Arnold Wesker, the English play writer emphasizes social points of view in his play The kitchen (1957–1959). He painted in true metaphor the world, he shows us, its autonomous organisation, inside structure, connections, conflicts and hierarchy. Into the middle of his drama, which happens between working conditions with social inspiration, he puts the questions of social dialogues. The artists of the Andrej Bagar Theatre in Nyitra, during the present economic crisis, finds actual the performing of this play.

The performers of The “Kitchen” want to make us think about the indirectly shown but suitably performed problems of our world. From this point of view, the kitchen can become the significant symbol of the reality, which surrounds us. The micro world of the performance can be widen into universal in that way, and it can illustrate that theatrical rule, according to which a theatrical performance with its micro world, can illustrate in reality the macro cosmos, its concentrated, summing compression.

The actors of the Andrej Bagar Theatre from Nyitra can elevate the kitchen into the symbol of their own professional workshop too. Which means, that the performers have the opportunity to make sure of their own possibilities, to immerse together in those spiritual depths, which is carried and summed up in the play by a generation’s messages, thoughts, symbols. According to it the performance of The Kitchen can show the other less well-known side of the actors and the whole troupe, the way, how they can make a performance together. Let’s see, what do these performers prepare in the kitchen of the Andrej Bagar Theatre?

The Hungarian director, Zoltán Balázs, for the performance of the play, The Kitchen by Arnold Wesker, has chosen the circular shaped studio of the theatre. The choice of this circle shaped stage connects perfectly to the director’s concept, according to which, the performance is going on in a central place, which can ensure the place, which is suitable for both the centrifugal and the centripetal movements and it is an ideal place at the same time for the multidimensional overlaps. By entering the studio, it becomes totally obvious that the performers emphasize the fine artistic approaches. However, the fine artistic elements do not illustrate, but it can be connected to the topic of the kitchen. Instead of the hyper modern actual solutions, by the set design they build up very uniquely the visual world of gastronomy and of the staff, who are moving in the kitchen. Péter Polgár, the young Hungarian set and costume designer, does not put the place in front of the viewers with the ordinary fine artistic solutions, which he deprives from its naturalistic, documentary nature. He dresses the chefs and the waitresses in uniforms. He matches the costumes to each other according to surprisingly uniform ideas. The chefs and the waitresses appear on stage in innovative creatures of dresses instead of realistic working costumes. In the costume plan of “the kitchen” it is exemplary, that the dresses get into a seemingly neutral place from the ordinary stereotypes, where they can be renewed. Péter Polgár has not needed to offer crutches for the actors to from master chefs with his costumes. Everybody is dressed into unified, scarf like skirts, and he can balance that way the gender differences between men and women. While the actors’ strangely weird and characteristically long by the ground skirts, make us remember the Japanese kimonos mostly, the waitresses are wearing uniformed black and white miniskirts, which get their personalities.

We can state, that the Hungarian troupe with the special intercultural theatrical approach of the original play, can bring some fresh air into the Studio of DAB in Nyitra. The many nations of the kitchen (Irish, English, German, Italian, Cyprian and so on) in the play by Wesker, are made to be equal, not only by their kitchen uniform, but with their innovative “dresses” they can change refreshingly the traditional staging interpretation of the play too. The kimonos of the masters of kitchen with the Asian like make ups, together with their wigs and costumes refer to the eastern cultures. The performers put the multicultural kitchen into holistic perspective by the showing of another culture. By the fact, that the dominant kitchen gets an eastern-like appearance, the symbolic dimension of the performance becomes universal. It is generally true mostly in connection with the costumes, especially the men’s black and white kimonos, which are decorated by brown stripes. The chefs form an unified choir with the lowered skirt-like clothes. Surprisingly the director and the designer nuance the figures on stage by not emphasizing their nationalities (German, Irish, English, Cyprian and so on), and let the actors wide area to work out their characters.

In the performance of The Kitchen the intercultural phenomenon can mean the existence of two cultural worlds at the same time. The performers, who are consistently and inventively stylizers, emphasize the symbolic, metaphoric and transcendental meanings of the situations of the Wesker’s play. The set harmonises well with the special forms of the creatively stylized costumes. The place, which is similar to a painting, is full of creative signs. It is characterised by versatile functionality: with its emphasized concrete elements it can emphasize a controversial micro-world, which is placed then into a sacral surrounding. The stage with its circle shape makes us remember a mandala, where the power of yin and yang can be found too. The mystical and eastern element, which appears in Wesker’s “kitchen” can bring a sovereign and intercultural element into theatre. The set designer, Péter Polgár, puts a monumental copper pot into the middle of the mandala, of the circle shaped stage of the studio. All rubbish from food get here. The button of the pot as the whole stage too is covered by sand. The greyish material with its neutral colour together with the actors’ uniforms have an interesting effect, it gains almost archetypical dimension. The set designer can create a light set, which is stuck to the ground at the same time, from the dusty sand, where the idea can operate well, according to which, they throw and blow through the unified material all over the surface of the circle. The actors can move silently with bare foot on the sand, and it changes the kitchen into the space-time of the moments, which are passing fast. The sand, which has been put on the grand is formed by the designer with light and circular lines, and that way he fills the place with the meditational stresses of Japanese gardens. With it, he subjects the whole place to the finely cult and universally connected conception at the same time. Partly we have already referred to that punctually worked out minimalism, which characterizes the whole performance. We cannot say that the conception would have made the kitchen realistically bigger. Péter Polgár’s set has abstracted the kitchen otherwise, he has tried to form it into an artistic piece of work. The symmetrically hanged copper discs form its most characteristic properties. We can see copper circle working surfaces with different sizes, which are hung from above, together with knives keepers, potholders, kitchen tools, scales, which are the chefs’ creative working stands. Everybody is working hard, but they form just dull white mixture of flour instead of real professionals. The chefs choose the right ingredients, they make portions from them with sharp knives, and they form the imagined portions of food onto the plates. The whole mechanism of the kitchen is organised well over-thought, with its well-matched tools and properly formed parts, makes us remember an imagined factory.

