Moliere's "The Imaginary Invalid" is
a farcical play about a hypochondriac who is so obsessed with his health and
money that he ends up neglecting his family. The story involves several
different themes and plots within one family. A new interpretation of this 17th
century play is now being performed at the Arts Club Theater; it incorporates
some new changes and modernizations in addition to the traditional
improvisation. Morris Panych has definitely succeeded in delivering a new, more
comical version of Moliere's final play.
Moreover, the dominant theme of this play is body versus mind. The play is about a
wealthy, but stingy man who believes that he is constantly sick (Argan).
However, there is an obvious doubt to whether he is really sick or if he is
just imagining his illness. Therefore, the primary theme is Argan's internal
struggle of body vs. mind. This theme is developed throughout the play into
smaller themes such as masculinity versus femininity, greed versus love, and
death versus life.
Two of the major changes from the text to the
play are Argan's degree of illness and his death. In the text, there are very
few elaborate descriptions of Dr. Purgon's treatment. However in the play by
Panych, there is no shortage of enemas and other "bathroom" related
scenes. I originally thought this change was for comical purposes, but after
some additional thought I questioned whether Argan was imagining his illness or
if he really was ill. In the text, by not having too many bathroom scenes, Argan
seems to be imagining his illness (thus, he is the imaginary invalid). In Panych's stage version, Argan shows
several symptoms of being ill; this definitely confuses the original play by
Moliere. One of the original purposes of
the play was to criticize, among other things, the medical profession in
Moliere's time. Now, if Argan really was sick, does that mean that the doctors
were correct in their analysis? No, it doesn't. I believe that Panych intended
to show that it was the doctors' treatments that made Argan ill and eventually
killed him.
Another major change from Moliere's version is
Beralde's gender and role in the play and in the family. Beralde is transformed
into Argan's sister, instead of his brother. Panych saw male versus female as a
major theme. If you look at the structure of the original play, all the people
who truly love Argan and mean him well are female, except for Beralde. In fact
out of all the different characters who take advantage of Argan, only one of
them is female- Beline (yet, even she has more traditional male characteristics
than some of the male characters in the
play). Therefore it makes more sense for Beralde to be a female in the play.
Panych also changed Beralde's role in the play. In the original version Beralde
is the "man of passionate eloquence, resourceful valet, good father,
master of revels, he is a foil for all the evils [in the play]: delusion,
credulity, tyranny, and fear"(p110). However, in Panych's version,
Toinette is the character who is responsible for putting an end to all the
evils. She is the one who is responsible for exposing Beline as evil and she is
the one who helps convince Argan that not all doctors are trustworthy by
disguising herself as one of them. Therefore, Beralde's role in the play is
almost strictly comedic- she acts as a narrator. She is the first character the
audience sees and hears; and, instead of being the stable brother, she comes
out claiming that she is the crazy sister.
Finally, the last major change is the exclusion
of Punchinello (Toinette's Lover) from the stage version. One of the major
themes in this play is love. Everyone in the play, has someone to love;
however, in Panych's production the Toinette's lover is excluded. There are two
possible reasons for this. First, Panych might have decided that there were
already too many plots and not enough time. Second, the maid is the heroine in
the play- in the end she cures Argan of his selfishness, exposes Beline's
greed, and makes it possible for Angelique to marry the man she loves- and
therefore instead of having a love, her purpose in life is to maintain order in
Argan's life. I believe that the second reason is the more probable one, out of
the two. Also, from seeing the stage version, it could be quite possible that
Panych wanted Toinette to be in love with Argan. This theory may be justified
by just looking at the scenes involving Toinette and Argan. In every scene in
which they are together, they quarrel as if they are husband and wife or
brother and sister.
There are endless interpretations of what
Panych really wanted to portray; was it about a man who imagined his illness in
his mind and then used it to get attention from those around him, or was it
about a man who was really ill and needed people to care for him? Panych doesn't
make this clear in his version; therefore I walked out of the play feeling
dumbfounded. This feeling did not overcome me after I finished the text
version. It was obvious to me that in the text, Argan was only imagining his
illness and that he was in dire need of attention. Argan has two groups of
people surrounding him; one group (the doctors, Beline, the Notary) wanted his
money and the other group (Angelique, Toinette, Beralde, Luisson) only wanted
his love.
