Girl on an Altar - Kiln

[barelyathletic]

Apologies if there is a thread already. I can't see one. Surprised at the lack of interest. It's obviously not selling well though despite some great reviews. I nabbed two great tickets on a very decent offer and am seeing it Saturday afternoon. Was interested to know anybody's thoughts if they've seen it.

[juicy_but_terribly_drab]

I saw the livestreamed reading over lockdown and thought it was great, but so much of it was narration that it felt more like being read a story so I haven't felt the need to see it fully staged. I'm also less intrigued by this cast than the cast of the reading so that probably made me less enthusiastic about going again.

[barrowside]

I'm almost certain we will be getting this in Dublin in the autumn as it's an Abbey Theatre co-production. I always enjoy Marina Carr's Greek inspired plays but keep wondering if she hasn't completely mined this seam at this stage. The Abbey staged a sensational revival of her early play Portia Coughlan with Denise Gough this year so I would prefer her to go back to her own original stories.

[Dave B]

Jun 7, 2022 9:50:33 GMT juicy_but_terribly_drab said:

 but so much of it was narration that it felt more like being read a story so I haven't felt the need to see it fully staged.

Exactly my problem with it. We saw it in the third or fourth preview (a lot of empty seats) and there was so much narration - even narrating the actions and thoughts of other characters on the stage, bits of it became a slog. Clearly a divide as it had a hugely warm response from a good third of the audience.

[dlevi]

Well this one was rough going. As others have stated here: there is far too much narration and not enough dramatic action and while Mr Walmsley is very hot I often felt that he was taking off his t-shirt just to engage the audience who might otherwise be bored out of their minds. Ms Carr's plays tend to get too verbose but this one much more than others. Annabelle Comyn's direction seems to be- when in doubt: shout. Only Tom Piper's design appealed to me, but it could be utilized for any number of classic plays in need of a contemporary twist. I

[barelyathletic]

Well, I thought this was great. Marina Carr's writing is poetic and compelling and it's brilliant storytelling. Her words are beautifully delivered and clear in the narrative. The whole cast are top-notch, but particularly Eileen Walsh as Clytemnestra. She covers the range from loving mother and wife to avenging fury brilliantly. The best actress I've seen this year. David Walmsly is very believable as Agammemnon, both soldier and King, haunted by what he has done but totally in denial, and their chemistry is electric. Kate Stanley Brennan as Calissa and Nina Bowers as Cassandra also give great power to female voices in a play that tackles the patriarchy and brutality of men at war full on. It's beautifully directed and staged. A really first rate classy piece of theatre.

[samuelwhiskers]

I was always going to like this because I love ancient Greek drama but I did really enjoy this.

It’s the kind of thing you either click into the rhythms of it or you don’t. It is slow, and there’s so much symbolism and subtext in the use of clothing, shoes, feet, materials, surfaces, and other props. Probably the most stunning lighting I’ve ever seen on stage.

The script is the weak element to the exceptional acting and design. What makes the Ancient Greek plays so powerful is the sense that an uncontrollable and unstoppable evil force has been unleashed by the original act (the murder of Iphigenia) that drives the action relentlessly on and on till it consumes everything in its wake until catharsis is achieved via more death. The decision to slow the action and put the focus on the domestic psychology how Clytemnestra and Agamemnon’s relationship decays in the years after the war, removed that sense. It reminded me a bit of “Middle”. And also the opposite of “Age of Rage” which hopscotches from dead girl to dead girl with alarming alacrity.

Some changes are hard to understand.

SPOILER: Click to show

Not completely sold on Cassandra no longer being gifted with prophecy and what it added to the play. Another major plotline is over Clytemnestra’s younger daughter Leda, but in Greek drama and mythology Leda was actually the name of Clytemnestra’s mother; her other daughter was of course Electra who becomes a crucial part of the story in the future. So I was confused as to why Electra wasn’t mentioned, and why Clytemnestra was talking so much about Leda and who Leda was in this version if not C’s mother! The person I was with said there was passing reference to Electra I missed so apparently C has at least two surviving daughters in this version, but just…doesn’t give a [bad word] about her oldest daughter? In a play that’s all about mother-daughter love? Couldn’t figure out why the writer invented a new daughter character while pretty much ignoring the actual canonical children who had their own major roles to play. Of course that’s pedantic and it’s silly to even apply the word “canonical” to myth that has so many different sources and historically has been dramatised by so many different writers. Even the various Ancient Greek dramatists include different numbers of children. But I would have preferred Electra not to have been brushed over.

The second war is unnecessary and detracts from the psychological drama.

I did like that Cilissa had a whole subplot and backstory of her own when she has only one line in the original play.

Having said that, the speech about dead girls, the conspiracy amongst men to kill girls, was one of the most affecting thing I’ve seen in theatre for a long time.

[Steve]

Jun 15, 2022 21:18:41 GMT samuelwhiskers said:

I was always going to like this because I love ancient Greek drama but I did really enjoy this.

It’s the kind of thing you either click into the rhythms of it or you don’t. It is slow, and there’s so much symbolism and subtext in the use of clothing, shoes, feet, materials, surfaces, and other props. Probably the most stunning lighting I’ve ever seen on stage.

