THE TESTAMENT OF MARY previews — Page 3

Kind of Off Topic but...

I can appreciate the fictionalized testament of Mary, but if a writer is going to explore the grief and pain of the Crucifixion via a fictional account of Jesus' parent, I'd really prefer it if Joseph were the narrator.

It's assumed that Joseph died sometime after Jesus was 12 years old (Joseph just completely disappears from the Bible after Jesus is found preaching in the Temple at 12 years of age). There is nothing in the Bible that specifically relates what happened to Joseph.

I appreciate Mary's fictionalized testament, but as others have pointed out, the play's accounting of Mary's emotions are kind of expected. I don't really feel like it's previously unexplored territory.

On the other hand, I'm more curious about what a writer might do with a fictionalization of Joseph's story. What if he were living at the time of the Crucifixion? Why was he absent and what were his feelings?

In the novella, Mary is speaking about the second visitor when she says:

"I told him before he departed that all my life when I have seen more than two men together I have seen foolishness and I have seen cruelty, but it is foolishness that I have noticed first. He was waiting for me to tell him something else and he sat opposite me, his patience slowly ebbing away, as I refused to return to the subject of his desires, the day our son was lost and how we found him and what was said. I cannot say the name, it will not come, something will break in me if I say the name. So we call him 'him', 'my son', 'our son', 'the one who was here', 'your friend', 'the one you are interested in'. Maybe before I die I will say the name or manage on one of those nights to whisper it but I do not think so.

All the references to "our son" and the use of "we" make me think that Mary is speaking to Joseph, but that can't be. This second man is also a writer (and is described as a faster writer than the first). Joseph did not write.

Mary also specifically refers to the disciples as "misfits" that Jesus had gathered around him. She goes on to say to this second man, "Not one of you was normal...", so I know he is also one of the 12 apostles.

Still, the short-lived possibility that she was speaking to Joseph put me in the frame of mind to consider how much more interesting this play would be (for me) if it were explored from Joseph's perspective and emotions. That would be something new.

Updated On: 4/8/13 at 01:36 AM

I would rather swim through a river of snot than see this show, but I'm still wondering why they have a live vulture on stage. Where is PETA? You would think they would be protesting outside along with the religious nutbags.

EricMontreal22, Thanks for you response about the book. I was wondering if the book offered any further insight, but it does not sound like it may.

More about the vulture from an article in the paper this weekend:

He’s a yellow-headed vulture. His name is Pinhead.

The bird appears with the actress, already in character as Jesus’ mother Mary, for 15 minutes before the show at the Walter Kerr Theatre begins.
Director Deborah Warner hatched the idea, and it’s gotten a rise out of audience members. That’s because some of them pass within arm’s reach of the bird as they take their seats.

No worries. He’s tethered. But he’s still dramatic and packed with meaning.
“The play is about death and Pinhead is part of that world,” says Shaw, an Irish actress known for her Tony-nominated performance in “Medea” and her role as Petunia Dursley in the “Harry Potter” films.

Pinhead is 3 years old, hand-raised from a chick, weighs about 2 pounds and boasts a 4 1/2-foot wingspan.

“He’s fully trained,” says Horvath. This is his Broadway debut but not his first professional acting job. His previous credits include flight tricks at stadiums in venues like Six Flags Great Adventure . “He’s our only performing bird.”

During the preshow, Shaw picks up the bird in her gloved hand and carries him around the set. She takes him offstage, where Horvath is waiting in the wings. The bird man and Pinhead then go home to Long Island.
Shaw has grown fond of her fine feathered friend. He’s a ham. “He’s my only co-star,” she says. “He’s very quiet. But the other day he shed a feather. He likes to improvise.”

You can read the entire article here:

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/music-arts/pinhead-vulture-winged-co-star-testament-mary-article-1.1306957

Updated On: 4/9/13 at 09:09 AM

Where is PETA? You would think they would be protesting outside along with the religious nutbags.

Why would they be protesting this when there's a dog in ANNIE, a cat in BREAKFAST AT TIFFANY'S, and a jackass in HANDS ON A HARDBODY?

---

I saw this last night and I think I am closer to Whizzer on this. I thought the pre-show was interesting, and liked how the audience was able to get to look at the set, and loved the vulture.

Then the show began. It is what I would call "oppressive theater." You are trapped for 90 minutes as Fiona Shaw yells at the audience, bright lights, loud sounds and other items are forced upon the audience.

Fiona Shaw is a brilliant actress. I saw her in Happy Days in Dublin and it is one I will always remember. It pained me to see her here working so hard for so little payoff. She screams, writhes, stomps her feet, get's naked, for what? Nothing.

I also felt like the delivery of many of her lines made her turn Mary into a gossipy housewife. That, and the root of her problem is that the play paints Mary so unflattering that in the end we just don't care.


In the end I felt that all of it meant nothing. It was arty for the sake of being arty. It became a parody of bad experimental theater. None of the bells and whistles really added anything. I feel like it could have been more compelling if Fiona was able to tell these stories in a straightforward way, without all of the dressing, that just made the proceedings longer and unbearable.

I can give it this one compliment. We often don't see many risks on Broadway these days. Everything is very crowd pleasing, and safe. This was anything but.

Reply to -- Is it good for the Jews?

Not good, not bad.

Most of the producers are Jews. Most of the people in the preview audience paying full freight were lesbian couples.

Updated On: 4/12/13 at 05:27 AM

Answering the query about Mary's dip into the bath on stage: I think it's supposed to symbolize a mikveh, a Jewish ritual bath.

Updated On: 4/12/13 at 05:34 AM

Saw this tonight and totally disagree with the notion that it's "oppressive" or that Shaw creates an unsympathetic Mary. I saw a woman who has been gutted by the death of her child for a cause she cannot understand or really support, a tragedy which she hasn't even been able to make sense of yet. I found her also drily funny and strangely welcoming, even with the outbursts of unreconciled rage that occasionally cause her to turn her back and stomp her feet. A very raw, and moving, performance.

It took a story that has is so ingrained in everyone's mind and flipped it around. It's the passion of the mother- the sacrifice that generally goes overlooked and unacknowledged.

---

>> "It took a story that has is so ingrained in everyone's mind and flipped it around. It's the passion of the mother- the sacrifice that generally goes overlooked and unacknowledged."

I think of this show as being similar to Maguire's "Wicked..." book. He took a well-known story and successfully re-fictionalized it.

It's one thing to do that with characters that are clearly and factually fiction. It's quite another to fictionally re-write the life and moral characteristics of the mother of Jesus - especially when there are so many who do not see Mary as a character from a fiction novel.

To do so seems basely exploitative. Perhaps controversy, tension, or the "stirring of emotions" are always signs of what "Art" is all about? ...or maybe they're not. (See what I did there?)

Updated On: 4/18/13 at 01:39 PM

I couldn't help but think how this belongs in a different venue. At the Public, LaMaMa, BAM... anywhere but the Kerr.

---

Saw it last night and got a lot out of it, the shift in perspective to Mary's maternal point of view was very interesting and well handled and often genuinely moving (that lovely resurrection dream was the highlight of the evening for me), I thought, even if it did end rather abruptly. It was interesting to me as, entirely coincidentally, I'd seen a good chunk of Scorsese's LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST the night before, and got a lot to think about in the differing treatment of often overlapping material.

I can't say I was as overwhelmed by the performance as the rest of the audience was -- people jumped to their feet and screamed BRAVA!!! the second the lights went out for the last time.

---

This is on gold club if anyone is interested.