Review: "Van Gogh Find Yourself"

The interactive show connects but struggles to maximize its uniqueness

I immediately spot Walter DeForest, the author and performer of Van Gogh Find Yourself, in the crowded lobby of the Metropolitan Museum of Art. His once black leather jacket, now covered in colorful doodles, and his white patent leather Doc Martins, also artistically dotted with paint, loudly yell “artist” to observers like me. His resemblance to Vincent Van Gogh, not the least bit due to DeForest’s red beard and yellow straw hat, is uncanny. So it is not weird at all when he shakes my hand and introduces himself as simply “Vincent.”

I’m not alone in this interactive art adventure. A couple of New Yorkers, Miriam and Simon, as well as Miriam’s parents visiting from Taiwan, are my companions for this intimate experience. “We thought it would be an interesting way for my parents to be introduced to the Met,” Mariam shared. “And a chance for us to learn something new about Van Gogh,” added Simon. Indeed, there are 17 paintings by Van Gogh at the Met, so the location for the show seems perfect (an alternative version runs at MoMA with only 3 paintings on site). But before seeing the artwork, we get to spend some time with the “artist” at the patrons’ lounge.

Six of us sit around a table in the corner as Vincent takes out a small tray of drawing supplies and a thin stack of paper. We all order tea. Walter tosses his straw hat under the table and puts on a pair of red-framed glasses, so nothing is in his way as he draws. The reverse-costuming is strangely on point. DeForest uses his resemblance to the artist to the maximum, but his show doesn’t solely rest on a superficial likeness. Over the course of the show, and during our chat afterwards, it becomes apparent that DeForest shares a deep connection with Van Gogh and wants to do him justice by retelling his life’s story. I suspect DeForest has likely had struggles as an independent artist that help him relate to Van Gogh, struggles to which he alludes but never discusses explicitly, focusing solely on his subject.

That said, there is a lot of controversy surrounding what Vincent Van Gogh’s real-life personality was like. Thanks to the 1956 biopic Lust for Life (based on the 1934 novel by Irving Stone), the famous Dutch painter is believed to have suffered from self-destructing behavior due to his mental health issues. Popular opinion, in particular, is that he cut his ear in a burst of madness in 1888 and then committed suicide two years later. But DeForest tells us a different version of the events in Van Gogh Find Yourself. He presents the loss of the ear lobe as a result of a quarrel with Paul Gauguin, an artist with whom he desperately wanted to be friends, though they eventually grew apart.

DeForest depicts Van Gogh as a misunderstood man who desperately suffered from loneliness, save for his relationship with his brother Theo. He speaks of Theo only with endless love and devotion, but is also ashamed to be a burden to him. Overall, it seems like Van Gogh only found peace in his art and even produced a painting a day during the last month of his life. The creator of Van Gogh Find Yourself presents this fact as a sign of a blossoming spirit and will to live, a concept that doesn’t fit neatly with the idea of suicide. The show takes the side of a different version of events as presented in the biography Van Gogh: The Life (2011), that a (possibly) accidental homicide was the cause for the artist’s death.

Using Van Gogh’s fight with Gauguin (which cost the artist a part of his ear and his reputation) and his alleged shooting by a teenager, DeForest is trying to find Van Gogh’s potential inner motivation to protect his abusers. And I feel ready to believe him as DeForest looks into my eyes intensely, as if his life depended on it. It seems at times that the performer assumes not only the role of the artist, but also the artist’s advocate in front of the audience-slash-jury. Is it Van Gogh who tries to win the trust of the citizens of Arles who whisper behind his back, or is it just DeForest trying to protect his icon from misinterpretation? The two personalities are so closely intertwined that it is hard to tell.

For the duration of the show, which lasts about an hour and a half, DeForest shares Van Gogh’s biography in a first-person narrative, but not always in chronological order. He draws portraits of the audience members, pausing his story at a moment when the retelling becomes uncomfortable for him, as if hiding away in his art. The silence hangs above the table for a minute as he draws curls and pouting lips on a portrait of me, making me look somewhat like an anime elf (very flattering).

