Introduction
In the context of Drama 2361, this essay critiques the HCC production of the medieval morality play Everyman, drawing on the textbook’s description of morality plays (Brocket and Ball, 2017, pp. 96-98). Morality plays, as didactic secular dramas emerging in the fourteenth century, served as a bridge between religious cycle plays and professional theatre, often allegorically depicting the human struggle between virtues and vices to promote moral and spiritual reflection (Brocket and Ball, 2017). This critique examines how the production aligns with and departs from medieval conventions in acting, set design, movement, and costumes, while analysing its overall effectiveness as a contemporary adaptation. The central thesis is that HCC’s production of Everyman is an effective updated version of this play because it preserves the core moral symbolism of medieval theatre while incorporating modern elements that enhance accessibility and relevance for today’s audiences, thereby reinforcing the play’s timeless message about mortality and redemption.
Similarities to Medieval Morality Plays
The HCC production of Everyman demonstrates several similarities to the textbook’s description of medieval morality plays, particularly in its thematic focus and symbolic elements. According to Brockett and Ball (2017, p. 96), morality plays are typically “about” the human soul’s journey towards salvation, using allegorical characters to represent abstract concepts such as virtues, vices, and worldly temptations. This is evident in the production, where characters like Death, Good Deeds, and Goods embody these abstractions, mirroring the didactic purpose of instructing audiences on moral choices and the inevitability of death—a preoccupation in medieval society influenced by sermons on the seven deadly sins and virtues (Brocket and Ball, 2017, p. 97).
In terms of acting, the performances align with medieval styles by emphasising exaggerated, representational gestures to convey moral lessons rather than realistic portrayals. For instance, the actor playing Everyman uses broad, deliberate movements—such as outstretched arms during pleas for companionship—to symbolise desperation and isolation, much like the emblematic acting in historical morality plays, which prioritised clarity over subtlety to reach uneducated audiences (Beadle, 1994). Similarly, the portrayal of Fellowship involves quick, erratic shifts in posture, from confident embraces to abrupt retreats, reflecting the medieval use of physicality to illustrate fickle human loyalties.
Set design in the production echoes the simplicity of medieval staging, as described in the textbook, where scenery was minimal or non-existent, often relying on open platforms or pageant wagons for outdoor performances (Brocket and Ball, 2017, p. 98). The HCC version employs a sparse stage with a central platform representing the earthly realm, transitioning to a dimly lit edge symbolising the grave, which avoids elaborate backdrops and focuses on symbolic space. This minimalism serves the same purpose as in medieval times: to direct attention to the moral narrative rather than visual spectacle.
Movement patterns further connect to historical practices. Medieval morality plays featured processional or circular movements to depict life’s journey, influenced by religious processions (Tydeman, 1978). In this production, Everyman’s path across the stage, circling back to confront abandoned companions, mimics this, symbolising the cyclical nature of sin and repentance. Costumes, while not strictly medieval, retain symbolic intent; for example, Goods is clad in glittering, metallic fabrics that evoke wealth’s allure, akin to how medieval costumes used simple tunics with emblematic props to denote character traits (Brocket and Ball, 2017, p. 98). These elements collectively uphold the morality play’s purpose of moral edification through accessible symbolism.
Departures from Medieval Conventions
Despite these similarities, the HCC production introduces several updates that depart from the textbook’s depiction of medieval morality plays, adapting the form to contemporary theatre while occasionally conflicting with historical authenticity. Medieval morality plays were performed with rudimentary, non-illusionistic scenery and costumes drawn from everyday medieval attire, such as tunics and leggings, to maintain relatability (Brocket and Ball, 2017, p. 98). In contrast, this production fully modernises costumes, using everyday modern clothing like business suits for Everyman and streetwear for Kindred, which conflicts with historical accuracy but fits by making the allegory relatable to a 21st-century audience, potentially enhancing engagement without diluting the moral message.
