PLAYS FOR HALLOWEEN MONTH!: A Look at "Dracula" adapted for the stage by Steven Dietz

 

Maggie Kelleher as Lucy, Mark Nadeau as Van Helsing in the middle, and me as Dr. Seward in Lakewood Theater's production of Steven Dietz's Dracula. My character should be relieved Lucy didn't marry him, since she's an undead monster now. 

I love Halloween. I suppose that isn't rare for someone who has spent most of their life in the theater. I imagine most performers  have a soft spot for a holiday all about getting into costume and getting out of yourself for an evening...

I also love horror movies and spooky books. I'm a Maine boy, so I have read a great deal Stephen King's work, because he is our Emperor in these parts. 

I also like spooky and scary plays, or any play with a Halloween vibe, though I sometimes think they are overlooked. That's why I've decided that this month, I will highlight some plays that I think are great for October, or, as I like to call it, Halloween Month. I figured I would start with Dracula by Steven Dietz, based on the novel by Bram Stoker.  I played Dr. Seward in a production at Lakewood Theater, and will share photos along the way...

Me as Dr. Seward, who is facing down madman and Dracula minion, Renfield, played by Bart Shattuck.

I have always loved vampire stories, so, as soon as I was old enough, I read Stoker's novel Dracula, the father of them all. I remember rushing to see Francis Ford Coppola's film adaptation when I was in middle school (probably too R-rated for me at the time, but I had cool parents), and while I loved it (I was like 12--- what wasn't to love?), I also wondered why every adaptation of Stoker's novel seemed to add a love story that just isn't there in the book. 

I was happy to be cast as Dr. Seward in Lakewood's production. Both of my parents had been in a different adaptation of Dracula when I was a boy, and I remember watching it over and over again. So being in my own production felt like a foregone conclusion, and I was happy to be in this particular production with my friends Jak, Maggie, Nick, Hannah, Jen, and everyone else involved. 

Playing Dr. Seward was a special treat, because I particularly like how Dietz treats the character in his adaptation.  Adapting a novel, particularly a longish one like Dracula, is not an easy task. Obviously novels and plays are very different art forms. But Dietz is faithful to the source material, while making a very theatrical play, condensing events and keeping scenes moving quickly from one to the next. 

Maggie (as Lucy) gets a nice necklace from Mark as Van Helsing, while Hannah as Mina and I look on and try not to be bothered by the smell.

Dietz wisely does not dramatize each of Lucy's suitors, though they are all mentioned. Dr. Seward stands in for the rest of them, and Dietz gives him a lovely monologue as he proposes to Lucy. It shouldn't be a spoiler to say that she rejects him, though in the script, he sees the rejection in her face, but continues his speech as a good gentleman should, telling her he will always be there for her when she needs him. From this speech and scene, Dietz continues  the speech as Seward decides to take comfort in his work, and uses this transition to a seamless scene with Renfield. Again, I am fond of how Dietz is able to keep the action moving with transitions like this... with so many scenes, a production can die of boredom unless the script keeps them moving. 

What could be wrong with Lucy? I hope it's not a freakin' Dracula!

I am of the opinion that live theater can actually create a creepier experience with scary stories than movies, due to the fact that it is life, happening in the moment to be shared with the audience. When it's going well, there is a lovely energy in the air. 

And, trust me, don't skimp on the blood. 

Take a bow!

So if you're looking for a good Dracula adaptation, I am a fan of the one by Steven Dietz. Sure, there are probably wilder ones and musical ones, but Dietz is true to the story and has plenty of atmosphere, and, in my experience, can be as simple or as complex to stage as your production will allow. If you are interested in learning more about licensing it, you can visit its page on Dramatists Play Service's website by CLICKING HERE

If you are looking for a fun and funny spooky play for younger audiences, may I suggest my play Are We Scared Yet?  from Elderidge Publishing? It takes some popular spooky stories and urban legends and gives them a fun little twist. You can learn more about that play by CLICKING HERE. 

What is your favorite scary/spooky/Halloweeny play? Let me know in comments!

WHY READING PLAYS IS GOOD FOR YOU....

 

If you haven't been following my blog (it's okay, there's a lot of stuff to do in this world of ours), I read 30 plays for the 30 days of September, one a play a day, reading the plays in one sitting to get a good feel of their dramatic arc and structure. I then wrote about each play, giving a basic run down of what it was about, as well as some history of its premiere production and its playwright, and other dramaturgical information, as well as some of my opinions about each play.  The 30 plays were as follows (you can click on each one to go to my post about it) :

1. Lemon Sky by Lanford Wilson
2. Ceremonies in Dark Old Men by Lonne Elder III
3. Painting Churches by Tina Howe
4. The Flies by Jean-Paul Sartre
5. All Over by Edward Albee
6. Other Places by Harold Pinter
7. Marat/Sade by Peter Weiss, Translated by Geoffrey Skelton, Verse Adaptation by Adrian Mitchell
8. for colored girls who have considered suicide/when the rainbow is enuf by Ntozake Shange
9. Brilliant Traces by Cindy Lou Johnson
10. Titanic by Christopher Durang
11. Sticks and Bones by David Rabe
12. Bosoms and Neglect by John Guare
13. Arcadia by Tom Stoppard 
14. R.U.R. by Karel Čapek
15. Trudy Blue  by Marsha Norman 
16. Morning, Noon, and Night by Israel Horovitz, Terrence McNally, and Leonard Melfi
17. Jack and Jill: A Romance by Jane Martin
18. The Good Doctor by Neil Simon
19. Fences by August Wilson
20. Tea and Sympathy by Robert Anderson
21. One Flea Spare by Naomi Wallace
22. The Taking of Miss Janie by Ed Bullins
23. The Master Builder by Henrik Ibsen
24. I Hate Hamlet by Paul Rudnick 
25. Hunger and Thirst by Eugene Ionesco
26. Summer and Smoke by Tennessee Williams
27. Mary, Mary by Jean Kerr
28. Indians by Arthur Kopit
29. Salomé by Oscar Wilde
30. Little Murders by Jules Feiffer
BONUS PLAYS THROUGHOUT THE MONTH:  This Property is Condemned by Tennessee Williams, Come Down Burning by Kia Corthron, and My Left Breast by Susan Miller

As the title of this post might and the above picture suggests, spending a month focusing on reading a play daily was very good for me, and I think it will be good for you, too. 

But why, Bobby, why?

Here are a few reasons:

- IT REFRESHES YOUR VISUALIZATION:  I found that working my visualization muscles was a real treat. Setting the scene in your mind, hearing the characters in your head, and actually watching the play unfold in your imagination is a valuable tool for any playwright, actor or director. 

- DETECTING STRUCTURE BECOMES ALMOST AUTOMATIC: Especially with well-crafted plays, the reader begins to fully and almost inherently feel the structure of a play, and sense its dramatic arc. Clearly, this is valuable for any one involved in theater. 

-ONE BEGINS TO GLEAN CHARACTER BUILDING TECHNIQUE AND DRAMATIC ACTION: All these things one learns in a script analysis class or an early acting college course can start to be gleaned simply by reading plays, paying attention to how dialogue creates ACTION for character, how the dramatic action builds based on OBJECTIVES and OBSTRUCTIONS. One can find this stuff easily on the page--- it is not hard to find, because as you read, you simply begin to understand it as you let the play build in your imagination. 

- IT IS FUN:  Yes, pure and simple, reading plays is fun. And by fun, I don't just mean with the comedies and laughing, etc. Fun is also being engaged. Fun is feeling something deeply, understanding something in a new way that you have never understood it before. 

-IT IS BOTH HISTORY LESSONS AND EMPATY LESSONS:  I noticed when reading many of these plays, particularly American plays of the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, how even plays that weren't outwardly political had something to say. Mary, Mary example, in many ways, seems like just a fun comedy, and it is that, certainly. But when you think of the time period and a female protagonist taking agency for herself, making the choices based on what she wants, it is a statement. A play like Tea and Sympathy  comments on toxic masculinity before the term existed, and comments on homophobia when it wasn't popular to do so. And plays like Indians, Fences, Come Down Burning, and The Taking of Miss Janie  deal with America's racism in stark and honest and necessary ways. And by presenting all of this as plays, where the reader and the audience is in the character's shoes, hearing their voices, it becomes an easier delivery system for empathy in many ways than other forms of writing (in my opinion... but don't get me wrong... I love pretty much all forms of writing). 

