Editor finds Molly Sweeney enjoyable and inspiring

By Frank Visco
Collegian Editor
November 14, 2007

In a nice display of cohesion, the Amaryllis Theater Company has put together an assured production of Brian Friel’s Molly Sweeney as part of Philadelphia’s first Disability Arts Festival, “Independence Starts Here.”

Sweeney, which runs through Nov. 18 at the Adrienne at 2030 Sansom St., carries a great deal of relevance, because much like the festival itself, it challenges the societal notions of disability. Through the use of three rotating monologues, the play recounts the story of Molly Sweeney (Pamela Sabaugh), a woman who regains partial eyesight after 40 years of blindness, only to discover that the change might not be a good thing.

The production also carries special relevance for La Salle. It is directed by Tom Reing, a frequent Masque collaborator and La Salle professor, and features the son of English professor Stephen Smith. Smith also happens to be one of the cofounders of Amaryllis, an ensemble that has been dedicated to reaching out to the disabled community since its inception in 1999.

Adding intrigue is the fact that this production is believed to be the first in which a blind actress has played the lead role. Although her casting could’ve been dismissed as a gimmick, Sabaugh, who lost all but her peripheral eyesight during youth, makes the part her own. Showing great sensitivity and understanding, she avoids garnering pity and instead offers a complex portrayal of wounded humanity.

The other actors are similarly strong. Stephen Patrick Smith is pitch-perfect as Frank, Molly’s bumbling boor of a husband. Although he’s well-meaning, Frank pushes Molly to seek medical assistance more out of a need to champion the cause, than out of her best interest. Smith nails this aspect of the character, while hilariously becoming sidetracked by the most mundane topics.

Michael Toner brings sensitivity and urgency to the role of Mr. Rice, Molly’s has-been ophthalmologist. He too pushes Molly to get the surgery, in large part because he is looking to reclaim his integrity after losing both his wife and his standing in the medical world.

The play’s central question, “Is/was Molly better off blind?”, has provoked discussion since its debut in 1995. Although many believe disabilities are something in need of being fixed, the play suggests otherwise. In the first act, Molly says she cherishes being blind because of the immense sensation she is capable of feeling. Thus, in pondering the possibility of eyesight, she worries that seeing will diminish her experiences by qualifying them.

Such ideas resonate greatly in today’s disabled community. In the recent La Salle production of his one man show Weights, Lynn Manning, an acclaimed poet, playwright and actor, claimed to love the freedom being blind afforded him. Meanwhile, there are stark points of view in the deaf community concerning the use of cochlear implants, which can restore partial hearing. Many people think they are great, but there are others who espouse sign language.

Overlong and a bit too talky, the play begins to drag half-way through the second act, but that’s more indicative of Friel’s play than the production itself. While the rotating monologues are interesting, they aren’t very theatric, and with no character interaction whatsoever, one gets the sense that Sweeney reads better on paper than it plays on stage.

Although technical aspects are minimal, they are a testament to the production’s restraint. Reing doesn’t force anything on the audience, making obvious, yet effective choices. Placing three chairs on the stage, he literally stages a triangle with his actors, placing Sabaugh in front, raised on a circular platform. Furthermore, when each character breaks into monologue, the lighting enhances their dominance, while playing down the other characters.

The set is also limited, featuring only a simple backdrop (flower shadowed wallpaper, with a window). More thought seems to have been put into costuming selection and it shows—you know something about each character before they even speak. The sound is top-notch as well, with a clarity befitting of a small three-quarters round production. Although flourishes are few and far between, a ticking clock is used appropriately during one of Sabaugh’s most gripping monologues.

Examining what the show’s playbook refers to as “disability’s many, glorious shades of grey,” Molly Sweeney provides a thought-provoking way to spend a few hours. Although the play tries one’s patience in the final half hour, great characters and lively performances make seeing it worth the effort.

viscof1@lasalle.edu