Catastrophe triumphs in "Victory"

The 17th century meets the world of the contemporary in Howard Barker’s Victory: Choices in Reaction. This past weekend, the College’s theatre department put on a fantastic rendition of this play, set in England around 1660, after the restoration of the English monarchy and eradication of the Republican rule of the Puritans. The plot follows a beheaded John Bradshaw’s wife (Lucy Van Atta ’12) as she searches for the stolen remains of her late husband, all the while undergoing a journey of self-discovery and a search for a future, fighting against her limited opportunities.

As I sat in the audience of Seeler Studio Theater, the chamber-like, almost oppressive feel of the stage set the tone for the rest of the play. The first act opens with a greatly distressed Scrope (Noah Berman ’13), begging both the audience and himself for mercy as the peons of the recently reinstated Charles II dig up the body of his old master, John Bradshaw. Though set in the 17th century, Barker’s play deals with quite contemporary themes and uses an archaic political setting as an allegory for the modern world. The art direction in the performance flawlessly encompassed both a historical narrative and modern feel. The scene transitions were chaotic and vibrant, highlighted by music from The Sex Pistols and Nine Inch Nails, and they established an energy that ran throughout the entire production.

There existed no epochal standard for the costumes in Victory. Of course, many characters were garmented in dress typical of the 17th century monarchy (though with a bit of a modern twist), but some came on stage with a much more modern feel and others still had the feel of neither contemporary nor monarchal dress; the king’s soldiers seemed more like they had come from a World War II battlefield than from King Charles’ royal guard. This confusion only added to the timeless feel of the performance, reminding us that the emotions and struggles of the characters were reflections of tribulations that unite people of all generations. The set was beautifully designed — minimal yet forceful. The simple ground design was highly dynamic, warping during the scene transitions to reflect the individual emotion and force of each scene. The ceilings were lined with large mirrors that, as the characters turned their eyes to God, reflected the flaws and struggles of humanity.

As the first act progressed, an impressively strong dynamic was established between King Charles (Matt Ball ’14) and Devonshire (Lilli Stein ’11). King Charles was, in many ways, twisted and without morals; he defiled Devonshire in the midst of a royal party. And yet, Ball’s portrayal of the King helped evoke a sense of pity towards his character, even leading the audience to “love the bone and blood of Charlie.” There existed in Victory no truly good or virtuous characters. Even the play’s protagonist, a woman who is mourning the loss of her husband and with him, her sense of remorse, is a character with whom I found myself struggling to sympathize. The entire cast had phenomenal performances but another personal accolade must go out to Christo Grabowski ’12. Grabowski captivated his audience as the comically perverse Ball with both wit and charisma and he managed to pull off the vulgarity of his character without coming off as tacky or forced.

The second act was a bit slower and shorter than the first, yet it felt much more dragged out. In no way did this take away from the overall strength of the piece. The ending scene brought the play full circle, with Bradshaw returning home. The scene was quiet in appearance, but carried the weight of the entire play and proved to be a powerful close to the piece.

In the director’s notes, it says that the production was intended to be “energetic, youthful, brash, impulsive and rude.” These goals were achieved with immense success. The energy was palpable even in the play’s quietest moments and each character acted as a strong part of an even stronger force that exploded on stage with both vulgarity and beauty.