We can say generally that the image of the stage is one characteristic of the performance. The relationships between each elements to one another. In the middle, with more circle discs, there is a cobber pot, which is there to prepare food in it. The strange company of chefs, who are standing on the wooden podiums, are connected to it. It is a shame, that the viewers do not have a better view on the whole of it, from a higher perspective, for example from the balconies, which are around the studio. From a kind of bird’s-eye view, we could get a unified picture of the micro world of the symmetrically designed area (Originally Wesker imagined his “kitchen” into the basement of a big restaurant.)

The visual unity of the whole performance is supported well by the sensitive enlightenment, which divides the scenes too at the same time. We can see the ordinary working days of a staff in a working place, in the simple kitchen of a restaurant, who change rude and sometimes friendly words with one another, as they are mostly tired of their work. Above them, similarly to a queen, there is Marango on a throne (Daniela Kuffelová), the mystical owner of the restaurant, who supervise from above the operation of the kitchen. While the foods are prepared, the individual portraits of the slaves of the kitchen, appear. They are characterized by unrestraint, competition, fear and subjection, but one thing is common in them: they are absolutely loyal to their boss, to Marango. The monotonous cycles of the order and preparation of foods are running in a continuously faster and faster speed, until they have reached their final top trade. Under the stronger lighting, the work is going on with the speed of a carousel. In this bustle of the kitchen, the mysterious Marango, who is affecting in the role of the gods, from above comes down sometimes between the ordinary people. She is the only character, who moves carefully and does not get into connection with the sand. She walks on the stairs, signed by the pedestals, which the culinary masters, who are standing on the circular arc, put down in front of her legs, one by one.

The director, Zoltán Balázs can handle the actors and actresses of the national troupe unbiasedly. He gives roles surprisingly to the younger actors, he gets involved even the younger generation too, for example Jakub Rybárik, Alena Pajtinková. At the same time, he guards the more talented actors with fresh and innovative method. Arnold Wesker’s dramatic masterpiece does not give the possibility for the individual artistic performances to stand out. The director continuously encourages the actors to shout down one another in one part, to react intensively with their voices to the happenings or to tell the texts as stereotypes, similarly as they are by a conveyor belt. It is a shame, that from the point of view of the sound effects of the play, the performers have not played on with the rhythmical sounds: sound, noise, chaos, bustle and so on. From the sound system of the staff’s monotonous work, a more pulsating composition could have been formed.

Between the chefs, Martin Nahálka in the role of Hans, was the most outstanding one with his disciplined, concentrated performance, he can build his character with his special tone of voice too. Milan Ondrík, who performed Peter, impressed me with his punctual, immediate reaction, which was without any compromises, with the cool almost civilian tone of his speech. He could draw attention to himself with especially strong emotional expressions, at the moment of the escalation of the riot, when the disorder broke out in the kitchen. At the end of the performance, after the fight with the staff and the leader, as a hurricane, he ruined everything around him as a protestation. When he stands into the central copper pot of the food rubbish (into the middle of the mandala) he could stir up all the rubbish of the world, with his assertive movements. He could show the spontaneous power of his nature in the most suitable moments, his temperaments, which could be matched the most to the situation and place. Jakub Rybárik’s strict Alfredo, the pragmatic man, who has risen to him his reasonable limits, he emphasized his emotional restrictions with his consistency.

Between the actresses many could stand out by their role formations. Gabriela Dolná performed the aggressive Bertha without useless comic models, with impressive drive during physical fights, tactfully in case of more harmful ones. For Daniel Kuffelova it was enough to give artificially tough appearance to Marango’s character to be able to evolve at the end of the performance during her attractively strong speech towards the angry Peter (Milan Ondrík). It is a captivating voice, which gained the maximum from the actor’s minimalism. Kristína Turjanová, who performed the English actress, could ease the hard working rhythm of the kitchen, and at the same time she could soften the stresses of her love affair with the German Peter chef (Milan Ondrík). It was an extraordinary performance, as she could show the hidden, inside stresses of the secret love affair on their working place. Her rude, mechanical mask did not cover her pain, but in contrast to it, it could emphasized it. The expressive character of the machine like waitress suited well to Alena Pajtinková, with her performance, she could give the necessary drive and some boldness to her Violet.

To sum it up, the creative Hungarian performing troupe with their newish approach could enrich refreshingly the DAB theatre of Nyitra. The ruling aesthetic ideas of the director’s conception reflected inventive and trans-cultural point of view. The biggest benefit of the performance of The Kitchen, was the fact that the performers could make experiments with the original play and staging forms, using real courage.

Miroslav Ballay, KOD, 2011

(translated by: Veronika Fülöp)

However, the worlds of the performance, The Kitchen, which was staged by Zoltán Balázs in Nyitra, in the Andrej Bagar Theatre and of the performance, Paranoia in the Théâtre des Lucioles in Rennes are totally different from point of view of their topics and vision, the common thing in them, is that they fill with playfulness the frames of the chosen strict form. Divadelná Nitra festival, part 3.

Arnold Wesker wrote The Kitchen in 1959. Between the long Introduction before the play and the advices to the director – for which he apologised in the first sentence – he said: “Shakespeare would consider the world to be a stage, I consider it to be a kitchen, where the opponents cannot understand each other, and where, because of the continuous running and moving even the flashing straw torches of friendship, love and argument can blow out soon.” (translated by Tibor Bartos) He characterizes the roles for long, he tells their positions in the kitchen, their ages, their nationalities too. If we just take into consideration these later ones, we can tell, that this kitchen of an English restaurant, would be able to get an interesting stich in the today united Europe, as from the continent, even nowadays many people go to get a job on the other side of the channel. That way, the originally realistic – but not naturalist – context would get a new meaning.

Then the director can get inspiration from the very popular gastro realities too, from Jamie Oliver’s series, in which he introduces disadvantaged youngsters into the word of work in a kitchen, until Gordon Ramsay’s programme, where he reform restaurants, coloured with profanities. The viewers can meet a familiar world on stage this time too, and they would face up with still a realist – and not a naturalist – world as well.

Zoltán Balázs has chosen a way, much more different from these: he successfully adapted his characteristic eastern, meditative mood and the strictly defined world of movements, between the frames of so-called kitchen sink drama. (Or the other way around.) He gets important help from Péter Polgár set and costume designer, who with this work has got the awards of Dosku, so Stage by the Slovakian critics, in both categories.

