At Home at the Zoo

It was lovely to squeeze into the hippest venue in Canberra for some intellectual stimulation, presented by brand new company Something Borrowed. At Home at the Zoo opens with Peter absorbed by “the most boring book [his company] has ever published,” when his wife, Ann, starts to hint at unhappiness within their marriage. Simmering tensions rise and climax with alarming revelations by both characters. Peter escapes to the park for some peace, but fatefully meets Jerry with tragic consequences.

Smith’s Alternative is a cosy coffee shop with a great atmosphere that comes with a few challenges – tight space, street light and noise, an awkward pillar and an audible hum from fridges and coffee machines. Something Borrowed’s minimalist production overcame these with strong characterisation, direction and good projection. With only a few props, simple effective lighting and stylised movement, the production drew attention to the clever script. The play itself makes an interesting study in the craft of storytelling. Albee’s first play, 1959’s The Zoo Story, forms the second act. I saw this play in 1984 and remember it as simple, raw and abstract, reflecting Theatre of the Absurd roots (and, Albee now claims, his own inexperience as a writer). The prologue, written 45 years later, is more magic realism than absurdist and develops themes of sexuality and subtext of frustration and complacency that weren’t present in the original. It gives a context and character development which changes the feel of the earlier play.

Kate Blackhurst brought out Ann’s massive frustration, which Ann herself misread to be entirely sexual but appeared also to be social and intellectual. John Lombard played Peter as affable and bewildered. Graham August’s remarkable performance as Jerry became enraged had spittle flying, face flushed and veins standing out on his neck. Director Gruber ramps up the tension gradually through both acts. One interesting device she used was hand movement to signify anxiety, with Ann wringing a tea-towel neurotically and Jerry performing what was almost a dance with his hands. The constant motion was both mesmerising and a little stressful. Meanwhile, Peter was almost motionless until he was goaded into action towards the end of each act. As the audience was partially in light, the actors were able to make eye contact to involve them in the unfolding drama.

All in all, this very thoughtful production was a very satisfying experience. 

Cathy Bannister