LAMB’S STRIVES FOR AN EYRE OF MYSTERY
Playwright David McFadzean is no stranger to Lamb’s Players, having been a part of the company from 1979-1984. From there, his career took him to writing and produced for TV and film, including Roseanne, Home Improvement, Carol & Company, Thunder Alley, and the Mel Gibson comedy, What Women Want. For his world premiere of Jane: A Ghost Story, he comes home to Lamb’s, the Coronado company which does the world premiere justice.
No small task reducing Jane Eyre to two hours of dialogue and McFadzean does take some liberties with it, but the cuts and adaptations work well, giving us a surprisingly complete and tight interpretation of Charlotte Brontë’s 1847 novel.
Natasha Harris as Jane Eyre and Manny Fernandes as Edward Rochester
(J.T. MacMillan)
The story follows our heroine, the orphaned Jane Eyre (Natasha Harris), from the home of her cruel Aunt Reed (Cynthia Gerber) to being shipped off to boarding school to young adulthood. As her first career out of school, she becomes governess in the home of wealthy bachelor, Mr. Rochester (Manny Fernandes) whose ward Adele (Lizzie Morse) needs…well…some governing. The crux of the story is in the complex relationship between Jane and the moody Rochester, played adeptly by Fernandes, who gives Harris plenty to react to.
So where’s the ghost story? It’s in there and McFadzean nourishes and expands upon what’s in the book to add the creepy vibe for this Halloween-timed debut. Despite the title, though, the ghost story component is perhaps more marketing than a true theme of the show, resolved about two-thirds of the way in. It’s an enjoyable aspect, but the reality is that this is primarily a very good adaptation of the novel that happens to involve a mystery…one that may or may not involve ghosts.
Natasha Harris as Jane Eyre and the cast (J.T. MacMillan)
The story is reset in the 1920s, allowing McFadzean to play with a few more modern themes, like a Victrola that is weaving lovingly into the plot, giving us some wonderful music (like Irving Berlin’s “Always” and Isham Jones’s “It Had to Be You”) to go with the storyline as well. More music is achieved with some lovely a cappella singing at times by members of the company.
McFadzean helps move the storyline along by using Jane as a narrator between scenes. Some may find this device distasteful, but the effect works fine here and feels in character with the tone set by director Robert Smyth.
Natasha Harris as Jane Eyre and Manny Fernandes as Edward Rochester
(J.T. MacMillan)
The program feels much like a staged version of Masterpiece Theater. This is neither a praise nor a critique; more a recommendation that, if you enjoy that kind of program, this may well be one worth checking out.
As proficiently as McFadzean has adapted this, though, I found myself wishing it could have been a mini-series, perhaps four one-hour episodes, because parts do feel a bit rushed in the writing to get on with the next part, so we could be complete in two hours. It would have been satisfying to see what he would have done with more time to explore aspects of her life, especially in school.
The good news is that I would happily have watched all four hours if the quality remained this high, especially if Harris were again so well cast as Jane, giving her grounding, believability, and a lovely hint of early feminism.
Jane, A Ghost Story
Lamb’s Players Theatre
1142 Orange Ave, Coronado, CA 92118
Wed at 2 & 7; Thu & Fri at 7; Sat at 2 & 7; Sun at 2
ends on November 12, 2023
for tickets, call (619) 437-6000 or visit Lamb’s Players
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
I missed something. This is a very positive review, but I found the play tedious. The cast was adequate, but the plot lacked the mystery and tension of the novel. The miscasting of Rochester made the love interest almost ludicrous (I’m afraid that a balding, paunchy too much older man is not at all what I saw in my reader’s eye; the older man in the Brontë novel seemed in his mid-30s or -40s). The brooding and intensity that added romantic excitement weren’t there either. So disappointing.
I accepted the differences in their ages and physiques as something of the period; that a good kind man was considered appealing more than this time of lifetime gym memberships. We watched Downton Abbey without anyone really questioning the physical types or ages of some of the pairings. Just a different world where women often married men much older than them, even by choice.