posing to strike, a lizard, a Lucifer. Epp’s Tartuffe may be magnetic, yet we never forget he’s also repulsive. This isn’t a likeable character; he’s truly dangerous and represents all that is morally repugnant about religious hypocrisy. It’s a testament to Epp’s great skill as an actor that he creates such a powerful evocation of negative charisma.
His counterpoint is Sofia Jean Gomez’s Elmire, whose cool exterior (tellingly swathed in an enormous dress of icy blue silk) presents the forthright arguments of truth. She believes she can out-maneuver Tartuffe; to her shock, and ours, she’s wrong. Her ultimate violation is one of the key moments that shifts us into tragedy. It’s truly terrible and intentionally revolting. Gomez is riveting in the way she reacts to what is not only a physical violation, but the violation of the belief in truth prevailing, and trust.
As the man who enables that violation and loss of trust, not just for his wife but his entire family and his own self, Luverne Seifert is brilliant. His Orgon is like a bull in the arena, unaware of the matador’s attack until it’s too late, blustering about. His devotion to Tartuffe is naïve of its erotic undertones, but they are blatant to us. Serrand illustrates this perfectly with Orgon cementing his subjugation by flagellating himself with a wet towel for Tartuffe’s pleasure, like frat-boys in the school gym.
A great deal of the success of Serrand’s Tartuffe is the dedication of the cohesive ensemble, and their complete immersion in a world where vocal naturalism and physical absurdism exist together. Their physicality is like that of a dance company, with gargoyles climbing and lovers leaping, and even a mere hop onto a table has character meaning. From Nathan Keepers’ chilling Laurent, to the scintillating and ridiculous lovers’ quarrel of Lenne Klingaman and Christopher Carley, the ensemble is excellent. And I’m not sure I’ve ever enjoyed Molière’s text more than when Suzanne Warmanen’s Dorine escalated it back to scathing hilarity.
TARTUFFE
Highly Recommended
June 2 – July 5
Shakespeare Theatre Company at
Sidney Harman Hall
610 F Street NW
Washington, DC
Tuesdays thru Sundays
Tickets: $20 – $110
Details
Tickets or call 202.547.1122
———————
This is a pristine production design. There’s a jewel-box of a set by Serrand and co-scenic designer Tom Buderwitz, reminiscent of French 17th-century churches and their cool interiors, lit by Marcus Dilliard to mimic sunrise to sunset. The costumes by Sonya Berlovitz are exquisitely sly, and the sound design by Corinne Carrillo ably accents the tableaux Serrand increasingly uses as the action turns from comedy to tragedy.
Molière’s purpose in writing Tartuffe was to expose hypocrites to the truth about themselves, and ultimately, that’s the purpose of art, to hold the mirror up, and see what we find. Throughout, Serrand teases and twists moments of reverence and religious imagery – Pietà, communion, the altar, holy water – until the final image of the punishment Tartuffe is given erupts into full-on blasphemy. It’s a shocking image that I won’t spoil, as its impact depends on not expecting things to go that far. Is it necessary? That’s for you to decide for yourself. I believe that by taking such a risk, Serrand restores the play’s original impact as a subversive force denounced by the clergy, government, critics – a play censored and a playwright persecuted.
It didn’t make me comfortable.
But it made me think about the power religion still holds over me.
——–
Tartuffe by Moliere . Adapted by David Ball . Directed by Dominique Serrand . Featuring Steven Epp,Sofia Jean Gomez, Christopher Carley, Brian Hostenske, Nathan Keepers, Lenne Klingaman, Gregory Linington, Michael Manuel, Luverne Seifert, Suzanne Warmanen, Ross Destiche, Maria Leigh, Michael Litchfield, and Stephanie Schmalzle. . Co-Scenic Designers: Dominique Serrand and Tom Buderwitz .Costume Design: Sonya Berlovitz. Lighting Design: Marcus Dilliard,and Sound Design: Corinne Carrillo . STC production: Assistant Directors Craig Baldwin and Nathan Keepers . Production Stage Manager: Joseph Smelser . Assistant Stage Manager: Elizabeth Clewley. A co-production of Shakespeare Theatre Company, South Coast Repertory and Berkeley Repertory Theatre . Reviewed by Jenn Larsen.
