The biggest sin of Sarah Burgess' Kings is that it's merely entertaining.
You're probably wondering why that's even a sin.
Of course, it's not. Lots of people go to the the theater to be entertained. I'm sure that's why Cats ran for twenty years.
The problem with Kings is that it's masquerading as a deeper play when essentially everything Burgess has to say is right there on the surface. There's no there there. The whole thing is presented quite literally. The playwright highlights the fact that lobbyists are controlling American politics, that politicians can be bought for the right price, and that well, cash is king. All things we as the audience already know because we live in America in the present, where laws are made to benefit those greasing the palms of the people in power.
Kings focuses on, or at least pretends to focus on, two female lobbyists, Lauren, who lobbies in finance and Kate, whose focus is healthcare, as they attempt to manipulate politicians for their own causes. Oh, and did I mention they also used to date? This is a detail that is throw out to us but never actually makes any impact on the play. Neither of them are particularly likeable, in fact they're downright grating.
I say that Kings pretends to focus on these women because the real center of the play is a novice congresswoman from Texas, Sydney Millsap, who refuses to play their game and would rather make choices based on what she thinks is right for her constituents. Millsap also becomes the moral center of the play as she gains popularity and a bit of help from Kate, and even unseats a long-standing male senator in the primaries. Ultimately, she does not win the general election because well, she doesn't want to play the game despite Kate's warnings. This leads to Kate having very vague and undeveloped feelings of guilt at the end. But...too little too late. Kate and Lauren aren't particularly fleshed out characters, and we certainly do not care enough about them to feel sorry for them when things do not go their way. Kate's been in the game too long to suddenly feel remorse for not doing more to help the right woman. Isn't this what her job is?
Regardless, Burgess needs to figure out just where her focus lies. The action checks in on the lobbyists from time to time but we spend the most time with Millsap. The shift in focus is so dramatic that Kate and Lauren feel like an afterthought. Especially when they bring nothing new and fresh to the proceedings.
I don't often mention direction or technical elements but I cannot ignore the downright awful staging by director Tommy Kail; the set is just all wrong for this play. Having the playing space in the center of the stage with the audience facing each other makes absolutely no sense, and nothing in the text supports it. It should've been a traditional proscenium set. Is it supposed to represent a boxing ring? Well, nothing in the text sizzles like a boxing match, and the characters never face off in a way that is even remotely exciting (the closest we get is a debate between Millsap and the incumbent senator).
But I will say one thing: this is the first time I've ever seen sizzling fajitas on stage.
You're probably wondering why that's even a sin.
Of course, it's not. Lots of people go to the the theater to be entertained. I'm sure that's why Cats ran for twenty years.
The problem with Kings is that it's masquerading as a deeper play when essentially everything Burgess has to say is right there on the surface. There's no there there. The whole thing is presented quite literally. The playwright highlights the fact that lobbyists are controlling American politics, that politicians can be bought for the right price, and that well, cash is king. All things we as the audience already know because we live in America in the present, where laws are made to benefit those greasing the palms of the people in power.
Kings focuses on, or at least pretends to focus on, two female lobbyists, Lauren, who lobbies in finance and Kate, whose focus is healthcare, as they attempt to manipulate politicians for their own causes. Oh, and did I mention they also used to date? This is a detail that is throw out to us but never actually makes any impact on the play. Neither of them are particularly likeable, in fact they're downright grating.
I say that Kings pretends to focus on these women because the real center of the play is a novice congresswoman from Texas, Sydney Millsap, who refuses to play their game and would rather make choices based on what she thinks is right for her constituents. Millsap also becomes the moral center of the play as she gains popularity and a bit of help from Kate, and even unseats a long-standing male senator in the primaries. Ultimately, she does not win the general election because well, she doesn't want to play the game despite Kate's warnings. This leads to Kate having very vague and undeveloped feelings of guilt at the end. But...too little too late. Kate and Lauren aren't particularly fleshed out characters, and we certainly do not care enough about them to feel sorry for them when things do not go their way. Kate's been in the game too long to suddenly feel remorse for not doing more to help the right woman. Isn't this what her job is?
Regardless, Burgess needs to figure out just where her focus lies. The action checks in on the lobbyists from time to time but we spend the most time with Millsap. The shift in focus is so dramatic that Kate and Lauren feel like an afterthought. Especially when they bring nothing new and fresh to the proceedings.
I don't often mention direction or technical elements but I cannot ignore the downright awful staging by director Tommy Kail; the set is just all wrong for this play. Having the playing space in the center of the stage with the audience facing each other makes absolutely no sense, and nothing in the text supports it. It should've been a traditional proscenium set. Is it supposed to represent a boxing ring? Well, nothing in the text sizzles like a boxing match, and the characters never face off in a way that is even remotely exciting (the closest we get is a debate between Millsap and the incumbent senator).
But I will say one thing: this is the first time I've ever seen sizzling fajitas on stage.
Comments
Post a Comment