Lies, relationships, and the unpredictability of love all come to attention in Jane Austen’s comedy, Emma, playing in the beautiful Cleveland Playhouse through March 21.  The story begins as the young Emma, immune to love herself, engages to predict and not-so-subtly influence the matching of her best friend, Harriet Smith, to a husband.  Emma’s childhood companion, Mr. Knightley, implores that she not meddle.  But meddle she does, picking mates based on her conception of a good match.  But her efforts, in the end, produce a tangled mess of many relationships.  Like the original 1815 story, the adaptation by Michael Bloom and direction of Peter Amster is humorous and lighthearted.

    As Emma convinces Ms. Smith to transfer her amorous attention from the lowly (according to Emma) Mr. Martin to a different man, the seemingly respectable Mr. Elton, one theme of the play is revealed: can one truly know what is best for another?  Eventually, though, Mr. Elton reveals his desire for Emma herself.  Now she must convince poor Ms. Smith, to whom she so recently argued Mr. Elton’s great merit, that he is worthless.  But Emma lacks any interest in Mr. Elton, or love in general.  She is rich and cared for and has no need for it.  A modern philosopher might question the psychology behind Emma’s rejection of love for herself, but infatuation with the matchmaking of others, but the story never pursues her reasons in depth.

    The plot gains complexity with the introduction of two new characters, the shy Jane Fairfax and the exuberant Frank Churchill.  Zac Hoogendyk’s portrayal of Mr. Churchill is one the stand out performances, imbuing a raised level of humor and interest in the production upon his arrival.  Like the audience, even Emma begins to fall for him, she supposes, for the time being.  Oh, she is whimsical.  The relationship and others continue to pinball from Emma’s influencing, and feelings continue to be hurt, even though she has the best of intentions.  Eventually she concedes that Mr. Knightley was correct when he suggested she mind her own business.  A series of other events, including a lie, an insult, and a death lend gravity to the otherwise jovial plot, and provide more importance to some of Emma’s interferences.  To remain fun, however, these instances are not fully dealt with and may leave the audience slightly unsatisfied.

In addition to Mr. Hoodgendyk’s performance, the portrayals of Emma by Sarah Nealis and Harriet Smith by Carolyn Kramer deserve ovation.  They are likable and laughable characters.  I was additionally struck by Emma’s excellent facial expressions of surprise and consternation throughout the show.  Also, an old-school dance number and the constant hypochondria of Emma’s father bring many smiles.

Eventually, Emma’s actions and motivations lead to an ultimate revelation about her own love.  What is good about Emma is its laughs, what is astonishing is its sustained relevance.  Change a few character names to those of modern movie stars and TMZ could fill a week of production.  Or, perhaps, the play is not just about the rich and famous.  The play questions the common dramas and manipulations that we all encounter, and suggests we think about the truth behind the motives of our “altruistic” actions.  

By Nick Kaye