A friend and I picnicked at Schiller Park and watched The Three Musketeers the other night. The play touched on some of the darker parts of Alexander Dumas' novel, but it is a mostly fun-filled performance. It has athletic fights and bright-eyed (and touchy) youth. And the Cardinal conveyed a world of restrained creepiness in his "Ouch" when the Queen slapped him. The addition to the story of Sabine as D'artagnan's sister worked well, particularly for the ending. I'm not a big fan of changing art to meet current sensibilities. So, when I first heard about the Sabine character, I thought, "They did that just because there are no strong good female characters." (The female villain -- Milady -- is a very strong character, and well-played in this production.) But the character of Sabine fits. She stays true to the time period of the play. There were adventurous girls, and they would have to disguise themselves. She didn't sound like a 21st-century woman.
But, unfortunately, there are moments when 21st-Century ideals invade the play for no artistic reason. That throws me out of the play. The characters leave the world of The Three Musketeers, and become just normal people in costumes. One blatant instance was near the end. Constance, lady-in-waiting to the Queen and D'artagnan's lover, insists on calling Da'artagnan "my best friend."
Milady responds with "You mean your lover."
Constance insists, "No, my best friend."
Constance's label is modern, not true to the play or her character. The Queen would have been Constance's "best friend." And no woman of that period would refer to a non-relative male as "best friend." This pandering insults the audience's intelligence and hurts the play.
But that's just a nit-pick. Overall, the play was a fine performance. I can't wait to see the other two plays Actors' Theatre has lined up this summer.
Photo by Carol Ottolenghi
Comments