Do I think if you are serious about theater that you should try a similar challenge of reading 30 plays in 30 days?  Yes I do! 

Do I think if you just like reading that you should try a similar challenge of reading 30 plays in 30 days? Yes I do!

Do I think we should normalize reading plays in the same way that we read novels and short stories and poems,etc.? You bet! 

I know I plan to keep reading more and more plays. As a playwright, it has recharged my batteries and inspired me. I hope to read at least one play a week from here on out (on top of all the books and such I want to read, too). 

Don't feel you have to have the same reading list that I did (although I must say it is a pretty good one... I did try to be diverse and wide-ranging). Read any type of play that interests you, and then, please feel free to comment here and tell me about it. 

Thanks for taking the time to read my final thoughts on my 30 day play reading challenge. Go out and have a great month of reading yourselves! 

Shameless plug:  If you want to read any of my plays as part of your challenge, you can learn about them by CLICKING HERE

30 PLAYS IN 30 DAYS: Play #30 "Little Murders" by Jules Feiffer

 

The Penguin Edition of the Play, featuring a still from the film adaptation

I can't believe it... September is almost over, and my challenge is officially finished. I have read 30 plays in 30 days. Today, I will do my daily write up of the day's play, but tomorrow, I will write a little bit about the value of this experience, and how reading plays every day has made me feel great, and taught me a great deal, too. In short, I recommend it if you are looking for inspiration. But more on that tomorrow. In the meantime...

Play #30

Little Murders by Jules Feiffer

I have said this about several of the plays I have read this month, but Little Murders, despite being dated in some regards, is honestly just as relevant today, if not more so. I had read the play a number of years ago, probably as a teenager or young adult, but couldn't remember it--- strange, since as I read it today, I realized it was a piece that really hits my sweet spot as a reader and audience member--- a savage and savagely funny satire and dark comedy that brilliantly and forcefully depicts an America where violence, and particularly gun violence, is as American as apple pie (as Clive Barnes wrote)... or, in other words, simply America. Feiffer said he was inspired to write the story after the assassination of JFK (though he was not necessarily a fan), which was quickly followed upon by the assassination of Oswald, and the violence in Vietnam:  "So the motive of the play was the breakdown of all forms of authority--- religion, family, the police. Urban violence was always the metaphor in my mind for something more serious in the country." (Quote from the New York Times)

The play begins in the Newquist family's apartment: the matriarch, Marjorie needs to prepare for dinner, as grown daughter Patsy is bringing her new boyfriend Alfred over to meet her family. Carol, the patriarch (who hates being called by his given name of Carol), figures he will have to booze up the young man to find that he isn't good enough for his daughter. He is adamant that every boyfriend of Patsy's has not been a "real man", and questions their sexuality, all while ignoring his son Kenny, living at home but attending college, who may be closeted. Patsy, a very positive, bright, and strong daughter arrives. She is adored by her father and brother, yet her mother seems somewhat uncomfortable around her. Alfred, her new boyfriend, is a big guy with bruises all over his face--- because of his size, he says that people always want to pick fights with him. He lets them beat on him (as long as they don't touch his cameras--- he is a photographer) until they tire out. This does not sit well with Carol:

CAROL: Christ Jesus, you're not a pacifist?

PATSY: (warning) Daddy...

ALFRED: (slowly shaking his head) An apathist. 

Patsy, in fact, can't pull herself away from Alfred because he is so different--- he won't fight, and because of this, she can't win a fight with him. 

The family and guest sit down for dinner amidst rolling blackouts and gunshots going on at a fairly regular rate outside the window. And this continues all throughout the play, the gunshots, even before the wedding of Alfred and Patsy (after a big to-do because Alfred doesn't want God mentioned in the ceremony) until, ultimately, there are tragic results from the gunshots, leading to the death of a major character (I won't say which one). Bringing about an ending that essentially paints the picture that the American way of dealing with gun violence is by becoming perpetrators of it yourself. 

Jules Feiffer was known as a cartoonist first, at the Village Voice (where he produced the weekly comic strip Feiffer until 1997) before garnering a reputation as a writer and playwright, though as Clive Barnes noted, his cartoons are always monologues from a character, or dialogues.  He wrote the animated short Munro which won an Academy Award. He also wrote a novel called Harry, the Rat With Women in 1963. 

Little Murders  first appeared on Broadway in 1967, featuring Elliot Gould (who would later star in the film adaptation), but it was iced out by critics and closed after seven performances. It fared better in London. But then in 1969, it was staged Off-Broadway, where it probably belonged in the first place, in a production featuring Fred Willard and directed by Alan Arkin (who would helm the film), and received great reviews and ran for 400 performances. 

Feiffer is 92, and, from what I could find, he is still teaching at an MFA program at Stony Brook Southampton. He won a Pultizer for Editorial Cartooning, and is in the Comic Book Hall of Fame. 

I cannot tell you how much I love this play. It is the type of bold, dark comedy that I find both hilarious and poignant and important... the kind of work I like to do myself from time to time. I would love to see it produced a whole bunch--- as I say, it is still very relevant. 

If you are interested in reading it or licensing it for production, you can do so by clicking this link to CONCORD THEATRICALS.

Any thoughts on this play or this film?  What are some other great plays you think I should read and discuss? Please feel free to comment. 

And if you're interested in my work, check out My List of Publications.

30 PLAYS IN 30 DAYS: Bonus Play "My Left Breast" by Susan Miller

 

Here is another bonus play for my "30 Plays in 30 Days" September reading challenge. My Left Breast by Susan Miller is a one-woman show that I found in a collection I have of The Best American Short Plays 1993-1994. The play originally premiered at the Actors Theatre of Louisville in the 1994 Humana Festival where Miller performed the piece herself. 

A multi-layered monologue, My Left Breast tells the story of a "one-breasted, menopausal, Jewish bisexual lesbian Mom", from a diagnoses of breast cancer through a mastectomy, from raising her son, to a breakup of a long-term relationship, and a diagnoses of osteoporosis... and through it all, Miller tells the story in a very human way, with plenty of humor, insight and poignancy.  I found the descriptions in the aftermath of her breakup relatable, and one can feel the no-holds barred honesty as she approaches each subject with a kind of grace in her writing.

Susan Miller received an Obie and shared the 1994/1995 Blackburn Prize for the play. It is published by Playscripts, Inc., a very fine publishing house (they carry two of my plays), so if you are interested in reading the play or licensing it for performance, you can visit their website by CLICKING HERE.

If you know this play, have read it, seen it, or performed it, let me know your thoughts by commenting on this post. If you would like to learn more about my plays, you can do so by CLICKING HERE.

30 PLAYS IN 30 DAYS: Play #18 "The Good Doctor" by Neil Simon

 

I have decided for the month of September to read 30 plays in 30 days. It is my belief that, if possible, a play should be read in one sitting to get a better inherent sense of the dramatic arc. Each day, I will write a short post here about the play of the day.

Play #18

The Good Doctor by Neil Simon

Neil Simon hardly needs an introduction, as he is perhaps the most prolific Broadway play hitmaker of the last eighty years or so, starting with Come Blow Your Horn in 1961. Mr. Simon died in 2018 at the age of 91, over thirty plays, 20 screenplays, and dozens of television sketches and teleplays to his credit. I can also not stress enough how every student of playwriting, or any kind of writing in general, should read his memoir Rewrites, which follows his early years of learning how to write for the stage and all the work that goes into crafting a play. His second memoir, The Play Goes On, is also a valuable look at his life, though not as heavily focused on the craft of writing. Simon won a Pulitzer for his play Lost In Yonkers, and as well as a handful of Tonys, a Golden Globe, and many other awards along the way. 