The stage is the middle of the studio hall of about ten metres diagonal of the theatre of Nyitra. The stage, which can be white, circular pan, a plate of a scale, a pancake, baking board, chopping board, is covered by a material, which is greyish white, has strange consistence, mostly similar to stone broken into dust, which make the viewers associate clearly into flour in an unmarked place of a kitchen. In it – obviously for practical reasons – the actors are moving (bare) foot covered with bandage, but with it they refer to the sacral nature of the place too. In the middle of the place, a wok like deepening plate with a very big diameter is the sink, which must be tidy. (It is not an accident that Peter from the performance, gives out his anger in this beautifully swept up and raked place.) There are piled up white plates around him, by the outside arc there are golden discs hanged from the ceiling, these can be cymbals, which can give sounds, baking pans and always swinging scales at the same time.

We can say, with our already mentioned knowledge from television, that the world of the chef’s dresses does not consists of just white, it is made softer and more modern by some colours. In this kitchen, the male actors of the troupe of Nyitra, are wearing T-shirts, which let us see their muscles, and a stylish version of the skirt like parts of samurai’s kimono instead of “normal” aprons – they unite east, tradition, working uniform, modern male fashion in themselves. The waitresses are in “waitress like” unified miniskirts, in similar black wigs, they are moving like urban geishas. On the top of hierarchy Marango is sitting in her burning red chair like a tennis or volleyball referee, the owner, who has faded, but emphasised her femininity with black and lace (yes, she is a woman), and she is leafing through with fake carelessness, lazily the Financial Times, the glossies, dealing with home design and the profession.

At the beginning of the performance, everybody is sitting in strict position, in piece or searching for it, and when the work begins, the gold coloured kitchen tools are appearing, and the material, which covers the stage becomes a kitchen ingredient. During the preparation of the meticulous food of sand – not stylized but realistically – the childishness and playfulness, the phases of creation-preparation-destruction and the necessary powers for it are condensed. And on the unstable surfaces – standing on the chopping block, on the cinder – the practiced, routine like movements, which are concentrated and economical at the same time, can refer to the frustration because of the present, and a desire for a better life too. The rhythm of the hour gets strictly faster, we cannot get enough from the actors, only some characteristics, but it is obvious, that they serve the director’s and the viewers’ orders.

Tímea Papp, Fidelio, 2011

(translated by: Veronika Fülöp)

Chekov wrote the play at the age of nineteen into eleven notebooks, connected by string. It is two hundred printed pages. Without cutting it would be a nine hours long performance, or even more. The text, which was thought to be lost, was found in 1914. It was published nine years later.

The first page came off, so the play has been called Without title for a long time. A version of title is the – Without any Father, Erzsi Gaál last staging called it that way in the Castle Theatre, where her National troupe brought the play on ice – it brought us closer to the original aim of the drama monster, than the Platonov, which is usual for us. The later one narrows it down into one wandering hero, the earlier one reports the peers’ obsolescence.

It is a symphony of great orchestra. It is prelude for all the Chekov’s plays. All his later plays can be found in it, from Ivanov until The Cherry Orchard. Voynitsev would perform Hamlet in it, as Hamlet is hidden in The Seagull. Voynitsev is the stepson of the landowner, his name is different from Voynitsky only with a syllable, so from Uncle Vanya, who supports going on as well – Sonia: “work, work” – as the bitter raising of hope echoes in Platonov. Uncle Vanya becomes angry: he could be Dostoevsky or Schopenhauer. Here Platonov complains, that if he had not waste his life, he would have become Byron or Columbus. The selling of The Cherry Orchard is in connection with the wasting of indebted Voynitseva’s property. They push into aimlessly their never fulfilled desires, as well as The Three Sisters do. It is the silent fail of the old-fashioned noble life on the countryside, the possibilities have slipped out under their foot, but the remaining desires, which cannot be fulfilled can be sounded first in Platonov too. It is not a first trial of his young age. It is not a trial of pen. It is not about the lack of knowledge of theatrical rules, in contrast to it: the play is about the denial of safety. The great fights, the withering without any outside driven actions, the drying from the branch can be seen here with all its splendour towards death.

I am sure, that the Russian life – the life – in its all beauty can develop here, if the whole play was performed during an evening without any cuts. Of course, only between the most optimistic circumstances. Where the high levelled theatrical culture of the troupe and of the society can perform together, where money (of the theatre and viewers), the talent, and the educated viewers can form optimistically the human encyclopaedia, which does not take into consideration the theatrical rules and recreate them at the same time. It would not be unique in the theatre history, But the Chekov probe was always outside of it. Then we can hear the harmony of all motifs. The tight connection between the far parts of the story. It becomes clear, that how much new thing has been brought by the almost child man from Taganrog, as well as his brutal recreation and different point of view.

I admit that it is insatiability. The Autumn Festival in Budapest and the Thália Theatre have given the possibility to the Troupe of Maladype to create the present performance on the place of once existed pub named by Miss Arizona, Mrs Rozsnyai.

In Zoltán Balázs staging, in the middle of the place, around which we are sitting on its four sides, Bea Molnár’s huge billiard table is standing. The performance is one fatal play. (In Erzsi Gaál’s staging the characters were going around unwieldy chess pieces, as the toy tools of a mental game).

