George Bernard Shaw !

Well I designed the sets for it and came up with a concept of the characters being fairly bird-like. The main set was a giant cage/greenhouse dome...the turkish bath was very reminiscent of a water dish for birds...everything was fairly subtle though...I felt this reflected the prison type feel taht the daughter has, plus the witty back and forth banter seemed very bird-like.

Akiva

I saw a production a few years back that a friend was in, and during previews it was well over two hours long, and great as the dialogue was- it suffered.

During the run they made some cuts and trims and got it down to a decent running time, one that didn't hurt the butts of the audience members, and I remember liking that version MUCH better.

My advice- make some cuts BEFORE you get it on it's feet, you won't regret it.

I can't STAND shows that are more than two hours. Anything that doesn't have a "decent running time" should not be allowed to open! I saw a production of HEDDA GABLER that was two hours and fifteen minutes! I thought I would DIE! TWO HOURS AND FIFTEEN MINUTES!! I was never so happy to see someone shoot themselves! It should have been broken up into two nights like that Nicholas Nickleby thing that I believe ran for more than THREE!!! Hours. Yikes, talk about butt-ache!

---

I wouldn't even see HENRY I!!!

---

Sulleen, you crack me up!

But seriously, it was REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY long in previews- people left in droves.

And then after he cut about 25 minutes, no one left. A much better show.

And no sore butts!

Perhaps you're right, but is that your feeling about all plays?

Are you morally oppossed to cuting Shakespeare as well? Are all cuts bad?

My favorite production of Hamlet (Simon Russell Beales at BAM a few years back) had quite a few cuts, and it was stunning. Should every word have been left in?

My point about this production of Shaw was that the audience was bored and restless, and the production unfocussed- but throughout previews they made some trims, the show really came to life- and the audience came to love it. It all turned out for the best. So I was trying to help the original poster by alerting him to the fact that Shaw does tend to ramble on a bit- brilliantly, yes, but a few trims may not be a bad thing to consider.

Sorry you took offense!

*shakes head & chuckles to self* "Ryerson UNIVERSITY!"

I have to agree, the director *should* have made any cuts/trims before production began. This is what I was trying to tell Virgil Blessing 2 (from whence that name?).

However, sometimes you don't get a clear sense of the production and what works until it's up on its feet, in front of an audience.

But yes, absolutely- most trims should be made in advance.

Okay Virgil!

I Never really get into these message board things (I'm not interested usually in the Menzel vs. Chenowith crap!)but this post is actually something I could help with....Here goes:

First of all, I LOVE this play. Yes it's "talky" and a little hard to follow, dealing as it does with so much philosophy, but ultimately I find it to be one of GBS's less didactic pieces. He allows "the debate" to continue long past the curtain, and Hypatia's wonderful button "Thank Goodness!", into our own lives. And it's pretty funny!

I have seen three different productions of this play and would gladly sit through a dozen more but let me give you my thoughts and impressions on those three.

The first was a college production which used a carousel motif. This I believe grew out of a design discussion which drifted into the "circular" elements of many of the characters arguments. The conservatory set resembled a carousel pavillion and each of the characters were dressed in elegant, but rather exagerated Edwardian summer clothes. I remember a good deal of the blocking subtly suggested a circular motion and that there was a practical fountain center stage. The plane crash was spectacular with Lina and Percival literally falling out the sky in parachute harness to the accompiament of a great deal of breaking glass. Pretty Cool! The acting was above par for a university production, even considering that this was one of the finer undergrad programs in the country. All in all a lovely and faithful production.

The next production was a few years ago at the Denver Center Theatre Company. I'm a little more intimately connected with this one as I was understudying Bently, so I watched it a good deal. It was presented in the round and really had no far fetched "Concept". Gunner was a bit older than he should have been, Johnny a little short, Bently a little tall, Percival way past the age of 26 that I believe Shaw gives for him. (In fact I believe that prompted a slight text change!)But these were actors who knew their way around Shaw's dense construction and witty wordplay. The evening literally flew by! Pace is very important to this piece I think and it requires actors to speak in larger "arcs" and longer sentences with very few pauses between lines. I watched the actress playing Mrs Tarlton struggle with this until she finally said "I guess I have to stop acting and just say it!" It worked!

Then I saw a very "high Concept" version last summer at the Shaw Festval. The set was literally covered in the words of the play and involved characters on swings and see-saws. Actors actually read some of the scenes from large books onstage. I am not at all opposed to "deconstructed" versions of classic plays but I think what is done should illuminate the text rather than make it incomprehensible. Shaw was pretty experimental himself (Back to Methusela, Man and Superman) and may have been amused by this had he seen it, but I thought it clouded the play and made most of it absolutely unwatchable. The salvation was the fact that the actress playing Lina had obviously chosen to just "do the play" and her scenes were quite good. But ultimately my companions, who had never seen the play at all, had no idea what the play was about. Not Good.

I hope this has been at least entertaining! Feel free to e-mail me if you want to know more. Oh! And read "The Madras House" by Granville-Barker if you get a chance. It was a rehearsal of this play that prompted Shaw to write Misalliance in the first place and the two can be thought of as companion pieces. Both deal with morality and the garment trade!

Best of Luck!