An Enemy of the People

We were allowed into the auditorium just before curtain where we were greeted by an open set on which, behind a partial screen, some characters were eating dinner.

The set was surrounded on three sides by some outline drawings in black and white of the town in which the play is set. These flats were very impressive, and gave a sense of the placement of the household within the town. The house itself was represented by several free-standing flats on wheels, which were painted to represent walls, windows and doors. The downstage area represented the lounge, and the upstage area was the dining room. The freestanding flats were turned and moved at each change of scene by the 'towns people'. This had obviously been choreographed and was well rehearsed.  One or two of these scene changes were over-long.  There were two 'doors'; one upstage right to the street, and one upstage left to the study. These doors looked very realistic, yet they were not used, and characters simply walked around them.  This may have worked better if the doors had not looked more abstract or not quite so realistic. As already mentioned, there were actors eating at the dining table before the start of the play, and this continued throughout the first scene. I found this to be a little distracting at times as it tended to pull focus from the action in the downstage area, and I'm not sure that it added anything to this opening scene. 

Scene 1 introduced us to the main characters and their relationships. A comfortable family life was portrayed, but the sense that this was about to fall apart was ever present. The action in this piece really picks up in Scene 2, with a long discussion and argument between the two brothers. Here, and throughout the play, it seemed that the actors had been encouraged to overlap their lines, which made the dialogue seem very natural. The drawback of this was that once or twice I was conscious of actors reacting a little too quickly to a line, before their character had actually heard it.  However, it did create and maintain a good pace throughout.

Act 2 opens with the public meeting in Captain Horster's house. In this scene, the townspeople joined the audience and spoke from the auditorium, and this, together with the additional crowd noises, gave a really good sense that we were part of the meeting. Both Peter and Tom had long speeches in which they had to address the audience directly. In both cases these were very well done, with eye contact and a real sense of passion from both actors. The exit from this scene, with Tom being barracked by the townspeople worked well, and the subsequent scene change, which involved townspeople bringing on rocks and bricks accompanied by the sound of breaking glass, gave a real sense of the horror of the family's situation.

The actors coped well with the challenges created by the gender-blind casting. The women who played men all did so very naturally, without falling into the trap of over-doing the male characteristics. Relationships between the characters seemed genuine, although there seemed a lack of closeness between Dr and Mrs Stockman (possibly this was a deliberate comment on the state of their marriage?). I was not sure of the exact period of this play, but the costumes appeared consistent throughout.  Props and furnishings also seemed appropriate. Lighting was well cued, and sound effects worked well. Make up was nicely understated (very important when the audience are so close to the actors).

It is always lovely to see a challenging play which has obviously been reflected upon and thoughtfully  analysed by both cast and Director.

© NODA CIO. All rights reserved.