The best performers get all the nine wonderful roles. However, Zoltán Balázs gets two performers from Temesvár: Erika Tankó (who performs Platonov’s wife, from the harmless until the wild one), and Zénó Faragó, who performs with sharp plasticity Isaac Abramovich Vengerov, the lazy and curious one from Paris, and lottery winner new rich man of the future. The Slovakian Vica Kerekes has performed for a long time in home theatres, but now she becomes mature as a freelancer in the Maladype Theatre between their connected safety, where they catch each other’s look as aerialists. Judit Kovács Ligeti is the owner of the Voynitsev property, she is the widow wife of the general: she reigns over the others, as she is supported by the past welfare, she owns only the power of her womanhood and sharp mentality. Zoltán Lendvánczky starts her stepson with sparkling joyful laughs, and when his life collapses, the smile seems to be frozen on his face, he is not crying for himself, however his remaining smile tells: he cannot believe the catastrophe of his love. He has not got used to the bitterness of life. The hopelessness develops in him only later. Kamilla Fátyol in the role of the cheating wife is more and more safety, she is catching with her deepening performing culture. Zsolt Páll is anxiously above the others as the gold idol of his wealth. Ádám Tompa (Triletsky) is flying over the stage as a joyful elf. He treats confidently the viewers. He does it so friendly, that the asked ones answer him fluently. It is not an easy trick. Tompa brings the cloudless serenity at the beginning of the performance. He is the master of play, the boy, who is always ready to eat, drink and make jokes. He seems to be the one, who orders the ballet of the joyful group of guests around the table. There should not be any misunderstanding: Platonov is not any kind of physical theatre, neither a dancing composition. But the members of the troupe has so well-trained moving, that their steps, gestures are strictly punctual, as in a classical ballet.

The programme does not help me, but I think, that they use János Elbert, little bit polished translation.

The main character remains the last one: let’s come Ákos Orosz’s appreciation. We do not see a lazy, overweight one, left in the countryside. Platonov is 27 years old. Ákos Orosz will be 25 in a month. The role is at his age, but he knows more than it. He escapes from female arms to arms. First he is distant, then he gets used to lies of love, about which it cannot be known, that how much it is a lie or a truth. We can follow a cheerful young man’s slow collapse with artistic truth, from the closeness of a microscope. The cheated world turns against him. He realises himself, his fail. He is stub around with billiard cues. From Orosz’s body the toy sticks come from, as from Saint Sebastian the arrows did. The Roman guard was killed because of his catholic belief. Platonov was killed, because the others think, that they are different from him. They are not solider or more honest, or more resistant to seduction than he is, and they are not more empathetic to their partners than the lazy teacher is. They do not have solider aim of their life. They are just falling into the world.

Péter Gál Molnár, Nol.hu, 2010

(translated by: Veronika Fülöp)

There is this world of gentry in Chekov’s plays, with which we have not got any connection nowadays. It cannot be understood well, why and what do they do and how somebody can be proud, if live on loans and uncertain values of their once noble origin. Chekov is eternal anyway, in spite of the fact, that seemingly money is in the middle of his plays, the real main character is always friendship, love, relationships and all the feelings and conflicts in connection of these. So the director can create a valid, contemporary performance, if he sees the most important thing. Zoltán Balázs comes from the good direction when he gets from the performance the shining of the ball halls, dinner rooms, garden paths, and from the dresses, which were palm itchy over-decorated.

His logic is not based on numerous unexplainable symbols, as the presence of a billiard table can stand in for eventuality, luck, conscious reasoning and everything, with which the human behaviour can be explained. Everybody it connected to everybody, as well as the billiard balls, which sometimes get in connection, push each other on to help them win or distract someone from his aim the other one. It is a game for life. Chekov’s characters also play with their lives, and sometimes with the others. Then Platonov intentionally and sometimes unintentionally becomes the white ball on the billiard table of life.

The actors have only a few properties, but it is not a problem for them, to make us believe, that a billiard ball can be love letter, a cue can be a weapon, or the billiard table can be a dining room. If someone does not perform in a scene, then he is sitting between the viewers and watching. In reality everybody knows everything about the others. There is not any secrets, just benevolent suppression. If someone leaves the scene, then the next character jumps up from his seat. The pictures of the film come one after another fast, but the two and half hours long act is hard anyway. Sometimes we can fell some rhythmical disorder, but luckily a blazing moment almost always comes to help us out.

Ákos Orosz, as Platonov, is watching resignedly as everything is circling around him. First, he is a childish master of jokes on the edge of madness, then he is slowly giving up dissimulation and a misanthrope comes up from him, who hates himself too. This multiple poled personality can explain why he can attract all the women and even the men around him. After a while, a profiler would put on him without a second thought the mark of future suicide, but it can be believed that the other, who live around him, would keep him alive with their love and hate. What we see, it can make real, that everybody has a past, present, fate. Judit Kovács Ligeti’s Anna Petrovna is not a simple failed noble person, but a woman, who can move lines well, who has an attitude, but love can turn her into a silly goose. Ádám Tompa, who performs Triletsky, is not a conceited doctor, but a real hedonist yuppie, who is afraid of responsibilities. As well as Zoltán Lendváczky’s Voynitsev is an over educated unemployed with a load of anxieties instead of a simple parasitic genteel young man. Zsolt Páll’s old Jewish man wishes for some kind of life besides his huge wealth, at the same time he believes that in reality he is the good one, and Zénó Faragó, who performs his son is dandy and besides his playboy-like nature is a real love-eager child. Erika Tankó as Sasha is fragile and powerful, dumb and clever at the same time. Similarly to Kamilla Fátyol’s Sofia, who is not just a simply educated, bored young lady, as she becomes a silly porcelain doll at the moment she sees Platonov. Grekova is not a clumsy one, who wears glasses now, Vica Kerekes can forms her into a passionate woman.

Everybody is real, so their motivations are understandable, the sentences, which we hear, have real meaning. Meanwhile the play is going on, which foreshadows the possibility of improvisation, and even wants it, as the balls usually do not end up there, where they should, a bad push can change everything. During the performance, we can often hear the question: what is your plan. The troupe of Maladype by slapping on face the clichés in connection with Chekov, must have plans, anyway the performance can be better sometimes. But without plans, there would not be any plays too.

Krisztina Szepesi, Pesti Műsor, 2011

(translated by: Veronika Fülöp)

The theatre season has started with a dump of Chekov in Budapest. After Serban’s The Three Sisters (National Theatre) and László Marton’s Uncle Vanya (Vígszínház), Zoltán Balázs with the troupe of Maladype puts on stage the writer’s unfinished play from his young age, Platonov, during the Autumn Festival in Budapest, in the Thália Theatre.

If we compare this play to the other Chekov’s plays, it is less commonly performed. However, in Budapest it could be watched until spring in the Örkény Theatre, staged by the director, Jurij Kordonszkij, with László Széles, in the main role. Anyway, here it got the title of: Without father, and it was the Platonov of another generation, of the thirties and forties.

