The Caucasian Chalk Circle

Once again The Cotswold Players have taken on a less frequently performed play, written by Bertolt Brecht nearly 70 years ago, but could have been written about any conflict torn community at any time, including the present day. Brecht uses a ‘Play within a play’ to tell his story. We first find ourselves in a war-ravaged village in central Europe. Two groups of people are trying to claim the land, one group wishing to flood the land to provide irrigation for growing grow fruit trees and the other group wishing to use the land to rear goats for cheese production. One group organise the telling of an old folk tale to help illustrate the dispute and who should have the land. A musician arrives and acts as storyteller. In the first half of the folk tale, a young serving girl Grusha, reluctantly finds herself responsible for the safety of the son of the beheaded Governor. It shows how she looks after him at great risk to herself and the adventures she has. After the interval we are apparently in yet another story, but as it progresses it seems we have returned to the original village and learn what has been happening after Grusha left with baby Michael. She is then brought back to face the Governors wife, who realising the only way she can gain access to her dead husband’s wealth is through the child, so wants him returned to her. To decide who cares most for the child and so look after him, a chalk circle is drawn on the ground and the child placed in the centre, with each woman holding a hand, the women are told that who pulls the child from the circle is the ‘real’ mother. As Grusha cannot hurt the child she lets go of him, leaving the Governors wife to pull him out. This happens a second time and the child is then given to Grusha, who has shown she really cares for the child and so should look after him. The storyteller concludes by saying the land should go to the fruit growers, as they will make better use of it.

This was a challenging undertaking, with such a large cast taking many roles and having many costume changes. The costumes were an interesting mixture of ethnic and more modern, with no doubt who the soldiers were in their military style uniforms. It had been set very simply but effectively, with two extremely sturdily constructed wooden towers, with an upper floor, which could have been the ruins of any building in a war torn territory, leaving the audience to imagine the various locations within the story. All the furniture and props were brought on by the cast and organised by an ‘on stage’ stage manager. All the sound and lighting effects were well cued and everything appeared to work smoothly, moving slickly from one scene to the next, ably linked by the Story Teller. Those in the cast, who played multiple roles, created each an individual character for each. The company worked well together, those with minor parts to play were equally important to the development of the story, helping to create a real community. It is difficult to comment on individual performances, everyone was confident, but I did like the way Azdak developed from the village scribe to the Judge. Also ‘Baby Michael’ was a masterpiece from the props department. As a the Story Teller in the Prologue says, “It is our job to entertain, your job to draw conclusions”. It was performed in such a way that it did enable the audience to stand back and see the bigger moral picture. Director Jonathan Vickers certainly succeeded in his vision of retaining the purity of the concept of a group of villagers putting on a play-within-a-play in a ruined village. It was certainly thought provoking.

Well done everyone.

© NODA CIO. All rights reserved.