Despite some of the critical honors and his unprecedented (and never duplicated) success as an American playwright, Simon was never taken as seriously as many of his contemporaries, as though his prolific nature and the fact he was writing comedies somehow meant he was pandering to audiences, or not a craftsman worth the admiration of say, a Pinter (Pinter actually loved The Odd Couple) or a Tennessee Williams. Underestimating Simon's importance and artistry is a mistake, I think. While he had some stinkers (what writer hasn't?), the truth is, he was solid at structure, creating human characters people related to, and, as his career progressed, someone who wasn't afraid of having real pain in his comedies. Famed actress and acting teacher Uta Hagen compared his comedies to the works of Anton Chekhov.

And that's the perfect segue to talk about The Good Doctor, Neil Simon's play that is a love letter to the master, Chekhov himself. The play features "The Writer" (played by the late, great Christopher Plummer) in the original Broadway production), a stand-in for Chekhov, who talks about his love for/compulsion for writing, as he introduces sketches based on Chekhov short stories, with scenes called "The Sneeze," "The Governess", "Surgery," "Too Late For Happiness," "The Seduction," "The Drowned Man," "The Audition," "A Defenseless Creature", and "The Arrangement."  It is a bright, breezy, fun read, with Simon clearly showing much love and care to the source material and its writer, a kind of "pupil appreciation for the master" sort of piece. I can imagine audiences having a great time, so long as they don't mind watching a collection of scenes as opposed to one longer piece. I daresay this would be fun to act in as well. 

While I enjoyed reading it, it is lighter fare, even for Simon. Each scene builds to a kind of punchline and little more, and while Simon is skillful in tying them together with the character of "The Writer," the play does feel a little disjointed.  

But it is good old fashioned entertainment, nonetheless.

The Good Doctor ran for 203 performances in 1973 at the Eugene O'Neill Theater, and was nominated for Four Tonys, with Frances Sternhagen winning one for Best Featured Actress in a play. 

30 PLAYS IN 30 DAYS: Play #15 "Trudy Blue" by Marsha Norman

 

I have decided for the month of September to read 30 plays in 30 days. It is my belief that, if possible, a play should be read in one sitting to get a better inherent sense of the dramatic arc. Each day, I will write a short post here about the play of the day.

Play #15

Trudy Blue by Marsha Norman

Marsha Norman received the Pulitzer Prize in 1983 for her play 'Night Mother, and wrote the book and lyrics for a Broadway musical adaptation of The Secret Garden, which scored her Tony and Drama Desk Award for Outstanding Book of a Musical. I was mostly familiar with three things about her:  a writer's handbook in which she wrote an essay giving advice (including to read 4 hours a day and not let anyone ask you why you were just sitting around reading), her play Traveler in the Dark that a friend and fellow student directed at Bennington, and her play Loving Daniel Boone (which I read because the premiere production starred my playwriting professor Gladden Schrock in the title role). 

Trudy Blue originally grew from a short one act called Lunch With Ginger, which is still a scene in the play. The play centers around Ginger, a middle-aged writer who lives a great deal in her mind, struggling with a marriage that has gone stale and a life that doesn't feel all that happy to her. The play moves back and forth between what is real, what is imagined, and what is remembered, and has a tendency to honestly feel like it can operate outside of or general ideas of space and time. In this regard, Norman achieves a true kind of daydream-like quality that goes well with the character. Ginger is working on a new book, featuring a lead character named Trudy Blue, a stand-in for Ginger who knows exactly what she wants, knows exactly what she wants to say, and is unafraid of doing what will make her happy. 

Some may be bothered by the fact that Norman doesn't give us exact answers, but such things rarely bother me, so long as I have been interested enough in the journey. And while I do feel the play could be shaved a little bit, Ginger is an interesting character, and, as someone who daydreams quite a bit myself, I could relate to her. I think most writers could. I mean, who doesn't wish they could write a character who could solve all of their problems and be as brave and bold as we all secretly wish we could be?

Trudy Blue was first performed at the prestigious Humana Festival of New plays in 1995, but, from what I could find, is not the most popular of Norman's works. Regardless, it is a play that I think would be interesting to see on the stage. 

30 PLAYS IN 30 DAYS: Play #10 "Titatnic" by Christopher Durang

 

I have decided for the month of September to read 30 plays in 30 days. It is my belief that, if possible, a play should be read in one sitting to get a better inherent sense of the dramatic arc. Each day, I will write a short post here about the play of the day.

Play #10

Titanic by Christopher Durang

I have been a fan of Christopher Durang since my high school days. Like many young people over the country, I first became acquainted with him from his play The Actor's Nightmare, a one-act that is still done quite often for high school one act play programs (I starred in it my Freshman year of high school). From there, my drama director, who had a most impressive collection of plays, would lend me other, less age-appropriate plays Durang had written (my drama director was super cool). 

I am fairly certain I never read Titanic high school. I may have read it when I was in college, but that was quite a while ago, and my memory of  it was fuzzy, if there at all, so I decided it would be like reading it again for the first time, and indeed it was. 

Christopher Durang is one of those awesome playwrights who provides a great deal of backstory in the published collections of his plays and on his website. Titanic started as a playwriting exercise while he was at Yale, and continued to be workshopped there. It became a very early New York production for the young playwright when it was produced off-off-Broadway and then moved off-Broadway. The cast featured Sigourney Weaver, one of Durang's good friends from Yale, who has been in a whole lot of his work since. Running at about an hour and some change, the off-Broadway production featured a curtain raiser, Das Lusitania Songspiel, a cabaret piece written and performed by Durang and Weaver. 

Durang makes it clear on his website that this one act is NOT for high schools. He writes, "It's funny and very perverse, and definitely the most x-rated of my plays."  (He means this due to language and things that are talked about--- it is not actually x-rated... more of  a hard R). And indeed, it is gleefully perverse and, in my opinion, hilarious, with laughter on every page. It is meant to go to extremes, and like others of his earlier one acts, characters shift in their identities and motivation in strong, bracing ways. This is a high energy play, intentionally shocking and surreal, with a love of strange language that feels inspired by Ionesco, and a kind of sexual and sexuality free for all that is not guilt free or without consequence. Durang notes that he has not seen a production ever quite hit the tone he saw in his head while writing--- "I've seen the funny farce, but I've never seen the moments where weird and unexpected sadness presses itself through."

Richard Peterson and Sigourney Weaver, from Christopher Durang's website

I can understand what he means. As I was reading, while I laughed out loud more than once, these characters are in dark situations. One character specifically is heartbroken every moment that goes by and the ship isn't sinking.  And almost every character makes mention of a yearning, a longing, a kind of loneliness or need for connection that cannot be filled. This was not lost on me, though I imagine it must be difficult (Durang, once again on his website, tells us, "This is a really difficult play to do") to get the tone just right in production, when there is so much talk about animals hidden in genitals and dildos being strapped to heads. Indeed, and I am not making this up, this kind of energy has the kind of feel of how Ancient Greek Theater Festivals were described in books I have read about them. A kind of bittersweet, dark bacchanal. 

This is my cup of tea, though it isn't for everyone. Durang writes in his collection 27 Short Plays that "One should never call a play Titanic as this is too great a temptation for critics to say Titanic Sinks and Durang Goes Down With His Ship. Etc., etc., all of which happened."

But I think it's a riot. 

To read more about Christopher Durang's thoughts on the play, CLICK HERE to be directed to his website. 

30 PLAYS IN 30 DAYS: Play #7 "Marat/Sade" By Peter Weiss, Translated by Geoffrey Skelton, Verse Adaptation by Adrian Mitchell

 

I have decided for the month of September to read 30 plays in 30 days. It is my belief that, if possible, a play should be read in one sitting to get a better inherent sense of the dramatic arc. Each day, I will write a short post here about the play of the day.

Play #7

The Persecution And Assassination of Jean-Paul Marat As Performed By The Inmates Of The Asylum Of Charenton Under The Direction Of The Marquis De Sade by Peter Weiss, with the English translation by Geoffey Skelton, and verse adaptation by Adrian Mitchell (The title is most often shortened to Marat/Sade in conversation about the piece for obvious reasons)

I realized I had never read the script for Marat/Sade but had only seen a few scenes from Peter Brook's film adaptation, which have faded from memory if I am being honest. Though I have read many raves about the film adaptation, and I am sure it is good as Peter Brook directed the initial productions by the Royal Shakespeare Company in 1964 that moved to Broadway in 1965, one can't help but feel that so much of what makes the script so vibrant and almost dangerous is that it is a quintessential play-within-a-play format--- it's just that the play within the play is being performed by inmates of an asylum. 