On the occasion when non-English speakers are visiting the show (which is often since it is broadly advertised on AirBnB), translations might be plugged into these pauses. But since everybody in our group speaks English, we sip our tea in silence, which turns out not to be uncomfortable at all. If anything, it makes me think that there are not enough situations in my life in which I can be silent yet feel in contact with other people. As the artist draws, I observe his technique and study the details of his punk outfit standing out against the posh interior of the patrons’ lounge. To think about it, this very discrepancy itself is a great tribute to Van Gogh, who was poor his entire life and now, after his death, his work sells for millions.

When the show is over, the group is led by Walter (on goes the straw hat and off goes the Dutch accent and drawing glasses) to the museum galleries. We admire the sizable Van Gogh collection that the museum possesses and happily take photos with both a 1887 self-portrait of the artist and his theatrical reincarnation. Our tour-guide shares some of his thoughts on the paintings, but mostly allows us space to soak in the art, within the context of what we’ve just heard. This strolling from painting to painting in the museum seems a little under-planned when it could have been a bigger part of the narrative, or at least more seamlessly integrated into it. Part of the attraction of Van Gogh Find Yourself is its versatility; it can be hosted literarily anywhere and travels easily. Yet it seems like a great opportunity to make it more site-specific depending on where it takes place: in this case, the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York.

In our conversation after the show, DeForest shared that sometimes he makes his audience members draw as well, and I immediately wished we had done so on the day that I attended. It feels like Van Gogh Find Yourself could be a perfect safe space for non-artists to try their hand at portraiture, since Van Gogh himself only started painting at the age of 28. In fewer than 10 years he went from being an amateur to an influential artist, and then became the most beloved painter of the Western world, post-mortem. I wouldn’t go as far as converting the show to a “Paint-and-Sip” type of activity while listening to DeForest narrate Van Gogh’s biography in the background. But having participants drawing during the experience certainly might have some relaxing and even empowering effects as well as facilitate compassion towards the artist, something that DeForest strives for.

Other than sitting for portraits and listening, the audience doesn’t really participate in Van Gogh Find Yourself and I found this lack of interactivity a little disappointing. Throughout the show I nearly opened my mouth to say something or ask a question. It seems like with a small audience (usually four people), a more conversational tone with elements of improvisation incorporated into the narrative, could make the entire experience feel more flowing and natural.

DeForest certainly knows his subject well and could handle any question from the audience members. But most importantly, he treats the famous artist with tender attention, making him feel closer to the audience than we are ever likely to get. Van Gogh paintings had a new meaning for me and I felt an emotional charge during our stroll through the Met post-show. There is not only a genius behind them, there is a person there who is, like many of us, struggling with his inner demons and trying to connect to others. It is easy to put a deceased person on a pedestal but what about treating artists with compassion and kindness when they are still alive, before it’s too late?

__________

Van Gogh Find Yourself continues through June 22, and will return in the fall. Tickets are $69.

(This review was published on noporoscenium.com on 6.07)

Review: “Nomad Motel”

Life is a struggle when you are a teenager with a dysfunctional single parent, but Nomad Motel assures us that as long as you have a friend who pushes you to follow your dream, all is not lost.

Nomad Motel, a play by Carla Ching that just opened at Atlantic Stage 2, takes the audience on a journey to the state of mind that comes with being seventeen, when every other minute you think you might explode, sometimes from joy but mostly from pain. Even if you've never had the experience of sleeping on a concrete floor in an abandoned convenience store somewhere in Orange County, California, the feeling of having no firm ground to stand on and a persistent itch to follow your dream might seem familiar. This is what makes the characters of Nomad Motel so relatable.

Christopher Larkin and Molly Griggs in Nomad Motel. Photo by Ahron R. Foster.

Alix (Molly Griggs) and Mason (Christopher Larkin) don’t have much in common except for a school assignment on Shakespeare and a burning desire to break away from their parents and the lifestyles to which they are bound. Alix’s mother, Fiona (Samantha Mathis) is struggling with her acting career, losing the family house and raising three kids in a motel room. This leaves no time for dealing with her daughter’s problems, and although Fiona acts like Alix’s best girlfriend, she fails as a mother in her daughter’s eyes. James (Andrew Pang), Mason’s widowed father, practices a contrasting parenting style. Although he is far away in Hong Kong, he controls every aspect of Mason’s life, from what his son eats to what career he should pursue. This character remains a mystery, partly due to the secretive nature of his occupation (possibly related to the mafia), but also because of a lack of visual and narrative clues. Despite this, we do know that James has a heavy influence on his son—cleverly illustrated by a video call scene with the father’s face blown out on a backdrop of vertical blinds.

