The American Clock - Old Vic

Dear God. This is an absolute mess.

It felt like it had been staged after an 'ideas board' at one of those dreadful workshops run by fresh faced facilitators who call everyone 'guys' regardless of the gender make up of the room. 'Just remember there are no bad ideas!!'

Live jazz band!
Revolve Stage!
On stage seating!
Tap dancing!
Random Singing!
Dance marathons!
Colour blind casting!
Diverse Casting!
Anachronistic music!

Literally it seemed everything had been thrown at this but without any clear idea of what was trying to be said. The colour blind idea was great to evoke modern American families but ruined by casting three generic families who were all the same. Why not have one ethnically diverse family rather than splitting it across nine people. What did that actually achieve? This also served to confuse the plot as scenes which should have run seamlessly had lessened impact as you weren't sure exactly who that was on stage, is that the son or somebody else? Hang on who's Sidney? The fried chicken and WPA scenes suffered badly from that. Plus Arthur Miller is hardly known for writing strong complex female parts so why split it across three people giving them appreciably less to do.

I don't know the play so can't say if the fault is in the writing or in the directing/staging. I was surprised to read that the jazz band was put in by Miller in an 86 revision. And where did they go after the interval? Why was the woman who wandered out and sang two numbers apropos of nothing, and not I don't think in character, not with the band? And the tap dance?? Is that always there? If it's new, just why??

The first half felt interminable and they kept wheeling a piano on and off with no discernible purpose for the first 17 hours which was referred to briefly in the second half almost as a magic talisman and then taken off stage. I toyed with leaving at interval but stuck with it, Act 2 felt quite different and like a series of unrelated vignettes which was made worse by the doubling/tripling of actors. The scene for example with the comic strip dialogue writer? How did it relate to anything else?

Did I mention the tap dancing? I suppose on the plus side I can say I've seen an Arthur Miller musical now.

One thing that I found very strange was in the scene at the WPA where the largest actor on stage collapses from hunger and is referred to as 'starving'. I couldn't work out if this was being cruel or trying to get a cheap laugh or making a point that sailed over my head. I found it really jarring. Maybe it's a different actor each performance? I also noted near the begining where the same actor is paired with the smallest person on stage, drawing attention especially to their considerable disparity in size. Am I just being over sensitive?

It was very sparsely attended, from my seat I could see two people in the left of the circle and no one else. Four or five in the centre circle but I couldn't see further back. My entire row of the stalls had five people in it. Also the cast took their one bow at the end then just left the stage. None of that milking the applause.