Singing without amplification, supported by a nine-piece orchestra under musical direction by Ewan, Goldberg aptly captured the sense of the time and historical significance of the work. The meticulous blending of voice and orchestration was indeed a very strong feature of the production.

Considering Peter Dark’s unsentimental and carefully constructed performance of Peacham and his consistent merging of a tight script with his singing, there was much to look at. Neeme’s direction was virtually photograph accurate in terms of holding true to Brecht’s staging intentions; a significant achievement.

Students of Brecht could marvel at how so many of Brecht’s key theatrical points were evident in Neeme’s work.

So why didn’t the production fulfil its promise?

Brecht spoke of the “the art of being a spectator”; the art of observation and a keen relating of what was on stage to the reality of people’s lives in historical circumstances. While there is much to be taken from a museum piece on Brecht’s work, this production lacked attitude and the focus to challenge anyone. Playing in a musical comedy style suitable for most American musicals did not give the work a dark underbelly that allowed for any real purpose.

Where did it connect with its audience? Why should anyone care what happened? Quite simply the production had value in displaying the “gestural” shaping of Brecht’s work while lacking the power to affect any reaction.