Maybe one of the character of the play, Triletsky can give the answer to the question, why Zoltán Balázs wants to put on stage exactly Chekov, and why he has chosen this play, what could he see in it, what made him put it on stage here and now with this young troupe. He defines his own situation that way: “I am twenty-five years old, since the university nothing has happened to me, and probably nothing will during the next five years.” We can recognise the generation of the today premature twenties, who have lost their illusions and they escape into temporary works and relationships. To quote one of Chekov’s peer, János Asbóth, who in his novel, in The dreamer of the dreams, which he wrote almost at the same time as the Platonov was written in 1870s, talked about this feeling of life that way: “To be beat before fight. To be robbed from hopes. Where are you, all my big dreams?” And how and with what can aimless, flowing years be spent? With games, whether they are real games or games of love-power.

According to it the whole performance is built on one single metaphor, on the metaphor of billiard. The set is a billiard table, the viewers are sitting around it, above it, composed in a square, there are lines of lamps. (The set is designed by Bea Molnár.) Those actors, who are not performing, are sitting in the first rows, next the viewers. During the dialogues, the actors are playing billiard. This is the point, where those, who do not understand the game, so as the critic, can lose some references, some nuances, but it is obvious that according to the score and success of the game, the actors improvise too. The billiard table is not only for the game of course, but it can become the place of love affairs and fights of business too. Platonov’s wife is balancing around the edge of the table, she rises up between the others, then – before her collapse and suicide – she almost falls down from there.

The other “stone” Platonov on this table, not with real stones, but they take revenge for their offences with cues. The continuous placing and pushing of the billiard balls can express the characters’ continuously changing structure of relationships too, they are pushed next to each other or even pushed far away sometimes by the conscious planning, than accidentally. The metaphor can work, and during the three and half hours long performance, rarely can be felt that it starts run out of breath, or it is overburdened, for example, as I have mentioned, when Platonov’s wife is balancing on the edge of the table, for such a long time. The ending picture with Platonov who is stub to death by cues, then without the holding power of the sticks, which are pulled from his body, he collapsed as a lifeless puppet, is so powerful, that it can make valid backward the consistent, central building.

Ákos Orosz’s Platonov at the beginning of the performance is unscrupulous, he takes everything easy, sometimes he is irritatingly loud half-matured, half-teenager. He play with feelings and people, especially with the four women around him. Then the only one, with whom he tries to be fair, the general’s wife will hate him too as the others, and then he will become bitter slowly, and ruin his wife, who is performed by Erika Tankó, who is honest by the edge of gullibility and devoting. Judit Kovács Ligeti, who arrives from the theatre of Zalaegerszeg, joins the troupe of Maladype now. In the role of the general’s wife, first she is elegant, an aristocratic phenomenon, so the contrast becomes even bigger, when driven by the passion of love, she almost overwhelms Platonov.

This performance gives much weight to the two Vengorovich, than for example the one by Örkény Theatre. Zsolt Páll’s older Vengorovich treats modestly, with dignity his own wealth, but then when the general’s wife refuses him, his hurt ego, which wants revenge, appears. His son, by Zénó Faragó’s performance, is more unscrupulous, he looks down the Russian countryside from the point of view of Paris, but it cannot stop him to get the last drops from his possibilities from home. His light coloured costume, which differs much from the other black dresses, separates him from the others. (Bea Molnár designed the costumes too.) Kamilla Fátyol in the role of Sofia performs on a wide scale from the rigid paralysis until the passionate outburst. Vica Kerekes forms a graceful and uncertain Maria. Ádám Tompa (Triletsky) is easy-going and confident, he communicates with the viewers too. Zoltán Lendváczky performs the step-son of the general’s wife, he is Sofia’s husband, his performance becomes truly strong, when he has to perform the disappointed and disillusioned lover.

The excellent team play of the troupe means a lot to keep up the tension and the viewers’ attention all through the performance. Judit Góczán, dramaturg has a great work in it too, as she has formed the dramatic material of the performance from a play, which would be longer than the double of the present three and half hours, with the absence of roles, with their connection, and the restructure of the text. Thanks for Zoltán Balázs, from this material a characteristic performance was born, which can sound valid, in which the hero of our time is: Platonov.

Lilla Turbuly, prae.hu, 2011

(translated by: Veronika Fülöp)

The complex and rich group of symptoms of Platonov now the Maladype Theatre and Zoltán Balázs director open for viewers with respectful stubbornness, who are ready to play and think.

It is a well-known fact that Platonov is the last play between the complex works of Chekov, as its writer was not twenty when he wrote it, but he was dead for more than two decades when it was first published, and it important staging can be mentioned only from the second half of the XX. century. The fact, that Maladype Theatre that has stepped on seemingly unknown but in reality, well prepared roads, they have changed a lot in their brands, audience and actors too, and now from Leonce and Lena they have arrived to Chekov’s play, which he left for the after-ages without any title. It is an important message, but it is also a hard task for the viewers and the performers too.

First of all, I have to talk about the director and Judit Góczán, dramaturg’s exciting version of text. In the book it can be read on two hundred printed pages, in Platonov, which contains many later grown motifs and symbols of the four great Chekov-plays later, there are seemingly too many gossiping, over-spoken situations, and side roads, which wish for a sharp-eyed dramaturg. Not only because of its length, but it is an art on its own to cut and write Platonov on stage.

In this case they have regulated definitely that many times refreshed sea of text with good sense, which is mostly based on János Elbert’s translation. From the characters, who are mentioned by twenty names by Chekov, here remains just nine: the Voynitsevs’ farmer neighbours, the servants and other additional elements have totally disappeared or absorbed in other characters so that we can concentrate with all of our energy on the most important situations, which are outlined with punctual accuracy. From this point of view, Isaac Abramovich’s character has changed the most, who is, in the performance of Maladype, at least three others, he gets more texts from the still existed character of the original version, so that he can form a more detailed picture of the rich Jewish man’s arrogant son, who rebels against Platonov (for example Osip, who is not on the programme, is created again in Isaac’s character). The direction of cuts can be felt well: they successfully put the smaller and bigger planets, which are circling around the middle of the gloomy Platonov-universe, on a more predictable orbit.