Acting styles also diverge; whereas medieval performances relied on verse recitation and broad gestures for large, outdoor crowds (Beadle, 1994), the HCC version incorporates naturalistic dialogue delivery with modern inflections, such as casual slang in Fellowship’s excuses. This update can conflict with the archaic language of the original text, creating a dissonance that might distract from the solemn tone, yet it effectively bridges the gap to contemporary viewers by making the play less archaic and more immediate.
Set design sees a significant departure through the use of modern lighting techniques, absent in medieval theatre, which relied on natural light (Tydeman, 1978). Here, dynamic spotlights—shifting from warm ambers during worldly temptations to cold blues at the grave—add a layer of emotional depth, conflicting with historical simplicity but fitting seamlessly with the preserved symbolism by visually amplifying themes of enlightenment and judgment. Movement is updated with choreographed ensemble sequences, including abstract dance-like interludes during penance scenes, which differ from the straightforward processions of medieval plays but enhance the production’s dynamism, arguably making the moral journey more visceral.
These departures generally fit well with the historical elements by modernising without erasing the core allegory, though occasional conflicts, such as modern slang, risk undermining the play’s gravity.
Analysis of the Production and Performances
Viewing the HCC production reveals a compelling blend of historical reverence and modern innovation, with standout performances that utilise movement, speech, lighting, costumes, and scenery to convey the play’s message. The stage opens with God, portrayed by an offstage voice amplified through speakers, overlooking a minimalist set dominated by a raised platform in neutral greys, symbolising the mundane earthliness of human life. As Death, played by an actor in flowing black robes with skeletal motifs, summons Everyman, the lighting shifts to stark whites, evoking a sense of divine scrutiny and the cold finality of mortality—colours that might signify purity juxtaposed with dread.
The actor portraying Everyman, central to the narrative, moves with deliberate slowness initially, pacing in tight circles to represent internal turmoil, then accelerates into frantic dashes when seeking companions, speaking in a measured baritone that escalates to desperate pleas. This physicality underscores the character’s evolution from complacency to repentance. Good Deeds, depicted by an actress in tattered white garments symbolising battered virtue, begins prone on the floor, her voice weak and trembling, but rises with fluid, strengthening movements post-confession, her speech gaining clarity and volume, representing redemption’s empowerment.
Notable is the performance of Goods, where the actor piles shiny props like coins and jewels onstage, mocking Everyman with a sneering tone and exaggerated gestures of dismissal, the metallic costumes reflecting stage lights in golds and silvers to symbolise fleeting wealth’s temptation. Lighting plays a crucial role; during the abandonment by Beauty and Strength, warm spotlights fade to shadows, visually marking the loss of earthly attributes. The scenery remains sparse—a single grave-like pit at stage edge—but is augmented by projected images of crosses and hourglasses, adding symbolic layers without overcrowding.
The play’s message centres on life’s transience and the enduring value of good deeds, urging audiences to reflect on their own mortality and prioritise spiritual over material pursuits. Post-viewing, one is meant to feel a contemplative urgency, prompted to evaluate personal actions in light of eternal judgment, reinforced by the Angel’s welcoming voice at the close.
Conclusion
In summary, HCC’s production of Everyman effectively balances medieval inspirations—such as symbolic acting, minimal sets, and allegorical costumes—with contemporary updates like modern attire and lighting, creating a cohesive adaptation that honours the morality play’s didactic roots. These elements align with the textbook’s descriptions while departures enhance relevance, though minor conflicts arise in tonal shifts. Ultimately, this updated version proves effective because it revitalises the play’s message for modern viewers, encouraging moral introspection in an engaging format, thus demonstrating the enduring applicability of medieval theatre in contemporary drama education.
References
- Beadle, R. (1994) The Cambridge Companion to Medieval English Theatre. Cambridge University Press.
- Brocket, O. G. and Ball, R. J. (2017) The Essential Theatre. 11th edn. Cengage Learning.
- Tydeman, W. (1978) The Theatre in the Middle Ages: Western European Stage Conditions, c.800-1576. Cambridge University Press.
