A GREAT PLAY FOR HALLOWEEN MONTH: I Interview Bradley Walton About Their Play, "Villains and Zombies"

 

Angry Zombie Nate Feleke, Photo by Sophia Kurzius

Here we are, Halloween Month still marching on to the final big day, and it is time for me to talk about another play that I think is perfect to produce during the scary season. It is called Villains and Zombies, by my playwright pal Bradley Walton. The show is unique in that it takes the idea of super villains, which we are all familiar with in comics and movies and television, and places them on stage. I was completely fascinated at the idea of directing a graphic novel in a theatrical setting, something one does not get the chance to do very often--- add in the horror element with zombies, some philosophical discussions about redemption, and flawed but relatable characters (not to mention the chance for some disgusting zombie makeup), and you have a perfect show that presses all of my geek buttons.

When I first started publishing plays, I reached out to playwrights who were being published in my market for advice and commiseration, not really expecting people to get back to me. I was mistaken--- most of them did write back to me, but Bradley did even better by calling me up, chatting with me for the better part of an hour and giving me advice and telling me about their experience in the business.

Bradley was generous enough to take the time and answer some questions about the writing of Villains and Zombies, comics, and why zombies are so scary.

Playwright Bradley Walton

BOBBY: One of the reasons I wanted to direct Villains and Zombies is because I loved comics growing up, and your rarely see superhero (or in this case, super villain) stories told on the stage. I know you've forgotten more about comics than I will ever know, and I'm curious what inspired you to take a comic book type story like this (or your excellent play Higher Power) and create it specifically for the stage?

BRADLEY: My answer to this is probably going to be horribly disappointing. Basically, I needed to write a play for my school that year (as I do every year) and a comic book-type story is what was rolling around in my head. Ditto for Higher Power. You can tell any genre of story on the stage, you just have to adapt it to fit within your resources and what’s possible in a live performance environment. That can be constraining, but it can also inspire you to get creative. It also forces you to focus on character rather than the fantastical action stuff, which was fine with me because I was much more interested in exploring how having super powers influenced who the characters were as people.  So it was largely a matter of “This is what I’m going to write this year” and it just happened to be a comic book-style story.

BOBBY: One of my favorite special series when I was collecting was Batman Vs. Predator, in large part because it combined my beloved Batman with a horror creature like Predator. I also collected a Dracula comic series and a brief run of Morbius the Vampire. Were there any specific comics with elements of horror that inspired your writing of Villains and Zombies? Why do you think superhero stories tend to blend so well with elements of the horror genre?

BRADLEY: Funny you should mention Dracula. I used to collect sketches of Dracula that I commissioned from artists at comic book conventions. It was something everyone was familiar with and felt free to put their own spin on, so it made for a good subject. But to answer the question...no, not that I’m aware of.  I’m actually not much of a horror fan at all.  (Very much in contrast to my kid.)  I’m pretty sure I was reading The Walking Dead at that point, but I have zero recollection of it rattling around in my head at all as I was working on this.  (In contrast, J. Michael Straczynski’s Supreme Power was definitely rattling around in my head.) The zombies were really just a device to put a group of deeply flawed characters in a desperate situation that would force them to reevaluate themselves and undergo significant personal growth in a very short period of time.  But I do think horror and superheroes blend well, and that’s because they can both involve fantastical elements.  If you can accept that a person has super powers, then using those powers to fight reanimated corpses isn’t a stretch at all.  Ditto for giving those powers to reanimated corpses, which Marvel has done in its Marvel Zombies comics and also recently on the animated What If…? series.

Full Cast photo from Foxcroft Academy's production, 2014

BOBBY: Another reason I loved producing the play with my high school group was that it led to a great deal of interesting discussions and character work. Many heavy and important themes are in this, which, to be honest, surprised a great number of my colleagues who came to see the show. They did not expect a play about villains battling zombies to carry themes such as redemption, the shades of gray between good and evil, loyalty, loss, guilt and even how a marital relationship can strain and break. Can you tell me a bit about how you decided to explore these kinds of themes through this story and these characters?

 BRADLEY:  Aside from the two main characters and their ex-marital relationship that serves as the backbone of play, along with the basic concept, setting, and the ending... everything was made up on the fly as I wrote, and I wrote pretty quickly.  It was kind of amazing.  I’d just reach blindly into my head for the next thing that I needed and there it was.  And very little revision was needed afterwards.  So it really wasn’t a conscious decision to explore those themes, so much as “that’s just what came out.”  As to why that’s what came out, I’d say it was because I was a fan of dark, character-driven superhero comics, so that’s where my brain went.  It probably helped that I knew exactly how the play would end, and I was always writing with that specific direction in mind.