The stage was quite magnificent at first and it
definitely contributed to the mood of the play. It had six doors on the right
side and four doors on the left side; also, the right side was pink, while the
left side was light blue. In addition to the many doors and different colours
of the set, there were several different angles contributing to what was
basically an optical illusion. The angle of the floor and walls made everything
which was downstage appear as though it was bigger than the objects upstage.
Argan and his "throne" (which was actually a big toilet) were placed
in the middle of the stage; therefore allowing all the action to revolve around
him. The set was meant to symbolize the themes of the play. Pink is a colour
usually associated with life, love, health, and femininity. Blue is associated
with sickness, death, unhappiness, and (oddly enough) masculinity. I believe
that this was a good idea in theory.
The acting was superb, creative, and hilarious.
I found that Panych selected a cast of actors who all work very well together
and who are all very talented improvisers and comedians. I remember being very
impressed by Ellie Harvie's (Angelique) improvisation skills when she went out
to speak to her "imaginary friends" (the audience). She required some
responses from a couple of audience members, who weren't being too helpful, to
explain how and where she met Cleante. The responses put her in Stanley Park,
where she saw Cleante and immediately being attracted to Cleante's fleshy left
ear. This was probably one of the most successful scenes in the play as judged
by audience response. As the play progressed some of the other actors, such as
Ted Cole (Cleante), incorporated the audience members' responses into his
dialogue. He referred to his meeting with Angelique at Stanley Park in the
scene where he and Angelique are improvising an opera in the second act. All
the actors worked very well with each other and produced many comical moments
with the use of pure body language, facial expressions, and their gorgeous
costumes. Toinette's mustache that kept falling off her face when she was
dressed up as a doctor is a good example of a comedic improvisation, especially
when she stepped on it and yelled, "Cockroach!". Another instance of
good interaction between the actors came between Toinette and Angelique; when
Angelique is describing her love for Cleante in the early part of the first act to Toinette. Instead of letting
her tone of voice be the only indicator of that she is tired of listening to
Angelique's rambling, Leslie Jones (Toinette) walks around the stage looking
for any chore to keep her occupied while having to listen to Angelique. This
provides the audience with several laughs and a better understanding of both of
the characters on stage. The actors'
voices and actions were always clear; this was one of the factors that kept the
audience involved and attentive at all times- not even once, did I not
comprehend a word or action. The acting was definitely the most valuable asset
of this play because of the interaction that occurred between the actors on
stage.
In addition to the brilliant stage and acting,
the costumes and lighting further complimented this play. The costumes
definitely had a 17th century look, but with a 20th century twist. Toinette's
dress was probably the best used throughout the play. At one point in the play,
she hides several bags by standing over them and covering them with her dress.
Beline's costume was also quite amusing and it definitely also added to her
evil character. Her dress was very different from the other actresses, which
reinforced the fact that she was the only evil female character in the play.
The lighting was also another contributor to
the successful production. The lights didn't change very often. When they did
change it was for a purpose related to the play- whenever there was a
soliloquy, all the other characters would freeze, and a spotlight would focus
in on the character who was speaking. Also, in the beginning of the play there
was a "shadow" act played out from behind the curtain. For it to
work, there was a light behind the actors (who were behind the curtain) and
their actions were reflected onto the curtain by the light.
Besides the scenes involving fake turds and the
scene where Argan shows us his buttocks, I thoroughly enjoyed my first
experience in the theater. At times it appeared to be a stand-up comedy act, as
late-comers were ridiculed by the actors and interaction with the audience
occurred throughout the play. The play was well directed, acted, and produced
and the audience response was tremendous- I was quite surprised that there
wasn't a standing ovation.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Moliere;
"The Imaginary Invalid"; translated by John Wood in 1959; Published
by Penguin Classics.
2. Knutson,
Harold. MOLIERE: An Archetypal Approach. Toronto and Buffalo: University of
Toronto Press, 1976.
No comments:
Post a Comment