Few operas have the name
recognition that Mozart’s “The
Marriage of Figaro” holds. This
weekend, the School of Music,
Theatre & Dance will present a
modern interpretation of the great
classic at the Lydia Mendelssohn
Theatre.
Directed
by
Grant
Preisser, the opera will be sung
in Italian with projected English
supertitles.
The
University
Philharmonic
Orchestra,
conducted by Martin Katz, will be
performing alongside the singers.
“The Marriage of Figaro” is a
romantic comedy — a rarity in a
genre that is normally overflowing
with tragedy. The story, based on
the play by Pierre Beaumarchais,
is set in Seville, Spain and follows
the story of Figaro, a servant to
the Count and Countess, and
his fiancé Susanna. The Count,
unhappy with his marriage to
the Countess, is infatuated with
Susanna. The Countess hears
wind of this love affair and
furiously vows to take revenge.
Thus springs a complex plotline of
trickery, cross-dressing and tests
of loyalty. Think Shakespeare’s
“Othello,” but with less ominous
undertones.
Under Preisser’s direction, this
centuries-old opera is much more
adapted to modern times.
“He decided to put a big clash
between women as sex objects

and
women
as
empowered
figures,” said Zachary Crowle,
a SMTD graduate student, of
Preisser. Crowle plays the Count,
a character that regularly sexually
and
verbally
abuses
women
throughout the opera. Mozart
creates a foil to this sexism in
the character of Susanna, who
is a refreshingly strong female

character.
“She’s very smart, very funny
and not afraid to speak her mind,”
said Mahari Conston, another
SMTD
graduate
student,
of
Susanna.
“The women are not only
constantly standing up to those
with power, but are working
together to improve upon it,”
said Kristine Overman, SMTD
undergraduate. The beauty of
“The Marriage of Figaro” is in
these timeless parallels to modern
times; the behaviour of Susanna
and the Countess are reminiscent
of the ongoing global #MeToo

movement.
Preisser has also taken care to
enhance Mozart’s emphasis on
class struggle in the opera. Written
just before the time of the French
Revolution, “The Marriage of
Figaro” was considered very
controversial when it first came
to theaters, so much so that a
majority of theaters refused to
air the opera. The socioeconomic
clash between Figaro, a servant,
and the Count, a member of the
extravagant aristocrat class, is
apparent to any viewer.
“It was really one of the first
times in history that any kind
of literature stood up to people
in power,” Crowle said. We see
this kind of opposition to power
every day in the news, through
marches and protests both in the
University and around the world.
SMTD undergraduate Justin
Burgess,
who
plays
Figaro,
commented
that
the
visuals
have been updated as well to fit
with modern times; they aren’t
the typical archaic style that is
expected of operas.
“There’s a juxtaposition of
old imagery mixed with bright,
modern day technicolor,” Burgess
said. “It really makes a cool visual
for the audience.”
From relatable characters and
relevant social issues, to modern
sets and color schemes, SMTD’s
rendition of “The Marriage of
Figaro” aims to think outside the
box and adapt to the changing
interests of our current society.

‘The Marriage of Figaro’
to keep with modern times

TRINA PAL
Daily Arts Writer

Courtesy of SMTD

“The Marriage of
Figaro”

Mar. 22 @ 7:30 PM,
Mar. 23 & 24 @ 8 PM,
Mar. 25 @ 2 PM

Lydia Mendelssohn
Theatre

$30 or $24 reserved
seating, $12 student ID

What’s my relationship with
Shonda Rhimes’s shows? Let’s
just say it’s complicated.
My love affair started many
years ago when my mom and
I became hooked on the soap-
opera antics of “Grey’s Anatomy”
— that is, before it digressed
into a monotonous, millennial
obsession. From there, I stopped
visiting Shondaland for a while,
because “Scandal” was deemed
a little too, well, scandalous for
my 12-year-old self. Yet, when I
eventually got around to watching
the suspense-filled series, I was
left in awe of the bravado of Kerry
Washington. Now even more
recently, I have started binging
“How to Get Away with Murder”
and
have
become
instantly

infatuated with the mystery of it
all, streaming it every chance I
get.
Throughout the many good and
not-so-good phases of Rhimes’s
creations, her sign of involvement
is undeniably recognizable. In a
seemingly tired and repetitive
fashion — or perhaps as a mark of
sheer genius — her shows share

the same tropes and themes
across the board: a bold female
lead, a group of attractive young
professionals trying to prove their
worth, dizzying love triangles,
a lot of dead bodies and an epic
soundtrack.