In case of Chekov at the beginning of the first act they are playing chess, at the beginning of the second act we can hear the sounds of bowls, then they refer to card games – as the totally boring country life can be made more exciting by the game and the joy, which comes from it! On Zoltán Balázs’ stage the game becomes the idea, which orders the life: however not on the same way as in the case of Leonce and Lena’s optional episodes or Egg(s)Hell, which got completed by scales of improvisations. The real contribution by viewers is limited here only for one episode: during Isaac and Platonov’s pool game, we can vote by hand rising, for the one, who will win it according to us. The chance, the predictability, the planed nature (the meaningful question of “What is your play” always circles around in the air), the game, which it taken seriously and “serious” things, which are trivialized into game, for example love, marriage, property, values – Zoltán Balázs organises the evening around these topics.

The huge billiard table, which reigns the Arizóna Studio of Thália Theatre, around the four sides of which the viewers are sitting, helps him and – during the last third of the three and half hours long performance – prevents him too (set: Bea Molnár). The great numbers of pure light bulbs, which are hung above it, shine and turn pale understandingly and sensitively, as the scene needs it. The beige colour of the material, which covers the table with black frame is the same as the colour of the wooden floor, which covers the place of performance, and surrounded by the black podiums of the auditorium. As the cues push the shiny billiard balls accidentally or according to plans, the characters are pushed similarly to one another accidentally but even predictably on a little bit bigger “table”. The chosen surrounding and its obligated tools are playing continuously: the central piece of set becomes bed or dining table that way, the ball can become letter or clock and so on. The figure of Platonov, who is sentenced to death and stuck around with cues, is a wonderful picture: everybody takes revenge for their own offenses on the elevated main character. Then Sofia takes the cues with herself, one by one, and as a bizarre creature, which is covered by rigid spikes, she looks at the slowly collapsing body after the taking of the last cue.

Triletsky in his opening monologue tells us well understandably the rules of pool eight. It is interesting because Platonov frequent monologue formed sighs, which can be found in case of Chekov, are missing from the text, apart from this earlier one, there is not any other moment, when only one character is standing on the stage. There are remarkably many physical contacts, funny and violent pushing, seemingly lovely cuddling and seemingly angry indignations: so the game is going on endlessly with the human shaped balls. The game, the end of which, so the most diligent player, Platonov’s removal can be predicted anyway, but until then there are many sudden combinations and ideas of game can be tried out.

First round: Platonov and the women. The first one is Judit Kovács Ligeti’s general’s wife, who is graceful, Anna Petrovna, who tries to hide her fiery emotions behind her cold elegancy, aristocratic vibe. Then there is the laboured reborn of the once love affair from the university, the Sofia-story (Kamilla Fátyol): from the side of the man it is a gentleman’s hobby, but form the side of the woman it is a game, which is treated dead seriously, which ruins at least two marriages and a human life. The easiest victim is the always offended Grekova (Vica Kerekes, guest star), who is changing blush with crying, and hard to be taken seriously. The childish woman of fate would be Platonov’s wife: Sasha (Erika Tankó), who tolerates more her odd husband’s strange things, than it could be tolerable.

Second round: Platonov and the men. Ádám Tompa’s Triletsky does tricks and acrobatic things as an always cheerful master of games, all through the first part of the evening, just to let his place later to a Triletsky, who draws into the background, but observes everything carefully. Sergei’s, who is oppressed many times, as the general’s wife’s son, and as Sofia’s cheated husband, miniature tragedy Zoltán Lendváczky can express with all of his body. Zsolt Páll shows the respectable Jewish man, Abram Abramovich to be proud and miserable at the same time. His son, Isaac (Zénó Faragó) is angry not only with his father and Platonov, but with the whole world: his cold and sarcastic speech can push his figure flexibly from a comical one to the infernal one.

Ákos Orosz’s Platonov has a boyish charm, he is a funny man, who has not known anything about spleen, he pillories the others’ pettiness and narrow thinking with jokes of a clown. He does not ponder or philosophize, instead of it, he solves his problems from drive, with enthusiasm, and meanwhile he causes newer ones unnoticed to himself and the others. The women, who are always remarkably friendly to him, help engage his energies temporary and the men, who always become his enemies somehow. He is got stuck between women and men, and he watches their fights from higher and further. His loneliness grows cosmic in the middle of the pettiness, which overruns Platonov, as any climbing plants would do it.

Tamás Jászay, Revizoronline, 2010

(translated by: Veronika Fülöp)

The first performance of Maladype Theatre in this term is the Platonov, Chekov’s strange play.

This play by Chekov is not performed too often. It is not accidental. It is an early performance, he wrote it at around his age of twenty. It is a play, which appeared just long after the writer’s death. After knowing the later great dramas, from their points of view backward, it is that kind of play, which would give some kind of mixture of Chekov’s all plays. There are many conflicts, many problems waiting for solutions, many sentences, many different life situations and many ways of life can be familiar for those, who knows Chekov’s plays. The main motifs of Platonov are the relationship between father and son, the helplessness, the desperation, the desire for cleverer, harder life, the desire to go away, the falling into the dust of countryside, the losing of property, the losing of a life style, the way as it becomes empty. Later they get into the great plays of world literature, as the basis of them in a cleverer form, as they are opened, divided, separated. (The Seagull, The Three Sisters, Uncle Vanya, The Cherry Orchard)

As we are entering the Arizona Studio of Thália Theatre, we arrive into a black and white space. The stage, which is covered by white wooden floor, is surrounded by black podiums on its four sides, we, the viewers can sit on them. In the middle of the white wooden floor there is a huge billiard table, covered with black and white, with colourful balls. There is a continuous billiard game here. As the colourful balls on the table do according to the physical rules: by the pushing of the cue they go around, circle, crash to one another, leave each other, they push each other on, they hit the edge of the table, they bounce from there, sometimes they fall into the net and that way the human billiard game is going on in the space around the table, similarly to it on a bigger billiard table outside. The characters, who are dressed mostly in black and white costumes, sometimes crashed to each other, leave each other, come closer and further to one another, they change places and knock each other out.

