by Tony Wack
The Property Known as Garland directed by Kristopher Fraser ’13 tells the story of former child-star and singer Judy Garland. Well, “tells the story” might be pushing it just a bit.
The fact of the matter is that Judy Garland, played by Rachel Smith-Weinstein ’13, spends the entirety of the play complaining about her childhood, her home-life, her mother, MGM, her career and her rise to stardom. She essentially criticizes every single thing that brought her to where she is now. There is a time and a place for that, which has hourly rates, but it’s not on the stage.
What I find most peculiar about the show is that I am not entirely certain what it was going for or what it wanted to do. Based on the sad tale of woe that Garland weaves, you would think that she is either trying to invoke sympathy and sadness within the audience, with the highest honor being able to reduce them to tears.
However, in between complaints, aggressive rants, maniacal laughter and bouts of melancholy, one cannot hope but feel depressed and uncomfortable. By the end of the show, there was a sense of relief among the audience members as if they felt they had finally been let off the hook after being yelled at for something they had nothing to do with in the first place.
The main problem with Garland as a whole is that it is essentially a monologue and the way that she so easily breaks the fourth wall to speak to the audience gives the impression that she is having a nervous break-down, but if that was the intended affect then it was not made clear. The play is Judy Garland giving a speech with her being interrupted every now and then. When the humbly assistant Ed, played by James Kriz ’12, it is usually to check up on Judy or see to her needs and I feel not concern for how she will react to will react to him but rather relief that all her bitter anguish will finally be directed towards somebody else.
The concept of flashbacks is prominent with Kriz playing all of the male roles and Lyz Glickman ’13 playing all of the female — her most prominent being that of Garland’s witch-like mother. I have no problems with flashbacks, however, when they are brought into a soloist context they create awkwardness in place of depth. In truth they do help explain Garland’s attitude, but are forgotten within the next few minutes when the complaining resumes.
Despite these criticisms, Garland actually did possess some shining qualities which are mainly seen within the acting. Smith-Weinstein comes off as determined, confident and strong with a lovely voice and speech. Kriz’s innocent and almost childish portrayal of Ed makes him likable and relatable as if a member of the audience has decided to interact with Judy on a regular basis. Glickman provides excellent support and maintains a stern attitude that lingers and is made stronger with each flashback. The set is simple but believable with decent costumes that add the extra touch to each character and skillful production team.
Basically, my major issue is with the play itself since I do not see why anyone would find it entertaining (unless you would like to see the Roast of Marlene Dietrich). I believe that director Kristopher Fraser has much potential; he just needs to be more selective about his productions.