The
further one gets from the debut of a play which has an agit-prop
message, the
further one gets from the sensibility of the era in which it was
created. So
when watching the first Broadway revival of Robert BoltÕs A Man for All Seasons since its debut in 1963 (the second NYC
revival if you count a
1987 one off-Broadway
and likewise produced by the Roundabout
Theatre) it can be helpful to bear in mind that its heroÕs unconflicted
(albeit
not, to him, unchallenging) stoicism was very much a portrait for its
time.
The
play, set in England between 1529 and 1535 is about Sir Thomas More, then a Lord Chancellor, and a fervent
Catholic,
despite King Henry VIIIÕs having separated from Rome by instituting
Òthe church
of England,Ó a move largely believedÑand as dramatized hereÑto
legitimize HenryÕs divorce from Anne, with whom he was unable to father
the
male heir he desired. To cite a Wikipedia entry: ÒIn 1530 More refused
to sign
a letter by the leading English churchmen and aristocrats asking the
Pope to
annul Henry's marriage to Catherine. In 1531 he attempted to resign
after being
forced to take an oath declaring the king the Supreme Head of the
English
Church Ôas far as the law of Christ allows.Õ In 1532 he asked the king
again to
relieve him of his office, claiming that he was ill and suffering from
sharp
chest pains. This time Henry granted his request.
ÒThe
last straw for Henry came in 1533, when More refused to attend the
coronation
of Anne Boleyn as the Queen of England. Technically, this was not an
act of
treason as More had written to Henry acknowledging Anne's queenship and
expressing his desire for his happinessÑbut his friendship with the old
queen, Catherine of Aragon, still prevented him from attending Anne's
triumph.
His refusal to attend Anne Boleyn's coronation was widely interpreted
as a snub
against Anne.Ó
The
drama centers on MoreÕs (Frank Langella) refusal to sign the Act of
Succession, which would have gone
counter to his belief that any but the holy church in Rome could
legislate in
matters of religion. MoreÕs arrangement with the king (Patrick Page) (again as dramatized by Bolt) is
uneasy but
clear: so long as he keeps the reasons behind his refusal to be a
matter of
private conscience, never articulated aloud to anyone (this will
include his
family, so that they can never bear false witness under oath), he will
not be
charged with treason. But via the crafty advisor Thomas Cromwell (Zach Grenier), more and more intricate legal traps
are brought to bear, testing
not only MoreÕs steadfast mettle, but that of his family, wife Alice (Maryann
Plunkett) and daughter
Margaret (Hannah
Cabell). All leading to
the
execution from which More had felt
certain the law would protect him. Alas, the one thing he refused to
reckon
with was the law being bent, perverted and ultimately rendered
meaningless by
those in power.
As
with any resonant historical drama, the historical figures are
presented by the
author selectively and at that even selected and composited from a much larger roster of characters
(i.e. we
donÕt meet MoreÕs entire family, nor hear about any members not
onstage, nor
learn that Alice is his second wife
and Margaret a daughter from his first marriage). So though in fact More was a
much more complex and
controversial person than the fellow of determined nobility presented
here, it
is as a vessel for the meaning of nobility that More is here used.
Though
Bolt was a British dramatist, he had his eye on abuses of justice in
world
politics, and itÕs not surprising that the play took hold in the US: A
Man
for All Seasons hit
Broadway a
scant few years after Senator Joe McCarthy and the House Un-American
Activities
Committee were putting not-dissimilar pressures to bear on witnesses to
inform
on innocent friends, colleagues and family in a witch hunt for covert
Communists. A drama about a man who will not yield while all around him
fold to
expedience was exactly what the era wanted and needed.
So
while critics of this new production are not precisely wrong to say
that, over
the haul of a play nearly three-hours long, Thomas More is a
dramatically
static character who would be more interesting if he soul-searched and
vacillatedÑthey also miss a primary point: BoltÕs More is no more a
figure of 2008 than he is of the 1530s. HeÕs a figure of the early
1960s. And
were he anything else, A Man for All Seasons would tell a different story of another
generation
and indeed be a different play; for while issues and themes can be timeless, and art in any of its
forms
enduring, a dramatic work is always a mirror of its time. Often a parochial mirror, at times even
a
distorting mirror, commonly an unintentional mirrorÉbut a mirror
nonetheless,
because a writer can only write in the present. ThereÕs little doubt
that, with
the prevarications of the Republican party, both in office and on the
campaign
trail, and possibly the snarkiest, most disturbing Presidential race in
history, the production team and director Doug Hughes think A Man for All Seasons has contemporary resonanceÑbut itÕs a mistake for anyone to think
that
it could ever be an exact fit to our time. Hence a certain stylistic
outdatedness.
NowÉdoes
that make Thomas More any easier to take in 2008? LetÕs just say he has
a
fighting chance in the persona of Frank Langella, one of the very few
American
stage actors of note capable of real, classic grandeur in a manner most
often
associated with scions of British theatre. If he cannot give us a
doubting
More, he at least gives us one who must react to watching his lifeline
to the
law degenerate from a steel cable to a tenuous thread.
The transitions he goes through may be
those of degree, but Mr. LangellaÕs wattage is so high that even small
adjustments are writ large.
If
the rest of the cast isnÕt quite at Mr. LangellaÕs level of charisma
(and how
could one expect them to be), most hold their own, most distinctively
Zach
Grenier with his unwaveringly villainous Cromwell to provide a balance;
Maryann
Plunkett, whose admiring exasperation with More speaks (in the best
sense) for
that of the audience; and Patrick Page as King Henry, whose mercurial
volatility expertly captures the pathology of intimidating power. (And
I must
add, Hannah Cabell in the less showy role of MoreÕs daughter struck me
as a
very promising newcomer. I believe weÕll see more of her in more
prominent
parts.)
Even
with the elimination of The Common Man, a Brechtian character who
commented on
the action and played small roles in the original version of the script
(a
character likewise eliminated in the film), BoltÕs play is far too
long, by
todayÕs standards, considering that, save for the introduction that
sets the
players in motion, each scene is a variation of the same battle. Even
the
epic-style over-writing is indicative of the late 50s, early 60s. But
still,
there is beauty of language, iconic characterization and a moral that
is, in
the end, if not as touching as it once was, at least a little
inspiringÑcajoling us to
be better people.
If
not everything is
for all
seasons, the strength of that much seems like enough to make allowances
forÑand even embraceÑthe restÉ
Go to David
Spencer's bio
Return to Home Page