Imagine that you were at a performance of The Marriage of Figaro in 1784. Write a review of the play for inclusion in a main-stream journal of the day.Last night I finally saw the long awaited sequel to The Barber of Seville, long awaited not for its theratrical value, but perhaps because it has been rumored that upon its presentation to his royal highness Louis XVI, the King was to have remarked that such a play could never be allowed on stage. Fortunately for us he did not stand by this appraisal and for the first time last night the play The Marriage of Figaro was performed in a theatre. Audiences were not disappointed. Unlike other sequels this play actually held some of the freshness and vigour of his earlier work, The Barber of Seville. The characters are perceptibly the same, although time has passed in Andalusia. The court of Versailles still reverberates to the sounds of gaiety and laughter and yet there is a sense of disillusionment, that happiness can not necessarily be won merely through the pursual thereof. The mood still appears to be one of irresponsibility; the characters live for the day and indulge in all the follies that this lifestyle brings.Figaro is still a young man, young and in love; and yet he is old enough to have serious doubts as to the full extent of his luck; will this love and good fortune last forever? He is still one of the wittier characters of the play but at times his wit seems to fall more into the realms of irony. He has seen the world and appears to know whats in it. He is not the man he was in The Barber. The character appears to have good sense, seasoned with vivacity and forays of humour. It is a part written to bring honour to the talents of of any player fine enough to discern the fine shades of the part and fully rise to the occasion; just as the actor playing the part last night achieved. Upon reading the script it would be easy to see how this funny character could be spoiled by the...
