For Twin Cities readers, my Arts Editor and I recently attended a production of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, an adaptation by Jeffery Hatcher, put on by the venerable Theater in the Round. This is an alternate tale, of a Dr. Jekyll not entirely without sin; of a Mr. Hyde, not entirely without love. The tale opens with the good Doctor’s disdain of one Dr. Sir Danvers Carew, who has not Jekyll’s medical skills, yet still teaches to packed houses.
Then comes the transition, and Mr. Hyde occupies the stage. As the play follows its permutations, sometimes Mr. Hyde is played by one actor, sometimes another; in one scene, four actors are simultaneously Mr. Hyde. Yet this multiplicity does not prevent Mr. Hyde from discovering a young woman who finds his violence, moodiness, and depression to be an antidote to her own deadly dull existence, and even as bodies begin to pile up, her fierce love remains on fire.
From time to time, the two sides of the coin occupy the stage at the same time, arguing. Jekyll knows Hyde has become dangerous, for he can force his way to the fore of their shared body, and let go only when it suits his purposes, while Jekyll can only fight, fiercely, for control of his body. Traps are set, and soon we come to our conclusion.
While we enjoyed our visit, we were not entirely happy with both the production and the script. With respect to the latter, while representing Mr. Hyde with a coterie of actors can give us access to his dark, grim mental state, it’s also apparent that each represents a particular faction of the dark, and there is no attempt to explore these facets of evil. Perhaps this would have been distracting, but I am still thinking of this as an opportunity lost.
With respect to the former, we occasionally lost track of the actors. We felt this was due to in part to dreary fake British accents that were not distinctive; indeed, despite physical differences, the actors tend to speak at an identical pace, with similar accents, and thus, beyond Dr. Jekyll, the men were rarely more than wallpaper that, briefly, has come to life. The ladies fare somewhat better, fortunately, but had little chance to put that to good use.
The stage, on the other hand, was nicely done, and the lighting was handled with a deft and imaginative hand. The script leads down some different paths, and as the two personalities vie for dominance, we appreciated the twists of two vigorous personalities wrestling with desire, despisement, hate and love, until one becomes the other in a fatal dénouement in which a sacrifice has collateral damage in a most unusual mode.
Despite our reservations, this is a play worth a look if you enjoy the Jekyll and Hyde trope.