Peter Weiss's script is clearly inspired by Brecht, and the text and Peter Brook's direction of the play in its English translation were inspired by Antonin Artaud's "Theatre of Cruelty", a type of theater designed to shock the audience with movement and gesture different sensory disruptions. It was Artaud's belief that such things were more visceral and important than text. Marat/Sade, in many ways, is a meeting point for the best worlds of Brecht and Artaud, for the text is certainly important here. 

I won't go into a huge history lesson here, but the play is set in an asylum in 1808 as the Marquis de Sade (far too much about the real guy to go into here, but, yes, sadism is named for him), is putting on a production of the execution of Jean-Paul Marat, which occurred July 13, 1793, during the French Revolution, of which  Marat was a prominent figure. He was assassinated by Charlotte Corday. Again, I won't go too deeply into the history surrounding the play, but I encourage one to research the story of Charlotte Corday and the death of Marat--- there's even a haunting painting that is recreated in tableau near the end of this script. 

So Sade is putting on his play, which is actually something based in history. The director of the asylum, Coulmier (who is also a character in the play, a Napoleon fan), did allow the Marquis de Sade to put on plays in the asylum for the education and rehabilitation of the patients. 

Essentially, in the most basic terms, the play is about revolution, and the philosophical differences between Marat and Sade. Sade argues a more individualistic belief--- he spent much of his life in and out of prisons, including five years in the Bastille. His works did often deal with sexuality, violence, blasphemy, and he was a firm believer in freedom unrestrained by morality. Marat, who spends much of the play in the bath due to his skin disease, believes that true change comes in the upheaval of society, the chaos being an important step, but then brought back by a leader (not a dictator).  The play is largely a thematic discussion about revolution truly means. In this way, I am surprised it is not produced more often these days--- I think it could really strike some interesting conversation. 

But what I love most about the play is its energy, the setting in the asylum, and that it is intended to step in and out of the moment to unsettle the audience. The device is powerful, at times very funny, but also unnerving. 

I can't speak for the original German, sadly, but Geoffrey Skelton's translation and Adrian Mitchell's verse adaptation is lyrical and thought-provoking. My pen was busy underlining lines that really struck a nerve with me, or that I found beautiful. 

The Marquis de Sade says near the end:

"Our play's chief aim has been-- to take to bits

great propositions and their opposites,

see how they work, then let them fight it out."

And that may be the best summation one could give. 

30 PLAYS IN 30 DAYS: Play #6 "Other Places" by Harold Pinter

 

I have decided for the month of September to read 30 plays in 30 days. It is my belief that, if possible, a play should be read in one sitting to get a better inherent sense of the dramatic arc. Each day, I will write a short post here about the play of the day.

Play #6

Other Places by Harold Pinter, a collection that consists of three short plays:  A Kind of Alaska, Victoria Station, and Family Voices

Those who know me know of my deep and abiding love and appreciation of Harold Pinter's work. I remember being in high school and reading pieces like The Dumb Waiter and A Slight Ache for the first time and falling completely in love with the language. In college, I encountered works like The Caretaker, and perhaps my personal favorite (it was Pinter's own favorite, according to an interview on Charlie Rose) The Homecoming. I have owned this collection Other Places for a spell, but, for me, when I love a writer, I want to save some of their work for a later date, and that date came today (perhaps because I was talking about Pinter yesterday while discussing All Over). 

Other Places was first presented by the National Theatre, London, in 1982. A Kind of Alaska is perhaps the most enduring and received the most attention of the trio, and it is, arguably the meatiest of the three, presenting a side of Pinter that surprised some critics and audiences. Michael Billington wrote in The Guardian that, "A Kind of Alaska (which strikes me on instant acquaintance as a masterpiece) moves one in a way no work of his has ever done before." And while I am not sure I completely agree, there is no question that the piece is bold and creative with a great emotional payoff, while still posing some very interesting questions along the way. A note in the text from Pinter tells how the play was inspired by Awakenings by Oliver Sacks, a true story of people who, in a sense, froze in time with a sickness called encephalitis lethargica, "sleeping sickness". In the play, a middle-aged woman wakes up from this sickness, having stopped in time when she was a 16 year-old girl. Pinter's work in establishing her disorientation and confusion is masterful. With her is Hornby, who has been treating her all this time, often neglecting his own life in the process, and Pauline, Deborah's younger sister who was only 13 when Deborah fell ill and is now also a middle-aged woman. The initial production starred Judi Dench as Deborah, and one can't help but imagine how great this Dame of the theater was in the role. 

Victoria Station is a split stage conversation between a Controller and a Taxi Driver, and is a classic (and quite amusing) example of Pinter's theme of the spaces that often effect ability to communicate. A simple, short conflict, but it made me laugh out loud more than once. 

Family Voices was originally produced for radio on BBC 3 in 1981 before becoming a stage piece. Indeed, one can imagine it working well as a radio piece. It consists of 3 voices giving parallel monologues--- a son, mother and father--- in the form of letters. Whether these letters were ever sent is a matter we cannot be sure of. I found the piece to be filled with Pinter's usual beautiful writing, which often comes off as lyrical in its precision and honest directness. We may not always completely understand, but we know that the characters understand, which is good enough. 

I could go  on and on about Harold Pinter all day, as he truly is one of my heroes, but I won't do that right now. It is probably enough to know that he received the Nobel Prize in Literature in 2005, an honor he very much deserved, and gave a speech that is still worth watching (a speech he had to send by video, as he was too sick with cancer to attend in-person).  You can watch it by CLICKING HERE

INTERVIEW WITH PLAYWRIGHTS DOUGLAS E. HUGHES AND MARCIA KASH!

 

Marcia Kash and Douglas E. Hughes, a great comedic playwrighting duo!

Note: This interview first appeared in Lakewood Theater's program for their production of Mr. Hughes and Ms. Kash's play, Something Fishy.

BACKSTORY WITH BOBBY KENISTON

Something Fishy, by Douglas E. Hughes and Marcia (pronounced Mar-see-a) Kash, premiered at the Lighthouse Festival in Ontario, Canada, in 2016. Regular audience members of Lakewood Theater are no strangers to the works of Mr. Hughes and Ms. Kash--- we have produced two of their most famous titles, Who's Under Where?, a farce about love, marriage and lingerie, and Too Many Cooks, a delicious tale about cooking, gangsters and mistaken identity, to huge laughs and thunderous applause.

The writing team graciously took the time to answer a few of my questions. Their answers--- which came separately--- demonstrate just how wonderful a collaboration they have shared over the years.

BOBBY KENISTON: There is no doubt that during every election season, one can't help but find Something Fishy in the air, no matter what side of the political spectrum one finds themselves. What do you think makes politics and politicians a topic that is so ripe for farce and lampooning? Is comedy the great unifier?

DOUGLAS HUGHES: Good question! One of the central themes of Something Fishy is that politics, to a very large extent, is theatre; and as recent events have clearly indicated, that theatre can often tip over into farce. Hence the setting for the piece.

MARCIA KASH: I think comedy most definitely is the great unifier- as long as everyone can laugh at themselves as much as the other guy. Politics and politicians are perfect for farce as they, like characters in farce, are constantly caught in the spotlight, changing the story (the spin) and trying to say/do the "thing" that will win the day- whether or not it is true.

BOBBY: You began your collaboration in the early 1990s with Who's Under Where? and have since written a total of six plays together, with your latest, Deadline, having a professional reading at the Purple Rose Theater. At the risk of asking a question you might be sick of, how did you become writing partners, and what makes the collaboration work after all this time?

MARCIA: We became writing partners accidentally. I moved back to Toronto after some years away, with a half-written first draft of Who's, and reconnected with Doug, who was a friend, at the time he was embarking on a writing career. I asked him if he wanted to help me finish it and - bingo. We scored! The collaboration works because we share a similar work ethic, enjoy creating complicated plots and twists- and when we're not annoying each other, we make each other laugh.

