After a transfer last March to London’s West End, the incredibly original and galvanic production of The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime, based on the book by Mark Haddon as adapted by Simon Stephens, won seven Olivier Awards matching the number for the musical Matilda.One of those awards went to Luke Treadway who was described as inhabiting the complex character Christopher, both challenged with symptoms of Asperger’s as well as remarkably insightful, galvanic and a savant of math, science and technology.
Recently, I saw the innovative production with a new cast including Mike Noble (Christopher), Rakie Ayola (Siobhan his teacher), Trevor Fox (father), Amanda Drew (mother) and Gay Soper (a friendly neighbor). While Treadway may have left big shoes to fill, the performance by Noble is nothing short of astonishing. We were on the edge of our seats through every minute of a truly mind-boggling evening of theater.
The staging presents an open cube with three walls and the floor as ever morphing surfaces for state-of-the-art, digital graphic imagery. The technology of this production sets a new benchmark for theatrical design. Prop use is minimal: boxes or benches surround the stage. Members of the cast are used as silent observers to convey community. Also, intricate choreography creates the confusion with which he navigates crowds. It is awe inspiring when he simply climbs up a wall on invisible stairs and then comes tumbling down an ersatz escalator.
This technology and use of exotic special effects is acknowledged in an inventive manner when Christopher bounds back on stage after the curtain calls. He is compelled to explain how he had solved the Pythagorean Theorem during the honors math exam that culminates the second act. While solving the problem, he refers to the special teams that ran all that technology.
There is a kind of layering in the telling of the narrative. Rather early in the first act, Siobhan, his special education teacher, reads from the book by Haddon allegedly written by Christopher. As a play within a play, at some point, Christopher decides to make a play of his book. This has a twist when he tells a character/actor that he is too old to play a copper. Then, late in the second act, when he is frustrated by solving the math problem in the exam, he wants to explain the solution. Siobhan reminds him that it’s just a play, and there isn’t enough time for this. She suggests that he might explain it after the show.
This staggering between illusion and reality is clever in the manner of Pirandello’s Six Characters in Search of an Author or Shakespeare’s play within a play in Hamlet. These time and reality shifts, however, did not sit well with Ben Brantley in a New York Times review. “…Though the device of Siobhan as an interpreter is retired for much of the second act, she shows up again to step outside the show and suggest that this play is a work that Christopher has made by his very own self. Yuck. Perhaps the point here is that even the best-intentioned souls can be patronizing about the struggles of the mentally challenged. Or perhaps the show’s creators believed this tone of voice is necessary to appeal to the children in the audience. In any case it is likely to irritate anybody older than 8.” Is that really “Yuck” which he wrote? For, at worst, a small hiccup in an otherwise brilliant and magnificent production? Arguably the most unique on either side of the pond in this century? What do critics know? And does it make one any less perceptive to be absorbed by a visual feast of production values as well as heartfelt, gut-wrenching performances. Okay. The play does get a bit sentimental as plucky Christopher claws his way over all those incredible obstacles. Like the impossibility of getting from point A to point B without circling madly about. Oh yeah. The dog at nighttime. We see just a flash of the mutt spiked with a pitchfork setting the drama in action. Being close at hand to the crime Christopher is an immediate suspect. The investigating copper makes the mistake of touching Christopher. That’s a serious no-no. He absolutely cannot stand to be touched. It totally freaks him out. Having been accused, and then quickly absolved, Christopher is determined to solve the crime. (Plus, he has this thing about Sherlock Holmes.) His quest for truth is a folly rather like that of Oedipus investigating who killed King Laius.
By the end of the first act, Christopher’s father, who patiently cares for him, has lied about his departed mother who does not. His short explanation is that she died. Another no-no for Christopher is the tyranny of truth.
While this is unfolding Christopher is intent on assembling a model trains set with stations and scenery; at the end of which it all works. This sets in motion the second act when he will travel to London to live with his mother. Watching Christopher stagger on with danger ever lurking is totally heart wrenching, as when his pet rat escapes and Christopher hops down by the tracks to find it. We are on the edge of our seats as strangers pull him out just missing an oncoming train.
Of course, the big question is when will this five-star production transfer to New York? It seems inevitable but there is no news on that so far. Until that happens, when in London, be sure to spring for pricey tickets for this sold-out production.