The fundamental problem with this production of Tartuffe wasn’t that it was dark, or shocking, or stylized, or sexual. No, the problem is that it was BORING. It dragged. Nearly every scene took twice as long as supported by the text and plot. And, slow as it was, it felt even slower — at the end, looking at my watch, I was surprised to find the night was younger than I thought.
At that glacial pace, we had plenty of time to notice that all the care and trouble to make the adaptation dark/shocking/stylized/sexual had failed to make it powerful — it had only made it pretentious.
The execution was impressive; the visual design was beautiful, the choreography dazzling (although often distracting from the text), and some of the acting was good (such as Luverne Seifert as Orgon). But none of this could overcome the production’s turgid self-importance.
I have never in my life seen a production so in love with itself. Reading the program at home later, I saw that the most annoying minor character (one who never missed a chance to irrelevantly pull focus from scenes and undercut any attempt by his fellow cast-mates to give Molière’s actual text its fair shake) was the assistant director, which says a lot about how self-indulgent this show was.
Finally, the notion that the production could claim to be powerful for making the audience confront ourselves and our own era? Laughable. To do that a show has to inspire divided loyalties from the audience, and point out *our* hypocrisy. Merely letting us self-indulgently tut-tut at the religious hypocrites who are still out there today (but not, of course, in an enlightened STC audience) — that’s not challenging, it’s just, again, self-serving.
Jeff,
Please don’t re-think attending shows at the Shakespeare Theater. I’ve been a subscribing member for several years and this play was the only time I’ve been anything but delighted in what they’ve produced. I loathed this production (totally uneven, no sense of timing, etc.) and could barely believe it was being performed at this wonderful theater. This production of Tartuffe is not at all indicative of the STC’s wonderful work.
It wasn’t that this adaption of Moliere’s critique on hypocrisy was overly sexual — it was, or it was asexual – it was; but that it only communicated on the physical/sexual level. The angles, the physical abruptness, the protuding tongue all got in the way of Moliere’s creative genius; – a little like pornography gets in the way of plot. I found it difficult to sit through, and think only the peculiar times we are in could produce this. And at the most (or least) it should not be acted at the Shakespeare theatre. Shakespeare, and Moliere would be HORRIFIED.
Jeff,
Also saw it last night. We pretty much agree with your comments especially the excessive screeching (and shouting). Even many of the movements were more annoying than enlightening. I understand that the ending was intentionally blasphemous but why? Not ready to cancel next year’s subscription, but one if not our least favorite show and we been going since Folger days.
Dale,
I’m not sure how you can call something a “tour de force” when you also admit most of the crowd left at intermission. That doesn’t usually occur during “tour de force” performances. We are also inveterate theatre enthusiasts, and like you, we’re still talking about it at breakfast – but about how horrible the production and acting were. It’s actually made us seriously re-think attending shows at the Shakespeare theatre.
This adaptation of Moliere’s Tartuffe may be one of the most memorable stage performances I have ever seen. The set was critical to the “success” of the performance and changing only one part of this entire performance would have weakened it. My wife and I noticed that many did not return for the second act. To call the overall performance “upsetting and disturbing” would be unfair. It was all that but much more. We attended the Tuesday evening the 17th performance and were still discussing it at breakfast this morning. For anyone who enjoys a “tour de force” this should – must – be on the list. We are inveterate theater enthusiasts and this has added immeasurably to our theater experience. Bravo to all who made this so unforgettable.
Actually. I do agree with you. This was unfunny and poorly acted. There were a few laugh lines but it had the production qualities of a high school play. The actors all overacted and screeched their lines at full volume. This came across as more of a pathetic lparody than a real adaptation.
I originally saw this play performed as a humorous farce as one would expect from Moliere. That was what I expected again. The actors were excellent but I did not like this overly dark production. The humorous lines and occurrences in the first act, for me, were overshadowed by the terrible, not funny things that occurred for most of the second act. No wonder it was censored and had to be rewritten.
I am sure others will disagree.