
The Seagull premiered at the Alexandrinsky Theatre, St Petersburg, in 1896. This isn’t the Alexandrinksy, but it is St Petersburg!
If you were to imagine the plays of Chekhov arranged on a seesaw (bear with me on this idea), his early offerings like Platonov and Ivanov would be high in the air on one side of the seesaw and his meaty humdingers like Three Sisters and The Cherry Orchard would be firmly rooted to the ground on the other. The Seagull would be hovering over the fulcrum in the centre, bursting with Chekhov’s teeming ideas and themes, but never quite playing them out to their maximum effect.
I’m glad to get that iffy metaphor out of the way. The Royal Lyceum Edinburgh production of The Seagull enjoyed a brief extension at the Chichester Festival Theatre last week and marked not only new Artistic Director James Brining’s first show for the Lyceum but it has also been hinted that it will have been Caroline Quentin’s swansong in live theatre (which would if true, officially, be a travesty). In his programme note, adaptor Mike Poulton emphasises that he hasn’t attempted to modernise Chekhov to make him in some way more relevant today, because Chekhov is naturally eternally relevant; and when I read that before the show started, it was music to my ears.
That said, this production took traditional to its extremes. It was the very essence of reverence; yes, it allowed Chekhov’s text to do all the talking, but it came across as surprisingly bland. There was very little change of pace; the big dramatic moments (of which there aren’t many) were softly delivered, and both the comedy and the tragedy of the play were dialled down. The central character, the fading but still vain actor Arkadina, has the potential to horrify the audience with her insensitivity but still make you laugh with her asides; the main tragic character, her son Konstantin, ought to move the audience to tears with his mental torture, so that his final act comes as an awful culmination of his misery. But the production was neither funny enough to make you laugh much, nor tragic enough to make you cry. Overall, it just wasn’t enough.
There were, nevertheless, a number of successful aspects to the show. You really gained a sense of what it might have been like to live in the middle of the Russian nowhere in the 1890s, with decent people scraping a living whilst decadent others showed no empathy. It offered a substantial atmosphere of hopelessness; the disparate elements of a non-cohesive community where the only thing you could enjoy was the sunny weather, which would eventually turn into your enemy when winter came. Colin Richmond’s set judged that faded glory perfectly, with its tall windows and encroaching fields, suggesting that the natural environment would soon overtake the increasingly dismal dacha as it falls into decline; a lovely allegory of the last days of the Tsars.
Caroline Quentin’s Arkadina was the picture of haughtiness, full of a pretence of caring whilst scarcely hiding her selfish soul. She gave the character an urban sophistication to contrast with the rural backwater and portrayed her as a genuine person rather than an any kind of caricature. The humour that is an essential part of Arkadina never quite came to the fore, but it was a very believable performance. Harmony Rose-Bremner was excellent as Nina, unassuming but ambitious, looking to improve herself and gain favour wherever possible. She made a good partnership with Lorn Macdonald’s Konstantin, trying to perform his pretentious play to the best of her ability; Mr Macdonald portrayed Konstantin as a weak and ineffectual aesthete, trying to find his artistic voice – but perhaps not trying that hard. Unfortunately, the final scene between the two where Nina explains why she went off with Arkadina’s lover Trigorin, and Konstantin’s beseeching that she stays with him, came across as very static and monotonous, creating a conversation that ends very much with a whimper rather than a bang.
Elsewhere, Steven McNicoll made the best of his opportunities as the estate manager Shamrayev, bringing in some welcome humorous petulance when refusing to budge over providing horses for the carriage; Tallulah Greive was a splendidly belligerent Masha, Forbes Masson gave a wistful, but distant, performance as Dorn, Michael Dylan’s Medvendenko was suitably hard-working but under-achieving, and Dyfan Dwyfor a convincing, if perhaps over-likeable Trigorin.
Art versus reality, eloquence versus an inability to communicate, fresh ambition versus the reality of failure. Chekhov’s ideas are all there, but they felt particularly sub-surface in this production rather than given their full potential. All very respectful and all very safe; it was good, but you can’t help but feel that with that cast it should have been better.


