'Tis Pity She's a Whore is a terrible name for this play. I'm not sure I understand what the title has to do with the plot. It is a crazy play. I loved it but also found it very disconcerting. 

The plot is simple enough though there are many subplots that muddy things up a bit. One nice thing about the subplots is that are actually tied to the action of the main plot which is not always the case with theses Jacobean plays. Giavanni is in love. He tells his friend the Friar. Unfortunately, he is in love with Annabella who happens to be his sister. She is being pursued by three different guys, Soranzo, Grimaldi, and Bergetto. Soranzo has a servant, Vasques, who figures prominantly. Annabella is not interested in any of these suitors but is actually in love with her brother. The two begin sleeping together. Bergetto is an idiot. Grimaldi is a from Rome. He and Soranzo fight a lot. Soranzo is a jerk who has committed adultery with Hippolita, whose husband has since died. Soranzo will not marry Hippolita as he said he would now that she is free. She plots with Vasques to kill Soranzo by poisoning him. Bergetto is not actually in love with Annabella but is pursuing her to please his uncle Donado, a friend of Giavanni and Annabella's father Florio. Bergetto is smitten by Philotus the niece of a physician. The physician is actually Richardeto, Hippolita's husband who is not dead but in disguise to get revenge upon Soranzo for cuckolding him. Events transpire resulting in the death of Bergetto, Grimaldi's exile, Philotus becoming a nun, and Soranzo marrying Annabella. Hippolita dies by her own poison when she finds herself double crossed by Vasques.
Things are pretty bad. Annabella is pregnant by Giavanni. Soranzo treats her terribly in order to find out who the father of the child is. Vasques discovers that it is Giavanni and then plots his death. Annabella tries to warn Giavanni and longs for her death. Giavanni kills her and Soranzo before being killed by Vasques who is banished from Italy. Florio dies from shock and Richardeto finally reveals himself. End of play. 

This is a crazy play. It is amazingly subversive. One wants nothing more than for Giavanni and Annabella to be happy and end up together. This is of course not going to happen because they are an incestuous couple and these relationships end badly. It really is too bad because, along with Bergetto, Giavanni and Annabella are the nicest people in the play. Soranzo and Vasques are loathsome. Hippolita is shrill but sympathetic. The language is amazingly good. John Ford writes very supple and strong meter. The wooing scenes between Giavanni and Annabella are gloriously written. The end of the play is not really satisfying. The play has an incredible sense of inevitability that tragedies have where a bad end is clear and unavoidable but one really wants it to be avoided. 

I wish I could understand the title which is also the last line of the play. Annabella is not a whore. She was just in love with the wrong guy. Giavanni has some blame in it as well. I do hate double standards. I like the play.  

So I read St Nicholas by Conor McPherson. It's a one man play about an Irish theatre critic who encounters some vampires who change his life. It is a play I enjoyed quite a bit and have decided to memorize to do. It's story telling mostly. Very funny and well written. Like most of Mr. McPherson's play the main character talks about how much he drinks and I can't imagine putting that much alcohol away. Ultimately the play is about longing and despair and redemption. Loss of self and recovery. I will do it one day. I really don't have much more to say about this one except that it is very good and I will read it as many times as possible. 

This is The Animal Kingdom by Philip Barry. Mr. Barry is best known for writing the plays Holiday and The Philadelphia Story, both made into very good and successful films featuring Cary Grant and Katherine Hepburn. This play is an earlier one but features Mr. Barry's preoccupations with wealth and freedom. This movie was also made into a film starring Leslie Howard and Ann Harding (who coincidentally played Katherine Hepburn's part in an earlier film version of Holiday). Howard was reprising his Broadway success as were a few others in the cast. I saw the film and was inspired to read the play.

