A Streetcar Named Desire: A Stark Revival
Table of Contents
- 1. A Streetcar Named Desire: A Stark Revival
- 2. Paul mescal as Stanley Kowalski: A “Sexual Terrorist” Redefined
- 3. Blanche DuBois: An “Inviting Target”
- 4. Stella’s dilemma: Love and Fear
- 5. Director’s Vision: Overwhelming Interventions?
- 6. Drowning Out Williams’s Voice
- 7. A Brutal Take on a Classic
- 8. In regards to artistic freedom, when directing a classic play, should directors strive to stay true to the playwright’s original intent, or is it acceptable for them to make bold interpretations?
- 9. “A Streetcar Named Desire” Revival: A Conversation on its Bold Choices
- 10. The Performances: Mescal’s Stanley and Ferran’s Blanche
- 11. Director’s Vision vs. Williams’s Voice in “A streetcar Named desire”
- 12. Stella’s Dilemma: Love and Fear
- 13. Final Thoughts and Reader Engagement
Rebecca Frecknall’s revival of Tennessee Williams’ “A Streetcar Named Desire” at the Harvey Theater, Brooklyn Academy of Music, offers a raw and unsettling vision of the classic play. While the performances are compelling, the directorial choices create a world that is “meaner, and more violent” than Williams originally imagined.
Paul mescal as Stanley Kowalski: A “Sexual Terrorist” Redefined
Paul Mescal, known for other roles, initially seemed an unlikely choice to portray Stanley Kowalski, a character Arthur Miller described as a “sexual terrorist.” However, this production reveals Mescal’s ability to embody the character’s primal nature. His stanley is driven by a “fear of abandonment,” manifesting as a constant need for conquest.
- Stanley’s defining trait: Conceived in violence, his Stanley has but one decent emotion: fear of abandonment.
- Key Takeaway: Mescal’s interpretation adds a layer of vulnerability to Stanley’s aggression.
Blanche DuBois: An “Inviting Target”
Patsy Ferran’s portrayal of Blanche DuBois presents her as a particularly vulnerable figure. Arriving in Elysian Fields, she’s portrayed not merely as a nervous “moth,” but as “clearly certifiable; sweaty and picky and unable to stop her tongue,” making her an easy target for Stanley’s cruelty. Ferran’s Blanche starts at such a fever pitch that the only way is down–and it’s a scary ride.
- Blanche’s vulnerability: Ferran’s Blanche starts at such a fever pitch that the only way is down–and it’s a scary ride.
- Stanley’s line: “We’ve had this date with each other from the beginning,” is not, in Mescal’s reading, just about sex.
Stella’s dilemma: Love and Fear
Anjana Vasan delivers an “excellent performance” as Stella, torn between her love for her sister and her life with Stanley. The production highlights Stella’s affection for Blanche, presenting it as more profound than “the usual weak-tea toleration.”

Director’s Vision: Overwhelming Interventions?
While the actors’ performances are praised,the director’s vision is critiqued for being heavy-handed. Frecknall’s “Streetcar” is described as being “staged by Stanley,” emphasizing violence and obviousness. The reviewer notes several “contemporary staging cliches,” such as:
- The cast arriving as if for rehearsal.
- A soaking rainstorm.
- A dancer miming the ghost of dead love.
- An onstage drummer.


Drowning Out Williams’s Voice
The review argues that Frecknall’s directorial choices obscure Williams’s original intent. Miller wrote that “Streetcar” was “of language flowing from the soul” – Williams’s soul. The play, Miller wrote, “made it seem possible for the stage to express any and all things and to do so beautifully”.The production’s harsh lighting,sound,and costumes undermine the play’s inherent beauty and drown out Williams’s voice.
- Beauty, in Miller’s sense, is not on Frecknall’s menu.
- The famous lines are often thrown away as if they were grandma’s embarrassing tchotchkes.
