Oh what a rogue and peasant slave ... am I?

It seems only fitting that my first attempt at blogging should start with some "words, words, words" about the Oregon Shakespeare Festival in Ashland, where I am currently on a very delayed summer vacation.

Some perspective: I first attended OSF in 1975 as an impressionable teenager, fresh off a month-long camping trip in the Pacific Northwest and eager to meet up with my family again, albeit in a small town in Southern Oregon that I had never heard of before but which apparently had an annual theater fest of some kind. My father had been an expert witness in a trial in nearby Medford earlier that year and had been urged by his hosts that he just had to bring his family up to experience the wonder of Shakespeare in Ashland. It should be noted that my dad, a noted ophthalmologist, was an expert witness in exactly ONE trial during his career, and it was here. The Fates definitely wanted my family to make this journey.

As a young man, I was aware of Shakespeare through school - we had read Julius Caesar and Measure for Measure. And I had memorably fallen asleep on the couch during a PBS broadcast of Laurence Olivier's Richard III, although it was probably the Contac allergy pill I had taken that afternoon that was the culprit. (Those insidious tiny time pills, you know!) What I was expecting, good or ill, I don't recall. That weekend we saw three plays: Henry VI, Part One; Charley's Aunt; and Long Day's Journey Into Night. All I can say is, I was hooked. A heavy drama with one of the most talented casts I have ever seen (including William Hurt and Jean Smart, among others), a lighthearted farce, and a history play full of spectacle under the stars.

My parents brought us back every summer after that, and when my sister moved back east and my parents' attendance became less frequent, I struck out on my own. Now here I am 35 years later - having never missing a season since 1975 - sitting at my laptop striving to assess this afternoon's performance of Hamlet.

I feel quite at home!

I have seen several iterations of Hamlet here - some more successful than others - and my first comment would be that of all those productions this has to be the most creative of the lot. The pacing was excellent and the designers of the sets, lighting, costuming, and sound outdid themselves. That being said, I do have quibbles about certain directoral and acting choices.

First, an overview: This production was staged indoors at the Angus Bowmer Theater. It was directed by Bill Rauch, the festival's new artistic director, and was built around a very accomplished OSF actor named Dan Donohue. It also featured a hearing-impaired actor named Howie Seago in the role of the Ghost of Hamlet's Father who had a significant impact on the play's action by his presence in the cast. (More on that later.)

It was also heavily influenced by the festival's ongoing commitment to developing young audiences by setting Shakespeare's plays in contemporary surrounds and utilizing constructs that resonate with today's youth. OSF's attempts in these areas have been mixed in the past. A recent production of Romeo & Juliet with a similar approach didn't suit my tastes at all. The approach to the language seemed casual and the lead characters seemed unready for taking on such nuanced roles, but when I looked around and saw a house full of young people thrilled beyond measure I reassessed my opinion. I was in my mid-40s and for the past few years I had been among the youngest in the audience. I said to myself that this evening was worth it if it helped to create the audiences of tomorrow and preserve the legacy I have come to treasure.

Today's production incorporated a contemporary setting, modern dress, hip-hop music, electronic surveillance, and the use of American Sign Language. The stage was set for a similar reaction to R&J. However, I have to say it was for the most part quite successful. The key was Donohue, who I have never seen give a bad performance. (His Mark Antony in Julius Casear a few years back was revelatory.) The direction was crisp and the show's vision was clear and compelling. Even the best Hamlets I have seen had me looking at my watch a few times; not in this case. Notable performances included Donohue as the melancholy Dane, Richard Elmore as Polonius, Greta Oglesby as Gertrude, Armando Duran as Horatio, Bill Geisslinger as the Gravedigger, and Vilma Silva and Jeany Park as Rosencrantz and Guldenstern, respectively.

I didn't care as much for Jeffrey King's interpretation of Claudius, but then it's an unlikable character ... and the hardest role in the show to bring forward believably into the modern world. I've always liked King in contemporary plays (especially Bus Stop a few years back), so my reaction is most likely just one of personal preference. More problematic was Susannah Flood's Ophelia, who started off quite well in the early scenes with Elmore and David DeSantos' Laertes but whose mad scene seemed to defeat her somewhat. Although she had a marvelous dreamlike physicality, she seemed out of her element dramatically. They played her very young, which worked initially, but when it came time for some gravitas it simply wasn't there.

