The Tragedy of Tonal Dissonance

A big perk of working at the agency is being able to see new theater in the city for free. Last night, I went with the agents to Malfi, Inc. at the Milk Can Theater Company. It was an interesting experience, though a heartbreaking one in some ways.

Malfi, Inc. is an adaptation of John Webster's The Duchess of Malfi. The original is a relentless tragedy, often criticized for its over-the-top violence, though just as often praised for its timelessness and deep social resonance in any era. The work was adapted by Bethany Larsen into a unique and modern version, replacing cardinals with senators and duchesses with socialites.

I'm not going to go into the plot. Let us suffice to say that it involves werewolves and badass mercenaries. It is, in essence, something I might have written myself. I can see why such a play would be tempting for an adaptation; however, watching the play last night, I felt that I could not only see the writer's hand, but also where she went terribly wrong.

The answer lies, as it so often does, in the tone of a piece.

As I mentioned before, the original Malfi is a tragedy. Which was why I was surprised to see the following in the author's written intent:

"When I started working on my adaptation, I looked hard at the framework of the original... How could I make that modern? How could I make that funny?"

Oh dear, dear dear.

Anyone who knows me personally knows that I like to walk the same, strange line between comedy and tragedy, classical and quirky. But, over the almost-two-hour run of the show, it became very clear to me that this play didn't quite know if it was a tragedy or a comedy, born as it was of both mothers. By the end of the play, when every character was brutally murdered, the audience was laughing harder than it had at any of the jokes that had been crafted into the piece.

It was too bad, and dare I say, almost triggering to me personally.

I am nowhere near as successful as Ms. Larsen, but I have been involved in my share of readings, workshops, and even one staged performance. And there is a certain special kind of pain that comes from your audience laughing when it isn't supposed to.

During the final death scene, out of respect to (what I thought was) the authorial intent of the piece, I kept silent, trying to live in the space I thought I was supposed to be in - a space of mourning for these characters. However, the more the bodies hit the floor, the more the laughter pealed. I began to question myself as an audience member, which took me completely out of the play and its world. Was I doing the wrong thing? Is this a comedy?

Whatever Malfi was, it failed to define itself clearly as such. With caricatures for characters, the initial minutes of the play were set up as a satirical comedy. However, when it came time for the ditzy socialite, her slang-spewing, cokehead best friend, and her bizarre family to die, I couldn't bring myself to feel anything, try as I might. I was still unclear at this point whether the people I had been watching for two hours were supposed to be more than two-dimensional. As objects of mockery and vehicles for satire, the writer scarcely seemed to care for these people. How was I supposed to?

To make matters worse(?), two characters caught my eye - and my heart - in a way befitting a tragic piece. The first, Antonio, was soft-spoken but masculine, interesting, and relatable. The second (and more interesting to me) was Daniele, Larsen's Bosola analogue. I was excited by her; she was unlike most other female characters brought to the stage, and the kind of character I had always dreamed of playing in my green and soft days as a theater geek. These two seemed to have little place in the world of Malfi, Inc. Where the Malfis and their cohorts were campy and strange, Antonio and Daniele were utterly human.

During Antonio's demise, and during Daniele's "heel face turn" (sorry about that link, by the way), the play failed to make the jump from campy comedy to serious tragedy, leaving these two dramatic characters behind. The result was awkward confusion and a case of tonal dissonance.

There is something even sadder about this particular case: even if it were perfectly crafted, this play has a definite shelf life. Malfi, Inc. is set very squarely in the early 2000's. Certain references (Angelina Jolie in "Salt") and slang terms (an overabundance of "totes") date this play in a way that will make it impossible to translate in later years. Larsen has effectively taken a timeless play that resonates in any era and created a campy sketch that can only live in one decade.

I hate to be that guy. I really don't usually react this way... when I spend my time at a theater, I REALLY want to like something. I open myself up to where the playwright wants me - it is the least I could do, since it is what I hope an audience would do for me. And Malfi, Inc. wasn't a disaster. There were parts of it I did like, and I truly can respect Larsen for taking the Duchess in a new direction. But until someone figures out if this play wants to be a comedy or a tragedy - and takes it to that place - the result is simply unfortunate and sad.