‘Waiting For Godot’ – STC

WAITING FOR GODOT – BY SAMUEL BECKETT
DIRECTED BY ANDREW UPTON
SYDNEY THEATRE COMPANY – SYDNEY THEATRE
12 NOVEMBER – 21 DECEMBER 2013

Sybil: So here we are in the car doing our Post Show Drinks without drinks… but it is post show – just post show car ride…
Lea: It needs its own hashtag.
Sybil: It totally does!
Lea: We’ll come up with something clever…
Sybil: So…. we did not do an interval chat at Waiting for Godot, because we wanted to save it up, to discuss all together.
Lea: Although often we do do that with a long show, this is 3 hours including interval… but Waiting for Godot being what Waiting for Godot is… it’s really a riff on a theme for 2 and a half hours…
Sybil: And, I was going to say – everything that I thought at the end of the first half, I still think at the end of the show, but there were a few changes. So I thought Hugo Weaving was better in the second act than he was in the first, because in the first I was loving everything Richard Roxburgh was doing, and kinda finding Hugo Weaving a little bit – like he was girning, pulling faces… whereas in the second act he did start off like that but towards the end of the second act, I thought he was much better.
Lea: Do you know, interestingly I thought exactly the opposite. I thought Richard Roxburgh pulled more faces in the first act, and seemed to be more ‘put on’. But their performances overall, they were finding freshness in every line.
Sybil: And the rhythms.
Lea: Splendidly.
Sybil: It was beautiful. There were rhythms and pauses and builds and – you know – and they found humour in things that I thought were wonderful.
Lea: That you might not have seen on the page initially.
Sybil: No! And, you know, I did this play in Year 11 in school. Now, WHY by the way, a drama teacher would choose Waiting for Godot to do at a girl’s school is beyond me! Anyway – I don’t remember what part I played, that’s how much of an impression it made on me – but I did remember the play. And I guess part of the issue is that I’ve always loved… I was going to say Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, but that’s not right! Vladimir and… the other one. Gogo and…
Lea: Didi and Gogo.
Sybil: Yeah! I’ve always really loved them as characters, and I’ve never really loved Pozzo and Lucky. And I didn’t love them in this either.
Lea: There were some moments that were genuinely clever and poignant but they were just few and far between.
Sybil: If I had to choose one or the other I prefered Pozzo? I was really, really, REALLY irritated by Lucky. Not all the time. Just the majority of the time.
Lea: That’s not going to leave the right taste in your mouth is it?
Sybil: Yeah. I just thought he was over playing. And there were moments – Richard Roxburgh did it really well – when other things were going on on the stage, he had his own business but he was not pulling focus. Whereas I felt like Lucky was trying… well maybe he wasn’t trying, but he was pulling focus through stuff that wasn’t adding anything. And I really, really struggled with that. Didn’t love it – didn’t love that character. Didn’t LOVE the whole play, to be absolutely genuinely honest. And I really wanted to. I was really excited about it.
Lea: I know. I remember reading it in Uni and I understand, theoretically, why it’s an important play, but it doesn’t do it for me. And it still didn’t. And coming off the back of moving house and pulling lots of late nights – and I’m SO embarrassed to say it – but I struggled to stay awake. And I had some (sheepishly) micro-sleeps.
Sybil: Did you?
Lea: I did. I did a jolt to the side & had to pull myself back up again.
Sybil: Wow. It’s been a while since that’s – I can’t remember when that’s happened to you before.
Lea: It hasn’t! It actually has never happened. It’s happened to my husband!
Sybil: Not micro either! Just full on sleep!
Lea: But I was so distraught that it was happening. I was fighting with every inch of my being but it’s… it’s circumstantial but also you’ve kinda got to be… I remember thinking at the beginning of the show – Hugo and Richard were genuinely doing a great… exceptional performances of what is a difficult text and I was thinking, wow – it’s like they’re doing it for the first time and it was written for them.
Sybil: Yes and at the beginning I was thinking – god, I could just watch THEM all night and then even that got too much.
Lea: Yeah, it’s challenging.
Sybil: And not the whole thing. There were moments even towards the end where I just thought it was wonderful.
Lea: Yeah exactly. And I think the thing is, I do like Absurdist Theatre, but I just think I needed it to be just a bit more compact and a bit… more.