With respect to the divorced couple who are the play’s two main characters...I’m very happily married and have been for 25 years.  When I write about couples in relationships, to some extent I’m always drawing on my relationship with my wife.  The two characters in the play had a marriage that was grounded in causing mayhem together as super villains.  They were forced to go into hiding when something happened that made the world too dangerous to be a super villain, and without the mayhem, their marriage fell apart.  But they still love each other.  I can relate to that.  I can write that.  So I did. 

BOBBY: What do you think it is about zombies that makes them so scary to us, but also so very popular in our entertainment?

BRADLEY:  They’re people.  Or at least, they used to be.  They could be someone we love.  They could be us.  We can easily see a dark reflection of ourselves in them, which is what makes them great metaphors for other things...mindless consumers, mindless followers of some particular ideology, mindless pretty-much-anything-you-can-think-of.  They’re not complicated or difficult to understand.  They can be physically horrific to look at....or not.  Zombies are incredibly versatile.

BOBBY:  And finally: what advice do you have for any school or community theater group out there that is interested in producing Villains and Zombies?  (Note:  As someone who has directed a popular production in my home town, I highly recommend it!)

BRADLEY:  When I did the play with a group of high school students, they had some difficulty relating to the characters.  The super powers had nothing to do with it.  It was the grounded-in-the-real-world stuff...marriage, divorce, reconciling, going into hiding, giving up the thing that gives your life meaning, being a criminal, choosing to be something other than what you’ve been  your entire life...they had very little personal experience to draw on relating to these things.  So if you’re doing this play with younger actors (or even older ones), plan to spend some time working on them getting to know and understand their characters.  

From a purely technical standpoint, there’s some offstage dialogue at the end of the play that’s easy for the audience to miss because there’s a lot going on.  Make sure that dialogue is clear, audible, and try to find appropriate beats in the action to insert it.

Also, if I was writing the play today, I would probably have given the two main characters different super villain names than North and South, because I feel like in the current political climate, those words have become more readily associated with the Civil War. I used those names because I associated them with cold and hot. No Civil War connection is implied or should be inferred.

Leah Word and Gabriel Piquette as Malin and Monstro, respectively

Again, I want to thank Bradley for taking the time to answer my questions, and to highly recommend Villains and Zombies for production. My students had a blast. I produced the play in 2014, and just a few years ago, one of the students from the show made a long post on social media about how lucky and grateful he was to be in a play that combined super villains and zombies while in high school, making the point that it is so rare to be able to portray something so cool in a high school play.

Now that's a positive impression!

If you would like to learn more about Bradley's work, and you are in luck because there is a whole lot of it!, you can do so by clicking the links below:

BRADLEY'S PLAYS AT BROOKLYN PUBLISHERS

BRADLEY'S PLAYS AT ELDRIDGE

BRADLEY'S PLAYS AT THEATREFOLK

BRADLEY'S PLAYS AT PLAYSCRIPTS, INC.

BRADLEY'S PLAYS AT BIG DOG PLAYS

BRADLEY'S PLAYS AT HEUER

BRADLEY'S PLAYS AT YouthPLAYS

And if you would like to learn about my spooky comedy for younger audiences, Are We Scared Yet?, you can do so by CLICKING HERE

Please comment below with the titles of your favorite Halloween Month plays!

And feel free to visit my book review blog, "My Only Friends Are Books" by CLICKING HERE

PLAYS FOR HALLOWEEN MONTH!: A look at "The Canterville Ghost" by John Vreeke, adapted from the novella by Oscar Wilde

 

Mariah (as Virginia Otis) and Bob (as the Canterville Ghost) in a production I directed for Lakewood Theater in Madison, Maine. "When a golden girl can win/Prayer from out the lips of sin"

The Canterville Ghost by John Vreeke is a most faithful adaptation of Oscar Wilde's story, as, in fact, it takes much of Wilde's prose and splits it up among the characters. It is a piece, much like readers theater, where the cast simultaneously narrates the story and acts it out, often picking up cues mid-sentence from one another. It was challenging to direct such a piece, and, I daresay, challenging for my actors as well (though I can say with all honesty that they all did a wonderful job). The flow is of utmost importance, and the script is a valuable lesson of looking and listening, so vital for every actor. 

