October 16, 2008
The Masked Canterbury Tales: An hour of Geoffrey Chaucer through the medium of mime
It’s difficult to know exactly what the production were trying to achieve through this rather bravely unconventional single-act play. As a short, amusing, experimental piece of theatre, it provides what it says on the tin, but if you were looking for a substantial piece of thought-provoking drama, look elsewhere. The Masked Canterbury Tales is a novel take on the well-known, well-loved and for some, well-studied Middle English text, taking four notable pilgrims and four notable tales and, quite literally, acting them out: there is no spoken dialogue between the actors (most noises being for comic effect). The only words carrying along the play come from the raw text of Chaucer’s narrative itself, read out with charm by Sindall in (thankfully) modern English from one propped corner of the stage, with the other three performers carrying out the main physical drama in unabashed, bawdy and slapstick style. There is also some excellent technical use of lighting and visual touches, for example providing a screen for audience sensibilities in the ribald culmination of the play in The Miller’s Tale.
The multi-sensory experience of hearing the narration together with the displayed physical play of the story really brought out the humour and subtleties of Chaucer’s word and wit, and in this respect, the performers succeed – their enthusiasm for the story shines through in their movement, though their words are constricted.
Why masks were necessary was a personally pondered question, however: for a play that deliberately constricts the speech of the actors, their facial gestures as an evocative medium of physical is rudely forbidden by a visually vulgar and dramatically superficial mask. The whole approach is rather puppet-show, and the humour sometimes falls empty. The action of Chaucer is condemned purely to physical action as theatre, with no exploration of deeper meaning. We are encouraged to just enjoy the stories themselves, which range from the politically-incorrect-for-modern-times, to the cautionary, to the purely lewd, slapstick fabliau that we often forget was just as enjoyed in Chaucer’s time as it is in ours.
For students new to Chaucer, the play is an interesting taster of what English Literature has to offer, though in substance the experimental novelty wears quickly; one act is probably the limit of what it can stretch to.