The production of Macbeth mounted by the Trinity College Dramatic Society at the George Ignatieff Theatre last week was supposed to be set in post-World War I Scotland. On paper this seems like an interesting choice with lots of potential for expanding the scope of Shakespeare’s action-packed psychological tragedy. Unfortunately, the setting of the “roaring ’20s” proved to be inconsistent, superficial and ultimately distracting from the Bard’s masterpiece.
Setting Macbeth outside of the intended 11th century is never a safe choice to make; in fact, it is the theatrical equivalent of choosing to handle nitroglycerine. If it is not treated with absolute commitment and attention, it can become an extremely dangerous and harmful choice to make.
From the beginning, it was obvious that elaborate sets and detailed costumes were not to be the focus of this production. The set was spartan, and often barren, while the costumes looked like they had either been brought from home, or purchased at an army surplus store in Kensington. Since there can be no allusion to the updated setting in the dialogue (which was thankfully left fully intact), it is primarily the job of the sets and costumes to convince the audience of the true date.
To make matters worse, music by New York electroclash duo Fischerspooner was played before each appearance of the three witches. Sure, Fischerspooner is sexy, just like the witches, but their album is also from the year 2002, and the witches are supposed to be living in 1920. Perhaps because they are witches they could have magically traveled forward through time to an HMV, fallen in love with FS at a listening post, bought the album, and returned to the heath… but come on! This was a frustratingly bad choice that was ultimately confusing and frankly made no sense. There are tons of evil and sexy songs from the 1920’s that could have been played to the advantage of firming up the audience’s notion of when the play was taking place. No play should depend on the director’s program note to establish the setting.
Props also needed to make some sense. Where were the guns? If this is just after WWI, why did everyone carry a dagger and call it a sword? Baz Luhrmann proved in his adaptation of Romeo and Juliet that problems like this can be solved with some creative thinking. Also, after Macbeth murders Duncan and becomes king, why does Lady Macbeth still have to compulsively wash her guilt into a basin? Shouldn’t he have at least earned himself a sink, if not a crown? A greater commitment to period set design and consistent costuming would have strengthened the argument that this play was indeed set in the 1920’s. The fact that this production lacked in those two specific areas to begin with did nothing but a disservice to the play.
Problems with sets and costumes aside, some solace could thankfully be found in the acting on stage. Catharine Dunn, Sophie Chung, and Sarah Warren were wickedly sexy as the three witches, John David Wood was absolutely stellar as the betrayed Banquo, and Rouzbeh Fard delivered a professional-quality performance as King Duncan. It was pure tragedy that the best performances of the night were limited to characters who got killed off in the first half of the play. Thankfully, Fard did return to play the First Murderer, a role he also commanded with almost equal skill and poise. In the role of Macbeth, Alistair Scott, former vocalist for local R&B band The Crawling Kingsnakes, delivered an uneven performance. Although obviously well acquainted with the script, Scott’s performance was wooden and at times, semi-robotic. To be fair, the more insane Macbeth became, the better Scott’s performance was.
The direction was also unbalanced. Some scenes, like Banquo’s ghostly appearance at supper, were well directed and exciting to watch, while others-such as when Ross informs MacDuff of his family’s murder-were incredibly boring because there was no business on stage other than the dialogue. Malcolm and MacDuff were simply standing on an empty stage doing nothing but talking to each other.
Overall this performance would have been much better if it had been left in the 11th century. The choice to move the action into the 1920’s was a step half-taken, and should have been left on the drawing board altogether.
