Soul of 'Hamlet' gets lost in ambitious interpretation by Rude Mechanicals

By Sarah Rubin

Daily Arts Writer

Arguably Shakespeare's greatest play, Hamlet has phenomenal potential to be developed in all aspects. If done right, it can captivate an audience. Arguably Shakespeare's hardest play, Hamlet has phenomenal potential for disaster. If done wrong, it can be boring and tedious.

Hamlet has more lines than any other Shakespearian character. Complex and fascinating, he can be dramatically interpreted as a madman, a genius, a lover, a devoted son, a justice-seeker or a schmuck.

Last weekend, The Rude Mechanicals chose to divide him into two people, personifying both major personalities that he adopts. Director Heidi J. Powers explained, "With our new cutting of Hamlet, we explore the complexity of the title character. By splicing Hamlet into two voices, we place a focus on his conflicting desires: To act or not to act."

This idea is confusing, yet feasible. Hamlet B, played by Molly Froenfelter, and Hamlet Y, played by Patrick Morgan, work together to display the enigma that is the "Prince of Denmark." Physical interaction was a base component of their strategy; they were intimately touching most of the time. Hamlet B was contemplative, and Hamlet Y was compulsive.

This twist aids the performance's audience-grabbing capacity. However, several other major experimental interpretations counteract the double-Hamlet effect. Polonius, humorously portrayed by Lisa Ehrlich, was a woman. This adds a completely new dimension to the play. Although the change makes sense in some ways, it hinders play coherence in others. In the text, a lack of maternal influence and estrangement from Gertrude propel Ophelia's madness. Without these proponents, Ophelia is left with Hamlet's capriciousness as her only source of disturbance. It's a weak argument for insanity.

Horatio is a woman. Rosencrantz is a woman. The grave-digger is a woman. Many females could have been either effective or malignant. The failure here was that they were neither one.

Lines were cut to make Hamlet graspable. The characters, as they were presented, lacked sufficient development, though. Something else needed to be done to enhance their unique qualities and situations.

Transitions between scenes relied completely on the lighting, which incidentally was fantastic, appropriate, lovely. Costumes were simple black. Music was in poor taste and random. The set consisted of Neo-classical marble stairs and columns. Blocking was routine and predictable.

Hamlet can completely stand upon the power of its dialogue if a director does it justice. This director's take required all of the missing facets, and they were not to be found.

There were flashes of brilliance. It should be made known that Ophelia was magnificent. Byronie Maros was effective and sharp, maximizing Ophelia's fragility. The presentation was poignant and shining, in contrast to less-commanding attempts. Laertes (Ian Burkow) was also well-acted.

Rosencrantz (Sara Grady) and Guildenstern (Brian Lobe) were cute. Hamlet, Sr.'s ghost was acted by various cast members, reaching and moaning under transparent chiffon - what a good idea; it fit.

Audiences respond to Hamlet's ability to evoke compassion. This feat is accomplished because viewers can relate to the frustration caused by character isolation. The characters' inability to understand each other is pathetic and exasperating and great.

But to kill Shakespeare and then to fail to resurrect him is blatant. It's like taking apart a Rubix cube and then not being able to put it back together. It is obvious that this play's poor direction was its tragic flaw. However, it is good to keep in mind that the cast and crew members were students attempting to create art. Ralph Waldo Emerson said, "Every artist was first an amateur." And, pity, 'tis true, 'tis true.

Courtesy of UAC

The Rude Mechanicals performance of "Hamlet" was directed by Heidi J. Powers.