Hedda+Gabler+Review


 * For the most part I thought what you wrote about was fine but I do think you left out comment on some other important matters that were a major part of this production such as, some of the physical actions of the characters, costumes and makeup, set pieces, such as the trunks and suitcases and many stacks of books, the gun and its use, the lighting, and what amounted to a set. Even the casting was fair game. I'm not quarreling with what you wrote, I'm hoping you will expand your writing to cover the larger picture of the production that is designed to influence our thinking about any production. **


 * A- **

Miller Mrosek Dr. Richmond Thea 2100H 19 October 2014 Hedda Gabler Review  Henrik Ibsen’s “Hedda Gabler” is a classic work that has gained popularity as time has passed since its introduction in 1891. There were a few elements of UGA’s presentation of “Hedda Gabler” that I was pleased with, and there were others that I was not a fan of. I found the plot enjoyable and entertaining, and overall I had a pleasant viewing experience.  I thought the acting in this play was well done for the most part, and I particularly liked watching Hedda and Judge Brack. The actor playing Hedda truly embraced being the villain, and she made me dislike her. She embodied the deceiving and mischievous nature that Ibsen intended when writing the story, and for that she deserves credit. The Judge played his role in a manner that implied he was also a bit devious and had his own ulterior motives for his actions, similar to Hedda, but with a bit more class and dignity than she expressed. Their interaction throughout the play was quite intriguing and garnered my interest throughout. The actor playing George Testman did a decent job, though I thought he was a bit too overdramatic at times and could have done better. I also thought the actress who played Aunt Julia did a good job showing her displeasure with Hedda’s behavior in a somewhat indirect way that was still plainly evident to the audience.  A problem this play had, that was for all intents and purposes unavoidable, is the lack of age disparity among characters. All of the actors are students around the same age which doesn’t allow for much age range between them. For example, George Testman’s Aunt Julia, who was supposed to have been much older than he was, was played by an actress who appeared to be roughly the same age as Testman. This is to no fault of the director or actors, but it did force the audience to use their imagination as to the true appearance of Aunt Julia and some of the other older characters in the play.  One part of the set I found rather odd was the placement of the actors behind sheets onstage. From almost any angle in the audience it was possible to see one or more actors seated in chairs behind a sheet hanging from the ceiling. There were several times in the play when actors went all the way off the stage where they could no longer be seen, which means there was backstage space available and the director purposely chose to place the actors onstage in this manner. I find the decision highly questionable. Having actors, who are not involved in the current action, visible to the audience inherently takes away from what is happening onstage. I don’t think it added anything to the performance, I think the actors should have gone all the way offstage.  This poor choice in set design was compounded when actors who were in position behind the curtains would speak and participate in the onstage action. This led to the assumption that this character was in another room or somewhere out of sight of the characters onstage. The problem with this is that it then makes it difficult for the audience to determine which characters sitting behind sheets are in a position to be involved or not. It lessened the emphasis on the action onstage, which was a big detractor for me.  The play “Hedda Gabler” was originally set in Norway in 1891. This play was very much a modern take on the play, and I’m not sure it was for the best interest of the performance. Many aspects of this production could have been done in a way that pertained more accurately to the original roots of the play, and I think this could have given it a more authentic feel than what I felt when I saw the play. One part of the play that I felt didn’t fit, although a minor detail, was the use of an iPad or iPad like device to emulate Eilert Lövborg’s manuscript. I don’t see why the director felt the need to use an iPad, a new invention of the 21st century, to imitate an object that easily could have been simulated by using an actual book. It didn’t make much sense to me at all. I was also thoroughly confused when Hedda said she was burning the manuscript while she hit it with a hammer. I thought this was very poor design, and this part of the play could have been carried out in a much more realistic manner. I understand the safety concerns when it comes to using fire onstage, but the director could have had Hedda toss the manuscript into a fireplace, or any number of other possibilities that would have been far more accurate than her hitting an iPad with a hammer.  I was even further puzzled when the broken iPad that was used to exemplify the burnt manuscript was left in a central location onstage for the next scene when George Testman returns and is looking for it. I’m not sure if the director did this on purpose in attempt to have some sort of creative effect or simply overlooked its presence onstage, but to me it was ridiculous to leave the item that was portraying the manuscript onstage right in front of a character who is looking for it, but cannot find it. It made absolutely no sense to me and I thought it had a negative effect on the scene in which Testman was talking to Hedda about the manuscript when she told him she burned it, as I was stuck staring at the manuscript that was still onstage wondering why it was still there.  All in all, I thought UGA’s production of “Hedda Gabler” was entertaining and I believe I got my money’s worth. I definitely do not agree with all of the director’s decisions, but the acting saved the play in my opinion and made me forget about the details that I did not approve of. Hedda Gabler in particular was fantastic in her role and really held the play together. Without her ability to induce displeasure and loathing from the audience, I think I would have been easily bored. I think it could have been better, but this rendition of Hedda Gabler was enjoyable to my taste.