I wonder what Caryl Churchill makes
of the fact that two Australian state theatre companies are producing her 1982
play Top Girls this year? Perhaps she
doesn’t know anything about it, or is just grateful for the royalties. Or
perhaps, like me, she is just a little bit confused.
Whatever
director Catherine Fitzgerald says about the play’s enduring relevancy (and she
is, I think, at least partly right to argue this case in light of today’s fundamentalist
capitalism) Top Girls is a play wedded
to its time. It’s so much about the
1980s that you don’t even need to, as Fitzgerald has done in her production for
the State Theatre Company of SA, put everyone in shoulderpads and assail the
audience with bad synth-pop at every opportunity. Make no mistake, this is a
play about Britain – England – in
1982: Thatcher, monetarism, corporate culture. It is also intimately concerned,
as the third and strongest act makes clear, with issues of class, and their
apparent negation in Thatcher’s social Darwinist world.
Why,
then, put such a play on in Australia ,
30 years after it was written? I don’t know the answer to this question.
Fitzgerald’s program notes, written I presume as a sort of pre-emptive strike
against criticisms of irrelevancy, make for worthy reading but provide no real
answers. It’s a bad sign, in any case, when the production of a 30-year old
play has to be justified by its director, as though it were applying for a job.
The
truth is, I suspect, Top Girls was
chosen to feature in both STCSA’s and Melbourne Theatre Company’s 2012 seasons
because a lot has been said and written in recent years about the gender
imbalance in Australian theatre. An Australia Council report emerged in April, Women in Theatre, which confirmed what
everybody knew already – women are grossly underrepresented in Australian
theatre. Top Girls makes for an
obvious choice of play to attempt a redressing of this inequality because it is
by probably the most well-known and influential female playwright of modern
times and features an all-woman cast. Throw in (naturally) a female director,
and there you have it: a play by a woman, performed by women, directed by a
woman. I don’t think I’m being too cynical. I think, actually, the selection of
Top Girls by STCSA and MTC is far
more cynical, not only because it smacks of ‘so there’-ism but because it’s a
lazy choice which has far less to say about the lives of women living now than
Fitzgerald seems to think.
The
play opens surreally, with a dreamlike sequence in which six women from various
historical epochs have dinner at an upmarket restaurant. One of them is the
booze-soaked Marlene (Ulli Birve), of the Top Girls employment agency. She is
the only character who appears throughout the play. She is joined for dinner by
Isabella Bird (Eileen Darley), a Victorian traveller, Lady Nijo (Lia Reutens),
a Japanese Emperor’s courtesan, Dull Gret (Sally Hildyard), a woman from
Brueghel’s painting Dulle Griet, Pope
Joan (Antje Guenther) who, disguised as a man, was thought to have been Pope
between 854 – 856 BC, and Patient Griselda (Ksenja Logos), of Canterbury Tales fame. As the wine flows
and courses come and go, the women discuss their lives, loves and
disappointments, via Churchill’s trademark overlapping dialogue.
All the performances
here are strong, but the dinner is marred by some curious directorial
flourishes; Isabella arrives on an enormous, silly tricycle, Dull Gret from a
hole in the floor which represents a cartoon version of hell replete with
belching smoke and incessant screaming, and Pope Joan via the air on a sort of
papal hovercraft as a burst of Monty
Python and the Holy Grail-ish mock-religious sound fills the theatre.
Fitzgerald clearly doesn’t have much faith in the ability of Churchill’s first
act to hold the audience’s attention. I thought, too, that the use of slavishly
correct accents was unnecessary, adding a further, obfuscating layer of
theatricality to proceedings. It is enough (possibly more than enough, given
that Lady Nijo was performed in the play’s premiere by Lindsay Duncan) that the
characters are differentiated by their appearances.
The second act sees the
action transfer to the Top Girls employment agency, represented in Mary Moore’s
commendably minimalist set design by a handful of desks, office chairs and a
water cooler. It is also here, however, that the biggest failing of the show’s
design becomes overwhelmingly clear – a literal glass ceiling which hovers over
the action, breaking apart and coming together again at different points during
the action. It’s an inanely obvious conceit and the fact that it moves rather
shoddily only highlights the daftness of its inclusion.
The scenes set in the
employment agency are undoubtedly the least interesting of the play and the
audience’s slackening attention was palpable during the perilously long time to
the interval (close to two hours). The story of children Angie (Guenther) and
Kit (Carissa Lee), introduced during the second scene of act two, brought, I
think, many of us back; I for one was transfixed by their volatile backyard
antics, smartly telescoped to one small part of the stage. It is, ultimately,
Angie’s story which becomes the most significant of Top Girls. She represents the generation – of women, yes, but of
men too – who are set to be left behind by Thatcher’s brave new world. The two
moments that stood out in my mind after the play both involved her, the first
in which she has fallen asleep in a chair at the employment agency and Marlene,
watching her, chillingly observes: ‘She’s not going to make it.’ The second
occurs at the end of the play, when Marlene, in an intriguing role reversal, is
going to sleep on the couch at her sister’s house when Angie tears into the
room, having been woken by a nightmare. Just before the lights fade, she says
one word: ‘Frightening.’ In this single word, Churchill captured her prognosis
for 1980s England .
She was right, of
course, to be fearful of everything that the Thatcher/Reagan axis represented.
Fitzgerald is also right to be fearful of the legacy of that axis which
continues to be felt today, and will no doubt redouble its effect in this
country should a Liberal government come to power next year which looks
increasingly likely. I don’t know that Top
Girls can tell us very much about this, and I don’t know that this
production can tell us very much about Top
Girls. ‘Frightening’, however, it is.
No comments:
Post a Comment