DOUGLAS: Another excellent question, one that allows me to share one of my favourite stories about our collaboration. We were sitting side by side at my computer one day, bickering at each other about something we were working on at the time, when Marce suddenly looked up and said, "You know, this relationship is exactly like a marriage," to which I responded, "Yeah--without any sex." Marce shot back, "Like I said--it's exactly like a marriage." As flip as that remark may have been at the time, there's a lot of truth in it. Like any intimate relationship, a collaboration such as ours requires a lot of work in order for it to be successful; and fortunately, we've both been willing to put in the necessary work over the years. A fair degree of autonomy in a relationship is also a healthy thing, and we've always had that. Both of us have worked on many solo projects as writers, as well as working with other people. I guess you could call our "marriage" an open one.

BOBBY: Comedy seems to lend itself to the art of collaboration--- Moss and Hart come to mind, of course, or other Lakewood favorites Billy Van Zand and Jane Milmore. Does having a partner to bounce ideas off of lend itself to comedy more so than other genres? Like musicians riffing, seeing what works?

DOUGLAS: Absolutely! One of the most common questions we get from other writers is, "How on Earth do you manage to write with a partner?", to which I usually ask, "How do you not?" There are lots of comic playwrights, of course, who are perfectly happy to work on their own, and thrive doing so--Norm Foster being an obvious example (although Norm's been known to collaborate as well from time to time); but you're absolutely right. When you're writing comedy, it's a great help to have someone else there to bounce ideas off of. I think Marce and I have different strengths as writers--strengths that complement one another--and as such, our working together means that the finished product can often exceed the sum of its parts.

MARCIA: Totally. In our case we began our careers as actors and were very comfortable collaborating. Unlike our pal Norm Foster, we need to bounce our humour off one another. Norm has a facility for one-liners that we have to work very hard at!

BOBBY: Your plays have had over 200 productions all over the world and been translated into six languages. You even visited Shanghai to see a production of your farce A Party to Murder. [Interviewer's note: I am about to be very embarrassed to have called this play a farce] I imagine it must be quite a thrill to see your work find such wide and diverse audiences! How was the trip to Shanghai, and how does comedy, or farce in particular, cross the language barrier?

MARCIA: I believe we are translated into 8 languages now... A Party to Murder isn't a farce, it is a murder mystery. The Shanghai trip, however, WAS a farce. I broke my knee on the first day and so our adventures there had a very unusual element added in. The experience of seeing the show from a wheelchair, in Mandarin, was one I will never forget! The audiences there are very young, very tech savvy and very interested in Western culture. The production and reactions were so different from what we are used to seeing.

DOUGLAS: One of my greatest joys has been having had the opportunity to see a number of productions of our plays in different languages and different cultures--I've seen our work done in French in Québec, in Polish in Warsaw, and now, in Shanghai and Shenzhen in Mandarin. I should point out, though, that the play in China was actually a murder mystery, not a farce--although our visit to Shanghai was such an adventure that our first instinct was to sit down and write a farce about it (that idea's on the back burner for the time being). What was interesting about seeing our some of our plays in Québec and Poland was that both cultures have a deep understanding of the genre of farce, and as such, appeared to enjoy the plays on a level that I hadn't quite seen in the many productions I'd attended in English Canada. That's not to say the English-speaking audience didn't enjoy it; it was more my sense that, despite the fact that the francophone and Polish audiences were seeing translations, the plays were set in a language that they instinctually understood.

BOBBY: You both have worked as actors, and Marcia as a director (even directing Doug in a few productions). How do these other roles influence your work as playwrights?

DOUGLAS: I think the best answer I can offer is this: Marce and I were both actors when we first started working together as playwrights. So, when we got to a part in the writing where we weren't sure whether or not a moment or a bit of business was going to work, we'd simply get up and do it. I think being actors also had something to do with our comfort level when it came to collaborating as writers. Rehearsing and performing a play is an inherently collaborative process, one we were completely at home with; so, writing together just seemed a logical extension of that.

MARCIA: Oh, it all informs everything. When we work together we have a very useful shorthand.

BOBBY: And finally: As we all know, we are living in a very strange time when it comes to theater. Lakewood has managed to open at limited capacity, as Maine has remained relatively safe during the pandemic. Many theaters are struggling, and I know that as a playwright myself, it certainly makes an impact. How do you think theater will move forward during these strange times, and prove itself to be as essential as we all know it is? What do you think of theater companies using platforms like Zoom to present live performances online?

DOUGLAS: I really hesitate to predict where things are going to go, but I'll say this much: I think that, in the short term, live theatre is going to go through an extended period of upheaval. How extended that period is will be a direct result of the state of the pandemic. However, the desire to experience interactive, live performances of all kinds is an innately human trait, and in the long run, I think it's that need for a collective, communal experience that will eventually lead us back to the theatre (and the music hall, the opera, the ballet, etc.) once again.

MARCIA: I look forward to the time when theatres can reopen to full capacity and programming but I think it will take quite some time. Currently our industry is devastated and the future looks very gloomy. I appreciate all the online programming that theatre folk are putting out- but personally I can only handle so much. I miss the "liveness" of theatre. It's just not the same watching on a screen at home. I do think that many good things will come out of this time and on a personal note, I am hopeful that our plays will still be relevant and appealing to theatres and audiences when this is all over.

You can learn more about Douglas E. Hughes and Marcia Kash by visiting their websites:

Douglas E Hughes | Actor / Playwright / Novelist

Website for Marcia Kash

APPRECIATING THE LITTLE (BIG) THINGS

a VERY cool production photo from a school group in Virginia who did my play "Confession:  Kafka in High School"

It is easy making a life for yourself in the arts. I don't say this to discourage anyone from trying--- indeed, if it is what you love, and you can't imagine yourself being happy doing anything else, then I encourage you with a whole heart to pursue your passion and follow that dream.

Just know that it's not always easy.

My first two plays were published in March of 2010.  One of them was Rumplestilskin the R-Dawg: Hip-Hop Minstrel, from Brooklyn Publishers and the other was Confession:  Kafka in High School, from Playscripts, Inc.

Now, almost five years later, my plays have been performed in 44 different states and 4 different countries.  I have 32 publications in four different catalogs, and my work has been chosen to be a part of three different anthologies.  I have self-produced a few plays for adults, been to different festivals and competitions, met some really great people, and even have a script that some kind folks in Delaware are working hard to make a movie from.

Best of all, I hear from students every now and then from all over the country (and, sometimes, all over the world).  They'll drop me a line on my Facebook Page or at theater.is.a.sport@gmail.com, and ask me questions, or just say hi.  Sometimes, they'll send me cool pictures like the one above.  Or, this one below:

A poster for a production of my play, "Avoiding the Pitfalls of High School Dating"

All of this is super cool, and I love it.  But, still, it is easy to get down on myself many days.  After all, I'm 37 years old and I don't have a "steady" job (or, according to some, a "real" job--- but that's for another post), I struggle financially a great deal, and have no money put away for the future, because I barely have money for the present.  Such things can make one lose faith in themselves a little from time to time--- while I'm grateful that my work is produced, and I'm thankful for every group who chooses my plays, I've yet to have a definite "hit" per se.  A few have come close, but not quite.  And that's okay.  My playwriting career grows a little every year, and it feels wrong to ask for more than that.

But, in my defense, it is human nature to want to climb to the top of your field, or, at the very least, have a good view of the top from where you are.  And everyone wants stability, as well as a reward for hard work (and writing plays can be very, very hard work).

So when I get down on myself, I'll look at the messages I have received from students, or at the many cast photos and production photos.  I'll stop and remind myself of something very important:  the productions of my plays aren't just a list on a piece of paper I receive from my publishers.  They are teachers preparing a group of students.  These students practice to memorize words that I put on a page to tell a story.  They stand backstage before a show, feeling that same excitement and energy that I feel when I'm in a play, and they are feeling it for my work. My work!  This group of kids have come together to CREATE, they have formed a CAST BOND, all revolving around a play I WROTE!!