Let me be clear, though —
Shonda Rhimes’s brand as one of
the most powerful Black female
producers is iconic, full stop.
She’s gone on to build an empire
by herself, with five shows airing
or in development on ABC, a
production deal with Netflix and
fame emerging from four years
of #TGIT watch parties. After
all this time, it’s no secret that
Rhimes has generated a television
phenomenon, making nuanced
characters and absurd subplots
her showrunner staple.
But how much longer will the
same old storyline be able to pack
a punch? With “For the People,”
Rhimes’s newest addition to the
Shondaland family, it appears that
her winning formula is beginning
to lose its magic touch.
This time around, the latest
ABC legal drama follows a crew
of budding lawyers — three for

Repetitiveness of Rhimes

MORGAN RUBINO
Daily Arts Writer

the defense and three for the
prosecution. As their personal
and professional lives clash, they
take on some of the most high-
profile cases in the U.S., while
also probably sleeping around and
forming a list of enemies.
Judging its merit by a mere
60 minutes, “For the People”
has nothing on the pilots of
“Scandal” and “How to Get Away
with Murder.” For starters, its
core group of actors are largely
unconvincing, save for Regé-Jean
Page (“Roots”) as the resident
trouble maker and prosecutor
Leonard Knox. Even then, most
of the leads are undiscovered
talents with a bright-eyed, fresh-
faced quality to them that feels
out of place on what should be a
more gritty series. As defender
Sandra Bell, the assumed female
lead, Britt Robertson (“Girlboss”)
does a satisfactory job of carrying
the plot along, but lacks the
gravitas
necessary
to
even

attempt to match Olivia Pope
(Kerry Washington, “Scandal”)
or Annalise Keating (Viola Davis,
“How to Get Away with Murder”).
That’s not saying, though,
that “For the People” should
even be compared to prior
Shondaland royalty. In fact, an
area that the show differs from
its predecessors is in its portrayal
of the judicial system as a whole.
The presentation of what court is
like — the behind-the-scenes look
at being a lawyer and the overall
stresses of the job — are not only
authenticized, but emphasized.
Instead of some mysterious
murder
or
dramatic
affair
stealing the spotlight of the
show, experiences that could
conceivably happen in the real
world float to the forefront. In
the first episode, Sandra is tasked
with defending a teenage Muslim-
American accused of planning to
bomb the Statue of Liberty. OK, so
maybe this example is a little far-

fetched, but Sandra’s emotionally-
backed defense of the innocent
boy snaps us back to reality. On
the flipside, an insider trading
case pits lawyer couple Seth (Ben
Rappaport, “Outsourced”) and
Allison (Jasmin Savoy Brown,
“The Leftovers”) against one
another,
literally.
As
Allison
defends and Seth prosecutes, the
pair constantly have to remind
each other that their relationship
can survive this — which is, of
course, a tell-tale sign that it can’t.
It’s almost as if I can predict
exactly what path “For the
People” is likely to follow because
its plot so far is extremely
average. Maybe I was missing
some of the Shonda Rhimes’s
signature chaos and tragedy, or
maybe the tropes are just getting
out of touch. Either way, “For the
People” and its fight for justice
sparks an unimpressive sense of
déjà vu and doesn’t add much to
the Shondaland dynasty.

ABC

AMC

TV NOTEBOOK

TV has come a long way.
Long gone are the days of the
sickeningly
uniform
ubiquity
of “fast-food TV,” those easily
digestible 20 or 30-minute serials
and soaps whose laugh tracks
and cheap drama relegated TV
into being the immature little
brother of film. Fast forward
20 odd years and, as hundreds
of think pieces espouse, on a
regular basis, we are in the
“golden age” of TV. While film
sometimes gives the impression
of falling into an endless cycle
of reboots and sequels, TV is
filled with innovative, clever,
dramatic, Shakespearean works
of art. Even Meryl fucking
Streep is on HBO. Helping kick-
start this revolution was a show,
on a floundering network with
unknown actors, called “Mad
Men.”
Or so I’d been told. Despite
being familiar with all the
“modern classics” of “The Wire,”
“The
Sopranos,”
“Breaking
Bad,” etc., I’d hastily dismissed
“Mad Men” as being style over
substance. I was unable to look
beyond the glamorous hair, suits
and fancy cocktail orders to see
what “Mad Men” truly is: one
of the greatest set of character
studies in modern TV.
“Mad Men” spans roughly a
decade in the 1960s and 1970s,
focusing on the offices of Sterling
Cooper, a Madison Avenue firm
at the height of the advertising
craze. It centers on the life of
Don Draper (Jon Hamm, “Baby
Driver”), a talented creative
director at Sterling Cooper with
a ridiculous amount of self-
assured swagger and an equally
mysterious past. The show uses
the
interactions
of
Sterling
Cooper employees to explore
and reflect upon the changing
social norms of the turbulent
’60s, drawing on topics from the
counterculture movement to the
Civil Rights Movement.
Period dramas had been done
before and since, but few have
the ability of “Mad Men” to
fully engross in the world they
portray. The attention to detail
in every aspect of the show is
stunning, but more importantly,
the environments the character
live in do not feel explicitly like
sets. Rather, they are as dynamic
and alive as the characters
themselves.
While Don Draper’s story is
the centerpiece of the show, it

