SWITCH OFF
“There is definitely a line between what your vision is as a director and what the author’s or creator’s vision for the show is,” says Jesse T. Nee-Vogelmann ’13, who directed “6 Characters In Search of an Author” last year at the Loeb Experimental Theater. “At the very beginning of the process you have to make a decision about how you are going to handle this.” This production of the famous piece by Luigi Pirandello was conceived from the very beginning to be an adaptation of the original work that was meant to fit into the context of the Harvard undergraduate experience. “Some changes were small, ranging from things we just don’t use anymore like a prompter and a prompters hut. Instead of someone taking notes in shorthand, someone would be taking notes on a computer, and someone had to run and get their charger.” However, none of these changes affected the plot or overall message of the play. Vogelmann sought to make the play more accessible to an audience of Harvard students without sacrificing the original intent of the play. “What adaptation is about is finding out what the core of the production is and seeing what you need to do to make that come across stronger.”
This mentality aims to revive theatre as a medium. “In a lot of ways theater in America doesn’t get as much respect and support as other art forms because it is generally considered boring—with the exception of Broadway—so adaptation is really important in getting audiences to see theatre,” says Vogelman. Adaptation can be seen to some extent as a marketing tactic. For Joshua R. McTaggart ’13, a Crimson Arts editor and student director at Harvard, reinterpretation is also a way of keeping theater relevant. “If we were still doing all productions of Shakespeare in traditional Elizabethan costume, and we did opera the way it was done in the 17th and 18th centuries, I think modern audiences would switch off."
KEEPING IT FRESH
It may be fitting that controversy is returning to “Porgy.” “The fact that Sondheim spoke out so strongly shows how important it is to revisit the opera. Clearly nerves were touched, but then you know that you’re doing something really alive and touching something central to the culture, and that’s only positive,” says Oja. Updating a work, regardless of its artistic merit, has value in its ability to breathe life into the otherwise dusty projects of our collective past. Looking at a play or an opera in a new light also gives us an opportunity for cultural reevaluation. “If a classic work can’t survive a new window dressing then maybe it isn’t as bulletproof as we thought,” says Cote.
The good news: no matter what the final word on Paulus’ work is, “Porgy and Bess” will continue to provoke. It has already survived numerous changes: the opera became a musical in 1942, all-instrumental album by jazz great Miles Davis in 1958, and finally a movie a year later. “We all have our favorite books, our favorite art works, our favorite chairs in our living rooms that we don’t want to recover. We become used to certain things, objects of beauty that give us pleasure, and it can be very hard to watch them be altered. This doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be altered, but it can be difficult,” says Oja. “Porgy,” when thought of as simply a piece of artistic history, is predictable and safe, but also runs the risk of turning stale. Individual reinterpretations can sink or sail, but the process of reevaluation is vitally important for keeping culture fresh.
—Staff writer Noah S. Guiney can be reached at nguiney@college.harvard.edu.