The Man in the Attic - Out North - Role of the Speaker

Anchorage's Out North Theater was the setting for the world premiere of Australian playwright Timothy Daly's play, The Man in the Attic. I think it’s neat when we get to see world premieres (of non-Alaskan) plays here.

This is not a review of the play. I haven’t had enough time to process it, nor, having seen it just once, am I sure I can make any serious pronouncements without going back to see if my recollections are accurate..

The premise is an interesting twist on an old familiar theme - the persecution of Jews in Nazi Germany. What is it about Nazi Germany that fascinates writers so much more than other human persecution and suffering around the world? (I write this aware from the program that Black Cockerel [link added later] of Africa - another world premiere - is up next at Out North.) Is it because both the persecutors and persecuted are white? Is it because the context is already so familiar that the audience already understands who the good guys and bad guys are?

I realize that when I say I haven’t processed the play yet, I’m really stalling. Overall the play kept my attention. There were a few things I really liked, one I didn’t, and that while there were moments - like the man in the attic’s debate with God - of above average interest, for the most part the script was ordinary. The language conveyed the content, but the words didn’t dazzle me, say, the way they do in a Tom Stoppard play.

But let’s also remember that the cast was local Alaskans with acting experience, but not world class actors. I’m reminded of this because Bernie Blaine, the actor who played “Speaker,” did manage to elevate all her lines into riveting speech.

But I’d like to explore two ideas that came from the experience of the play. The first is about acting in a play that is set in a different culture and language. The second is about the device of “Speaker” the part that combined the roles of Greek chorus, narrator, alter ego, and a few more. Bernie herself, after the play, described her part as "the literary device."

I’ll do Speaker first and language in a second post.

The basic set was a small house and attic that were open to the audience. To the right were two chairs where one or two actors sat when they were not in the scene and where action in the neighbor’s house took place. On the left was “Speaker” sitting at a table with electronic equipment. She confused me at first. She began, if I remember correctly, as a narrator giving the audience asides. “This is a story” I remember her saying. But she also said things that the actors echoed. And this was done so well it seemed totally natural. Later in the play she actually got up and gave one of the characters a prop. At other times she would prod a particular actor into examining something more closely. And all the while she was controlling the music and other sound effects. This latter role I think was the director’s idea, not the playwright’s.

This part grew on me as the play went on. I think in part it was because of the actor’s great voice and persona. She was a bit like the lion tamer at the circus - keeping the actors performing, prompting them now and then, seemingly in charge (controlling the music added to this sense) but trying to keep out of the spotlight as much as possible.

Why was this role in the play? Was it merely to make sure the audience understood the story line? Did it have some greater metaphorical meaning, perhaps intended to mimic the way the Germans controlled the stories the man in the attic heard? Or the way the Nazi’s controlled the stories the Germans heard? I don’t see direct parallels.

In any case, it was nicely done and added greatly to my playwatching experience.

Part II is here.