NEW YORK--"How could we let this happen," one character cries to his friends (and the heavens) in Richard Nelson's overly talky, but quite topical drama Conversations in Tusculum. Set in ancient Rome, in the months before the events chronicled in Shakespeare's "Julius Caesar," the play looks at several freedom-loving people, now living under the yoke of a dictator, and the lengths they will go to change their situation.
Brutus (Aidan Quinn) and Cassius (David Strathairn), soldiers on the losing side of a battle between Caesar and Pompey, having been pardoned by Caesar, have come to their respective villas in the Tusculum countryside (15 miles southeast of Rome) to lick their wounds.
Accompanying them is Brutus' new wife Porcia (Gloria Reuben), daughter of Cato, a man who committed suicide rather than surrender, as Brutus, Cassius and so many others did. Also at Tusculum is author Cicero (Brian Dennehy) who, in his writing, supports the Roman Republic and who is desperately trying to end a mistake of a marriage to a much younger woman.
As the play begins there are rumors Caesar will have himself appointed dictator for life, thus forever dooming the Republic. (He's also had a month named after him and is taking steps to be proclaimed a god.) Brutus rages against not only Caesar's actions, but also his own inability to do anything about it. Indeed, he has often thought about killing himself, but refuses to give Caesar such satisfaction.
Things change however, when he is summoned to see Caesar, who tells Brutus he wants him (along with Cassius) to be a part of his new order and spells out his ideas for making the Roman Empire bigger and better than ever. This in turn reawakens Brutus' idealism, with his enthusiasm affecting Cassius, and to a much letter degree Cicero. Brutus begins to believe that change is possible and that by working within the system, things might get better. However that hope is brought cruelly crashing down when Brutus and Cassius realize Caesar, a master manipulator, is only using them. Soon events are set in motion that will lead (in another play) to the final confrontation between Caesar, Brutus and Cassius.
Though the setting of the story is unique, the situation is not, with underlying themes and questions sadly familiar. Should Caesar have shown mercy (for whatever reason) to Brutus and Cassius, thus allowing them to be free to plot against him, or is he so blind and sure of his power that he no longer fears them? Should people work with an enemy, who they believe was the ruination of their country, (which they love above all else) in the hope that change will come of it? And if one destroys the person(s) in power, who will rise to fill the vacuum?
Interesting points all, especially when Cassius notes he has seen people in other countries who want to kill Romans and that Caesar (or someone like him) is needed to keep the barbarians from the gates. There are also numerous swipes at political hangers-on and the question of basically selling ones soul for a dream, as Cicero does when he praises something Caesar has written, even as the bile rises in his throat for doing so.
There is definitely a parallel which can be drawn to current events in the United States and the country's relationship with Iraq, but instead of laying out the facts or point of view and letting the audience draw its own conclusions, the show tends to be far too preachy (especially in Act II), hitting one over the head with its message-which becomes dangerously like a diatribe at times-where a subtler approach would work much better. (Cassius discussing with an actor houseguest (Joe Grifasi) how, in a play one can say things one would not dare mention elsewhere, is an example of this sort of "stacking the deck.")
What make the play worth watching are the excellent performances. Quinn is superb as Brutus, who goes from being embittered to full of hope to facing the grim realization that the choice for change is in all of us. (If we're willing to do what's necessary to make it happen and then live with the consequences of our actions.) His every step is filled with determination and purpose, even though the character's motives are constantly changing.
Matching Quinn blow for blow is Dennehy, who does a masterful turn as Cicero. A man who fights with his pen, he berates Brutus for even thinking of violence against Caesar, firmly believing that the way of the sword can never lead to peace. Cicero is also the most well rounded character in the play, the subject of humor for his marriage and a vessel of pain as he grieves for the loss of his daughter.
Strathairn is good as Cassius though he has much less to do than Dennehy and Quinn, but acquits himself well as a calmer counterpart to the other two. Also good is Reuben as the dependable Portia, Grifasi as the actor who reads aloud what many of the characters are thinking, and Maria Tucci as Brutus' mother, who has gotten figuratively into bed with Caesar in an effort to stay on the good side of those in power.
It is clear Nelson (who also directed the piece) has something to say, but he takes too long getting there; especially since the outcome is pretty much known before the play begins. More problematic is that too much time is spent with Brutus and Cassius endlessly relating what happened to them. Seeing some of these events actually occur onstage would have worked much better.
Sets by Thomas Lynch are adequate, costumes by Susan Hilferty and lighting by Jennifer Tipton work well.
Conversations in Tusculum
The Public Theater
425 Lafayette Street
Tickets: 212-967-7555 or www.publictheatre.org
Running Time: Approximately 2 Hours, 15 Minutes
Closes: March 30, 2008
Judd Hollander is the New York correspondent for the London publication The Stage.
Feeds