Oslo, July 2016

Wasn't going to do a report about Oslo. It's been a loooong time since I was deep in Jerryland. But like herpes, like Lady Macbeth's damned spot, le fandom is something you never get rid of completely. Anyway, I find I have things to say. This report is ++spoileriffic so I urge you guys (all 0.75 people reading this) to go see the thing for yourselves, then read this. Or just see it, and skip the reading part. *cough*JANET*cough*

After almost 10 years, I’m glad Oslo was the play I was able to see Jerry in. Coast of Utopia is a hard act to follow, but Oslo is bloody good. It’s only by happy coincidence that I was able to see it. When my cousin’s wedding date was set for July in Canada, I was like…wouldn’t it be convenient if Jerry had a play on then? Hahahalols, that will never happen. And then it did. Incredibly considerate, thank you LCT. 

Unlike for CoU, where I read the play and essays and reviews and historical texts as homework, I went into Oslo completely blind. Didn't even read the Playbill or program. And I'm glad. It gave me completely fresh eyes for this play. I was kinda worried about not understanding the thing, which is why I booked to see it twice, on a Friday and Saturday night, but in fact it’s pretty easy to follow as the narration fills in the gaps. I'm still glad I saw it again though. Once for the first impressions and figuring out who's who (and there are a lot of whos), second time to really think about it. The bathroom conversation both times I went was old ladies saying "did you hear it's 3 hours long? I hope I stay awake.” Which I was also worried about, but the time speeds by. 

The show starts with the house lights on, and with Terje doing the fourth wall thing by handing a Playbill over to an audience member. The setup is theatre in the round, in a drawing room. It’s intimate. Actors enter and leave from corridors set between the aisles, and sometimes even from the stairs. What I think all this is intended to do is to implicate the audience in the action. Maybe it’s a parallel between the audience’s spectating and the Norwegians’…like in physics, the observer effect means that watching something changes it. Maybe I’m jetlagged and overthinking it. The actors do all the handling of the stage furniture and props, I guess so that transitions are fluid and there’s not the distraction of scurrying stagehands. Anywho, some things never change: I had difficulty looking Jerry full in the face cus, I dunno, it's like staring into the sun or something. Still neurotic like that. Good to know I’m still the awkward potato at 30 that I was at 20.

There are summaries elsewhere but the basic outline is that Terje and Mona are a Norwegian couple, sociologist and foreign service official respectively. They work in Palestine and Israel and see the terrible violence there. Terje has this plan to try to get the two sides to talk to one another. Instead of the open, multinational round table negotiations with every issue up for discussion, like the stalled talks sponsored by the US, he has a gradualist approach where parties deal with one issue at a time, slowly building trust. Secrecy is paramount as it avoids the grandstanding that hinders the open talks. And so the couple pull strings and bring representatives from both sides to the table. It's risky as at the time, it's illegal for the Israeli government to be in communication with the PLO. There are multiple rounds of meetings, escalating from the small fish up to the real power players. Outside of the negotiating room, the Israelis and Palestinians eat together, tell bad jokes, swear, pontificate, share stories. Passions run high. Drinks flow. People clash. And you’re constantly reminded that the stakes are the highest: as the talks continue, outside in the real world, suicide bombers attack, civilians are killed on both sides. Real lives hinge on these few men getting their shit together and hammering out a plan.

Um, gotta give it to you straight. One of the first things that struck me is that Jerry's accent is…not Norwegian. Though it's slightly distracting sometimes, it is consistent, so you get used to it. That said, some other actors don't really do Norwegian accents either. I reckon it'd be quite acceptable for her to do a Mid-Atlantic accent, since diplomats often have foreign accents from work or school abroad.
[edit: having listened to some Youtubes of Norwegian accents, I'm starting to doubt this assessment. still, I stand by my comment that a neutral English accent would've been fine too]

