A Conversation With Director Allen Barton, "A Doll's House, Part 2", (The Doll's House Project), Beverly Hills Playhouse, by James Scarborough

Lucas Hnath’s “A Doll’s House, Part 2” picks up where Henrik Ibsen’s “A Doll’s House” (conversation with director Mia Christou here) left off, challenging our assumptions about Nora’s fate. Director Allen Barton’s vision breathes new life into this modern sequel, crafting a production that’s both thought-provoking and emotionally charged.

The play’s strength lies in its exploration of consequences. Nora’s return after 15 years isn’t just a plot device; it’s a reckoning. Barton navigates the complex dynamics between characters, each grappling with the aftermath of Nora’s departure. The tension crackles with unresolved issues and shifting power dynamics.

Mia Christou’s Nora is a force to be reckoned with - confident yet vulnerable, her return a mixture of triumph and trepidation. Peter Zizzo brings depth to Torvald, revealing layers of hurt and confusion beneath his composed exterior. Lisa Robins as Anne-Marie and Tati Jorio as Emmy provide crucial perspectives, their performances adding richness to the narrative tapestry.

Barton’s direction shines in the play’s quieter moments. He allows silences to speak volumes, letting the weight of years apart hang in the air. The result is a production that feels both intimate and expansive, tackling big ideas while never losing sight of the human story at its core.

JS: How do you approach directing a sequel to such an iconic work? What challenges and opportunities did this present?

AB: I chose not to look at this as “a sequel” per se, but rather as its own entirely independent play. It’s clear that Hnath intended a more contemporary feel to it, by observation of his writing style and even some of the vocabulary he chooses. Mia Christou (who is playing Nora in Part 2 while directing the original “A Doll’s House” ) and I spoke about how we didn’t want too stark a difference in style between the two plays. The original is something of an “old chestnut,” more malleable to adaptation, so we went with a concept where we could bring both plays closer in style and tone, and in a non-specific time period — neither the late nineteenth century nor early in the twenty-first. We envisioned a dramatic space where the audience wouldn’t try to date the furniture, but rather just engage with the ideas.

JS: The original “A Doll’s House” was groundbreaking in its critique of 19th-century marriage norms. How does Part 2 engage with contemporary issues of gender and relationships?

AB: Well, the “contemporary issue of gender” has gone so far in the last 3-4 years — the year 2017 (when Hnath wrote Part Two) can see like ancient history. I would say both plays stay well within traditional norms there. But when you ask how it deals with relationships, the relative roles of women both in the home and outside it, well — we’ve been talking about the same issues for far longer in the past than 1879, and no doubt that will continue into the 29th century, if we get there. I think Hnath did a great job of designing a very elegant problem that Nora has to resolve, and it’s one that puts her back in The House, where the issues surrounding long-term relationships and/or marriage transcend time and the specific values of any century.

JS: Discuss your decision-making process in casting, particularly for the role of Nora? What qualities were you looking for?

AB: This was easy for me, because Mia was the only option. We worked together in 2019 on “Duet for One,” a challenging two-hander about a female violinist confronting her diagnosis of MS. She delivered a monster of a performance, and I told her at the time she should only appear on stage when the role required her specific level of talent. We may have arrived at DH2 earlier, but the entire world went bananas there for a bit, and it took a while to get our sea legs back. We’ve been contemplating what we call the “Dolls House Project” for a couple years now, and were fortunate that this year lined up perfectly to try to pull it off. She’s clearly got the heavier workload, directing Part One and starring in Part Two. But to answer your question, if I didn’t have Mia, I’d be looking for someone with those qualities — a bit of old-world, a bit of old-soul, a timelessness, elegance, strength, power, vulnerability, some seductiveness, a kind of magnetic quality. She can’t just be some “normal woman.” There’s got to be a something about her. She walks down the street and people are going to look and ask, “Who the hell is that?”

JS: The play deals with the consequences of Nora’s actions 15 years prior. How did you work with the actors to convey this passage of time and its effects on their characters?

AB: I spoke to the actors early on in the process about what I called the “reservoir” of trauma that would have been created by what she did when she left. I was ten when my parents got divorced, and it’s never not a big deal — so I had this image that every once in a while this reservoir is suddenly flooding, unexpectedly. So particularly with Nora, who has gone on to lead such an unusual life, I wanted that haunted quality. Again — she can’t be just some normal woman coming back to handle a legal issue. Ditto for Emmy, who I envision being the only one who can do to Nora what she generally does to everyone else. With Anne-Marie — it’s not just nostalgic “oh good she’s back,” but it can encompass a motherly scolding judgment of her actions and opinions. And Torvald, to stay away from just the easy choices, but really diving into that sense of resentment, anger, and sadness about what she did and what it cost them all.

JS: Hnath’s script is known for its sharp dialogue. How did you approach the rhythm and pacing of these conversations in your direction?

