✭✭✭✭✩

by Gotthold Ephraim Lessing, translated by Edward Kemp, directed by Tim Albery

Soulpepper, Harbourfront Theatre Centre, Toronto

June 22-July 31, 2004

“A Wise and Timely Play”

Thanks to Soulpepper, Gotthold Ephraim Lessing’s great play “Nathan the Wise” is finally having its Canadian professional premiere.  The plea for tolerance among Christians, Jews and Muslims seems even more relevant now than when Lessing wrote it in 1779.  Over and over as characters ask first to be regarded as human beings and second as adherents of a particular religion, one marvels that such an important play has taken so long to reach Canada even as one rejoices that it finally has.

The action takes place in 12th-century Jerusalem, recently reconquered from the Crusaders by a sultan of the Egyptian Ayyubid dynasty, Salah-ad-Din (1138-93), known as Saladin in the West, whose most famous battle was against Richard the Lionheart of England.  Despite these circumstances, Saladin was renowned in both East and West for his generosity and religious tolerance, allowing the conquered Jews and Christians of Jerusalem to practice their religions. 

This history is only the backdrop for the story of Nathan, a wealthy Jewish merchant, known for his kindness and wisdom.  Nathan returns to Jerusalem to hear a strange story.  A Christian Knight Templar, just pardoned by Saladin because of his likeness to Saladin’s brother, has rushed into Nathan’s house as it was burning to rescue his only daughter Rachel.  The young Rachel is obsessed with her “angel” but Conrad, the Templar, is deeply conflicted and refuses to see her again.  His pardon from the member of one “enemy” religion and his rescue of a member of another “enemy” religion cause him anger and consternation.  Efforts to bring him closer to Nathan or Saladin only call forth his bigotry.

In the play all of the characters carry a secret concerning either their own identity or that of someone else.  Lessing has so constructed the plot that no one character holds all the pieces of a puzzle that will fully explain his true relationships to each others.  Yet, as the action moves forward secret after secret comes to light forming a complete picture by the end.  Thus the plot itself mirrors the play’s theme of the need for communal cooperation among members of different religions. 

Designer Dany Lyne has updated the action to the 1940s which works very well except for the Templar, whose hooded robe seems out of place.  This may, however, be deliberate since the Templar is the principal character who seem not to fit in to a Jerusalem governed by an enlightened Muslim ruler.  Half of the Harbourfront Theatre Centre stage is covered with red sand, including the suggestion of a wadi, and is dominated by massive fallen scorched timbers, reminders both of the fire at Nathan’s house and of the battles of the Crusades.  The surrounding back three walls are covered with books, suggested perhaps by the text that places native reason above book learning as a guide for action.  All is atmospherically lit by Sharon DiGenova and accompanied by the Middle Eastern sounds of Yair Dalal’s music.  

The prime virtue of Tim Albery’s direction is in making the involved plot and relations of the characters absolutely clear and in leading the action to its moving conclusion.  His blocking rather oddly places much of the most important action as far upstage as possible, and he lets the play down by not picking up the pace, especially in the second half, when, as in Shakespeare’s “Twelfth Night”, revelation precipitates revelation.  Edward Kemp’s contemporary prose translation is itself a problem since it never suggests that Lessing’s original text was written in blank verse, or indeed, in poetry of any kind.

The play is a triumph for William Webster in the title role.  He brings to the role all the humility and common sense that Nathan is said to have.  He uses subtle variations of intonation to suggest a Jewish accent and successfully avoids any hint of caricature.  He fully communicates Nathan’s decency and humanity and gives a masterful reading of the play’s most famous speech, the “Parable of the Three Rings”, in which Nathan subtly answers Saladin’s question concerning which of the three Abrahamic religions is the true one.  Webster’s is a performance of such quiet strength it supports the entire play.

In his one appearance David Calderisi is chilling as the Patriarch of Jerusalem, Nathan’s and Saladin’s nemesis and the most irredeemably bigoted character in the play.  Finely decked out to visit the poor, he casually mentions assassination and burning at the stake as useful religious tools.  Derek Boyes also gives a fine performance as Bonafides, a lay brother, torn between duty to the Patriarch and a sense of simple human decency.  Karen Robinson creates a very positive portrayal of Sittah, Saladin’s sister and, as Lessing shows it, effectively co-ruler with her brother.  She makes the most of the charm and wit Lessing gives her, in fact, making Sittah, in a protofeminist way, seem more aware and self-assured than her brother.

If all the other performances were on the same level as these the play would have much greater impact.  Andrew Moodie, however, never seems like a warrior and ruler or even a man with great power.  His diction is not clear or emphatic enough and his has not worked out how to present a man who is both familiar with majesty yet personally humble.  Cara Pifko as Nathan’s daughter Rachel has scenes of girlish infatuation and scene of a more mature Rachel criticizing her servant’s narrow views, but she doesn’t seem to be able to show more than one side of Rachel at a time.  Nathan’s Christian servant Daya is a more ambiguous character than Barbara Gordon plays her, someone who, when the moment comes, is ready to betray the master who has always been kind to her.  Vik Sahay tries too hard to make the dervish Al-Hafi a comic figure but does play his final renunciation of the world movingly.   

The Templar Conrad is, perhaps, the most difficult role in the play.  He is angry and moody throughout much of the action, yet he must garner some sympathy despite this for the play to work.  Dusan Dukic gives us what seems most like a bored, annoyed teenager rather than a man who is deeply troubled for reasons he cannot fully express.  We should see that the foundations of the Templar’s prejudice are crumbling under personal contact with people of other religions.  Yet the more he tries to eliminate these contacts the less happy he is.

The message throughout the play is that we live too close to one another to harbour blind animosity, that accepting every person’s basic humanity must override any perceived differences.  If Schiller’s “Ode to Joy” states that “all men will become brothers”, Lessing’s play states that all men already are brothers and should respect each other in that way.  Soulpepper could hardly have chosen a more appropriate time to stage this play.  We need an infusion of the rationality and hope Lessing embodied in 1779.  Whatever the production’s imperfections, Albery’s clarity of purpose and Webster’s Nathan create a thrill of discovery and a sense of moral uplift you will long remember.            

©Christopher Hoile

Note: This review is a Stage Door exclusive.

Photo: Cara Pifko and William Webster. ©2004 Guntar Kravis.