Enron1

Enron—Why?

Enron1

“Enron” was a huge hit in London, but bombed in New York.

The Enron Corporation was proud to call itself “the company that asks why.” I have to ask the same question about this show. Why Enron, why this style, why now? After all, so many other Big Business scandals in the past few years since the debacle have made us almost numb.

And while we’re in an inquisitive mood, what? Is it a musical? Is it a play with music? The old joke about a camel being a horse put together by a committee seems to hold true here. This show has the feeling of having been more handled than Angelina Jolie. There’s not a clear vision. Has this changed since Enron was a West End hit? No idea; I can only go by what I see on the stage.

It might have worked better as a straight tragedy. After all, didn’t the head honchos who brought down the company have the same ambition and hubris of tragic protagonists? They destroyed their own kingdom, and with it, the employees who worked there, and the stockholders who took a bath.

There was a good evening of theater here, because the cast was superb. During the performance I covered, at one point the lights went out when Norbert Leo Butz was delivering a soliloquy onstage. He went on for a few lines in the dark, then told the audience that because there was a problem with the lights and he wanted us to be able to see everything, they’d be stopping. He took the hand of the actor who was onstage with him, and led him off. All this was done calmly, without rancor or confusion. When the illumination returned, so did Butz. “You would think that with a company like Enron, we could afford to keep the lights on,” he announced to applause. He then took a brief moment, and continued from where he’d left off. He was easy, charming, and got back into the play without missing a beat. Live theater, and this is how that is done. Total class.

Also excellent were Gregory Itzin, as Enron owner Ken Lay, and yes, he is the bad president on 24; Stephen Kunken as maniacal genius Andy Fastow, who became the company CFO; and the glorious Marin Mazzie as tough business woman Claudia Roe. Special kudos to Mazzie, who allowed herself to look like a mature woman. She still has a killer body, and a face that’s more beautiful than ever. She entered in a red wrap dress, plays tough and smart, and was unforgettable.

The play revolved around the dreams and schemes of Jeffrey Skilling, who became Enron President, second only to Lay himself in the pecking order. Butz, Tony winner for Dirty Rotten Scoundrels, totally nailed the role. The self-proclaimed super genius, part visionary, part heartless bastard, was unstoppable in his quest for money and power. Butz somehow made us feel empathy for a man who came to symbolize the dark side of the American Dream. I’ve always admired his work, but watching him gracefully navigate through the oil slick of this show, I’ve become a real fan.

There were some true flashes of brilliance in this production. The raptors in the basement were haunting. They had reptilian heads, with flashing red eyes and sharp pointed teeth. Their job was to eat up Enron debt, which was accumulating in the dummy corporation set up by Fastow.

I never knew about Enron’s part in the California blackouts, but it made perfect sense to use light sabers, a la Star Wars, to illustrate their attack on the state’s consumers.

Enron is more interesting in retrospect than it was in the viewing. It’s always sad to see such an ambitious show, with so much talent, close. And there was a pretty good message, too. We can’t go on believing everything we’re told, and investing accordingly. In other words, trust your mother, but cut the cards yourself.

Michall Jeffers is an accomplished Cultural Journalist. She writes extensively, both in print and online. Her eponymous cable TV show is syndicated throughout the tri-state area, and features celebrity interviews, reviews, and commentary. She is a voting member of Drama Desk, Outer Critics Circle, American Theatre Critics Association, International Association of Theatre Critics, Dance Critics Association, and National Book Critics Circle. michalljeffers@verizon.net. michalljeffers.com

One Response to Enron—Why?

  1. Vanessa Prat says:

    “Enron is more interesting in retrospect than it was in the viewing. It’s always sad to see such an ambitious show, with so much talent, close. And there was a pretty good message, too. We can’t go on believing everything we’re told, and investing accordingly. In other words, trust your mother, but cut the cards yourself”

    Exactly. Regardless, the scandal was so hefty…maybe it does not deserve a play?

Leave a Reply