With different cultural and economic backgrounds and nearly opposite personalities, feisty Alix and timid Mason form a tender friendship though nursing an injured bird. Instead of marinating in their own problems, they choose to help each other out, giving each other encouragement to follow their respective dreams. Mason's dream is to be a professional musician (his father insists he studies business); Alix’s ambition is to study architecture in New York. For a moment she is convinced by her ex-boyfriend, Oscar (Ian Duff), that she would be just fine without college and they can just run away to New York together. But the trap door in this plan soon reveals itself and Alix has nobody to go to but Mason. Nomad Motel wins over the audience with its occasionally naïve frankness and obvious metaphors, like the injured bird, and a full-on sword fight literally illustrating the father-son relationship dynamic. But further topics, like racial injustice, get thrown in the bag of misfortunes without getting sufficient development.

The stage design by Yu-Hsuan Chen consists of an empty eggshell-colored room that is easily transformed into a motel room, abandoned convenience store (Oscar’s squat) or Mason’s empty living room. Since nearly all of Alix’s possessions fit in a couple of milk crates and a duffel bag, her moving in and out of places allows for easy transitions. Mason’s “cave” is located beneath the stage and consists of a row of cells stuffed with random furniture and objects. But why keep all these chairs tucked away and have an empty living room? This design inconsistency is representative of the discrepancy in Mason’s background. A Chinese mafia prince living under the assumed identity in an empty house stuffed with expensive liquor? This sounds like an ill-fitting fantasy. If anything, it robs the story of realism and takes away from the play's main point: the difficulty of finding your way in life and the empowerment that comes through true friendship. 

__________

Nomad Motel plays at Atlantic Stage 2, 330 West 16th Street, through June 23, 2019. The running time is 2 hours and 10 minutes with an intermission. Performances are Tuesdays through Fridays at 7:30 and Saturdays and Sundays at 2:30 and 7:30. Tickets are $55 ($40 for partial obstructed view) and are available at atlantictheater.org or by calling 866-811-4111.

Nomad Motel is by Carla Ching. Directed by Ed Sylvanus Iskandar. Set Design by Yu-Hsuan Chen. Lighting Design by Jeanette Oi-Suk Yew. Sound Design and Original Compositions by Emily Gardner Xu Hall. Costume Design by Loren Shaw. Fight Direction by Ryan-James Hatanaka.

The cast is Ian Duff, Molly Griggs, Christopher Larkin, Samantha Mathis, and Andrew Pang.

(This review was published on theasy.com on 6.03.19)

Review: "Beneath the Gavel"

The interactive hybrid piece allows the audience to bid on art while enjoying dinner

I would never have guessed that participating in an art auction would be more contagiously competitive than playing sports. To be honest, the idea of sports has never attracted me, and neither does bidding on them, but at Beneath the Gavel, the thrills feel real. I raised my paddle into the air to bid higher and higher. I crawled on the floor to collect more money. I felt consumed with a burning desire to get that several-million-dollar painting. And, I felt all this, despite knowing I was bidding on what was merely a printed poster, that the “celebrity” artist was fictional, and even the “money” I was paying for the art was fake.

Barbara Strongin in Beneath the Gavel

Beneath the Gavel, by Bated Breath Company, originated at New Britain Museum of American Art in Connecticut; the production also enjoyed an off-Broadway run at 59E59 Theatres in Spring 2017, where I first saw it. The latest rewrite has become more concise in telling the story of an artist who rose high in the art world through a love affair with his gallerist. Despite omitting some campy scenes, like a ballet of 20th-century artists, which were much beloved, it remains a poignant commentary on the ways of the art market. Bringing this interactive show from a traditional theater to the lavish red-gold-and-purple interior of Feinstein’s/54 Below Super Club aided in building an atmosphere of exclusivity and made me feel like a part of the deep-pocketed, high-brow auction crowd.

