A Delicate Balance previews begin tonight — Page 2

To me this play is as funny as it is intellectually demanding. Can you give us an example of something that got a laugh you thought was inappropriate.

Enjoyed entire performance on Saturday night. The audience was great, wish we all had given more time for the ovation and appreciation of the theater magic, a combination of the playwright, actors, director and designers work that have created that magic. Huge respect and admiration goes to Mr. Lithgow - never disappoint you - what a talent! Ms. Close was at her best. Truly believe that the only person that needs "settling" into her role was Martha Plimpton; hopefully, she will get there, she is a very talented actor. Strongly recommend for theater goers that prefer going over an impression left by the performance rather than enjoying the moment; this performance gave me both opportunities.

Odd that so little is being said here about Duncan, one of the greatest actresses alive who here is playing one of modern drama's juiciest roles.

For all its exquisite trappings, the production is troubling. The program says "now," yet none of the characters behave remotely like 63-65 year-olds would in 2014. Nothing tracks with boomer sensibilities. Albee wrote the play in the mid-sixties, it opened in 1966. Tobias and Agnes (and Claire) would've been born in 1910, so their behavior in '66 is grounded in early 20th century childhood socioeconomic issues (Depression, WWII, etc). Playing the show in 2014 means they were born in the late 40s to early 50s. Baby boomers. Yet none of these 4 women have careers, Agnes and Tobias have always had servants (they talk about the early days of their marriage -- when they had a drunk cook. In the mid 70s? Two 20 somethings? Really?) And they live in a 4-bedroom house -- 4 bedroom mansion, we are led to believe -- that has a full staff to deliver trays of food to Harry and Edna. I could go on, but the idea of setting it now doesn't work. They have dressed Close like the Tandy Agnes of 1966. And as she awaits her daughter's return from a 4th failed marriage, and dinner in her own home, she dons a floor length crepe gown and diamonds. And summons yet another cook. McKinnon's hands are tied, Albee changed only two small lines, and feels the play updates easily.

It does not.

If you are a contemporary of the actors playing Agnes and Tobias, and Claire (and Edna and Harry) as I am, you look at these people behaving like rich people 40 years ago, for reasons noted above. People my age were giggling at the first intermission, gathered at the bar, at the preposterous idea that these 5 adults represent our generation, no matter the class. Tobias would be a guy who scored Beatle or Stones tickets, not this old fart, again, more appropriately born before WW I. By the time Martha Plimpton's Julia arrives -- dressed hip, born in 1978, with neither career nor children, a 1998 college grad! -- the time warp aspect collapses. It's an error, and these actors could pull off a timelessness, if they made the production less naturalistic, or dared tie it to another era, as McKinnon did with "Virginia Woolf."

The final straw was the bizarre sociopolitical references. Both Julia and Tobias freely use the word "fag" about the dead son, without blinking. And yet put down "brutal Republicans" and talk of a "teenage marijuana nest" nearby. Julia, born in 1978, claims she's never smoked marijuana, as she married 4 different men. Huh? Who are they? In 2014? No.

---

Updated On: 11/7/14 at 08:24 PM

I'd love to talk about Higgins. Let me just say, she is integral to the best part of this production's interpretation (see my post above). I've seen several Ednas, but this is the first one to so completely dominate the precarious negotiations with Tobias and Agnes. Though Edna does the bidding for the temporarily displaced couple in the text, in this production Edna is clearly a kind of player. Prime mover. Higgins has been given an unflattering and inappropriate costume, a cruel sitcom styled get-up, to me one at odds with what the play says about her relationship. Yet she transcends it, and gives Edna a kind of moral clarity, an abject certainty. When she handles Julia (no spoilers), it's with a crispness and sense of purpose that makes her seem the sanest person on stage. I've grown used to the almost creepy Edna of Betsy Blair in the film. Higgins makes a case that Edna is probably a kind of survivor. Though if she loses her tight reign on her own emotions early in the play, as she finds her footing again, she builds a very plausible arc for this woman, a character Albee has written with few words. Very effective. If they'd change her costume (polyester and mink), she'd be even more persuasive.

