Curtain Critic: ‘Ubu Roi’ seems deliberate in its choices, but remains an arduous, exhausting journey

Curtain banner-01

The absurdism in "Ubu Roi" was purely executed in the eyes of Curtain Critic's Molly Bilker. She says the play, while arduous to her, seemed to strike a different cord with other audience members. (Photo credit to Justshreeeej Photography)
The absurdism in “Ubu Roi” was purely executed in the eyes of Curtain Critic’s Molly Bilker. She says the play, while arduous to her, seemed to strike a different cord with other audience members. (Photo credit to Justshreeeej Photography)

“Ubu Roi,” an original production out of Space 55 (though not on its first run), is — admittedly — difficult to assess. The show, an absurd take on a whole host of Shakespearean plot tools and themes, seems to achieve what it sets out to do. Yet it’s also arduous to sit through, gratuitous in its absurdity and redundant in its humor.

Absurdism is a tough enough genre at its core because there are elements of absurdism that are inherently strident, confusing and frustrating. One of my favorite reads several years ago was Christopher Durang’s single-scene “Naomi in the Living Room,” which sees its main character wildly berate her house guests for several minutes.

So the enjoyment that comes out of an absurd piece, something like “Ubu Roi,” is not necessarily enjoyment as we would consider it in any typical shape or form. That said, “Ubu Roi” still left me feeling a bit scraped thin.

The play follows the treacherous plots of Papa Turd, played by Ashley Naftule, and Mama Turd, played by Lana Antropova, who plot to kill the king of Poland and take over the country. During the first couple scenes, Papa Turd is, for the most part, unintelligible, shouting and running his words together. This seems intentional — but it also makes the character difficult to discern and the audience difficult to engage.

As the play continues, Papa Turd’s enunciation becomes clearer, but the shouting doesn’t die down. Lulls in the excitement are few and far between. The sheer amount of noise in the show can be exhausting.

Perhaps the more critical take is that, beyond the overstimulation of the show, the absurdist humor it riffs on begins to get old. The humor was one of the parts of “Ubu Roi” that really shone — it was truly, genuinely absurd humor, with no pretension of “trying” to be strange. But when the same jokes start to loop, we lose the primary part of the show that brought enjoyment and intellectual engagement to the stage.

There are certainly some elements worth commending. The cast followed a variety of quick costume changes and used numerous low-budget props that played very well on the Space 55 stage and set a lighthearted, DIY tone for the entire play. And the cast themselves were all strong performers, though “Ubu Roi” is so purposely overacted that it’s hard to say whether any cast member might have a predilection toward the melodramatic.

But despite what I experienced at “Ubu Roi,” I know others in the audience may have felt differently. This is where I question my own take. “Ubu Roi” was not for me, and due to its exhausting, strident nature, I wouldn’t typically suggest it to the people in my own life. However, perhaps it is completing an absurdist mission that dives just a little too deep into the absurdist pool for me to understand.

Whatever the case may be, the decisions made in presenting “Ubu Roi” never lost an air of deliberateness. My questions remain in whether those decisions, whether or not deliberately made, truly achieve the audience experience the show is meant to provide.

Rating (out of four stars): ★

Contact the columnist at mbilker@asu.edu.