AB: Well, you’re hitting my bailiwick — rhythm and pacing. Directing has always been closest to my early classical musical training, and I really enjoy “finding the music,” as an early acting teacher of mine said I like to do. I was really intrigued by Hnath’s writing, and I kept getting, particularly with Nora, this sense of rolling legato eighth notes, and I just tortured Mia in an effort to find —- what? The core, a kind of narrow diameter to her speaking style, where it has a very specific rhythm and tone to it. I felt it had to be slightly unnatural, so you’d maybe respond, “There’s something off here, but I also can’t stop listening to her.” There’s a certain spareness and formality to the entire play — it’s talky, but never casual. There aren’t props, or food, or phones, or much in the way of entrances or exits. So I tried to embrace that formality and make it part of how the actors perform as well. We worked really hard on that, so I hope people like what we came up with.

JS: Mia Christou’s set design plays a crucial role in creating the atmosphere of the Helmer home. Can you discuss your collaboration with her and the choices made?

AB: Here’s my collaboration with Mia on design: She presents a concept, and I say, “Yeah, that!” We just happen to line up on our visual tastes, but I’m very much in the role of… “Maybe a bit more… such-and-such?” Mia is a brilliant painter, her husband a renowned production designer for film and TV — I’m lucky that I just get to watch her do her thing, and then I nit-pick about the color of a chair leg, or the placement of a box. I’m like an editor to a good writer — I suggest what to cut, where to enhance. But it starts with our both innately disliking heavily literal stage design. We both like more simplicity, so the performances and the dialogue are always in first position. The actors kept asking, “Where’s the door?” I just replied, “No one will care. Don’t worry about it. No one will leave the theatre saying, ‘Nice play, but where was the door?’”

JS: The character of Emmy, Nora’s daughter, offers a new perspective on the family’s story. How did you approach developing this character who wasn’t present in the original play?

AB: I thought Emmy’s was the scene where Nora is tested in a way beyond the others. This is the one character she has never met before, with whom she has no history of conversation nor relative place-in-society as she would with Torvald and Anne-Marie — and it’s her daughter. The stakes there, the resonance, the depth of the “reservoir” I mentioned before — all very evaluated. So I wanted an actress who physically could seem to be Mia’s relative, but not just in her appearance, but also her own directness, a certain steadiness in the gaze, I felt that Nora could come apart as she sees her own reflection in this creature she abandoned at a young age.

JS: The play raises questions about personal freedom and societal expectations. How do you see these themes resonating with contemporary audiences?

AB: Let’s just say that on the issues of individual freedom versus social conformity, particularly in the Los Angeles of 2024, this play couldn’t be landing at a more appropriate moment.

JS: Discuss choices you made to bridge the gap between Ibsen’s 19th-century setting and Hnath’s modern continuation?

AB: We wanted to use Hnath’s world, which seemed timeless but yet more lean, more direct, as the one to influence its predecessor. Technically Part Two is 15 years after the original, but I wasn’t concerned with that literalness. It’s 15 years later than the original, and it’s over a century since the original play itself. Both of those are relevant numbers here. “A Doll’s House” can seem musty, a bit too long, and could lend itself to an overwrought production style with lots of heavy significant doors and furniture and all that. We wanted to bring the original closer to its sequel in terms of the basic story quartet: writing, acting, direction and design.

JS: As both “A Doll’s House” and “A Doll’s House Part 2” are being performed in repertory, how do you see these two productions in conversation with each other?

AB: My mentor Milton Katselas would often say, “The play happens out here!” — and he’d be pointing out to the audience, the seats of the theatre. I think I’m most interested in hearing from those patrons who see both plays — what they think about that conversation between them. I’m not sure myself what conclusions I want to draw. I don’t want to characterize the conversation beforehand. I think we’re going to find out over the next two months. 

PERFORMANCES (for both plays)
Running time: 120 minutes per show (including Intermission)

A DOLL'S HOUSE
Fridays at 8pm and Sundays at 3pm
- FRIDAY 11/01 8pm
- SUNDAY 11/03 3pm
- FRIDAY 11/08 8pm
- SUNDAY 11/10 3pm-
- FRIDAY 11/15 8pm
- SUNDAY 11/17 3pm
- FRIDAY 11/22 8pm
- SUNDAY 11/24 3pm
- FRIDAY 11/29 8pm
- SUNDAY 12/1 3pm
- FRIDAY 12/6 8pm
- SUNDAY 12/8 3pm

A DOLL'S HOUSE, PART 2
Saturdays at 8pm and Sundays at 7:30pm
- SATURDAY 11/02 8pm
- SUNDAY 11/03 7:30pm
- SATURDAY 11/09 8pm
- SUNDAY 11/10 7:30pm
- SATURDAY 11/16 8pm
- SUNDAY 11/17 7:30pm
- SATURDAY 11/23 8pm
- SUNDAY 11/24 7:30pm
- SATURDAY 11/30 8pm
- SUNDAY 12/1 7:30pm
- SATURDAY 12/7 8pm
- SUNDAY 12/8 7:30pm

Tickets:
- Regular: $35.00
- Students: $15.00 (Use Promo Code BHP20)

For information & tickets:
- Website: https://www.bhplayhouse.com
- Phone: 310-620-1134

Tickets also available at OnStage411:
- A Doll's House
- A Doll's House Part 2