Sybil: I wonder what it would have been like with the original director.
Lea: Yeah it’s hard, because we’re not absolutely in love with Andrew either.
Sybil: No. I did… look, I found some of the physical humour worked, I found some of it didn’t… I loved, loved the relationship between Hugo and Richard.
Lea: Oh, yes, outstanding.
Sybil: It was just beautiful. They were doing a masterclass in how to build comradery and history on stage in a relationship. It was just beautiful. But… yeah. I wanted to love it more than I did. Loved the stage.
Lea: Stark and dirty.
Sybil: And poetic.
Lea: Nicely put.
Sybil: And I do – same as you, I appreciate the play, I would have thought I would like it more than I did. I mean from my knowledge of the play I thought I’d like it more than I did. And it wasn’t the production’s fault. Well maybe it was.
Lea: No. I just think I never need to see Waiting for Godot again… I just don’t think it’s my cuppa tea in the end.
Sybil: Do you know what – ok, here’s something – I found this production more political than I remember? And I found that they really brought the links to Christianity much more to the fore as well. And I don’t know if that’s my perspective coming from it from my godless, heathen state now, but I noticed it more. The whole political thing with Pozzo and Lucky was a whole lot stronger than I remembered. Now that might just be my memory, I don’t know…
Lea: I like your take. I didn’t pick up on it particularly…
Sybil: Cos you were asleep!
Lea: Oh man! So embarrassed.
Sybil: So do we need to say anything more about it?
Lea: I don’t think so. I think it’s like a right of passage that we’ve seen it.
Sybil: Oh look, and I actually suspect that we’re going to ruminate and Hugo and Richard’s performances are going to become richer.
Lea: Oh they were outstanding.
Sybil: They were absolutely outstanding, and I think I’m going to become more and more irritated by Lucky’s performance. And the guy who played Pozzo? He could go either way! Not sure.
Lea: Let’s see how we go!
Sybil: So you know, there were moments of brilliance.
Lea: Oh yes.
Sybil: It would have been interesting to see it with the original director.
Lea: You know how they do the whole works of Shakespeare in 15 minutes?
Sybil: I’ve seen that!
Lea: I’d like to see Waiting for Godot in 10.
Sybil: Well maybe not 10. But for me – get rid of the Pozzo and Lucky stuff, just do the the Gogo and Dodo…
Lea: Didi and Gogo.
Sybil: Yes. Whatever, them. And do it in an hour.
Lea: Yes, I’d watch that.
Sybil: The best of… Waiting for Godot!
Lea: Got it.
Sybil: We are heathens.
Lea: We are.
Sybil: We’ve just lost all our credibility
Lea: It’s gone. It’s out the window!
Sybil: You know. I would have said it was my cuppa tea. Right exactly in my sweet spot. Fabulous actors, one of the great plays – you know it’s a classic, it’s part of the canon.
Lea: But it is difficult.
Sybil: It’s a difficult play…
Lea:  Out of 5?
Sybil: I don’t know!
Lea: I know it’s hard isn’t it. Almost like you need a day to think about it.
Sybil: What do you think?
Lea: Three?
Sybil: I’m going three and a half. Because I think it’s worth more than a three.
Lea: Yeah, it is for Hugo and Richard.
Sybil: They were fabulous… and I’ve never seen either of them on stage before and I was impressed.
Lea: I’ve seen Hugo.
Sybil: I’m going to give it a three and a half.
Lea: Well I’m sitting on a three and I may change it by the time this goes to air. We’ll see what happens.

IN SUMMARY

Sybil: A show that I genuinely believed would be in my ‘sweet spot’ – it just didn’t give me what I was looking for, despite stellar performances from Hugo Weaving and Richard Roxburgh. Maybe a ‘well made play’ is more my thing – I do like my theatre more visceral and connected. Give me some catharsis or a tune I can hum… Does that make me a theatrical heathen? Perhaps. So sue me. Who would like it? Well I would have thought I would… I guess if you want to see two actors in prime form, playing with language, meaning and clowning – then go see it.
Lea: Waiting For Godot is an important play, but not one I need to see again. But god I loved Hugo and Richard together. Maybe I have too many existential crises to deal with of my own, to be able to let go and take this ride with STC and Andrew Upton. I need a bumper sticker that says ‘I saw Waiting For Godot, willingly. Now I’m done!’.

Question: Is it okay to not like an evening at theatre, even though the performances were excellent?

PRE & POST SHOW DRINKS: A quick beverage in the foyer before the show and at interval. But as with many of the longer shows, a ‘Post Show Car Chat’ ensued.
HANGOVER STATUS: We waited for the hangover to show up, but it never came.

DRINKS ALLOWED IN THEATRE?