When I think of my work in these terms, I smile, and feel very special and honored and lucky.  No, I am not rich.  But my work is important.  In some small way, I have touched lives.  My work has taken on a life outside of me, and belongs to all of these other people now, and not just me.

And that's something that money can't buy.

Filing Your Taxes When You're A Playwright

Greetings, and welcome to theater is a sport.  My name is Bobby Keniston, and this is my little piece of the internet to talk about all things theater.  Yay for me.  Got some thoughts, get a blog--- why not?

I tend to write about what's on my mind for this blog, and what's on my mind right now is taxes, since the filing deadline is tomorrow (April 15th).  Now, taxes and theater do not an exciting combination make, but, there are a few things I learned as a playwright for schools and community theaters (the "amateur" market, as it is annoyingly called) about filing taxes made from royalties that not everyone may know, so I figured I would pass it along today.

First off, if one of the companies you're published with pays royalties only once a year, then they will send you your tax information with your royalty payments.  Others that pay twice, or quarterly, will send them out with the last payment you get of the calendar year.  The forms they send you are 1099-Misc forms, for "Miscellaneous Income".  The only boxes that will have anything in them are the payers address, the payer's federal identification number, the recipient's identification number (SSN), and then box number 2 for Royalties.

Here's the important thing to remember from this blog:  nothing is withheld from your royalties.  No Federal Income Tax, no State Income Tax, no medicare or anything like that.  This fact, of course, makes a big difference in how one handles their money.

Since nothing is withheld from your royalties, that means Uncle Sam is going to want his cut come tax time.  I know some playwrights and other artists under the 1099-Misc will make quarterly payments to the IRS, a kind of withholding as soon as they receive their funds.  But most people I know, myself included, just set aside money as soon as we receive our royalties.  If I get a payment from one of my publishers in October, and say it's for $1,200.00, I will 20% and tuck it into an account that won't be touched, so that I can have it ready to pay my taxes if need be.  I found that 20% is a good enough number for me that covers the bases.  Of course, I'm very poor, so I don't have to pay too much in too often, but, you get the idea.  So, with this $1,200.00 check, I would take $240.00 of it and squirrel it away.  Not necessarily a great feeling at the time, but better than worrying about paying it down the road when it's already been spent on your new sunglasses and meal or two at a restaurant with your sweetheart.

I do the same with every check I receive for royalties.  A simple, clean 20%.

A few other things to think about:

Since being a playwright means you are your business, think about saving receipts for certain items that are for your business--- obviously paper, printer ink, writing supplies will add up over time.  Certainly any travel expenses, like to a theater conference to make connections and hawk your scripts should be able to be used as deductions.  I once heard that going to the theater as "inspiration" and "keeping abreast of market trends" can be deducted by playwrights, but in all honesty, I've never tried.  That would certainly be cool though, wouldn't it?

So, that's all I really have on the subject.  If you're a 1099-MISC like myself, and you have other suggestions, please comment below.  Hey, tell me I'm wrong, if you want to.  I've only done what has worked for me over the years, and would be happy to hear other ways of handling our precious money.

All the best to you, and thanks for reading!  Not the most glamorous post, but I hope you found it somewhat helpful.

Playwrights for the Youth and High School Markets

Welcome to Theater is a Sport, my humble place on the internet to talk about all things theater. My name is Bobby Keniston, and I often introduce myself as a playwright for the youth and high school markets, and I'm telling the truth when I do.  I have thirty or so plays published for young people (with many that have crossover appeal for community theaters), and you can learn more about them by clicking HERE, or HERE, or HERE, or HERE.  

Now that I've gotten that self-promotion out of the way, today I would like to talk about playwrights for the youth, high school, and community theater markets.  Not just because I am one, but also because, to be frank, I don't think writers in this market get much attention or acclaim, but I'm convinced that what we do is not only vitally important to the survival of all theater in general, but important contributions to our overall culture at large.  And no, I don't just believe this so I can feel better talking about what I do at Thanksgiving while other family members have promotions and raises to go on about in conversation.

So what is a playwright for the youth and high school markets?  Well, quite simply, it is a person who writes plays to be performed either for or by children and/or high school students.  These are two types of what are known as "amateur markets", simply meaning that they are plays written for non-professionals to perform. I don't love the term "amateur market"  In truth, I've seen so-called "amateur" productions, both from schools and community theaters, that could really knock anyone's socks off, so there's nothing wrong with being an inspired amateur onstage, and yet, I find the term a bit condescending.  

So who decides what makes a play for the "amateur market"?  Well, once again, it simply means that it is a play that is designed mostly to have non-professional productions, and, perhaps, has never had a professional production (there are, of course, exceptions to this).  Yet, on the other, hand, many schools and community theaters do plays outside of the amateur market all the time.  For example, The Actor's Nightmare by Christopher Durang has been a very popular one act with high schools for years, though it was written to be a companion piece with his longer one act Sister Mary Ignatius Explains it All For You, to complete an evening of theater for an Off-Broadway run.  And, there's Almost, Maine, by John Cariani, which is now one of the most produced plays by schools and community theaters across the United States, and it started out Off-Broadway and in regional theaters.  Not to mention the plethora of schools who have performed plays by Neil Simon, or productions of Our Town by Thornton Wilder.  So, who decides?  The writers, in terms of their intended audiences, and the publishers, in terms of how they market the play.

The types of plays and playwrights I'm talking about, who focus a great deal of their energy on the youth and high school markets, are the ones who are found in the catalogs sent out to drama teachers across the world every fall and spring.  The names that keep popping up in the glossy tomes mailed out by Pioneer, Eldridge, Brooklyn Publishers, Playscripts, Inc. (in the youth and high school section), Heuer, Big Dog Plays, Dramatic Publishing and so forth.  Growing up, my father was a drama teacher and director for middle schools, and I would always look through these catalogs.  names like Tim Kelly, Craig Sodaro, Pat Cook, and many others would pop up over and over again.  I knew their names long before I had ever heard of Harold Pinter, Eugene O'Neill, or even Neil Simon.

Tim Kelly published over 350 plays in his life, and he died at the age of 67.  While he was alive, his plays were performed over 6,000 times a year, and were translated into almost a dozen languages.  His easy-to-produce, flexible cast plays were everywhere.  Google his name, and you will see a headline from when he passed away by Playbill magazine:  TIM KELLY, PROLIFIC PLAYWRIGHT FOR AMATEUR MARKET, DEAT AT 67.  Mr. Kelly was thought to be the most published playwright in America.  He studied at Emerson College, and got his MFA in Playwriting from Yale.  He talked a great deal about making a living writing plays for the "Way, way, way off Broadway markets".  He also admitted that critics would never like him or take him seriously.

Here's the deal, though:  how many of us read The Cat in the Hat or Green Eggs and Ham before we ever read a novel?  I would say most of us.  How many of us read books like Charlotte's Web and Harriet the Spy before we ever read Great Expectations?  Nowadays, which is a kid most likely to read first--- the new Magic Tree House chapbook or The Lord of the Flies?  One might say there's a natural progression in a reader's life from Flat Stanley to the works of Beverly Cleary to mid-grade readers to Catcher in the Rye to Dickens, Tolstoy and Balzac.  And chances are, young folks tackle Goosebumps before they jump into Stephen King and Edgar Allan Poe.

I cite these examples in the progression of a readers life for one simple person:  no one calls young people "amateur readers".  Even Young Adult fiction is called just that--- Young Adult.  And while writers like Beverly Cleary, Louis Sachar, John Green, and Judy Blume may never be mentioned in the same reverential way people talk about Philip Roth, John Updike, or Joyce Carol Oates, their work is still celebrated, and people are able to glean the importance of work for young readers, and accept them by and large as literature.  There's even a National Book Award given each year for a book designed for young readers.

In my opinion, and completely from my perspective, I don't believe, outside of drama teachers, that people truly understand what goes into writing a play for the youth and high school markets.  We don't just dive in because we figure it will be easier to write for kids than adults. It's not.  People can argue about the merits of a Tim Kelly play, and I may grant that many follow a certain formula, but, speaking as a playwright, it is not easy to write a play with speaking parts for at least 20 kids, that can also be doubled if necessary, and to move this story through a dramatic arc with simple settings, and appropriate dialogue.  It is not a simple task.  It takes work, creativity and imagination.

