No Escape Disturbing, Bloody Richard III Reflects Contemporary Events by Lisa Troshinsky Many play directors are highlighting connections between their productions and the war themes of todayís political climate. Gale Edwardsís violent, modern-day interpretation of ìRichard III,î currently at The Shakespeare Theatre, is no exceptionóand her statement on contemporary politics is far from flattering. Audiences need not turn to the news or fly to Iraq to witness ruthless bloodshed. They need only purchase a theater ticket. In other words, donít expect a pleasant escape from reality while attending this production. This rendering is an insistent, graphic and at times over-the-top assault on the senses. ìWe chose to do the play in a modern style. I donít usually like that. I like timeless and elegant Shakespeare,î said Edwards at The Shakespeare Theatreís Windows discussion, a special event the theater holds for the public at the beginning of each playís run. ìBut we decided to make ëRichard IIIí a modern piece. Itís about a lunatic that takes over the world and drives it into war. ëRichard IIIí manipulat es the media, has a spinner Ö this is a modern play for our time. This is a controversial play, a controversial production. Itís bloody, lots of murders on stage.î The production is in fact true to Edwardsís word and almost too disturbing to watch. The playís ghastly serial killings take place on Peter Englandís brilliant set, which depicts a modern, cruel, harsh, cold environment. Mammoth sliding blue-tinted walls open onto an institutionalized waiting room, which could be that of a psychiatric hospital, an unfriendly hotel lobby or even a bunker. Characters enter and exit from an elevator positioned behind these sliding walls, and Richard and his entourage take refuge behind a door marked ìRestrictedî beneath an ominous orange emergency siren. Many of Richardís victims await their executions while chained to cold and steely wheeled hospital beds, while others are escorted to the ìtowerîóstairs leading up to an eerie light that communicates a foreboding, post-death aura. Murell Hortonís costuming stays the modern course, with the male characters sporting contemporary business suits or gang-like leather wear and the womenís garb alternating between flashy, colorful, elegant evening dresses and sleek black mourning garments. Only clairvoyant Queen Margaret stands out in dress, draped in dramatic black-and-red, witch-like cloaks. The brutal killings are played out before the audienceís eyes. Lord Hastingsís head is paraded around in a sealed, see-through Ziploc bag; children are smothered while others are ruthlessly shot or stabbed center stage. And to drive the point home, Edwards changes the playís last scene to include not only the dead body of Richard III, finally killed by the Earl of Richmond (later King Henry VII), but also all the bodies of the playís slain characters. Although ìjusticeî is won by the playís endóRichard has been conquered and England is at peace once againócorpses overlap each other and are strewn all over the stage, a clear indication of the high price of any war and its irreversible damage. ìThis play is not just about politics and Machiavellianism. It is a medieval morality play, where God wreaks revenge on an agent of the devil and restores divine good on earth,î said Sarah Werner, interim executive director of The Folger Institute at the Folger Shakespeare Library. ìShakespeare is saying that it isnít enough to be an effective king, a king also must be about good and divine order.î Edwards takes this present-day analogy a step further when she casts the citizens as journalists, complete with laptops and notebooks and photographers snapping away at press conferences set up by the playís main players. The relentless, paparazzi-type behavior of the press serves as slight comic relief to the never-ending, gruesome murders we witness throughout the three-hour production. Any comic relief is welcome, and thank goodness we get some through the character of Richard himself. Masterfully crafted in this production by veteran actor Wallace Acton, Richard is an alluring, witty, charismatic, bright and articulate villain. ìRichard, through his soliloquies, tells the audience, ëI hate the king. Watch me bring him down.í You are an accomplice to his journey, which puts the audience in a complicated moral position,î Edwards said. ìRichard is bad, but he is fun to watch.î In fact, Richard is so candidly and one-sidedly evil (until he becomes king, after which he falls apart), his character offers a uniquely dark humor. Acton, a slight and nimble seasoned actor, dexterously adopts a slight limp and hunchback for the role and milks the audience with comic facial expressions and exaggerated movements. Although ìRichard IIIî is a one-man show, in that the rest of the characters are secondary, Actonís acting skills stand above many of his fellow thespians. While Acton always commands the stage and is a delight to watch, performances from the other actors are often muddled, hard to understand, or just not very interesting. ìëRichard IIIí is a one-man play with an ensemble around him,î Edwards said. ìThe pressure on the actor playing Richard is immense. He is on stage all night. Heís the engine that drives the plot forward. Itís also a challenge to all of the other actors who come on and disappear for most of the rest of the play. The other characters arenít woven into the plot throughout the play. Itís hard to deliver a character in two scenes, where their purpose is only to feed Richard.î Neither Acton nor Edwards are strangers to The Shakespeare Theatre or to each other. Last year, Edwards directed Acton as the lead in ìHamlet.î This is evident in the familiarity and fluidity of Actonís direction and performance. Acton has a long history with The Shakespeare Theatre and other Washington, D.C., venues. Edwardsís international directing career spans productions with Britainís Royal Shakespeare Company, some of Australiaís largest theaters, and Broadway musicals. At the end of the day, it doesnít matter if one parallels the tragedy of ìRichard IIIî with todayís circumstances. After all, Shakespeareís ìRichard IIIî isnít exactly true to history but represents the Tudorsí depiction of Richard (the Tudors succeeded Richard, the last of the York kings, and controlled England during Shakespeareís time). According to Edwards, ìShakespeare was a commercial theater writer, who wrote to make money and didnít let the truth spoil a good story.î In this vein, whether Edwardsís production is true to todayís political climate is immaterialówhatís more important is the fact that sheís created a riveting and memorable performance. ìRichard IIIî runs through May 18 at The Shakespeare Theatre, 450 7th St., NW. For more information, please call (202) 547-1122 or visit www.shakespearedc.org. Lisa Troshinsky is a freelance writer in Washington, D.C.