It's about a guy, Tom Collier, who has been living with a woman, Daisy Sage, without the benefit of marriage, as friends, having been lovers but now cooled. This is in 1920-something so it is very unconventional. When the play opens Daisy has been away in Paris drawing fashion for a magazine. While she was away Tom has met Cecelia and they have become engaged. Tom and Daisy are basically bohemians. Tom comes from an absurdly wealthy family. His father has been trying to get Tom to settle into some kind of stable career. Tom's most consistent job has been as owner of a small independent press that publishes fancy books. In the first scene Tom's father, Rufus, and his good friend, a lawyer named Owen have arrived at Tom's house to get some big news from Tom. Cecelia or "C" is there as well. We are also introduced to Tom's "butler", a former boxer named Red whom tom keeps on because he likes him. Red is a terrible butler. Tom arrives late and offends his father, The meeting was for Tom to inform them of his engagement, Tom receives a telegram from daisy saying she is back in NYC. He leaves to tells Daisy that he is engaged. Daisy is disappointed but supportive. 

Under "C"'s influence Tom changes. He begins to publish cheap bad books that make money. He tries to fire Red at "C"'s insistence, Red beats him to the punch though by quitting. He is supposed to go to the symphonic debut of a mutual former friend of Daisy and his but sends his regards by telegram instead after being seduced by "C" into staying to have sex with her. Time passes things get worse for Tom. he is estranged from his old friend's. He sees Daisy again and she realizing that she is truly in love Tom runs away to without telling tom where she is. Tom has a birthday party and "C" invites his old friends. Tom is about to produce a weekly magazine with his small press. Tom is becoming successful while losing his integrity and sense of self. His friends including Daisy leave the party early. Rufus gives Tom and absurdly large check which Tom is reluctant to accept. "C" thinks he should.They argue about that, Tom realizes that he is only attracted to "C" because of her sex appeal. She has refused him sex because he hasn't been doing things that way she wants. He leaves her the check for her after signing it over to her and goes back to Daisy. 

I liked this play. It has nice, breezy, well structured dialogue and nice ending. Tom is a good character that one likes and wishes the best for. Daisy is also a great character too and one really wants them to be together. Red is an awesome character. He's a former boxer who is down to earth and funny in his drunk scene. He also has that street smart ability to see what is going on to Tom before Tom does. There is a great moment towards the end, the set up to Tom's leaving the money for "C". He stars drinking as the two of them are getting on each others nerves and reminisces about a brothel he went to in England when he was young. One left one's money on the mantle for the woman you spent time with and that is where he leaves the check for "C". The moment when his understanding of his relationship to "C" happens just little bit after that and it is beautifully written.   


I liked this play. it is not as good as Barry's others but it has a germ of truth and a subtle conflict inside it. It is billed as a comedy, but it is only ruefully funny in a harsh and bitter way that is belies that classification. 

I read Hamlet again. What can I possibly say about that play that hasn't been said a couple of thousand times before. Not much probably. But I will write a little bit about it as I read it and also as I have played the part itself in several situations including a full production, I thought I might share some of my thoughts from those experiences as well. 

First off the play. Do I really need to write the plot? I guess I should in case people do not know it. Here goes: Something is rotten in the State of Denmark. The king Hamlet Sr. has been killed by his brother, Claudius, who has taken over the thrown and married Gertrude, the former and current queen. Just to make it clear, Claudius married his sister-in-law. The prince, young Hamlet, is very annoyed by this. He is sulking around making everyone feel bad. He has come from Whittenberg where he has been studying. The ghost of Hamlet Sr. begins prowling around and scares some guards who tell Hamlet's best friend Horatio who tells Hamlet. They all see the ghost and the ghost tells Hamlet how he died and demands that Hamlet revenge him. Hamlet take some time trying to get up the nerve to kill his uncle, the new king, He does this by making everyone think he is crazy including treating Ophelia, the girl he's been flirting with, like shit. The king enlists Hamlet's boyhood friends, Rosencrantz and Guildestern to help find out why Hamlet is all crazy. Some players come along and Hamlet gets them to do a play closely resembling the murder of Hamlet Sr. Claudius freaks out. Hamlet is now convinced that the ghost wasn't lying, He yells at his Mother and kills Polonius, a counselor to Claudius and Ophelia's dad. For this Claudius sends Hamlet to England where he plans to have Hamlet killed. Hamlet improbably escapes. Meanwhile Ophelia goes mad and kills herself. Her brother Laertes shows up and wants to kill Hamlet for killing his dad and driving Ophelia insane. Laertes and Claudius plot to kill Hamlet in a duel. The duel goes awry, Laertes, Claudius, Gertrude, and Hamlet all die. End of play. Basically. 

