Reviews started pouring in on 8 January for Robert Shaw's production of Three Women. The reviews continued into the next day. Here are a list of links...
Lyn Gardner at The Guardian (9 January)
A mixed review: while Gardner recognizes the power of Plath's poetry, it's translation from a radio drama to stage doesn't work for her.
Benedict Nightingale at the Times (9 January)
A more enthusiastic review, though Nightingale wishes there was more acting.
Ian Shuttleworth at the Financial Times (8 January)
Shuttleworth's title says it all, "The words do all the work." His review concludes, "Three Women resonates soul-deep, regardless of one’s experiences or one’s sex. But the power is all Plath’s, and nothing to do with the staging."
Fiona Mountford of The Evening Standard at This is London (8 January)
Mountford also seems more optimistic about the text of the poem, versus its being performed. She says, "there can be no getting around the fact that this isn’t a work crying out to be performed in a visual medium."
Heather Neill at Stage.co.uk (8 January)
Neill is also critical of the performance, saying, "This lyrical piece - intimate, luminous and fearless in its imagery - does not, despite the director’s assurances and the actors’ commitment, prove her a dramatist."
Sarah Blissett at Whatsonstage.com (8 January)
Blissett find Three Women to be "thought-provoking." Ultimately, however, she "was left disappointed at the attempt to present a world that Plath had intended for the imagination."
Overall, Plath's Three Women receives praise. Especially when they are looking at the poem, the words. They are more critical when it comes to assigning the title of dramatist to Plath (when even she called this a poem). Most of the reviews make special note to compliment Tilly Fortune's performance as the "Second Voice" who miscarries. Blissett quote just above seems to sum up the feeling of these reviews best.
If any Sylvia Plath Info Blog readers have seen the performance, please submit comments or a review to me via email and I'll post it here!
Lyn Gardner at The Guardian (9 January)
A mixed review: while Gardner recognizes the power of Plath's poetry, it's translation from a radio drama to stage doesn't work for her.
Benedict Nightingale at the Times (9 January)
A more enthusiastic review, though Nightingale wishes there was more acting.
Ian Shuttleworth at the Financial Times (8 January)
Shuttleworth's title says it all, "The words do all the work." His review concludes, "Three Women resonates soul-deep, regardless of one’s experiences or one’s sex. But the power is all Plath’s, and nothing to do with the staging."
Fiona Mountford of The Evening Standard at This is London (8 January)
Mountford also seems more optimistic about the text of the poem, versus its being performed. She says, "there can be no getting around the fact that this isn’t a work crying out to be performed in a visual medium."
Heather Neill at Stage.co.uk (8 January)
Neill is also critical of the performance, saying, "This lyrical piece - intimate, luminous and fearless in its imagery - does not, despite the director’s assurances and the actors’ commitment, prove her a dramatist."
Sarah Blissett at Whatsonstage.com (8 January)
Blissett find Three Women to be "thought-provoking." Ultimately, however, she "was left disappointed at the attempt to present a world that Plath had intended for the imagination."
Overall, Plath's Three Women receives praise. Especially when they are looking at the poem, the words. They are more critical when it comes to assigning the title of dramatist to Plath (when even she called this a poem). Most of the reviews make special note to compliment Tilly Fortune's performance as the "Second Voice" who miscarries. Blissett quote just above seems to sum up the feeling of these reviews best.
If any Sylvia Plath Info Blog readers have seen the performance, please submit comments or a review to me via email and I'll post it here!
Comments
Post a Comment