It is hard to say this but the main drawback to the show was the aforementioned Mr. Seago, a noted deaf actor. He has been here two seasons now and the attempt to recognize hearing-impaired actors has been a laudable experiment ... but I must say that for me it just isn't working. The scene between Hamlet and his spectral father normally has great visual and aural impact ... a ghost story revealed by fleeting glimpses of a wandering spirit and hushed, raspy sounds from beyond the pale. It charges the early action of the play and sets our protagonist on a perilous path. It should leave you drained. Though Donohue gave it his all, expertly signing his fellow actor's lines and communicating the thoughts, fears and entreaties of two distinct characters, the end result is still a stretch of dead silence and a very real-looking, far-from-ghostly performer. To achieve the task related above, it was necessary to draw the Ghost from his perch high above in the castle's battlements onto the stage level next to Hamlet, where he seemed all too corporeal. And when he was directed to utter some lines verbally, their obscured cadences proved to be distracting and took me out of the play. Also, later on during Act II an entire exchange of lines between father and son appeared to be signed without translation of any kind for the audience to hear. A choice, yes ... but an effective one?

It must be said, however, that the sign-language conceit did open the door for a very well-executed final scene. Hamlet lies dying, poisoned by his uncle's treachery, and utters his final speech, ending with: "The rest is ..." and he signs but does not speak the final word, "silence." Then his father's ghost appears and wordlessly cradles his dead son's body in his arms as Hamlet's friend Horatio cowers in the shadows and the spotlight surrounding the pair tightens to a blackout. It sent chills down my spine.

So, as is often true in theater, it's a double-edged sword. The jury is still out on this subject.

Other notables: Speaking of swords, there was a marvelous choice made regarding the usual omnipresence of pointy objects necessary for the killing of various characters in a period production. Modern characters don't carry daggers anymore. To get past this roadblock, Rauch inserted a large pair of household scissors early in the play that Hamlet took a fancy to and frequently utilised to illustrate his feigned madness by "customizing" his clothing. Later on they became the instrument by which Hamlet stabbed poor Polonius. The best surprise use of a pair of scissors since Alfred Hitchcock's "Dial M for Murder."

Favorite moments:

* Bill Geisslinger has been with the company on and off for almost as many years as I have been coming here and in both large and small roles he is always a delight. His turn as the Gravedigger in Act II was quite wonderful. He let fly with a bluesy rendition of the short work song Shakespeare wrote for him to accompany his grave task and summed up his character in a perfect and joyful moment.

* Richard Elmore is my favorite actor at OSF, bar none, and his Polonius is flawless. He is mesmerizing to watch. The lights go up, he makes his entrance, and then he starts playing with the text - as well as pauses, his greatest weapon - until the audience is totally in the palm of his hand. He can make you weep, as evidenced in last season's unforgettable Equivocation, or laugh with abandon, witnessed today in his senile yet sweet ditherings as Polonius. (I will have to do a blog entry on his body of work at some future date.)

* As mentioned above, Dan Donohue is the glue that holds this concept together. He is a very fluid and versatile actor who can play tragedy and comedy with equal expertise. He has the physicality, he has the gravitas, and he has a way of speaking that draws your attention without seeming mannered. You can hear every word he speaks and see every emotion playing across his face ... when he wants you to see it. His soliloquies were performed very naturally, as interior monologues unheard by those around him. There were no long solo speeches by Hamlet in an empty chamber. These were words in his head alone, and they felt that way ... not like your father's Shakespeare monologues! An effortless and moving performance.

* And finally, a word on hip-hop: The Player King and his compatriots did an absolutely amazing job rapping to Shakespeare's poetry. Over the years I have seen many attempts to adapt the Bard's songs to other musical genres and it struck me after the play at a post-show discussion with Christopher Livingston, who played one of the rappers as well as Osric, that hip-hop is decidedly suited for Shakespeare. The words seemed to flow naturally and quite beautifully to this musical form. The harmonies were rich and the energy was high. The amplification was a bit jarring at first but I quickly got used to it. And whether a newcomer to the play could glean the import of the players' recreation of the murder of Hamlet's father by Claudius - which was set up in the troublesome first scene between the Ghost and Hamlet - is debatable. But overall it worked for me.

So all in all a very interesting and entertaining production with a few minor flaws. I've seen some productions of this work that failed top to bottom. This was a far cry from that and a worthy opening salvo for my first play of the 2010 season.