The witch hunt is on . . .

I just caught a matinee performance of The Crucible at New Stage Theatre. If you're not familiar with this Arthur Miller masterpiece, it is set in the late 1600's during the Salem witch trials. The script explores the mass hysteria and mob mentality that ruled the small community of Salem, Massachusetts, when several young girls started accusing local citizens of witchcraft.

I thought this was a great production. First, the set was really well done - spare (almost Puritan! Ha!) with a beautiful drop of backlit woods. The mere suggestion of walls and ceiling, rugged furnishings, and spot-on costumes provided all the environment that the audience needed to see the world of old Salem. Also, I love the pre-show and intermission music. Airy a capella voices, almost angelic. Wow.

Rus Blackwell as John Proctor was a revelation. He was fabulous. Fabulous. I believed every word he said, and he turned in such a layered performance that probably half of the women in the audience want to have his babies now. I just can't say enough how impressed I was with him in this production. It's a good thing, too, because Proctor carries the majority of the production's weight. You cannot have a good production of The Crucible without a good Proctor.

Other standouts for me: Turner Crumbley as Reverend Hale was spot on. His character also does a lot of heavy lifting in the script, and Crumbley's rendition of Hale as one of the lone voices of reason in Salem resonated. Rachel Dunigan as Tituba was strong as well, and Joseph Frost as Governor Danforth and Gary Gusick as Judge Hathorne were both imminently hatable. Lesley Sheblak, who played Mercy Lewis, should have been given a bigger part. She did so much with the lines she'd had that I wished I could have seen more of her during this production. Lastly, Larry Wells was wonderfully slimy as Reverend Parris. (Wells does a wonderful job playing slimy guys. I'm not sure why; he's a perfectly nice guy. I'd love to see him play something really off-type for him to see what he'd do with it.)

I thought a couple of layers were missing, though. First of all, I didn't feel that we saw Elizabeth Proctor crack. I mean, I know that she's the long-suffering wife, I know she's cold and repressed. And I went there with her in the early scenes and ate it up. But in the scene at the end, right before Proctor is to be hanged, I really wanted that facade to crack. I wanted her to break down, to realize that her husband would be dead within the hour and to accept some of the blame for his infidelity. To try to apologize and make up for the past several months of beating him up. To tell him that she loved him, and mean it. To understand that she was carrying a child that would never know its father. That last scene is Elizabeth's confession scene, but it felt as though she still had a wall around her heart. Maybe I'm a sucker for over-acting, but I kept waiting for big, heaving sobs that never came. (I mean, Danforth is right. If you don't cry at this point, when the hell do you cry? The woman really is made of stone, for God's sake. No wonder Proctor cheated on her.)

Also, the relationship between Proctor and Abigail was not the way I'd have played it. In my head, when I read The Crucible, I thought a long time about the relationship between Proctor and Abigail. I thought that they were both sort-of round pegs in square holes. The repression and hypocrisy of their society chafes at both of them. They are both individualists. In addition, Abigail is something of a wild creature. She is passionate, impulsive, charismatic. She is also capable of almost anything (i.e. you never know what she will do next). And I think these qualities attract Proctor to her like a magnet to polished steel. I think there needs to be immense physical attraction between Abigail and Proctor, even months after their affair has ended. You have to believe that Proctor found Abigail so intense and desired her so much that he would risk everything - his good name, his marriage - to have her. And he still desires her, somewhere in his heart. And the same with her. But they didn't play the sex in this production. Maybe I'm base, but I would have played it to the hilt. There is a scene where Abigail and Proctor meet in the woods, after she has accused his wife. It's late, and she shows up in her dressing gown. There's a point when she even lifts her gown to show him the marks on her leg, left by vengeful "spirits." (Women didn't go around hitching up their dressing gowns in the late 1600s. There is more than just showing bruises going on here.) I think even at this point, the two still feel strong physical desire for one another. Proctor is fighting it, but Abigail wants him to give in to it. It's destructive, and it's just plain wrong, but I think it has to still be there.

I can totally understand why they chose to produce this show now; it's very topical. Aside from the Halloween tie-in, the social issues of the play are particularly pertinent right now as well. (One line, spoken by Governor Danforth, smacked of President Bush's "you're either with us or with the terrorists" mantra.) It's perfect synergy. After all, stripping people of their rights is pretty spooky, no? Hopefully, this show will encourage a little debate in Jackson. I know we talked about it after we left.

The show runs through October 29, and I highly recommend it. Tickets are $22 and can be had by calling the box office at 601-948-3533.

Comments