Judith Thompson’s powerful two-act play I Am Yours is a stunning story about more than just relationships. The title neatly encapsulates the complications of love and family and the fears and struggles that go along with that. Last weekend’s performance by the Hart House Drama Society may have lacked the depth of the piece but was nonetheless an admirable attempt.
In short, the story revolves around the lives of six characters and examines their individual struggles and the relationships they maintain. Artist Dee is newly separated from her husband Mack, a result of her night terrors and imaginary visions that instil a fear in her and those around her. She learns to somewhat come to terms with her anxieties after she learns that she is pregnant, not with Mack’s child, but rather with Toilane’s (the superintendent of her building).
Later the plot becomes further entangled when sister Mercy arrives to help Dee. Mercy is not without visionary hauntings of her own, however, as experiences from her past continually seep through to the present. This strange and twisted story delves further into the intricacies of relationships when Toilane’s lower-class mother, Pegs, is introduced.
The story itself requires no drama in the telling-the drama here lies in the subtleties of the situations themselves. That’s maybe why the players seemed to not quite live up to the material. The play is really about experiences-most unfavourable in many regards-but often intention was lost in the actors’ empty delivery. Perhaps this wasn’t entirely their fault-there’s only so much one can bring to the drama from one’s own personal experience.
Director Chris Saunders seemed to be aware of this, and so overcompensated with melodramatic dialogue, encouraging his actors to constantly switch from low emotion to high in a matter of sentences. The dialogue itself has moments of redundancy, but this was only heightened by the actors’ delivery. Since the play requires a deep awareness of not only the progression of the story but also the underlying images and messages, the audience was presented with the chore of maintaining an energy to help to carry the story where the actors could not.
The blank and minimal set further incited a sense of monotony in the performance, and the lighting transitions were as sparse (or chaotic) as the dialogue. All in all, the production may have been weak, but at the same time it evoked a deep appreciation for the cast’s dedicated attempts to play thirtysomethings mired in transition. It should also be noted that the production wasn’t without humour-Thompson’s work is always laced with dark comedy, and the audience reacted most to those bits.
It’s never easy to mount a Thompson play-the Hart House Drama Society’s production may have been uneven, but full points for a valiant effort.