---

Updated On: 11/8/14 at 09:00 AM

I'm with followspot, for all of the reasons I went on about above. The play has been baldly staged as contemporary ("now"), but the women seem to inhabit three different worlds and time zones, at least. The Agnes of Glenn Close next to the Edna of Clare Higgins makes the point easily. These women are friends? Why Harry and Edna are dressed as bourgeois suburbanites is beyond me, and not remotely in Albee's intentions. When Edna walked in Thursday night, the laughs started, as if she was a sight gag. Harry and Edna bring a black comedic vibe into the play, to be sure; but not sitcom commentary about tackiness and bad manners. This production suggests that part of the unappealing nature of Harry and Edna's unbidden intrusion is their inherent boorishness. Not in the play, and shoehorned in only makes it harder to suspend disbelief. But it's hard with this production anyway.

---

Updated On: 11/8/14 at 01:26 PM

Close had line problems when I saw it too. Lithgow seems to have adjusted his performance to accommodate her, coming off feckless sometimes because of the anticipated tentativeness instead of every bit her equal.

I thought Plimpton, Higgins, and Balaban were all very successful. Much more so than their counterparts in the last production - Plimpton especially had a strong show.

I am surprised there hasn't been more about Lindsay Duncan's interpretation. Is it a deliberate choice of hers or is her only way into the dialect to play it like a Marx Brother? Stritch's shadow may loom largest but I did not understand a lot of Duncan's choices, which seemed of another time and place and play to me. She and Close seemed to be missing the mark to a degree.

That said, the production still manages to serve the play well.

You really know your stuff, Auggie27. I enjoy reading your posts.

I adore Lindsay Duncan. Claire should be a threat. There is no threat in the Duncan/Close dynamic — although, as you've eloquently described, that dynamic is problematic in both directions in this production — Duncan doesn't have an active Agnes to work off of. And indeed, the shock value Claire uses as a weapon doesn't really make sense in the context of a 2014 setting.

I kept thinking what Judy Davis might do with the role.

Funny aside: When Claire lies on the floor and pontificates in Act One, the woman in front of me leaned toward her husband and loudly whispered: "Other Desert Cities." Made me think.

---

Very late to the party with this one, but sad to report that Close's line flubs have not improved. Saw it last night and am definitely still trying to digest the whole piece.

I stopped reading this preview thread after the first few entries went up in November, but I definitely agree with the time shifting not working well. I hadn't noticed the setting directions in the Playbill, and the first real clear indicator that this was set in the present was when Harry and Edna left in Act III with their nice, new four-spinning-wheeled luggage. Up until that point I was sure we were set somewhere in the 60s.

Lithgow, Duncan, and Plimpton were last night's standouts.

Any suggested resources/analysis of the play anyone is familiar with? Curious to dive into it a little deeper, as last night's first encounter has left me mostly uncertain.

I would still see it if you love Albee. It's not bad by any means. Just not truly inspired. At least you'll see some very fine performances from Lithgow and Duncan. And Close's third act was superb.

Saw it yesterday and was really looking forward to it, but I agree, it was very dull.

It IS a good play. It's not as good as ...VIRGINIA WOOLF, though. It needs the right handling and the right "balance" in the company. I always was deeply disturbed, as I've said before, by the audience who seemed to think it was a rollicking comedy the day I went.

One play that really deserves as much acclaim as A DELICATE BALANCE and V. WOOLF is THE LADY FROM DUBUQUE. Signature here in NYC did a wonderful production with Jane Alexander a few years ago, and it is the equal of WHO'S AFRAID OF VIRGINIA WOOLF?, just spellbinding, funny, tragic, and weird. I think it's my second favorite Albee.