This review was printed in the Stabroek News in January of this year. Mr. Gilkes had mentioned plans to stage the play in the US and Canada and I would urge all our Guyanese and Caribbean friends in the diaspora to not miss the chance to see it if it staged at a theatre near you. Or even not so near…It may resonate most with Guyanese but it’s an experience that would thrill anyone familiar with the peculiarities of
Woodbine or The Last Of The Redmen
A play in two acts for one actor by Michael Gilkes
Review by F. E. Alleyne
In his infamous defence of slavery, the Victorian Thomas Carlyle, once said that the union of abolitionist philosophy and economics, the dismal science, would give birth to “dark extensive moon-calves, unnameable abortions, wide-coiled monstrosities, such as the world has not seen hitherto!”
If there is any satisfaction to be had for people of the Caribbean where such creatures now abound it is surely in the thought that, were Mr. Carlyle to be transported to the mid-twentieth century Caribbean, he would undoubtedly have imploded from shock as he discovered a world in which we monstrosities had become the guardians and defenders of the very cultural values which he himself had professed to uphold.
But his vengeful spirit must have chortled away in glee as he read the title on the play-bill of a stage production at Cara Lodge in
One man, one small room, a few props, and a cozily ensconced rapt audience struggling to keep at bay the tearclouds threatening scattered showers. One life, epitomizing a class, a genus - some memories. The result, theatre at its best.
In recent years ‘one-man theatre’ has become all the rage in
Woodbine, is a play in two acts with a sole actor, the playwright, playing the role of the principal protagonist, Mr. Redman, whose life is being chronicled, as well as the other four major roles.
This is a tragi-comic fantasy in which Mr. Redman, last scion of the Redman family, is also an embodiment of The Redmen, the aptly described social class which occupied the middle rungs of the social and economic ladders of the epidermically-stratified societies of the post-war
Mr. Redman, the Redman, has in his twilight years been tide-swept into impecunious circumstances and is holding fast against the currents to the standards which characterized his family, the Redmans, while Mr. Redman, The Redmen, is dead and being mourned by Mr. Redman. The last of the Redmans is determined that his swan-song shall be an investigation into who killed his alter ego, The Redmen.
Smoke-and-mirror antics have nothing on this play. It employs deeply psychological sleight-of-hand and intellectually stimulating allegory, interspersed with seemingly prosaic passages, to produce a experience which follows the audience on softly padded feet as they leave, bemused, at its end.
This is serious socio-political analysis elegantly party-dressed as entertainment, and it is an indictment of all modern
But entertainment it certainly is too. From the dead-pan satire of Mr. Redman, punctuated with exquisitely delivered morsels of bawdy humour which never become vulgar, to the ‘sweet-boy’ mannerisms and machismo of his ‘small-days’ friend, the play holds the audience in the world it creates.
The emotionally charged sequences of the play are relieved at intervals with slide-shows of the Redmans and The Redmen (including those Redmen who - in the eyes of the Redmans – did not need the characteristic pigment since they were eminently qualified, on all other counts, to be Redmen) as well as by musical pieces, a competently but soullessly executed waltz, and a spirited masquerade dance which puts all modern Guyanese masquerade bands to shame.
The latter is accompanied by the simultaneous screening of a similar dance which, perfunctory though it is, draws the eye, producing an illusory effect as of simultaneous existence and echoes the surrealistic elements of the play itself.
So Who Killed The Redmen?
Act one, Scene one, opens with the parting of a pair of mahogany doors as an elderly man is wheeled onto the stage. He appears to be slightly infirm and displays the distraction and disorientation peculiar to the unutilized elderly.
The setting is the “The Palms”,
But this inmate is valiantly fighting the process. His room is incongruously furnished with an elegant escritoire, a legacy from his father, and on it lie a china bell and a few imposing tomes. A champagne flute nestling against a bottle of water proclaims that Roger Algernon Fitzwilliam Redman - self-described alms house inmate and eccentric old fart - has style.
A knock heralds the advent of an invisible newspaper reporter. Redman, R.A.F. – no, he wasn’t in the air force – visibly sloughs off his distracted mien, dons the proverbial stiff upper lip and greets the young man in a benevolently commanding tone which almost hides his pleasure at receiving a visitor and succeeds in intimidatidating his guest into respectful silence which lasts for the duration of the interview.
