Hughie, directed by Doug Hughes. Shakespeare Theatre,
Washington, DC, January 31 - March 17, 2013.
Today many directors approach a classic play with the
idea that they have to do something to it to make
it interesting. So we see productions in which a
director has superimposed a concept on a play, often
completely distorting the playwright’s vision. So it is
very pleasing, even remarkable, to see a production for
which the director chose to explore the play itself
deeply and present a true and moving picture of the
playwright’s work. Doug Hughes directed Hughie in
Washington and working with actors Richard Schiff and
Randall Newsome created a wonderful, deeply satisfying
evening.
Why was this short play chosen as the first production
of the new year at the Shakespeare Theatre? Artistic
Director Michael Kahn has been a true O’Neill enthusiast
for many years and has directed Mourning Becomes
Electra and other O’Neill plays, probably more than
any other American director. Last year at the
Shakespeare Theatre he directed a thrilling production
of Strange Interlude. He feels that O’Neill is
appropriate for the Shakespeare Theatre, saying to me
“Except for Shakespeare, who’s richer than O’Neill?”
Another question about the choice of the play relates to
its length. Some scholars and critics have pretty much
dismissed the play as too short to be of real interest.
When it was last presented in New York, critics
commented on how much the play cost a minute to see—in
other words are you getting your money’s worth? Kahn
stated in the Shakespeare Theatre magazine Asides
that in O’Neill the detail is what is important. “The
playwright conveys one layer of the story, the private
worlds of the Night Clerk and Erie Smith solely through
stage directions. Director Doug Hughes has taken on the
formidable task of making these secret worlds just as
palpable as the stage the two men share.” Approaching
the play in this way the director was able to develop
this (in Kahn’s phrase) “deceptively simple play” with
so much meaning and breadth that one could understand
why Jason Robards found it of interest to perform it so
many times over a period of thirty years and audiences
feel it is a fulfilling evening.
Hughes has directed numerous productions over the years
and has won Tony Awards, Outer Critics, Drama Desk and
others. In 2005 he received an Obie Award for Sustained
Excellence. He is no stranger to O’Neill, having
directed A Touch of the Poet at the Roundabout
Theatre in Manhattan. He also has fond memories of his
father as Harry Hope in The Iceman Cometh.
Richard Schiff just performed in Manhattan in
Glengarry Glen Ross with Al Pacino. He is both
well-known and popular in the political city of
Washington because of his performances in West Wing
for which he won an Emmy Award. He was drawn to this
role because of a continuing fascination with O’Neill
and his interest in exploring the solitude of Erie, “the
way we feel when we end up in this place and just want
to connect.”
Neil Patel designed a set which was very effective in
its simplicity and allowed some interesting movement for
Schiff. The original American production was criticized
by some reviewers as too big and open for the size of
the cast and the action. A later production was
criticized because it seemed too nice—comfortable and
inviting sofas contradicting O’Neill’s concept of a
third rate hotel no longer trying hard for any effect.
Patel’s set was divided into three sections. In the
middle of the stage was the desk with the Night Clerk
standing behind it and on either side were poorly
lighted spaces, one being the entrance from the street
and the other the way to the elevator and the lonely
room Erie wants to avoid. When Erie made his entrance he
came slowly into the entrance, stopped, sank down on a
hard straight back chair and took a drink from a bottle
in his pocket. Later, when he seemed to give up on the
new clerk and start to go to that lonely room, he walked
part way into the space stage left, a beaten figure
bereft of hope. In between he moved that hard chair
downstage and sat on it a while, and later briefly
perched on stools spaced apart stage left.
Hughes decided to take a cue from O’Neill who wrote that
he would leave the problem of communicating the thoughts
of the Night Clerk to the audience to future directors
with new techniques with film and sound. Hughes had
actor Reg Rogers record most, but not all, of the stage
directions which were then heard as the play progressed.
He also utilized two large screens in the side spaces
and a number of smaller screens in the central section
for projections of faces and other aspects which might
reflect Erie’s memories, dreams, and hopes. As always
with O’Neill the use of sound is very important. The
noise of the garbage cans being thrown leading the Night
Clerk to think “A job I’d like. I’d bang those cans
louder than they do. I’d wake up the whole damn city.”
The policeman marking his rounds, sirens, the passage of
the elevated trains and other noises were indications to
him of how late it was and how much longer he had to
work.
As is also usual in O’Neill there is comedy (although
many people either ignore it or deny its existence), and
Hughes is well aware of the significance of construction
in the speeches, the importance of a pause, and other
elements which cause laughter from the audience. A
particularly big laugh came about half an hour into the
play during which time Erie had spoken repeatedly about
his gambling. In a perfect deadpan Randall Newsome,
indicating that he had been lost in his own thoughts,
asked, “I beg your pardon, Mr.—Erie—but did I understand
you to say you are a gambler by profession?” If a
director is not expecting and appreciating the comedy in
this and other O’Neill plays, quite a lot is lost. As
Michael Kahn said in an interview with me, “I think you
should find as much comedy in O’Neill as you can!
(Laughing) He was an Irishman after all. There is
comedy. He’s a great playwright, after all, so he knew
what to do.”
Erie is such a demanding role. Schiff provided the
variety and intensity needed to grip the audience. His
movements and gestures seemed exactly right, all very
appropriate for a man desperately trying to communicate.
Hughes and he talked about the play in detail before
beginning rehearsals, and the director said that in the
few days after the preview performances they would
continue to make adjustments. Indeed, he said even at
the end of the run he could imagine continuing working
on it if he were going to be in the city.
The Sunday before the February 9 opening, the theatre
presented as part of their “Creative Conversations” a
discussion of the play with Doug Hughes and myself,
moderated by Literary Associate Drew Lichtenberg.
Hughes’ comments revealed his extensive knowledge of
O’Neill, literature in general, and theatre history. He
said he would like to direct some of the less frequently
produced plays by O’Neill such as The Great God Brown.
That is an exciting prospect as this Hughie was
truly memorable.
Hughes appropriately spoke of the anonymity of Erie, and
Kahn referred to the “two nobodies” in the play.
O’Neill, as interpreted by this director and cast,
turned them into unforgettable figures. Michael Kahn
wrote in Asides, “As in all of his plays, O’Neill
makes us question how our own lives are shaped by the
people we meet.”
Sources for quotes:
Asides. Shakespeare Theatre Company. 2012-2013
Season, Issue 3.
Shafer, Yvonne. “Michael Kahn,” Performing O’Neill:
Conversations with Actors and Directors. New York,
St. Martin’s Press, 2000.