However that's really the only thing I can nitpick. Her character is the moral centre of the play: the grounding force, the only adult in the room sometimes among all the dick-waving machismo and melodrama. She's also the narrator. While Terje is an enthusiastic, bubbling optimist who sometimes gets carried away, she is the firm hand that steers him back to cautious, non-interventionalist diplomacy. Her approach is almost like an anthropologist’s: to facilitate, to watch and observe, but never to intervene directly. A lot of her time onstage is sitting quietly and listening. Her costume is uniformly grey - a grey uniform. I interpret that as a kind of self-effacement and neutrality, almost wanting to blend in with the walls. It's a moderate and modest approach in a way that could be dull in other hands, forever urging restraint. But Jerry imbues Mona with a full-blooded vitality and passion which underlie her diplomatic cool, and which are unleashed once in a while to great effect. In a key scene when her husband oversteps the bounds in his eagerness for progress, she lets loose. She rips off her overcoat, symbolic of her protective reserve, and you see how deeply invested she is in this thing, just as much as he is. And yes, Jerry is still a goddamn lightbulb. It’s very hard not to look at her (though by jove, I tried). She commands your attention.

She's got another couple of great scenes. She narrates a time when she and Terje see two boys, one Palestinian, one Israeli, staring each other down, hating one another, but not wanting to do the terrible things they must. That is the catalyst for their efforts to get the Israelis and Palestinians to the table. It's moving stuff. Besides being the champion for non-interventionalist STFU, Mona does get to show off her poise and persuasive powers (woah there, alliteration). She shuts down one of the Palestinians who questions her understanding of the complicated politics of the region, by displaying how she’s “irritatingly well-informed”. She manoeuvres her bosses into supporting the negotiations, talks them off the ledge when they want to call it quits. In a comic scene, some German tourists arrive at the castle insisting that they have a booking, threatening the secrecy of the operation. She ushers them out vehemently (and in German!), earning the admiration of all the blokes. 

The first time I saw the play, I was carried away by the suspense of the narrative. The negotiations could fail at a hundred different junctures, they are threatened by egos, politics, leaks…but slowly, slowly, the parties find common ground and begin to budge on their positions. It's a miracle. You really are kept leaning forwards, bated breath, waiting for it to all fall apart…because well, spoiler alert, peace in the Middle East and for all mankind isn’t quite a reality just yet. Not just yet. Even with that knowledge, you’re on the edge of your seat. JT Rogers, take a freaking bow. It’s beautifully written. 

If it weren't history, I'd say it’s almost a West Wing liberal dream, a Polyannaish fantasy. Giving peace a chance and all. The end of the play is a stirring speech by Terje, which points out all that was achieved by the accords. Mona tempers this with some doubts about whether they did the right thing. But it ends with Terje's counter that despite the setbacks that followed the accords, including the assassination of Prime Minister Rabin, they were a start on the road to peace. First time round, that earned a “oh hells yes” standing ovation from me. So beautiful, so hopeful, that this intensely human way of making peace can work, despite immense obstacles, even if it’s only a partial win. Second time, it still was powerful, but I had questions. How does this idealistic, diplomatic approach fit with the problems we have now? If anything, our international forums are even weaker than before. The UN is toothless, the EU has been dealt the body blow of Brexit. The premise that rational actors can find common ground and shared humanity, despite conflict and grievances…how does that play out in the face of the brutality of ISIL? Or indeed, how does it work when our democracies' civil discourse is under threat from increasing polarisation and demagoguery? Then again, maybe twas ever thus.

I also wanted to know more about this couple. In one scene, Mona's boss says "THIS is who you ended up with?" Talking about Terje. And I have to agree…what underpins this relationship? It's obvious that Terje needs Mona, for her strength, for her position, for her powerful rolodex, but why does she need him? Another thing is that one of the Israelis asks Mona her motivation for being involved. Her answer is "if you have to ask, you wouldn't understand my answer." Which I'm not  quiiiite satisfied with. And more broadly, why were the Norwegians so involved? What's in it for them? It's one thing for individuals to be idealistic, but governments? The idea of a well-intentioned Western government involved in other countries' affairs is something that needs to be thunk about, hard. I’m not saying these questions detract from the play, but they’re just thoughts that were stimulated by it. 

