email this
print thisSAVE AND SHARE
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
A fine 'Line,' absurdly fun and disturbing
Israel Horowitz's one-act play Line is having a nice, crisp production by the Luna Theater Company at the Walnut's Studio 5, under Gregory Scott Campbell's direction. Like the best theater of the absurd, it is both entertaining and disturbing - as well as an invitation to interpret. What are they waiting for? (Surely it's not . . . it couldn't be. . . .)
So there's this guy sleeping on the floor next to a white-tape line. That's the extent of the show's scenery. Fleming (Chris Fluck) is wearing work clothes and work boots. He wakes up. He eats a banana and throws the banana peel on the floor. Contrary to all expectations, nobody will slip on that banana peel.
Eventually, he is joined by three other men and a woman. Well, "joined" may sound too friendly, since each person wants to be first in line.
There's the creepy young guy (Nathaniel Robertson), a composer, who is mad about Mozart and who analyzes the contents of people's wallets. There's Dolan (Mike Hagan), a middle-aged "Mr. Nice Guy" in a suit.
The arrival of a woman changes the group dynamic by adding sex: Each guy has a "dance" with her - even her underdog husband (Bob Schmidt). Molly (hats off to Tina Brock who stepped into the role only a few days before opening) "screws her way into first place," and suddenly the play seems to be about gender politics. That Molly can tailor the dances to the men - from minuet to bunnyhop - is a chilling comment on her manipulative powers.
Line is clearly a play about competition: The men compete with one another for Molly, as well as with one another - and with her - for first place. But they don't like her, so why do they want her? Easy answer: because she's there. Another easy answer: because the other guys want her. Easiest answer: for the same reason they want to be first in line. Each person succeeds and fails, and the tricks get dirtier and the waiting more violent.
There's a note in the program by Ionesco, who loved Line - and why not? If Horowitz hadn't written it, Ionesco would have. The playwrights share the same sociopolitical sensibility and express their contempt for humankind in the same absurdist manner.
The production's underscoring is clever, and the final scene ends, appropriately, with - and in - a fugue.
