‘Rooted’ – Don’t Look Away

ROOTED – BY ALEX BUZO
DIRECTED BY PHIL ROUSE
DON’T LOOK AWAY – NIDA PARADE STUDIO
30 OCTOBER – 9 NOVEMBER

Lea: Okay, so, another post show chat in the car, because the NIDA foyer was not really conducive tonight, without a big crowd in there, it doesn’t actually have a lot of atmosphere. And the bar didn’t seem to be open. Seriously. Come on!
Sybil: But on the up side they do allow us to take drinks into the theatre in plastic, so you know, there’s a big plus. We almost need to start rating our theatres on whether they will allow drinks inside. Are they civilised?
Lea: All right, I’ll investigate an icon. So we saw Rooted tonight, Alex Buzo. This is the inaugural production of a new theatre company putting on forgotten Australian works.
Sybil: How old is that play?
Lea: Um…. oh, I want to say 50 years? (ED: Written in 1969, so 44 years ago – pretty close – well played Lea)
Sybil: It felt like it was really 80s, but then they had computers and iPods.
Lea: They updated it.
Sybil: But they didn’t feel like they had all the way through. It still felt very 80s to me.
Lea: So as a play… the device of repetition. Obviously the character of Bentley was obsessed with precision in language, he said the same thing several times over with more words than were necessary. It was an interesting device at the start, but it never ended. And then everyone else seemed to do it as well.
Sybil: I just felt so incredibly devastated for Bentley.
Lea: Oh I know.
Sybil: The whole way through, I just wanted something to happen so he got some redemption.
Lea: Some relief?
Sybil: Something to happen so there was a happy ending for this poor man.
Lea: To actually have a friend.
Sybil: Or, you know, something? Something good to happen for him. It was just awful.
Lea: It was. It was really difficult to watch, wasn’t it? Because you liked him.
Sybil: Well George (Banders) made it a very likeable character. Even though he was pathetic – there was something about him that was endearing. And he played that really well – boring and a bit of a loser but he was endearing in his pure joy in having this new flat and having this beautiful wife…
Lea: And he was trying to see the funny side, and his enthusiasm, and…
Sybil: Yeah, but…
Lea: But his wife was such a…
TOGETHER: BITCH!
Sybil: But everyone – every other character was just awful.
Lea: It’s such a bizarre play. I don’t really get why it was written.
Sybil: Yeah, and I thought maybe it was looking at kind of that Australian macho culture? And worshipping…
Lea: Hero-worshipping the bully.
Sybil: Yeah. And he was the anti-bully, wasn’t he? I mean Simmo was his complete opposite.
Lea: Antithesis. And they have known each other all their lives. I found it interesting. though I was kind of confused – I was trying to find the deeper meaning when they were all forgetting the stories they should have shared.
Sybil: Yeah, at one point I was like – Simmo and Hammo are really common names – are they going to realise that they are actually talking about completely different people? And then I didn’t think so because they went to school together.
Lea: I started thinking that maybe Hammo WAS Simmo. Like that Bentley had split the personalities out in his head and just remembered the bits he liked as Hammo.
Sybil:  Ah interesting.
Lea: But I don’t think that’s true.
Sybil: But that’s a really interesting reading though – if Hammo died, and all the stuff that he liked was Hammo, then it was the final – in that last scene when he found out that Hammo had died…
Lea: When everyone rejected him.
Sybil: … everyone rejected him. AND Hammo – which is potentially the good part of Simmo – was gone.
Lea: Dead.
Sybil:  Interesting. I like it.
Lea: Thanks.
Sybil: Bit of cool interpretation on the fly there, Ms Riley!
BOTH: *giggles*
Lea: The part I liked was when Bentley was on his own. That exploration of his loneliness there in that second apartment was really gorgeous.
Sybil: It was devastating. No, wait. I didn’t love it.
Lea: No?
Sybil: No. Look, I actually thought George was really good. I thought his physical humour was just – he’s just so clever.
Lea: Well timed, well nuanced.
Sybil: Yeah, and at times it was a bit broad. But there was a real consistency through the whole thing so it worked for me. But why was there a loaf of bread in the Christmas tree?
Lea: I know. I don’t know. That was hysterical! “Ta-da!”