is the interactions of the large
cast of characters that make
the show a masterpiece. The
arcs of Pete Campbell (Vincent
Kartheiser, “The Most Hated
Woman
in
America”)
and
Sterling Cooper senior partner
Roger Sterling (John Slattery,
“Captain America: Civil War”)
are some of the show’s most
impactful, and, if anything, carry
more tenable lessons to draw
from. Sal Romano’s (Bryan Batt,
“Mississippi Murder”) arc is a
poignant exploration of society’s
view on homosexuality. Even the
minor characters, of which there
are hundreds, feel fleshed out
and realistic.
In another sense, the true
heroes of the show are the
women. Peggy Olsen (Elizabeth
Moss, “The Handmaid’s Tale”)
and
Joan
Harris
(Christina
Hendricks, “Zoolander 2”), the
show’s two prominent female
characters manage to rise above
the traditional social structures
imposed in a workplace such as
the Sterling Cooper agency to
gain greater standing. Peggy’s
arc in particular is stunning
to witness, especially after her
introduction as a seemingly
naïve, typical secretary school
graduate in the pilot.
Another remarkable aspect
of the show is that looking back,
it never relied on traditional
crowd-pleasers
such
as
shoehorned romantic plots or
violence. The relationships are
(frustratingly) real and complex.
All the drama and intrigue is due
to social interactions between
relatively uninteresting subjects:
Corporate
executives.
In
retrospect, my initial assumption
of the show prioritizing style
over substance was not just
incorrect, it was the exact
opposite of the true situation.
While
the
flamboyant
hair
and glamorous, three-martini
lunches
were
irresistible
to
watch, they weren’t for show, but
rather for realism. The skilled
writing and production elevate
the show from simply being
another “Pan Am.”
Each arc of each character
in “Mad Men” is dynamic and
compelling.
The
show
does
not fall prey to flanderization
and creates a cast of three-
dimensional
characters,
each
with his or her own set of
strengths
and
insecurities.
Ultimately, these attributes, in
addition to the authenticity of
the time period it portrays, make
“Mad Men” one of the greatest
TV shows of all time.

“Smoke Gets in Your Eyes,”
season 1, episode 1
The one that started it all.
Pilots are hard, and rightfully so.
More often than not, I’ve usually
had to give a show the benefit of
the doubt and keep on watching
despite a lackluster pilot. “Mad
Men,”
on
the
other
hand,
offers a perfect distillation and
introduction to its rich, complex
world. The first time we are
introduced to Don Draper, he’s
trying to figure out how to market
cigarettes
despite
growing
awareness of their health risks.
Peggy is only the bumbling,
shy secretary who hasn’t quite
learned how to navigate the
workplace. Pete Campbell is
the most dislikable, nakedly
ambitious prick one could be.
Looking back after finishing
the series, it’s a testament to
the quality of the writing that
while some of the characters
feel like completely different
people at the conclusion, their
transformations
are
entirely
believable if you look closer at
the pilot.
“The Other Woman,” season
5, episode 11
The Sterling Cooper team
is working around the clock to
secure the Jaguar account. At
the same time, Joan wrestles
with an extremely humiliating
proposal. Hendricks is stunning
in this episode, portraying a
subtle, complex reaction that
isn’t something we’d quite expect
from her. The episode conjures
a variety of ethical questions
regarding business in general,
and the juxtaposition of Joan’s
decision and the handling of the
Jaguar deal as a whole is one of
the series’ most compelling.
“Lost Horizon,” season 7,
episode 12
This episode features one of
my favorite television scenes
ever, as Peggy struts down the
halls of McCann Erickson with
sunglasses, a cigarette hanging
out of her mouth and a copy of
“The Dream of the Fisherman’s
Wife,” all with the most satisfying
smirk ever seen on television.
Prior to this triumphant arrival,
her interactions with Roger are
heartwarming. Joan’s mixture
of hope and disappointment
are
especially
poignant.
While Don’s journey is not
quite as interesting, it offers
a decent amount of character
development. It also tiptoes the
line of absurd humor and serious
social commentary extremely
well, as “Mad Men” often does so
successfully.

Revisiting TV: ‘Mad Men’

SAYAN GHOSH
Daily Arts Writer

“For the People”

Series Premiere

Tuesdays @ 10 PM

ABC

TV REVIEW

COMMUNITY CULTURE

5 — Friday, March 23, 2018
Arts
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com