Arts & Entertainment
Decadent drama
Blanchett and co. delight in Chekhov adaptation
‘Uncle Vanya’
Through Aug. 27
Sydney Theater Company
The Kennedy Center
$59-$135
202-467-4600
kennedy-center.org
Only a few big movies stars shine onstage like they do on screen. Cate Blanchett is one of them. She proved this to local audiences two summers ago with her compelling portrayal of Blanche Dubois in Sydney Theatre Company’s “A Streetcar Named Desire.” Now she’s back at the Kennedy Center confirming her sizable gift as beautiful Yelena in the company’s take on Anton Chekhov’s classic tragicomedy, “Uncle Vanya.”
Staged by Hungarian director Tamás Ascher, it’s an original, bold production that bursts with antic energy, laughter, sadness and self-imposed misery. Blanchett and the rest of the excellent nine-person ensemble cast take chances plumbing the material for all its humor and pathos and the results are terrific.
From her first entrance, Blanchett’s Yelena makes it painfully obvious that country life is not for her. With her white cat-eye framed sunglasses and silk scarf, she is dressed more for paparazzi dodging than walking the grounds of a crumbling estate in the summer heat. Her much older husband, professor Serebryokav (John Bell), looks equally out of place in his citified trench coat and galoshes. Indeed, they’d both prefer to be in town, but straightened circumstances dictate otherwise.
The estate is run by plain and stalwart Sonya (Hayley McElhinney), the professor’s daughter with his late first wife, and her unhappy Uncle Vanya (a marvelously depressed Richard Roxburgh). Vanya was once the professor’s biggest fan working tirelessly on the estate so the professor could concentrate on loftier pursuits, but no more. Vanya has grown disillusioned with his ex-idol. At 47, he feels cheated by life. Making matters worse Vanya is in love with the professor’s beautiful wife.
Totally bored and indifferent to her husband, Yelena alternates from icily poised to warm and almost goofy, but mostly she is restless. And while Vanya’s romantic advances repulse her, she does feel something for the visiting doctor Astrov (played superbly by Hugo Weaving, best known for the film, “The Adventures Priscilla: Queen of the Desert”). Though coarsened by a decade of hard work and vodka, Astrov remains charming and sensitive. Forward thinking like the playwright (Chekhov was also a physician), the doctor is obsessed with preventing the deforestation of the countryside. In fact, he delivers a monologue with a strong environmental message that strongly resonates today more than a century later.
Regardless of Astrov’s recommendation that Russians spare trees and extract fuel from the earth, a workman can be seen frequently chopping wood in the background. And despite (or because of) the doctor’s aversion to felled trees, Zsolt Khell’s set is mostly timber. The interior of the formerly grand but now rundown house is backed by a huge wall of weathered planks and firewood is stacked here and there.
Working from a lively adaptation by Andrew Upton (Blanchett’s husband with whom she runs Australia’s Sydney Theatre Company), Ascher rather brilliantly moves the action from turn-of-the-century Tsarist Russia to mid-1950s Soviet Union. There is no romantic descent into genteel poverty or hope for the future. The atmosphere is more stultifying than ever: as pesky flies drone, radio static hums, the household grows increasingly on edge, ultimately erupting in bursts of violence. And when they’re not fighting, the extended family goes in for demonstrations of remorse, friendship and passion. Also included throughout are some very funny uncomfortable silences, pratfalls and drunken interludes, but nothing feels the least forced when executed by this top-notch group of Aussie actors.
Tall and slim with chicly styled white-blonde hair, Blanchett stands out like a bright light and Györgyi Szakács’ gorgeous costumes only up the wattage. While the others sport baggy earth tones, her Yelena draws attention in a tight red dress and is equally fetching in the crisp gray traveling suit she wears to give the doctor a bracing farewell kiss before beating a hasty exit back to the city.
Arts & Entertainment
Sci-fi has long been at vanguard of LGBTQ representation
Story lines now criticized as ‘woke’ is weird
Since I was a teenager, I have liked sci-fi because of the depth with which it explores social issues. At the time, I didn’t know that I was autistic and queer, so I couldn’t see myself in other autistic and queer people. Instead, I saw myself in androids, mutants, telepaths, and sometimes aliens who were portrayed as minorities persecuted by the human majority. It was a universal language for talking about alienation, systemic discrimination, conversion therapy, segregation, and internalized self-hatred.
Now, when so many sci-fi stories are being criticized online as “woke,” it seems weird for me. This is especially true when we are talking about franchises, such as the British TV series “Doctor Who” and American franchise “Star Trek,” both of which have always been remarkably progressive by the standards of their own time.
Let’s take a closer look at “Doctor Who.”
In June 2026, the BBC cancelled the planned Christmas special, saying that viewers would have to wait longer for the next season after internal studio issues, and now the BBC is looking for new production partners. “Doctor Who” is the longest-running science fiction television series in the world, originally airing from 1963 to 1989 before returning in 2005. The future of the franchise is currently unclear, and many people online immediately began blaming “wokeness” for what had happened to their favorite show.
