Long Day's Journey Into Night

The Muddy Waters Theatre Company in St. Louis had quite a year in 2010. Following its production of Desire Under the Elms in March and Now I Ask You in June (the latter was reviewed in volume 32 of the Eugene O'Neill Review), this company, which dedicates part of each season to an investigation of the work of one famous playwright, took on the culminating play in the O'Neill repertoire. A program note states, "Our mission as a theater company is to inspire, nurture, challenge, educate, and empower artists and audiences in St. Louis to achieve the highest level of cultural excellence while providing unparalleled entertainment." With such a season, Muddy Waters has proven it is a company well worth watching both for its intentions and accomplishments.

They work in a small theater seating about seventy people. Harley Hammerman, with whom I attended one performance, remarked on the satisfaction of seeing Long Day's Journey in this type of theater where you can really see the faces of the actors and relate closely to their feelings. The audience sits on three sides of a small stage. The director made good use of it, placing in the setting only a table with a chandelier above it, chairs around it, an easy chair on the side, and a small sort of chaise lounge downstage. Entrances and exits on four sides allowed easy access for the coming and going of characters.

Sometimes it is harder to write a review about a good, solid production than one that tries to improve the playwright or perhaps doesn't trust the playwright. It is easy to recount awful errors in judgment. For example, I once saw this play with a Mary who appeared anorexic and who entered in the last act, not dragging the precious wedding gown but wearing it! In the St. Louis production, O'Neill was given full respect and his intentions were fully carried out. The director, Cameron Ulrich, one of the founders of the company, moved the actors around the stage with great clarity and precision, especially in some of the long speeches in which the actors must at some point have their backs to a portion of the audience.

Robert Ashton as James Tyrone moved effectively from miserly tirades to good-humored interaction with his sons and wife. He was especially effective in the long speeches about his hard life and early successes. It was particularly pleasing to see how much love (in many productions covered up by anger and bitterness) he displayed toward his wife and sons. Mary, played by Kary Ely, responded completely to this love, yet moved swiftly from adoration to bitter accusations. Aaron Orion Baker played the role of Edmund with poignancy and a sense of double anguish about his mother (her illness) and himself (his own). As Jamie, Joshua Thomas explored all the possibilities of anger, humor, and self-pity. Seeing his fine performance, I realized anew what a great opportunity the role gives to an actor, such as Jason Robards, to show his talents. A handsome man, with a fine voice, one could well imagine Thomas playing the role of James Tyrone in the future.

Two aspects of the production disappointed me. The first had to do with Mary's appearance. So much is made of her being an "armful" and having gained twenty pounds. The play makes clear when Mary dines with the family and is eating, she gains weight and is "her old self " again. When she is using drugs, she either eats little at the table or has her meals sent up to her room, in either case becoming thin. One of the reasons her husband and son are so convinced of her recovery and cure this time is that she is eating and has gained weight. This makes it all the more heartbreaking when they find she eats almost no breakfast, leading them to suspect the worst. Yet the costume for Mary in the first act was a striped skirt and very frilly see-through blouse, with a wide black belt emphasizing a small waist. Her hair was elaborately coiffed in a manner Mary alone could not have accomplished. In the last act, she appeared in a smartly cut pink satin robe, reminding me of a 1940s' film with Claudette Colbert or some other glamorous star. Although a few of her curls had come down, she certainly did not appear to be a woman who had been using drugs all day and staggering around in a dusty attic looking for her wedding dress.

The other disappointment was the director's decision to set up scrims around the stage to simulate the effect of fog. At first there were only a few and one could lean over and see between them, but in the last act the entire stage was closed off by them. Not only did they cut off that pleasing proximity, which I mentioned earlier, but they vibrated because of the ventilating system and had accidental highlights on them from the lighting. This was an expensive and distracting addition to the production.

The audience at both performances I saw responded strongly to the production. It was evident that the length of the play was not a problem and that they were moved by the performances. I can only wish this company would consider committing a second season to the plays of O'Neill.