The dramatic situation is familiar. There are nine characters, nine people, men and women, about who we do not know precisely where they come from, and where they go on. They live, exit and they are here. They do not have a real past and a real future. Their life is a big billiard game. They get next to each other somehow, they live next to each other, and they get married and divorced. Everybody cheats, everybody does it, and everybody is cheated. Everybody desires something else and everybody wants someone else. All the women wish for Platonov, for the twenty-five years old teacher in the countryside. They love and hate each other. There is not any real love, there is not any real friendship, there is not any real father-son relationship, and there is not any real life.

In Zoltán Balázs’ staging that way the billiard table becomes the symbol of the nine characters’ life and their place in reality too. Sometimes it is a dining table, sometimes it is the place of secret or not so secret love affairs, and finally the place of the main character’s death. The play has not got any hero, there is not any main characters. These characters, figure are not heroes. They are performers. We cannot love or hate them in reality, not even feel sorry for them.

The troupe of Maladype now gets bigger with some new actors. In the role of the widow wife of the general, of Anna Petrovna, we can see Judit Kovács Ligeti, who makes us remember the young Juli Básti. In the role of Grekova, we can see Vica Kerekes, and Erika Tankó in the role of Alexandra Ivanovna, the many times cheated wife of Platonov. Kamilla Fátyol performs Sofia Jegorovna, who cheats her husband, and she is the woman, who is crazy about Platonov.

Zénó Faragó arrives to the men as the performer of Isaac Abramovich. His father is Abram Abramovich, who is performed by the earlier member of the troupe, by Zsolt Páll. Fortunately, he shows the upstanding, tall, strong and muscular man instead of the boringly known typical Jewish figure. It is a shame that their conflict is one of the unfinished line in the play. We will not know the source of the father-son’s conflict, of their hate, and its final ending. Zoltán Ledvánczky and Ádám Tompa show us the two young men’s impossibility, helplessness from the countryside, who fall in hopelessness, desperation and alcohol.

Ákos Orosz performs the main role, Platonov. In his performance, he melts the countryside boy’s hopelessness, who has given up everything, his teenager humour, his impracticality, that man’s all cynicism, who accepts and ruins all women without any inhibitions, who offer themselves to him, his aimlessness of his spleen, which he cures with alcohol, and finally his death, which can put meaninglessly a point to his meaningless life.

The viewers’ closeness, their involvement in the game at the beginning of the performance, the actors’ calling out, the narrow stage, Zoltán Balázs’ staging – as we can expect it from him – can successfully save the performance from the suffering, fake pathos and sentimentalism of Chekov’s plays, which ae usual here.

Maybe more humour and a little bit shorter text can make this human billiard game even more enjoyable.

György Gold, Szabadidő Magazin, 2010

(translated by: Veronika Fülöp)

We are happy to see a formed Chekov interpretation with pure culture of form, clear guiding of thoughts.

The troupe of Maladype performed Chekov’s masterpiece in a performance, which is reduced to the importance of the play, it is totally naked, but artistic too. While we are watching the straightforward performance, which uses easy properties, and listening to the characters’ clear sounding speech, first of all I think, that how modern this play is, not only its language, its world view, but its portrayal, its situations of life, so everything, which can make it obviously suitable to express contemporary ideas even today.

Zoltán Balázs has organised the performance around and above a billiard table and in its flashing then fading light circle. We are sitting around the stage from four sides, the actors are in the first line between the viewers, and they step into the scene from there. The whole performance has a kind of lazy, frivolous, playful, youthful and meditative feeling, as we are not listening to Chekov’s deadly dialogues and word rhymes from the actors’ mouth. The performers deal a lot with the billiard turns, which are fixed between the Chekov texts, with the numbering and placing of the colourful balls, with the technique of the pushes, which are excellent sources of humour and tools of irony almost all the time. The big billiard table, which is enlightened by a shining line of lamps, is the place of the game: they are running around it, they are stepping and fighting on it, on the dramaturgically emphasized places the men push the women many times on it (and the other way around too). Many sequences of scenes, which are full of eroticism, are going on the table, covered with light clothes, there are violent love scenes too, and the couples come together many times in passionate, long kisses. The lazy and continuous game around the billiard table, and the concentration of all the places and scenes on this intense dramatic space give an excellent possibility to the director, to create the pure and clear surrounding of thoughts for the performance. There are not any annoying side sounds and side circumstances: there drama can be heard, which is reduced to its basic elements, and we can see those individuals that are naked down, as they are opening, come up against each other. Zoltán Balázs has reduced the play extremely pure, he has missed out many characters, scenes or connected. He “has charged” a lot to his actors’ performances, between the others with the fact, that he wants an extremely undecorated, but intensive method of play. In the performance there are not any “performing” in its traditional meaning: the performers live the characters with unstudied simplicity, and they tell their texts mostly in a way as ordinary speech can be heard. The artistic experiments of Maladype, which they perform tenaciously and their playing trainings, which could be often seen before in their previous performances become fully flourishing in this performance. We are happy to see a formed Chekov interpretation with pure culture of form, clear guiding of thoughts.