After descending a long dark wooden staircase enveloped in scarlet and gold wallpaper, I was handed a paddle and an envelope with play money, instead of the usual program. As the audience took their seats at the tables, the company members distributed silly plastic glasses in bright colors. I reached for some big apple-green star-shaped frames, reminiscent of Bar Mitzvah paraphernalia. It was soon time to throw them on when our guest of the evening, Haddie Weisenberg (Debra Walsh), appeared and we all sang her “Happy Birthday.” The show had already started.

The opening scenes rapidly intercut between the birthday party of the art dealer, Haddie, and the speech of the auctioneer, Barbara Strongin, in which she gave us background information on Ms. Weisenberg. As the show switched back and forth between the party and the auction, the role of the audience also shifted back and forth. We transitioned from being birthday party guests to auction attendees about to bid on the items from Haddie’s collection. Such is the cruelty of the art world: those who might claim to be your friend will become vultures when your art goes on sale.

The party is just a prelude to Haddie’s life. In a series of flashback scenes intertwined with the auction, we follow a passionate affair between her and her protégé artist, Daniel Zeigler (Jamie Roach). In their relationship, the personal is closely intertwined with the professional. From the moment the trembling Daniel serves a martini to his powerful patron, it was hard to tell what the matriarch of the art world was attracted to more: his talent or his looks.

The love affair unfolds across several scenes, accompanied by Anna Stefanic on the piano. Hearing Eric Satie’s melancholic Gymnopedie No.1 and Gnossiennes No.1 and No.3. made me a little sleepy, or was my drowsiness a result of  the dull depiction of romance between Haddie and Daniel? In the play, the supposed power couple is ruined because Daniel becomes increasingly more commerce-oriented and eventually casts away Haddie as his official dealer. But this comes as no surprise since there is hardly any chemistry between two lead actors.   

Daniel and Haddie aren’t the only ones that inhabit the world of Beneath the Gavel. Lively comedic vignettes about the art market archetypes are also mixed in with the tale of romance, betrayal, and artistic corruptibility. We meet a rich but uneducated collector, his cautious buyer, a pushy art-dealer, and an awkward art handler. And, of course, the queen of smoke and mirrors, the auctioneer Barbara Strongin. Inviting Strongin, a 38-year veteran of the international fine art auction industry and a woman of immense magnetism, to play herself is one of the best acquisitions Beneath the Gavel has to offer. She playfully reveals some of the secrets of auction mechanics to us, only to use them on the happily-fooled audience a minute later. It was like watching a talented magician perform an illusion as Strongin set up two bidders to compete with each other by manipulating their sense of pride, or as she took fake  “chandelier bids” from a nonexistent bidder in the back. Her strong presence and subtle sarcasm held the show together.

Overall, Beneath the Gavel left an uneven impression. The overly serious romance between Daniel and Haddie didn’t quite stand up to the farce of the art-world shenanigans. Mara Liberman, the writer and director, tries to put art in the context of not only the art market but also the personal lives of the people involved. Despite the beautiful concept, the tragic and comedic elements interfered with each other, often with rough transitions. For instance, there was a moment when ensemble members shot money into the audience. A lot of us enthusiastically dove under the tables to collect some extra cash, some doing it unashamed, while some did so a bit reluctantly. But then, a romantic scene between Haddie and Daniel followed immediately after. As non-mercantile as I would like to be in this tender moment, it was difficult not to start counting the unexpectedly acquired funds in my hands.

The auction in Beneath the Gavel is the only truly interactive component, while the rest of the show takes place predominantly on stage. This hybrid format was fine, but I wished there was some pre-show interaction with the actors. Since they were distributing sunglasses anyway, they might have approached us  “in character” already. This would allow for a more seamless and fun introduction into the auction world, which, as we learn from the show, is a lot about socializing. Beneath the Gavel is great for cautious audiences, consisting of those who are curious about interactive theatre but don’t want to roam around and rub shoulders with strangers. On the night when I attended, about eighty percent of the audience looked to be over fifty years of age, which is a rather unusual proportion for an interactive/immersive show. And this is wonderful since the niche is hardly occupied. Interactive theatre is often thought of as something catering to younger audiences, and it’s true for a lot of productions. Intentionally or not Beneath the Gavel provides an opportunity for the older patrons to play, without leaving the comfort zone of traditional theatre for too long.    