After all, the Doctor, an alien Time Lord who can regenerate and literally change faces, had traditionally been played by white men. But the last, Fifteenth Doctor was played by Ncuti Gatwa, a Black Scottish-Rwandan actor who has publicly identified as queer (and the doctor himself was first presented as queer character after a queer romantic episode where he kissed a man), while the Thirteenth Doctor was played for three seasons by Jodie Whittaker, the first woman to portray the Doctor. In 2023, the series also introduced Rose Noble, a trans feminine nonbinary teenager and supportive character played by transgender English actress Yasmin Finney.
But despite popular stereotypes online, “Doctor Who” did not suddenly “go woke.” The program has existed in two main eras: the classic series, which aired from 1963 to1989, and the modern revival, which has been broadcast on BBC One since 2005.
Even in the 1960s, one of the program’s earliest stories, “The Daleks” (1963–64), presented an obvious allegory for fascism, racial purity, bigotry and the horrors of war. Throughout the classic era, the Doctor frequently opposed militarism, authoritarian governments, and dictatorships. Many fans have also pointed to moments of queer coding and subtext throughout the classic series.
However, openly queer characters appeared as soon as the modern revival began.
The 2005 revival introduced Captain Jack Harkness, played by John Barrowman, one of the first openly queer recurring characters in the “Doctor Who” universe. He openly flirted with people regardless of their gender and later became the lead character of the spin-off series “Torchwood.” “Torchwood” went even further with LGBTQ representation, featuring multiple queer characters, including trans and nonbinary characters whose identities were treated as a normal part of the story.
“Doctor Who” has always been remarkably progressive for its time. The franchise doesn’t suddenly change its values, it’s always been “woke.”
The same happened with the American franchise “Star Trek.”
It is widely known as one of the most openly left-wing and progressive television franchises ever broadcast. The original series, which aired from 1966-1969, was created during the Cold War and featured the utopian United Federation of Planets, a society without poverty or money that can be characterised as socialist or even communist. It also featured Lt. Uhura, played by Nichelle Nichols, a Black woman serving as a highly respected bridge officer at a time when Black women weren’t portrayed in positions of authority on American television. The series also included one of the first interracial kisses in modern American television, between Capt. James T. Kirk (William Shatner) and Uhura in the 1968 episode “Plato’s Stepchildren,” a moment that had a significant cultural impact.
Gene Roddenberry, the creator of the franchise, said that he had wanted to include openly queer characters as well, but believed it would have been impossible to keep the show on the air because it had already pushed social boundaries in so many other ways.
Today, many viewers — including Elon Musk — claim that “Star Trek” has only recently become “woke.” In reality, I think it actually became less radical than the original series. Even queer characters are not a recent addition to the franchise. One of the earliest major queer characters appeared in “Star Trek: Deep Space Nine” (1993–1999): the Trill officer Jadzia Dax, played by Terry Farrell. In the 1995 episode “Rejoined,” she shared one of the first same-sex kisses in the history of the franchise.
However, for some reason, it was the openly gay couple Paul Stamets (Anthony Rapp) and Hugh Culber (Wilson Cruz) in “Star Trek: Discovery” (2017–2024), together with the trans Trill character Gray Tal, played by trans actor Ian Alexander, that triggered a major backlash among conservative parts of the fandom. That backlash reached another peak with “Star Trek: Starfleet Academy,” which features the canonically gay Klingon cadet Jay-Den Kraag. The actor has spoken about receiving abuse and threats because of the role, despite the fact that there was nothing especially ideological about his character. He was simply a gay character whose sexuality was only one aspect of who he was. In fact, considering the ideals of the original “Star Trek,” I was more surprised that the franchise still includes relatively few trans or polyamorous characters, and that they are not part of the lead cast. After all, the franchise was created to imagine a future that was ahead of its time.
So why do conservatives and anti-LGBTQ people continue to watch franchises that have always been deliberately progressive? And why do they keep claiming that these shows have only recently “gone woke”?
A more logical explanation is that parts of the audience have become less willing to accept the same kinds of progressive ideas that these franchises have embraced for decades. In other words, it is not the shows that fundamentally changed. Some long-time viewers have become more conservative than they were in their youth, while newer conservative audiences have joined them and begun criticizing franchises without knowing their real history.
In many ways, geeks have changed more than these shows have. Sci-fi hasn’t “gone woke.” Some of its fans have simply become less comfortable with the same progressive values these franchises have promoted for decades.
JR.’s Bar held a “RuPaul’s Drag Race: All Stars” watch party followed by a live drag show on Friday, July 17. The Vitamin C weekly drag show was hosted by Citrine with performers Brooke N Hyman and Rosie Beret.
(Washington Blade photos by Landon Shackelford)










The 2026 Rehoboth Beach Pride Festival was held at the Rehoboth Beach Convention Center on Saturday, July 18.
(Washington Blade photos by Daniel Truitt)













-
Rehoboth Beach5 days agoCelebrate Pride in Rehoboth Beach this weekend
-
India5 days agoExpected India Supreme Court ruling could shape future LGBTQ rights cases
-
Maryland5 days agoChrista Tichy hopes to preserve LGBTQ representation in Md. House of Delegates
-
Venezuela5 days agoAdvocacy groups join Venezuela earthquake relief efforts