A young and dynamic group of actors bring this performance to success. They not only with great power, but seemingly joyfully immerse into the maze of their passions. In the opening scene they are playing and getting wild almost carelessly. There are loud. They are careless. They are wild. They are brave. Then they slowly start showing the darker side of their characters. The first one of them is Ákos Orosz, who performs the main character, and his explosive Platonov. He is not a melancholic educated man: he is massive marching and clear bomb of energy. He is ironic in a squared shape. He is lazily grotesque. Behind his calm boyish face undivided, rude emotions are moving. Slowly something sweetish and rampant tangle circles around him. He is drifting and escaping: he is losing himself slowly. Orosz’s heavy Platonov finally stands like a statue on the wild battle-like field, his limbs are held by cues, and he falls as an exploded building, which collapses slowly. There is not any shooting of gun, his body and shape get divided somehow; he disintegrates and he is destroyed. Judit Kovács Ligeti’s Anna Petrovna with her big heart is a wild and experienced player of love. She would hug the half of the world, she works persistently to get Platonov. She humbles herself if she has to, and she leaves easily her womanish dignity. Kamilla Fátyol performs Sofia expressively, who is seduced and dizzy. She almost gets rigid because of the owning of Platonov; she becomes more and more assertive, she taps with her legs loudly, she becomes an arrogant woman, and it makes her fall even more ironic. Zsolt Páll has a noble posture, he performs the self-respecting Abram Vengerovich, who always knows punctually that how far he can go. Then he presents a bill rudely. His son, Isaac is performed dynamically and passionately by Zénó Faragó. When they fight with Platonov, the two man stand against each other rigidly on the height of the table (and from the pushful Isaac’s mouth we can hear Osip’s fatal threats, who was deleted from the cast). Erika Tankó performs the not so clever, good-hearted wife, her Sasha is the embodied humility herself: this sensitive woman subordinates herself to her husband from every points of view. While Sofia and Platonov wild love duet is going on the billiard table, the woman carefully balances around the edge of the table. As she is talking to her husband, it is funny and shockingly grotesque at the same time. Vica Kerekes, the nice one, who we have not seen on stage for a while, performs Grekova, the ugly girl, who is suffering from the sarcastic Platonov’s jokes, and she does it illusionary; she is an assertive young woman, she is ready to take a revenge, but finally she cannot get rid of the man’s attraction. Ádám Tompa’s blazing Triletsky is the galvaniser of the performance and once he was its raisonneur too. Zoltán Lendváczky as the cheated Voynitsev has a paler face.

The director keeps together the performance with strong hands: the smaller mistakes of rhythm can be solved during the later performances. However, the programme does not show any translator, the well over-formed and over-cut text has probably been made based on János Elbert’s translation. The costumes, which are just a little bit different from the contemporary dresses can be thanked for Bea Molnár’s work.

Dezső Kovács, szinhaz.net, 2010

(translated by: Veronika Fülöp)

The Autumn Festival of Budapest finishes with a nice surprise this year – Zoltán Balázs puts on stage Platonov by Chekov, with his own troupe, in the Maladype Theatre. We can see an intellectually effective and emotionally sharp performance, which balances with some risks between comedy and tragedy, as the sleepwalker Sasha tries to balance on the edge of a billiard table. On the table, where her cheating husband lives through his Don Juan-like adventures.

Some years ago, Zoltán Balázs just burst among the theatre directors with his high standard and intellectual directions.
At that point the quality of his plays were much better than his company’s acting skills. Now we see, that his young actors are mature and impressive and the director is working with greater and more sophisticated skills. He still prefers to use the simple geometric solutions: all actions are focused around a billiard game, a billiard table defines the cubic shaped theatrical space. From this small space the director takes out the maximum number of possibilities. He still loves the exact psychological portraits (like the allegories of the French Eric Rohmer-type), at the same time he knows, that the game has the chance of accident and risk – his actors are really playing billiard.

The viewers are watching their play joyfully and placing their bets. Maybe here is the time for the managers of the international festivals to bet on them too.

Natalia Jakubova, Nezavisimaya Gazeta, 2010

(translated by: Veronika Fülöp)

If someone wanted to put on stage Chekov’s first play, which he wrote at the age of nineteen, was thought to be lost for a long time, the all of it, it would last for almost ten hours. So far, nobody has been so courageous, but if Balázs Kovalik could do the Mozart marathon, he performed three Mozart’s operas on the same day, one after another, and then Zoltán Balázs with the Maladype Theatre would be able to do a Platonov marathon too.

This short three and half an hour, which they have performed from it, during the Autumn Festival of Budapest, in the Arizona Studio of Thália Theatre, is very promising. They can show the multiple lines of the play, its enjoyable polyphony, its wildness. It is not beautiful, it is rounded, we can see a suffering crying sad Chekov. From many points of view it is unpredictable. Which is supported by the huge billiard table, which Bea Molnár has designed into the middle of the stage, around which, we are sitting. Platonov takes the risk, he follows his momentary mood and instincts too, he is pushing the balls all through the performance. His surrounding gambles too with their life, and with billiard too in this case. The actors, who have practiced in performances, which have been built on improvisations as much as Leonce and Lena, where they could perform a scene in four different versions, can react with their good improvisational skills the fact, as they can push with the cue, and they can connect the texts to the unexpected situations. The figure, for example, who wants to perform confidently, jumps when he pushes totally out, while he is going on with his elevated sentences. The ball, which gets its aim before the obvious collapse, can be a temporary moment, which can give power. The play get the excitement of a competition, the billiard strengthens its unpredictability, but we obviously know that the people, who Chekov formed, do not go on towards the reaching of their goal.

In Hungary the most legendary Platonov performance was in the József Katona Theatre, Tamás Ascher put it on stage, and Géza Balkay performed the main character. He was himself that attractive-repulsive self-destructive one, that charismatic man, who was dangerous for himself and his surrounding too. He was the man, who remained under his abilities, the one, who he performed. But in this role, which we can tell, he performed to life-and-death, or more accurately, he lived it over, has already been over its own form. Ákos Orosz is more playful than he was. He watched the role from outside a little bit. If we like, he gambles with it. He uses market-like elements, wide movements of arms, strong mimic, he can change moods during a sudden moment, he plays tricks not only with his surrounding, but with us, with the viewers too. When he realises, what he has probably thought from the beginning, that the play is for nothing, he tries to be naughty even in the most tragic moments too, as Mercutio and Romeo do it in the Romeo and Juliette.

However, there is obviously much work in this performance, from the performing style comes that the performance is not balanced, however it is very inspiringly exciting in overall. There are too long situations, boring parts of scenes, there are some sleepy moments. Then to become exciting again, the actors get power again, and to come up with moments, which can surprise their partners or even themselves too. Judit Kovács Ligeti, Zoltán Lendváczky, Kamilla Fátyol, Ádám Tompa, Vica Kerekes, Zsolt Páll, Zénó Faragó, Erika Tankó are not performers of series, who works with routine. Besides their theatrical possibilities, they are searching for their own possibilities too. They try the unexpected one. It can usually make Zoltán Balázs’ performances interesting. Fantasy is matched with creative mood. Probably the performance of Platonov will get together better, it will get matured, as the good wine does it...

Gábor Bóta, Népszava, 2010

(translated by: Veronika Fülöp)