 David Terry and Rachel Terry. Photo - Sensory Creative
Donald Margulies’ play Dinner with Friends introduces us
to two married couples who have been a close foursome of friends for
over a decade, and what happens to this larger group when one of the
marriages breaks apart.
Gabe (Antony Gargas) and Karen (Rebecca Rocheford Davies) are the ostensibly happy couple, a pair of middle-aged, middle-class “foodies” who, twelve years ago, introduced Tom (David Terry), Gabe’s best friend since college, to Karen’s artist friend Beth (Rachel Terry). Tom and Beth
got married and both couples have been close ever since, raising their
respective kids and routinely sharing a summer house. However, upon
returning from a trip to Italy, Gabe and Karen are shocked when Beth tells them that Tom
has left her for another woman. Unbeknownst to them, their friends’
marriage has been on the rocks for quite some time, and when Tom
later arrives to tell his side of the story separately, he declares
that he in fact has been miserable for the bulk of their marriage.
The meat of the play then primarily deals with Gabe and Karen’s
attempts to come to terms with the situation and ponder their own
astonishing ignorance of its long fermentation, as well as the
implications this has for their collective and respective individual
friendships, and even the status of their own marriage. We are thus
witness to hurt and confused characters as they try to articulate their
disapproval, relief, shock, elation and betrayal over this turn of
events, and how their once cosy quartet has now been irrevocably
disbanded.
In particular, the play explores how even very intimate friends and
family members can have quite drastically differing perspectives on
themselves, each other, and the relationships that bind them all
together. For example, while Tom perceives his life-altering decision as a desperately needed personal rebirth, Gabe views their divorce as being “like a death”,
mourning the consequent passing of the happy double pairing that had
spent over a decade together. Indeed, perhaps the best scene in the
play is a later meeting between Gabe and Tom in a bar, some months after the split.
Whereas in an earlier scene Tom had demanded Gabe merely
be supportive and not pass any judgment, he is now prepared to listen
to what his old friend has to say, and it is not good. As Gabe explains to Karen in a subsequent scene, “I don’t love him anymore”, and indeed one can palpably feel the man withdrawing from Tom
as he tries to express to him his incomprehension and sense of personal
betrayal, a betrayal of their collective lives together.
The second act begins with a flashback to Tom and Beth’s
first meeting twelve years earlier at the summer house, and it is the
only scene featuring all four characters at once. It is an interesting
glimpse into the formation of the foursome, but is not particularly
revelatory (other than one fleeting hint of a secret which is
ultimately never paid off) and ultimately seems rather extraneous. By
starting Act Two with a flashback one begins to expect that the
remainder of the play will be set in this era, thus presenting a
backwards narrative, but instead it is an isolated scene which mostly
just seems structurally awkward. The remainder of the play resumes the
initial timeline after the passage of a few months and ultimately
reaches a fairly predicable conclusion.
All four of the actors in this production are very strong, each
presenting a distinct, clear characterisation with confidence and
conviction, ably directed by Kim Hardwick. Most scenes, even if
they feature a third character, are primarily duologues, and these are
well performed and make the relationships believable, if not altogether
compelling. This failure to elicit a deep sense of engagement, however,
is due to the words, not their speakers.
Indeed, it is hard for me to imagine how this play won a Pulitzer
Prize. Although interesting, skillfully-written and delicately
characterised, Dinner with Friends is really rather
conventional and hardly innovative in style, execution or topic. While
I do not wish to express any kind of disdain for the mainstream, it is
nevertheless difficult to see sufficient merit in this unremarkable
work to warrant such an accolade. It is a well-observed piece to be
sure, but little in it is especially moving or profound, while the
comedic moments are merely light touches to leaven the dour subject
matter.
To be a little more even-handed, one’s reaction to this play would very
much depend on the extent to which one identifies (perhaps unhappily
so) with the characters and marital fissures portrayed. For those who
are or have experienced such relationship woes, this might cut closer
to the bone, but not necessarily. Having seen Belvoir’s excellent new
production of Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? only the night
before, this portrayal of an acrimonious marriage breakdown seems like
weak sauce. Perhaps it is an unfair comparison to cite a modern classic
of such stature, an epic of total emotional apocalypse, but given the
similarities of both being four-handers about two married couples, one
ostensibly happy, the other apparently seething with hostility and how
revelations of each relationship reflect back on the other, one can’t
help but compare the two texts.
Dinner with Friends is a very good production of a solid play,
brought to life by talented actors. Just don’t expect anything
groundbreaking. And whatever you do, don’t see it the night after Woolf!
Darlinghurst Theatre Company and Fishy Productions present
DINNER WITH FRIENDS
By Donald Margulies
Venue: Darlinghurst Theatre | 19 Greenknowe Ave, Potts Point
Dates: Thursday 26 July to Saturday 18 August
Times: 8pm Tuesday - Saturday, 5pm Sunday
Bookings: www.darlinghursttheatre.com or 02 8356 9987
 Quote this review on your site | E-mail
Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.4 |