The reporter has come because this living relic is heroically and unprecedentedly attempting to produce a hard copy of the precariously stored contents of his failing memory. He hesitantly sits - assured that old age is not catching - and listens.
And so begins one of the longest and most brilliantly executed soliloquies in the annals of
Mr. Redman is disembowelling his memory and, utilizing the skills clandestinely gleaned from his father’s pathology texts, is attempting in this theatrical autopsy to discover, not what, but Who, killed the ‘middle class’. Exceed his jurisdiction as pathologist he might, but his detective work is no less painstaking as the dissected parts of the deceased are laid out for our examination.
Mr. Redman, as we will discover, is uniquely qualified for the task as both pathologist and deceased. But is he also the accused?
And, for that matter, is this autopsy or vivisection? Who says the middle class is dead? Surely a society must have a middle and not just a beginning and an end? Well, in this fantasy, anything is possible and the evidence Mr. Redman presents suggests that such an outcome really is quite possible.
But, we are dealing here with the middle class of the Caribbean as the Redmans knew it - people who usually happened to be somewhat tinged with vermilion, though sometimes they had no colour at all, or all the colours, but most of all who upheld the standards of our societies, who cared about culture, the arts, the environment, good government, personal responsibility, clean streets and neat fences, the helpless and needy, honesty, decency, putting one’s best foot forward, smiling in the face of personal tragedy, wearing their game legs, arms, and other handicaps as badges of courage. These were the bourgeosie as they later came to be derisively termed.
The ones who treated the entire
The latter philosophy is exemplified in the play by Mr. Redman’s “Do It Now” exhortation (no, Nike didn’t invent the concept, there was a better version before) but was more elegantly expressed by the penultimate Redman, Makepeace Richmond, the Guyanese sage who coined the term, ‘Clown Council’, and whose philosophy was “Oh, stop staring at your navel and get on with it”
So, now that we have defined the term, who or what killed the middle class? Mr. Redman lays out the evidence but knows his limitations as a pathologist and does not form conclusions.
This question has to be decided by all of us, the members of the jury, based upon a careful consideration of the evidence which was carefully compiled and laid before us by Mr. Redman, of
Was it perhaps that some essential Redmen elements wore Fanonesque masks to cover their skins rouges and were stifled with these? Is that a trace of powder on the evidence table – no, never mind, just a few ‘unfortunate black-peppers’. Or were they perhaps squashed in the upward surge as the upper classes retreated and the lower classes raced for the top? Or maybe was there a grand conspiracy involving all the classes, including The Redmen themselves?
Did they perhaps, not liking themselves, incorporate a timed self-destruct feature into their systemic structure? After all, see how flustered they were when British Royalty deigned to partner one their daughters in a dance.
Or was it a tragic accident which occurred as some
But maybe there was no death at all and Mr. Redman was deluded. He was, after all, a tad long in the tooth, and we must not forget that this is theatre, surrealistic theatre at that.
If there is one seeming flaw in this masterpiece it is the apparent existence of a vacuum which undoubtedly the playwright intended to serve as part of the evidence. The names and photographs of countless eminent Redmen of various hues are laid before us but there is a glaring absence. Where are the I-words? They can be counted on the fingers of one hand. And where is Mr. Redman’s wife, partly descended from I-words?
This play is based on the Taitt family, a prominent and accomplished Guyanese middle class family, who had all emigrated from
Mittleholzer, in his autobiography, A Swarthy Boy, described for us the intricacies of the colour-based caste system of post-war
Since the playwright would have known this, the small sprinkling of Indians in the account of prominent Redmen must have evidentiary significance. Are we the jury to cast suspicious eyes upon Indians? Is it possible that they were involved in the death of The Redmen?
As one who is of the pure vermilion blood on one side of the family and contaminated by the I-word on the other, I can testify that there certainly was motive. But that testimony should be stricken from the record and, as is usual in a proper court, from the ears and, in this case, the eyes, of the jury.
So who, or what, killed The Redmen? If the judge’s sentence which follows the delightfully surreal trial at the end of this play can be admitted into evidence and, since this is a fantasy, we may assume that it can, it would appear that the judge is privy to some information that is withheld from us.
Was the deceased really dead or did he shape-shift for a while into an amorphous splintered hydra, melting into bi-chromatic metropolitan societies and into the obscure almshouses, real and figurative, of the
But the rule of law holds sway in the