(This review was published on NoProscenium.com on 5.8.19)

Review: “Romeo and Juliet”

The Woolgatherers’ ambitious attempt to make Romeo and Juliet immersive wasn’t quite realized, but the performances saved the day.  

Upon entering Romeo and Juliet: A Party, I am asked to put on one of three stickers indicating how much I am willing to be involved in this immersive production: orange if I just want to sit back and watch, yellow if I want to participate but not in one-on-one interactions and green if I am up for anything. With a green sticker and a drink grabbed from the bar, I make my way to one of the tables scattered around the black box MITU580 theater.

Meaghan J. Johnson, Brandon Sawhill-Aja, and Samuel Im in Romeo and Juliet: A Party.
Photo by Ariella Axelbank.

The setting is promising: a three-piece band is playing popular tunes, actors are walking amongst the arriving audience members and the mood is cheery. Finally, Lady Capulet (Katharine Ginna), standing on one of a few checkered platforms planted around the room, taps on her wine glass. The band starts a new song and everybody is invited to dance, some jumping onto the central platform. We are guests at the Capulet Ball and one can even forget for a moment the tragic fate of the star-crossed lovers that are about to meet.

Unfortunately, after the energetic start, the interactive activities soon die out and, at any rate, don’t make much sense in the context of Romeo and Juliet. There is one more party game that we are invited to participate in: we are given cards with questions like What is your favorite breakfast? or What is your favorite weather? and are prompted to mingle until we find our match. As much as it is fun to move around, the purpose of this activity, and the additional dancing that follows, remain ambiguous to me. As soon as Juliet (Sarah Corbyn Woolf) and Romeo (Samuel Im) meet, the audience is forgotten and the play unfolds as in a traditional theatre. Some people are pulled aside by the actors, presumably for the one-on-one experience, but I can only speculate.

As an adaptation of Shakespeare’s beloved tale of the tragic love, this production by the Woolgatherers Theatre Group is successful in many aspects—first and foremost, the performances. Dressed in modern clothes (designed by Melinda Hare), the actors perform with exuberant, youthful energy, delivering the text with playfulness and clarity. Kelley Heyer, playing the Nurse, is especially memorable, drawing her character from an oh-so-familiar college-age babysitter, vulgar and feisty but loyal to her charge. Attempting to tell the story through Juliet’s eyes, director Grace Herman-Holland juxtaposes the young woman’s agency with the inevitable clash between her dreams and her family’s prejudices. In an interesting bit of staging, Juliet often places the other actors on the checkerboard platforms at the start of a scene, and then sits down and watches as the action plays out.           

The audience participation and live music that make Romeo and Juliet: A Party unique end up being liabilities. The dancing briefly creates the atmosphere of the party where the two lovers meet for the first time, but why include the game? The band is great but unfortunately the music drowns out some of the dialogue. Having a bar and encouraging audience members to use it during the show is a nice feature, but not very practical, as some guests have to walk through the room during the performance to get a drink. But these are all workable issues; as long as the Woolgatherers maintain their fiery energy and address the pitfalls of their first large-scale production, they might be just what modern curious audience needs: a fresh approach to classics with an immersive twist.  

__________

Romeo and Juliet: A Party played at MITU580, 580 Sackett Street, Brooklyn, through April 28, 2019. Tickets were $20 general admission, $35 VIP.

Romeo and Juliet: A Party is based on Romeo and Juliet by William Shakespeare. Directed by Grace Herman-Holland. Dramaturgy is by Nicholas Orvis. Costume Design is by Melinda Hare. Original Music is by Julian Giaimo. Production Stage Manager is Natalie Jones.

The cast is Peter Alexandrou, Katharine Ginna, Kelley Heyer, Samuel Im, Meaghan J. Johnson, Bereket Mengistu, Brandon Sawhill-Aja, and Sarah Corbyn Woolf.

(This review was published on theasy.com on 5.5.19)