Big questions of art are on exhibit in Red

  • Print
  • More

November 30, 2012

The Gazette
November 30, 2012
By Pat Donnelly


Read the article

Explores relationship between abstract expressionist Mark Rothko and his assistant

MONTREAL - Does serious art really matter? Or has it been eclipsed by popular art, which celebrates the moment over all? And do artists have to become demigods of “titanic self-absorption”?

In his Tony Award-winning play Red, which just opened at the Segal Centre, American playwright/screenwriter John Logan writes about the big questions of art in broad, bold, angry brush strokes tempered with deftly applied dabs of cool, dry wit.

Red is a play that, of course, aspires to art itself, exploring an intermittently abusive teacher/mentor relationship between abstract expressionist Mark Rothko and his assistant, an aspiring young artist named Ken. “You’re an employee,” Rothko reminds the young man. “This is about me. Everything here is about me.”

The portrait of the older artist rendered here is not a flattering one.

Ken gets somewhat less respect than the furniture from his boss – until he rises up and fights back, pointing out with all the passionately idealistic cruelty of youth, that Rothko’s day has passed, and cocky Pop Art now rules the gallery roosts.

For the London and New York debuts of Red, it was Alfred Molina who played Rothko. But, significantly, it was Eddie Redmayne in the supporting role of the assistant who won the Tony for his performance. As an acting match, Red offers an excellent opportunity for a younger actor to establish himself as a force to be reckoned with. Logan (whose latest film credit is Skyfall) gradually allows Ken to appropriate his own place within Rothko’s hermetically sealed world.

This is exactly what Jesse Aaron Dwyre does in the Segal Centre production discreetly directed by Martha Henry. While the greater burden of the play undeniably lies on the able shoulders of Randy Hughson, who plays the temperamental Rothko with infuriating arrogance and simmering rage, Dwyre’s reactions speak volumes. Ken’s account of a traumatic scene from his childhood alters the balance. Here it’s Rothko’s turn to react, with reluctant empathy.

Together, Hughson and Dwyre hash out the play’s arguments clearly, engaging us in the dilemma of artists who feel they are bartering their ideals when they accept commissions from big corporations. Rothko struggles with his desire to create a solemn space for art when he has actually accepted big bucks to decorate a posh restaurant in the Seagram building (owned by Montreal’s Bronfman family) in New York. Ken holds up the mirror Rothko seeks to avoid.

Set and costume designer Eo Sharp has created a detailed replica of Rothko’s studio on Bowery St. in New York City, circa 1958. It’s sparely furnished, messy, cluttered with paint cans, and dominated by huge blank canvases and faux Rothko paintings.

Standing studio lamps remind us of Rothko’s obsession with man-made lighting — of which we can see the value through lighting designer Robert Thomson’s inventive effects. Composer Keith Thomas makes us hyper-aware of the role music can play in the life of a visual artist. The scene in which the volume is pumped up on a classical piece while the two men furiously splash paint on a canvas is carried out with performance art bravado.

Anyone who values art (the name-dropping alone, from Matisse and Picasso to Frank Stella and Jasper Johns, is like a course in art history), appreciates thought-provoking theatre, and has at least read Hamlet if not Nietzsche, must see Red.

Red, by John Logan, continues through Dec. 16 at the Segal Centre, 5170 Côte Ste. Catherine Rd. Call 514-739-7944 or visit www.segalcentre.org.

Box Office
514-739-7944