Sybil: I thought that was all actually quite amusing, but I don’t understand why we were watching it now. And you know, it’s similar to Empire… in that I was like – if this is all a big set up for some fantastic twist…
Lea:  Or revelation.
Sybil: … or something, I will think this is brilliant. But it was like this whole big set up with no payoff.
Lea: Yeah. It was just so sad. He didn’t even have some final closure when he left.
Sybil: Yeah. Interesting, a very shallow, wide stage, with only two entrances and a few changes of furniture. It was an interesting choice but… I didn’t feel like it was ‘directed’. I didn’t see a director’s signature on it.
Lea: Yeah, I know what you mean. It felt a little directionless. Like that point made in the play – you need something to hang on to. You need a point of focus. It didn’t seem to have that.
Sybil: No. And maybe that’s the play. Maybe the whole thing is that it’s about a lack of focus.
Lea: And also it’s about a lack of connection, because no one was connected.
Sybil: Oh my god. That first scene where the husband and wife had these monologues where the other one was not engaging at all… I found that really difficult to watch. And then there was a whole period in there where I just couldn’t cope because of the moth.
Lea: Oh.
Sybil: And then did you see that he killed it – on stage?
Lea: No I missed that.
Sybil: So okay, it was on the ground, on stage.
Lea: Yes, I saw it, but I forgot about your thing with moths.
Sybil: And he picked it up and he held it and it was fluttering…
Lea: No! No! I missed that.
Sybil: And he’s sitting there and it’s fluttering…. and he’s going, what do I do with it? So he put it in the ashtray and crushed it to death.
Lea: Oh no!
Sybil: Then he got a cigarette and crushed it on top of it too. Of course, I had no idea what else was going on because that was the only thing I was watching. What was going on with this moth!
Lea: So, I’m thinking the play, in the character’s familiarity, in that they know each other so well and have known each other their whole lives, are actually completely disconnected – they have no focus, they’re flipping and flopping all over the place, and maybe it’s about that – that there is a band of Australian culture that…
Sybil: You know, I think it’s probably a forgotten play for a reason.
Lea: I was going to say that too.
Sybil: I think it shouldn’t be remembered.
Lea: Alex Buzo has written other fantastic plays.
Sybil: Oh look, I’m sure. As we know with Toby Schmitz – not everyone can write a winner every time.
Lea: And if they could, they’d be a freak!
Sybil: They’d be Shakespeare. Although, who knows how many BAD Shakespeare plays were just… lost.
Lea: That’s right. “Oh – oh dear, that play just accidentally fell down the drain”.
Sybil: Uh oh!
Lea: There goes Fred and Wilma…
Sybil: The FOUR gentlemen of Verona, no, that doesn’t work. Three? Na. Let’s go for two!
Lea: TWO!
Sybil: Woo hoo!
Lea: Nailed it!
Sybil: Macdonald? No. Macintyre? NO!
Lea: NO!
Sybil: MACBETH! Yes! Winner!
BOTH: *dissolve in fits of giggles punctuated only by weird snorting sounds, which of course, set us off again*
Lea: The forgotten plays of Shakespeare.
Sybil: Macdonald and Fred and Wilma…
Lea: And The Four Gentlemen of Verona.
BOTH: *kind of losing it now*
Sybil: So, yes, maybe it should have been forgotten… I would never choose to see that play again. But if anyone wants to re-write the ending to make it clever, that would make me happy.
Lea: Yeah. Maybe Toby.
BOTH: *CRYING with laughter and more snorting*
Lea: We’re not even drunk! But I like the idea of a theatre company looking for Australian plays that haven’t been put on for some time. That’s a good idea.
Sybil: Well there will be a reason why they haven’t been put on… well maybe there are some that are forgotten classics.
Lea: That go out of favour for a while, different genres get pushed in universities, and theatre companies. They tend to go in waves.
Sybil: That’s possible.
Lea: Out of five?
Sybil: Two??? Two and a half? Two.
Lea: Two? Two.
Sybil: Yeah. Two. I just – again – it talks to the quality of theatre in Sydney.

IN SUMMARY
Sybil: Some plays are forgotten for a reason. Whilst the cast was commendable for the most part, the production just didn’t hit it for me.
Lea: This play just didn’t feel fully realised and I don’t know exactly how you could drag this one into the 21st Century. Props to the company for trying and big props to Bentley.
Question: What do you think about reviving forgotten Australian works?

DRINKS ALLOWED IN THEATRE?