There are lots of little nuances and some truly great writing along the way. I find the play to be both great and over-rated. One thing I find odd and hard to buy is Hamlet's rescue from England by pirates. Very odd and strangely convenient. I also find Hamlet hard to sympathize with. He treats Ophelia awfully for no apparent reason. He treats Rosencrantz and Guildstern poorly as well. I feel bad for those poor guys. They are asked by their friend's uncle to see if they can help their friend in his insanity and for that Hamlet has them killed. They were accompanying him to England with letters asking the English to kill Hamlet when he arrives. R &G have no idea that that is their goal just that they are to help their friend. hamlet forges a letter telling the english to kill R &G. When Hamlet discovers that Ophelia is dead, he professes to love her, yet he treated her like crap. He's not a great guy; more of a whiny brat. 


Strangely, though, I have always felt an affinity toward Hamlet. I first played him for for a directing student at Emerson College. I had been cast as Horatio in the ghost scene, but the actor playing Hamlet vanished three days before the showing. The directing student asked me to take over. Playing Hamlet in that scene felt like second nature. I seemed to understand the role intuitively. I next played the Nunnery scene at Trinity  Rep Conservatory and again I felt as though I had already played the scene before. I did it quite well and some of my fellow actors told me that I was a good fit for Hamlet because of my depressive nature and moodiness. 


Many years later I played Hamlet in a very difficult and production. The edit was very strange and there were difficult personal aspects created by the director. The director had led my then girlfriend to believe she would be playing Ophelia and then cast something else. My girlfriend felt that, in loyalty to her, I should not do the play. I was 38 at the time and chances to play Hamlet in a full production would be fewer and fewer so I did not want to drop out, This led to crazy tension and arguments. All while trying to learn Hamlet. I did like that it was a very bare bones production with limited set pieces or costumes and instead focused on the words and the story. I got some good reviews never the less and it was through this production that I developed my negative opinion of Hamlet. I still did feel that odd feeling of knowing the part well intuitively. Another odd part of that production, that made Hamlet less sympathetic, was that Laertes was played by a woman. This made the advice Laertes gives to Ophelia about not believing Hamlet's wooing seem to come from personal experience, as though Hamlet were always leading women on and then toying with them.


My favorite aspect about the play is the first scene. Because the ghost is seen by the guards several times and Horatio once, it establishes the ghost as an actual entity and not just part of Hamlet's imagination. Whatever you may make of Hamlet's behavior, the ghost is real. I also felt that the problem of Hamlet's sanity was less profound than people seem to make out. I had always heard that you have to decide one way or another that Hamlet is insane or not. I felt that was not the case. In my opinion Hamlet himself is unsure of how far his role playing craziness is in his control. I found several moments where he realized that he might be out of control and is unsure himself whether he is insane or not.


The famous "To be or not to be..." speech is always hard. I didn't commit to it as fully as I could have when I did it at Trinity, but I did make a strong and strange choice. I had seen a number of actors do the scene with a gun or a sword and actually try to kill each themselves. This seemed wrong and odd to me because if I hold and unloaded prop gun to my head, I know it does not present actual danger to me so I still have to pretend that is might kill me. The same goes for a dull prop sword. I thought that to give myself an actual look right at death, I should do something actually dangerous. To that end I held myself over a thirty foot drop onto a cement stairwell. I wasn't going to let go and kill myself but if I slipped or if I let go death was right there staring at me. It was actually scary to me to do that. The second time I did it I felt that that kind of choice was not right and that he really is just thinking and talking about death and suicide rather than actually preparing to do it. It made it easier and less fraught and felt more honest.


All that said I do like the play, It is so full of profound and active speeches that it has a great energy about it. Everyone should read it.