A Brutal Take on a Classic
Rebecca Frecknall’s “A Streetcar Named Desire” offers a stark and brutal interpretation of Tennessee Williams’s masterpiece. While the performances are powerful, the director’s vision overwhelms the play’s lyricism and beauty. The production at the Harvey Theater, Brooklyn academy of Music, invites audiences to confront the play’s darkness, but risks losing sight of Williams’s original voice.
In regards to artistic freedom, when directing a classic play, should directors strive to stay true to the playwright’s original intent, or is it acceptable for them to make bold interpretations?
“A Streetcar Named Desire” Revival: A Conversation on its Bold Choices
We sat down with eleanor Vance, seasoned theater critic for StageRight Magazine, to discuss Rebecca Frecknall’s recent revival of Tennessee Williams’ “A Streetcar Named Desire” at the Brooklyn Academy of Music. Eleanor shares her insights on the production’s controversial choices and its impact on the classic play.
The Performances: Mescal’s Stanley and Ferran’s Blanche
Archyde: Eleanor, this production has garnered a lot of attention, particularly for Paul Mescal’s portrayal of Stanley Kowalski. One review mentioned he redefined Stanley, portraying him as driven by a “fear of abandonment.” What are your thoughts on his interpretation?
Eleanor vance: It’s a fascinating take. Mescal brings a vulnerability to Stanley that you don’t always see. It humanizes him, even as he commits terrible acts. This Stanley isn’t simply a brute; he’s a man grappling with his own insecurities, which makes his aggression all the more unsettling. It certainly offers a new layer to the classic character of Stanley Kowalski.
Archyde: And what about Patsy Ferran’s Blanche DuBois? She’s described as an “inviting target,” almost from the moment she arrives in Elysian fields.
Eleanor Vance: ferran’s Blanche comes in at such a high pitch of nerves and anxiety that she does feel incredibly exposed. It’s almost as if she’s already on the verge of collapse. This portrayal heightens the tragedy, as you’re acutely aware of how far she has to fall. It’s a truly harrowing “Streetcar” experience.
Director’s Vision vs. Williams’s Voice in “A streetcar Named desire”
Archyde: The director, Rebecca Frecknall, made some bold choices, including contemporary staging cliches. Do you think these choices enhanced or detracted from Tennessee Williams’s original vision?
Eleanor Vance: That’s the central debate, isn’t it? While the performances were strong, some of the directorial interventions felt heavy-handed. Staging decisions like the on-stage drummer and the mimed ghost of dead love ran the risk of drowning out the play’s inherent lyricism. Sometimes, less is more, especially when dealing with a masterpiece like “A Streetcar Named Desire.” Did Rebecca Frecknall go too far?
Archyde: The review we read suggested that the production’s harshness overwhelmed the beauty and poetry in Williams’s text. Would you agree?
eleanor Vance: Absolutely. One of the things arthur Miller said about “Streetcar” was that it expresses beauty with language flowing from the soul. This production, while undeniably powerful, seemed more interested in emphasizing the play’s darkness, almost at the expense of its inherent beauty. I do believe there is a risk in losing sight of Williams’s original voice.
Stella’s Dilemma: Love and Fear
Archyde: Anjana Vasan’s performance as Stella was lauded for highlighting the depth of her love for Blanche. How crucial is Stella’s character in understanding the play’s central themes?
Eleanor Vance: Stella is absolutely crucial. She’s the bridge between these two worlds, torn between her loyalty to her sister and her life with Stanley. Vasan’s performance elevates this tension, making Stella’s choices all the more heartbreaking. The director presents Stella’s affection for Blanche as more profound, not just weak toleration.That changes everything.
Final Thoughts and Reader Engagement
Archyde: what’s your takeaway from this revival of “A Streetcar Named Desire”?
Eleanor Vance: It’s a bold and unsettling production that certainly sparks conversation. Whether it ultimately serves Tennessee Williams’s vision is debatable,but it undeniably showcases the talent of its cast and the enduring power of the story.
Archyde: Thank you, Eleanor, for sharing your insightful thoughts. Now, we’d love to hear from our readers. What are your thoughts on directors taking liberties with classic plays? Do you think it’s essential to stay true to the original intent, or is there room for reinterpretation? Share your comments below!