I've focused so far on Mona for obvs reasons but her role is really a supporting one. She’s the setting for the jewel, rather than the jewel itself. Her narration is the through-line in the play, but the role isn’t as emotionally pivotal as say Natalie in Shipwreck. Most of the fireworks in the play are between the men. They have a great cast. Jefferson Mays' most interesting scene to me is when he is being bullied by the other guys. He's there to serve them and this higher cause of peace…but you can see him struggling against the emasculating humiliation. It builds into this pretend confrontation between fake-Arafat and fake-Rabin, and in this guise, he gets to say things he can’t as Terje. 

Um, looking at the cast list now I realise there are more people playing two roles than I had noticed. Despite seeing it twice, once very close up. Which is a testament to their acting… but I’m afraid it’s mostly due to my facial agnosia. Saw Jefferson Mays in A Gentleman’s Guide to Love and Murder last year and didn’t realise he was playing all the main roles til I saw the posters outside at the end. Slow clap. But anyway, yes, the cast is spot on. Michael Aronov as Uri was a standout for his swaggering charisma. His counterpart and counterpoint on the Palestinian side is Ahmed, Anthony Azizi. Both men have mercurial, macho temperaments. Both flirt with Mona unabashedly. They could be brothers, on opposite sides of the fence. One of the most powerful moments in the play is when the two men go for a walk on their own. They find out their daughters have the same name. For the first time, they sincerely reveal to one another how committed they are to the talks’ success. Shivers. Spine tingles. There’s one other scene which made me sit up and blink really hard. It’s at the end of the play, when Peres is on the line with Arafat. You can hear the whole audience holding their breath is when the accords are finally locked in, and you hear sobs down the phone line. Everything stops. 

Other highlights: Dariush Kashani is funny as the shouty Communist, but slowly you get to respect him as a very smart man. Daniel Oreskes does double duty as the superficially bumbling, but actually effective academic who is the first scout on the Israeli side, and also has a memorable turn as the stately Shimon Peres. “Fast and high.” T. Ryder Smith is the initially antsy Norwegian foreign minister, who once onside is a formidable asset. Joseph Siravo is the arrogant, bullshit-cutting lawyer for the Israelis, so it’s fun to see him loosen up as things get moving. 

Did I mention it's funny? Some big laughs. Some of my fave lols, in no particular order:

-Hips never lie.

-Your beautiful Rolodex. 

-Toast to Kissinger's asshole

-Iceberg, Goldberg… (lame-funny)

-Pissing in coffee cups. (I dunno why, this cracked me up for like five minutes.)

-Yossi Beilin’s weak stomach

-Fabulous impression of Arafat

-Do you have your gun?

-Waffles. (All the waffles bits. I feel like waffles now.)

-Now that we’re done waving our dicks…

-Jefferson Mays going “lalalala” (gotta see it)

What of the feels about coming full circle after 10 years? While I will always care about Jerry and her work, the squeeful flames of fandom have definitely chilled out a ton. The main way Jerryland lives on is through the mates I’ve made. Particular shoutout to Kerry. We’ve travelled in 4 countries together, shared hotel rooms and unmentionable smells and secrets, packed a U-Haul, attended a gay wedding, survived a strange as hell interactive play, and then there are the countless, countless beers. Also met up with Tess twice this trip, once on each coast, and Christina of the Twitter crew in SF, and the lovely Cee is putting me up in Paris later this year. Btw if anyone ever comes to my city, or my freaking continent, without telling me, I shall be quite cross. 

The ebbing of the keyboard-mashing, ear-splitting-squealing type of fandom is a bit sad, in that I had zero stomach butterflies of excitement going into Oslo. Seriously, I miss those squees. But it’s also good in that I went into the play with no preconceptions, and more like a normal (loljk never normal) audience member than a delirious fangirl. And still was blown away. This is a play that deserves a wider audience, and wouldn’t be surprised if it gets bounced to Broadway to be in contention for the Tonys. Anyway. If the pattern holds, Jerry and I are due for another date at Lincoln Centre in 2026. There with bells on.