Dmitry KOROBOV
The theater studio "By the way" of Vyacheslav Kaganovich continues the glorious tradition of theatrical asceticism in Chicago. For which he deserves enormous gratitude from those who need the theater no less than their daily bread.
The theater studio "By the way" of Vyacheslav Kaganovich continues the glorious tradition of theatrical asceticism in Chicago. For which he deserves enormous gratitude from those who need the theater no less than their daily bread.
The play "Chagall. The Color of Love" is based on the play "Flights with an Angel" by Zinovy Sagalov.
While I like Sagalov's work in general, I don't particularly like this particular play. It has a certain clunkiness, unambiguity, simplicity of moves, overload of small characters without any special characteristic features... But still, there is a certain potential. And here it is up to the director and, above all, the performer of the main role. Above all - because it is the acting that can pull the action out of this text.
For example, in the first production of the play, which took place in the Kharkov Shevchenko Theatre more than 15 years ago, the main role was played by Leonid Tarabarinov. He moved away from concretization, from Marc Chagall as such, playing the Artist in general, it was a poetic monologue (the presence of the Angel there only interfered). Having left age to the plasticity of old age, he, without changing it throughout the entire performance, carried within himself the eternally young soul of the creator.
Vyacheslav Kaganovich's approach to the role, I would say, is antonymous with Kharkov's. Here, too, there are breakthroughs into high creativity, but the starting point is always life in its most mundane manifestations, a kind of living and being. In front of us, in general, is an ordinary person with an unusual view of the world. As a young man, he wants to study at an art school, with difficulty achieves admission, but his world is wider and more unusual than that which appears within the walls of the school. Mark leaves it with the same stubbornness with which he was eager to get into it. Here it concerns his personality, his "self", and in such moments he is uncompromising. Kaganovich very well captures these transitions from a soft character to a readiness to defend his world in the most decisive way.
But the actor excels at scenes, I would say, of Chagall’s unity with the world that he so greedily absorbed. And again, they arise from simple everyday routine (how can one not recall Akhmatova’s “if only you knew from what rubbish poetry grows, without shame”). Here he climbs onto the roof – and there it is night. And with a blissful smile (no, with a smile of bliss) he turns his face to the starry sky, this is already a dialogue that will spill out in his canvases… And the same with people going to the synagogue, with love for Bela, with the “coloring” of the city commissioned by Lunacharsky… Everyday ordinary (and extraordinary) events are calls of inspiration…
And so, grain by grain, Kaganovich forms the image of the Artist, who emerges like a flower, almost invisible behind the web of life, but so bright and pulsating, as soon as this web is pulled back...
In addition to Chagall himself, Kaganovich plays many small roles-sketch. Here it is impossible to play everything evenly, those characters are remembered for which a successful touch was found (Lunacharsky's speech, the laughter of the painting teacher, etc.) Since these roles are only barely sketched in the play, those of them where bright acting "markers" were not found are simply forgotten.
In general, the performance reaches its highest points where it manages to “lower” the text’s raucousness and excessive pathos, to talk to the viewer in simple language, as they say, “about life”. And when this fails, the text begins to “cut the ear”, as, for example, in the scene of the Angel’s first appearance. Fortunately, in other images, the actress Marina Smolina reaches a very decent level. Before talking about this in more detail, one more (the most clearly perceptible) example of a complex relationship with the play. Two scenes with the Revolution. The first is a kind of “evil grin” of the Revolution, a grotesque symbol that may have been appropriate in the late 80s, but now, when Soviet history is perceived more calmly, it is clearly exaggerated and even jarring. But in the second scene, a theatrical miracle occurs, the authors of which are director Arnold Shvetsov and, first of all, Marina Smolina. Revolution suddenly turns into a revolutionary, the symbol into a woman. Unexpected for such an image, notes of participation and sympathy for the artist appear. We see an ordinary woman who sincerely feels sorry for Chagall, but just as sincerely she does not understand him and cannot agree with his worldview. She came from another dimension, in her world neither flying people nor pictures of pregnant cows in the city center can exist, but is it her fault? Smolina justifies her heroine as an actor, answering almost unequivocally: no, not hers.
But still, Smolina's two main images (apart from the Angel himself) are Bella and the Mother. If it is difficult to say anything evaluative about Bella, the role is so evenly played (except, perhaps, for the very powerful scene with the burning of her portrait), then the image of the Mother is a great success for the actress. Here, in every scene, there is pure emotion, whether she remembers her husband, laments that her son did not go to Vitebsk to visit his family graves, is horrified by Mark's refusal to study painting... With all this, she is so simple that her very humanity on some floors touches on the genius of her son. Perhaps she cannot understand everything in his work, but she can accept and feel it - undoubtedly. The human heart itself can be brilliant, the actress convinces us.
The pearls generously scattered throughout the performance are the musical inclusions of the violinist (oh, no! a virtuoso "fiddler"! ) Mikhail Kleinerman. He plays a few tiny episodes, and not badly, but what a violin!
It is impossible not to mention another full-fledged author of the play – the artist Irina Ratner. The scenery, made with her own hands (from start to finish!), gives the action an inexplicable flair, enveloping the viewer in a special Chagall atmosphere. The entire stage becomes Chagall's world. At the same time, without violating the concept of the play, this world often grows out of accurately observed everyday attributes.
The finale of the play would be really good if it weren't so predictable. It's already clear at the beginning of the second act (especially if you know the play) that the Artist and the Angel will light the seventh candle and go up this inclined plane somewhere towards the stars ("Let's fly!"). The only clarification is that they are going towards the carved figures of Chagall's flying lovers who have descended from the heavens. And, of course, they freeze, embracing each other and the candle, with inspired faces. Maybe that's okay. Although why not leave the stage like that, embracing, leaving the viewer alone with Chagall the artist, and even show reproductions of his paintings on the screen: here he is, Chagall, as we can see him today... But perhaps such a finale requires more creative risk (and even material resources).
I want to finish where I started.
The creative endeavor of Vyacheslav Kaganovich and the actors of "By the way", their work practically on pure enthusiasm and thirst for creativity evokes the deepest respect. Thank you. Sincere, like your performance. People need this. For, as we know from the cradle, not by bread alone...