Those of us who write for the youth and high school markets do so because we believe in the importance of theater in education.  Just as a readers' life progresses as they grow up, so does a performers'. Plays for young audiences are important.  Young actors need scripts that were written for them, with them in mind.  So do community theater groups.  My name might never be mentioned next to Harold Pinter or Edward Albee's, but I would like to think my work is one of many gateways that inspire a kid to grow up and read these men's fine work.

I am hereby suggesting these alternatives for the term "amateur market":  how about "the thespian-in-training market"?  Or maybe "Future Stars market?"

Perhaps we can just call it the "Youth and High School Market" and realize that it's just as important as any other market?

Thanks for reading.  If you have any thoughts, comments, or suggestions for alternatives to "amateur maket", please feel free to share them in the comments section below.

Playwriting Contests and the Myth of Exposure

WINNER!!!!!!!

That's a nice feeling, isn't it? To be a winner.  Whether it's $20 from a scratch off or first prize in a pie-eating contest, it feels nice to win something.  

For playwrights, it is an especially nice feeling, since, to be honest, we tend to lose so often. The writer isn't really the top of the food chain, unless you already have a name like Mamet, Albee, or Kushner.  

Oh, boy.  I almost hesitate to write this post, because I know plenty of folks will disagree with me. But hey, no one's forcing me to share my thoughts on a public platform, right?  So, if you read this post and disagree with me, feel free to post in the comments below (I ask only that you keep it clean, as this is intended to be an educational blog).

Every year, playwrights all over the world enter playwriting contests, hoping against hope that, unlike the slush pile of submissions at theaters and producers' offices, their play will have a chance to stand out and even to win.  And we all need a win now and again.  And after all, if you're paying an entry (reader's) fee, you know you work is going to be read and thoughtfully considered, right?

Let's not get ahead of ourselves.

I used to enter a great deal of playwriting contests, but I don't anymore.  The biggest reason is that I can't afford to.  Seriously.  Even some of the smaller entry fees ($10 or $15) add up, if you're entering a whole bunch of them.  And I have found that the prizes offered are just not secure enough for me or my checking account to take the risk.  

Before I offend anyone, let me first say that there are number of great playwriting contests out there which offer a great deal to a playwright, and are definitely worth considering submitting to.  There are theaters that are genuinely looking for new and upcoming talent, and exciting, fresh plays, and hold these contests in the hopes of discovering an unheard voice in the business. I salute these contests.  

Many playwriting contests, however, are simply fundraisers for the theater or group that is holding it. There is nothing wrong with this. There are plenty of worse fundraisers for a theater to have than one which offers a chance for an unproduced playwright to get their moment in the spotlight.  And I will be the first to admit that theaters need all the fundraising they can get, and, in order to keep theater solvent and relevant in our society, theaters, especially regional, little and community theaters, need to keep their doors open.  

But not to the extent where artists and writers are disrespected and, quite frankly, cheated.  

There was a contest I used to enter for a college theater company, that offered a first prize of $1,000.00 and a production, and offered a second prize of $500, and a third of $250, with possible productions for the runner ups.  I found this to be a contest worth entering, though I never won, and the reading fee was $25. I imagine this contest was flooded with submissions, as the prizes were pretty impressive, and the college was a moderately famous one with a well-known theater program. I encourage playwrights to enter such contests, I really do.

More and more, as I look through the list of playwriting contests I find on Reddit and other places, I see theaters offering a contest with a reading fee, where the prize is a production of  the winning play. If you look closely at some of these contests guidelines, they reserve the right not to select a winner, even.  But, if you do win, your play is produced at their theater, and you gain exposure for your play! Isn't that great?  And, now, you can add an "AWARDS/HONORS" section to your resume!  But does it say that you will receive any royalties from this prize-winning production?

I'm really not trying to be flip or sarcastic here, I promise.  The one award I have ever won through my playwriting, is, in fact, listed proudly on my resume, and, is included in cover letters for submissions to theaters and producers.  As I said before, we all need a win from time to time. However, what playwrights should also want, all of the time, is for their work and career to be treated like any other profession, and to be compensated accordingly.  I'm not saying a playwriting contest is only worth entering if the grand prize is $1000 or even $500.  What I'm saying is, in order to be a professional playwright, you need to be treated like a professional playwright and be paid for your work. It's not unreasonable to expect this. 

But what about exposure, you may ask?  Yes, playwrights need exposure for their work, this is true. And, yes, perhaps there are some circumstances where giving your work away for free in exchange for exposure for you play could be wise. If your play is going to be produced in an Off-Broadway venue, or a regional theater with a great reputation, reviewed by the New York Times and other major publications, then, yeah, that may just be a contest worth submitting to for no financial recompense. However, it is my belief that major venues are actually the types of places, by and large, that respect their artists enough to pay them what they deserve.

But any exposure is good exposure, right?  I mean, it doesn't have to be a huge venue to make it worthwhile.

I don't know.  Yes, it is good for playwrights to be produced.  I won't deny that. We all want to see our work performed, or at least know our work is being performed.  And yes, we should all support the little and community theaters across the country.

Still, it is my firm belief that we should support the arts only to the extent that an arts organization supports artists. Why should writers work for free when no one else is expected to?  Why should I support an arts organization that doesn't support my work, or value it enough to write a check for it? Is this organization really worth supporting, if they pay a professional in the industry with simply "exposure"?

My answer is no.  You can't claim to be a supporter of the arts if you're not supporting artists.  I repeat myself only because I believe this strongly.  

Unfortunately, it looks like I am in the minority.  Plenty of theaters receive enough submissions to such contests, because there are so many playwrights who are willing to exchange their work for exposure. Again, I understand this.  It's like submitting your short story to a literary journal that pays you in complimentary copies.  Hey, at least your work is out there, right?  And playwrights face so much rejection, an inherent desperation can grow inside, a need to see their work on a stage, a need to be validated, to be good enough. Only, unlike literary journals, there's no way to gauge what the "circulation" or audience size your production is going to be exposed to.  And, honestly, chances are, no one with any clout in the industry is going to be watching, who will then call you up and say, "Hey, I saw a production of your play at the So-and-So community theater... let's take it Broadway!"

I think my major problem with playwrights giving their work away for free is that, I feel, in some ways,  it strips away the validity of playwriting as a career, as work that is created to make a living. It gives a craft and art form that I take very seriously the scent of a pursuit followed by a an eternal hobbyist, one who is happy enough to sit at the kids' table and have their report card hung on the fridge with a "good job" magnet. Playwrights who are willing to give their work away for free devalues all playwrights who want to make a living. Personally, I think my work is worth more than a bumper sticker for my parents car that reads "PROUD PARENT OF A PRODUCED (BUT STONY BROKE) PLAYWRIGHT". 

So often, playwrights bemoan the state of affairs in the industry, how impossible it feels to get ahead, to make a living doing what we love to do. Perhaps the beginning of change comes with playwrights, en masse, believing in their work enough to expect payment.  At least something.  Say no too much and you'll starve, but they gotta give us something. Look at the reality of giving away your work to a contest, and even paying to give it away, and ask, Does this really validate my pursuit as an artist? Does this really make me feel like a winner?

If it does, go for it.  However, I would recommend to any playwright to save the money they would spend on contest entry fees this year, and instead, put that money into producing your play yourself. Make friends at local community theater, see if they'll let you use the space for a 50/50 split at the door. Get your actor buddies to help you out.  I promise you, more than likely, the experience will be just as valuable as winning a small contest somewhere.  You'll get to see your work live, in front of an audience, and you'll have more control over how it's presented.  You may not make a profit, but even if you break even or lose a few bucks, the experience will be worth it (I can say this, because it always has been for me).  Invite every newspaper in the surrounding areas to review it.  Create your own press kit. Blast it all over social media.  Make audience feedback cards, the works.  Doing this makes the production all about your play, and not about a theater's fundraiser.  And you get the joy of knowing you were proactive, and the final result is that your play had a production and you can see what works and what doesn't.  This is your work.  Don't wait for "them" to discover it and give it "exposure".  Expose yourself.  (Okay, that doesn't sound quite right...)