The script is the weak element to the exceptional acting and design. What makes the Ancient Greek plays so powerful is the sense that an uncontrollable and unstoppable evil force has been unleashed by the original act (the murder of Iphigenia) that drives the action relentlessly on and on till it consumes everything in its wake until catharsis is achieved via more death. The decision to slow the action and put the focus on the domestic psychology how Clytemnestra and Agamemnon’s relationship decays in the years after the war, removed that sense. It reminded me a bit of “Middle”. And also the opposite of “Age of Rage” which hopscotches from dead girl to dead girl with alarming alacrity.

Another major plotline is over Clytemnestra’s younger daughter Leda, but in Greek drama and mythology Leda was actually the name of Clytemnestra’s mother; her other daughter was of course Electra who becomes a crucial part of the story in the future. So I was confused as to why Electra wasn’t mentioned, and why Clytemnestra was talking so much about Leda and who Leda was in this version if not C’s mother! The person I was with said there was passing reference to Electra I missed so apparently C has at least two surviving daughters in this version, but just…doesn’t give a [bad word] about her oldest daughter? In a play that’s all about mother-daughter love? Couldn’t figure out why the writer invented a new daughter character while pretty much ignoring the actual canonical children who had their own major roles to play.

I saw the matinee, and agree that this is a very powerful version of the myth.

Spoilers follow, as I attempt to answer Samuel's question. . .

I think the reason for the invention of Leda, Clytemnestra's daughter by Aegisthus, is precisely that she is NOT a daughter by Agamemnon. Her presence is to bring out Agamemnon's essential "toxic masculinity," which I think is the actual theme of this version of the myth.

So my suggestion is that Electra, who is mentioned along with Orestes, is claimed by Agamemnon as his "property," and taken from their mother. Leda, by contrast, is not his property, being Aegisthus' child, a cuckoo in his nest. His murder of Leda is depicted as utterly callous and ruthless, disposing of a threat to his line, and dramatically, this gives the lie to any claim to "morality" by Agamemnon.

Agamemnon had argued that he HAD to kill Iphegenia, because the alternative would have been worse (ie the murder of his whole family by the equally toxic Achilles, and the other soldiers). This argument has weight, and in the unaltered myth, adds a tragic dimension to Agamemnon's actions, and indeed, the whole circle of death, that goes from Iphegenia to Agamemnon to Clytemnestra to Orestes, where everyone tragically falls like dominoes, part of the Atreus curse.

So, by creating "Leda," someone Agamemnon has no "moral" reason to kill, Carr creates a plot point that eviscerates any excuses Agamemnon might have. Instead, he is depicted as a proprietary animal, and it is this callousness that is evident in his ultimate dumping of the romantic myth that he ever loved Clytemnestra, or The Prophetess, or indeed, anyone at all, other than himself, and his grandiose vision of himself as a ruthless and great conqueror and fighter.

My thoughts on that.

[Steve]

Anyhow, I loved this version of the Agamemnon-Clytemnestra story.

Some spoilers follow. . .

Thoughts of Angus Wright's calm political Agamemnon, in Orestaia at the Almeida, for example, were swept away by David Walmsley's magnificently masculine, active and utterly callous Agamemnon, who very much felt like a character who leapt out of the ultraviolent action-packed chest-puffing sword-hacking world of Zack Snyder's movie, "300." Indeed, Walmsley is entirely reminiscent of Gerard Butler's Leonidas, from that movie, but without the moral backbone. Though Walmsley's Agamemnon disguises his soullessness with romantic talk and political excuses, ultimately he is a Putinesque figure: like Peter the Great, he wants what he wants, and is willing to take it, even if that means hacking up his own daughter, in whose death Walmsley brilliantly suggests he takes a perverse pride and pleasure, even as he talks a moral game and tries to put the blame on others for his vaingloriousness.

For these reasons, the play had massive contemporary resonance for me.

Eileen Walsh was equally brilliant as Clytemnestra, her indignant love for her daughter haunting Walmsley's moral mask of a disguise like an inevitable knife through the heart. It is notable that in this version, she, not Aegisthus, wields the axe!

Sometimes I hate monologues and voiceover, and sometimes I love it. I tend to hate it when it's just an excuse for not dramatising things, a failure to show not tell. But that isn't how I experienced the monologues in this play. I found them to be the piercing insights into characters' motivations that you otherwise would be denied, revealing the hidden truths behind the lies we tell to justify acts of extreme violence.

I found this play very effective.

4 and a half stars from me.

PS: Incidentally, I see David Walmsley has a small role in the Apple TV thriller as a villain going up against Gary Oldman's "Slow Horses" spy agency. I'd really like to see that on regular TV, or Sky, if and when it finishes its first run on Apple TV. Speaking as an Android user! 😂

[theoracle]

Jun 12, 2022 8:33:46 GMT dlevi said:

Well this one was rough going. As others have stated here: there is far too much narration and not enough dramatic action and while Mr Walmsley is very hot I often felt that he was taking off his t-shirt just to engage the audience who might otherwise be bored out of their minds. Ms Carr's plays tend to get too verbose but this one much more than others. Annabelle Comyn's direction seems to be- when in doubt: shout. Only Tom Piper's design appealed to me, but it could be utilized for any number of classic plays in need of a contemporary twist. I

Personally would've loved it if he had his shirt off the whole time but yes, I think this was a great effort from Marina Carr although the narrative element isn't going to be for everyone. I actually thought the set could've been more interesting but was still effective overall. Eileen Walsh gives a powerhouse performance throughout this and the last scene of Act 1 sent us out with chills that didn't go away until Act 2 started.