Again, I'm not saying do away with contests altogether.  Just read the fine print.  Make sure it is a contest that respects you.  Because if it doesn't, it's not a contest worthy of your respect or your work.  

Taking Matters in Your Own Hands: Self-Producing and its Benefits for Playwrights

The Original Cast of  The Re-Programming of Jeremy rehearsing

Greetings everyone, and welcome to Theater is a Sport.  Yesterday, I talked about writing a play with a message, and how and why I wrote my play The Re-Programming of Jeremy.  If you would like to read that post before reading this one, you can click HERE.  Today, is kind of a Part 2 about the life of a play of mine that means so much to me, and still remains unpublished.

So, to pick up:  I had written the first draft of Jeremy, and rather quickly.  I let a few special people read it, and then sent it to an editor of mine to see about publication.  Yes, I know that might seem strange--- in the professional theater, writers always seek productions long before publication.  I must confess, though, that, as a writer for the amateur market mostly (schools and community theater), most of my plays are published before there is ever a production of them.  It's just the nature of my little slice of the business.

In any case, the editor didn't want to publish it.  While he admitted it was a good play, he thought the subject matter a bit too dark, and way too controversial for the school market.  I disagreed, and still do--- gay teen suicide is something that happens. Bullying is something that happens. Misguided religious zealotry is something that happens.  And plays can be a great way to open up discussion about all of these matters.

I did have some doubts, though, not about the subject matter, but the play itself.  Did the structure work?  Would this series of monologues actually play, or would it drag?  And really, with questions such as these, there's only one way to find the answer.  You have to see it in production.

So I decided to produce the play myself.  Something I had never done before.  And, of course, I had no start up capital, and no real idea on how to go about it, but, what the heck?  I had to see the show on its feet, and do my best to get it in front of an audience.

My first step was to create a little production company, which was really a "Bobby Keniston Doing Business As" company.  I went to the Town Office and filled out the paperwork, so I could open a bank account for my "business".  I opened it with $25, the minimum amount out of my own pocket. And then I got to work.

I figured, since I had no money to pay anyone, I would direct the play myself.  I am blessed to have a great number of actor friends I have met over the years with my experiences in community theater, and I asked people to read the script and to be involved with the show.  I was elated that so many said yes.  The original cast was Alyson Saunders, Michael Pullen, Hannah Weston, Sue Burke, Lucas Bret Boffin, and Raelene Keniston (my mom).  I had difficulty finding someone to play the role of Jeremy's father, so, I wound up playing the part, because time was ticking away.

The theater I grew up at, which was literally my summer home all through my youth, and now, my adult years, is a beautiful, historic place called Lakewood Theater.  (You should CLICK HERE to learn more about them, after you read this post).   The general manager is Jeffrey Quinn, who has watched me grow up, and is a dear friend of mine.  Even still, I was nervous to approach him with a proposition.  You have to understand, one of the most expensive parts of mounting your own production can be rental fees for a stage or space.  And Lakewood Theater, which was designed way back in the day to be a Broadway style venue in Maine, would normally cost quite a bit of money to rent.  Much smaller venues, even in Maine, can charge up to $500 a night.  So, I was nervous about making my pitch to Jeff, which was basically, "Hey, Jeff, after Lakewood's last show of the season, can I use the space before you close up for the winter?  I'll split the door with you, 50/50."  He told me yes immediately.  I will always be grateful to him for that.

It helped tremendously that the play was simple to stage--- all we had to do was represent seven different spaces with a piece of furniture and a few props.  At the last minute, a cast member got a friend to run the spotlight for us, and we were good to go.

Though I had never done it before, I jumped into marketing.  I emailed someone I knew from the Morning Sentinel, a newspaper out of Central Maine, and he got me in touch with a reporter who came to one of our rehearsals and talked to us and took pictures (the photo above).  I expected a little story in a sidebar somewhere, and would have been happy with that, but, to my surprise, the story of my play was on the front page, the picture above the fold, with the headline:  "A Play For Our Times at Lakewood Theater".  Above the fold!  My cast and I couldn't believe it.  (I could believe a lot of the negative comments on the online article's page, though--- people writing in that the play was a "gay fluff piece", and that bullying wasn't really a problem.  I expected that.)

As with most low-no budget theater, the cast did far more than was expected of them, including securing their own costumes and many  of the props.  It is not hyperbole to say that each one of those wonderful people owned that first production just as much as I did.  It belonged to them, because they came to it with such love and belief in the story (and belief in me), and they will always be some of my favorite people in the world because of it.  I count them all as my friends, and something even more, something that can only happen when a group of people create something together.

During the rehearsal process, I decided that we waited too long to see Jeremy, the title character. He had one big monologue near the end.  I came up with the idea to have him almost "haunt" some of the other characters speeches, and even say lines with them.  I found this to have a poignant effect, and it got the wheels turning for a re-write.

We performed at Lakewood Theater September 30th-October 1st, 2011.  We had a good turnout, which included a Catholic youth group, and members from Equality, ME.  As advertised, after each performance, there was a discussion between cast and crew and audience, which was magical.  We talked about the issues of bullying, tolerance, acceptance,  The audience would ask questions and I would try to answer them as best as I could.  I was, once again, very impressed with my cast and how eloquently they answered questions directed at them, particularly the seventeen year old boy who played Jeremy.

After the success of those two shows at Lakewood, I brought Jeremy to my hometown theater, Center Theatre, in November of that same year, with most of the same cast.  Hannah was unable to reprise her role, but another excellent actress stepped in and took the part, by the name of Marisa Murray. Marisa immediately gelled with the cast, and her own take on the role, which, while different from Hannah's, was equally effective.

So...

I had performed the play four times, and had some ideas.  I let a few more people read the script.  A good playwright friend of mine named Bradley Hayward (you should check him out by CLICKING HERE) read it, and said he liked it a lot, but was wondering if there were a way to make Jeremy more active.  I agreed.

I wrote subsequent drafts, and started the play with Jeremy, talking directly to the audience. This improved the play's structure as well.  Now, we had a Jeremy who WANTED something.  He wanted to know who he was, he wanted to hear his story through others' mouths, so that he could put it all to rest.  This made a big difference.

This revised draft sat on a shelf for a while, until I was contacted by David Valdes of St. Paul's School in New Hampshire, who wanted to read the script.  He had somehow heard of the play through the different articles written about it in Maine newspapers. He read the script, asked if he could produce it with his high school group, and I had the pleasure of travelling down to see it.  St. Paul's was very kind to me, providing me a lovely guest room, and the opportunity to talk to some amazing students who worked really hard in bringing my play to life.

Since then, there has been interest in The Re-Programming of Jeremy in other places and media. Some wonderful folks in Delaware are trying to raise money to make an independent feature film of it.  I adapted the play into a screenplay, and found the opportunity to address other concerns about the piece.  I had received criticism that the play was against religion because of the extreme character of Rev. Becky Martin.  I never intended this, of course, as I actually identify myself as a Christian.  So I added the part of Pastor Tom, who was only mentioned in the original script, as a more compassionate view of Christianity, and, I added the character of the Vice Principal at Jeremy's high school, again, only referred to in the original, to take some of the heat off of Rev. Becky, by being someone who truly didn't care for Jeremy.  I incorporated a great deal of these changes into the stage play as well.

Right now, I feel, after five years and several rewrites, that The Re-Programming of Jeremy is in great shape, and, it remains a play that I am very proud of.  Had I never produced it myself, I may have never been able to make it the best play that it could be.  This is why I encourage playwrights who are frustrated to find ways to produce their own work.  It teaches you so much, and, you get to see first hand what works and what could be stronger in your script.  It also gives you the joy of seeing your creation come to fruition, and you can't really put a dollar sign on that.

So, while it's true that the play has never been published, The Re-Programming of Jeremy has taken on its own life, and is a play that has effected audiences.  If you're a producer for community theater or school drama, and would be interested in reading the script, feel free to drop me a line at theater.is.a.sport@gmail.com.  The licensing fees are negotiable, as it is a play that I would love to see reach more an more audiences.

Thanks for taking the time to read my post.  Have a great day.