If you are not aware of the story, it involves an American family by the name of Otis moving into a haunted manor house in England in the late 1800s. The house is haunted by Lord Canterville, an actor who murdered his wife in 1587. The house comes with a very serious housekeeper and butler, who warn the American family that they are moving in with a ghost. The family is nonplussed, and, part of the humor in Wilde's story is the fact that our Canterville ghost cannot scare these Americans, not even with the pool of blood that reappears even after it is scrubbed away daily.. It is also very playful in terms of the difference between Americans and the British. Even during his most extreme haunting of the family, the Canterville Ghost must endure the indignity of the family's father telling him to oil his chains, and the young rascal twins (patriotically named Stars and Stripes) hitting him with their pea shooter. 

The ghost being attacked by the family after a failed haunting

The heart of the play is in the relationship between Virginia Otis, around 16, and the Ghost himself. There is a prophecy that goes like this:

"When a golden girl can win
Prayer from out the lips of sin,
When the barren almond tree bears
And a child gives away its tears,
Then shall all the house be still
And peace come to Canterville."

Virginia is sensitive, an artist herself who has some lovely moments with the deceased and hammy actor. Here, the humor shifts into a poignant, lovely examination of death, the type really only Wilde can pull off. "The Ghost is so very tired. And it is Virginia who helps to release him, and bring the aforementioned peace to Canterville--- and not just the estate. 

Again, Mr. Vreeke's adaptation is not without challenges, but it is a rewarding piece that I enjoyed directing immensely.  You can find the rights to it by visiting Concord Theatricals--- simply 
CLICK HERE

If you're looking for a funny, spooky take on urban legends and ghost stories for younger audiences, check out my play ARE WE SCARED YET? by CLICKING HERE

What are some plays that get you in the Halloween spirit? Comment and let me know!

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!

LEARNING FROM STUDENTS: AN INTERVIEW WITH LILY BRAY, HIGH SCHOOL ACTRESS

 

Above, you will find a video about Erskine Academy's theater program in my home state of Maine, under the direction of Mr. Nored.  Last year, Mr. Nored and his wonderful group of students presented my play Confession: Kafka in High School for the state high school one-act play competitions. Even though I have lived in Maine for most of my life, my plays are rarely produced in my home state: I can count on one hand the number of productions of my plays in Maine that I haven't directly been a part of myself. So it was exciting for me to see that they were putting on my play, particularly since it is one of my personal favorites.

Time and again, the universe likes to tell us that, as Disney Land says, it's a small world after all, and not only was Erskine Academy putting on my play, but one of the actors, who also served as a student director, was the daughter Heidi Bray (who I knew as Heidi Ryder), a high school friend I was in a number of plays with lo those many years ago! Knowing that the daughter of a friend I had fond memories of going to one-act competitions with was now in a competition play written by me was surprisingly moving for me and gave me an interesting sense of... I don't know.... perhaps symmetry is the best word. 

Heidi is the blonde young lady... I'm the short guy being strangled affectionately

Heidi's daughter is named Lily, who at the time of this writing is a senior and an honor student.  Since I know her Mom and her grandmother, I thought this might be an opportunity for me to connect to an actual student who was recently in one of my plays and get direct feedback about her experience, what she and her cast mates found engaging, and to hear her thoughts about the piece as a whole. Since I no longer teach but still write a great deal for high school students, I felt this would be good for me and good for my writing--- particularly since I have been toying with the idea of writing a companion piece to Confession which would feature the character that Lily portrayed (a character named Miss Delisle, a principal at a high school, who is actually one of my favorite characters I have written in a play for students).  Lily kindly agreed to meet with me via Zoom (how else do people meet nowadays) to chat about her experience. The fact that she was not only a performer in the piece but a student director as well (something I think is a great thing for Mr. Nored to do, giving students these creative leadership roles) gave an extra layer of insight. 

Lily has always been interested in theater. Her middle school only had a theater program for one year when she was there, but she loved it and decided to shadow the drama class at Erskine when she had the chance for a "move up day".  As soon as she was a freshman, she got into her drama class, and through the drama class, got involved with the theater club.

Confession: Kafka in High School was my attempt to make themes explored in works like Kafka's The Trial  relatable to high school students, by having a character named Connor K (or Constance K when performed by someone who identifies by a female, like in Erskine's production) wake up to find himself or herself in a conference room at the the high school, accused by Ms. Delisle of having done something against the rules and being told to confess to his or her crimes. The only problem is, no one will tell Connor or Constance what they are accused of. From here, it leads to some of the issues of the absurd and existentialism, as well as the nature of authority that Kafka (and many others) approach in their classic works. 

Lily tells me that she and her fellow students thought a great deal about the questions of authority and what control (or lack of control) students may have in certain situations. I asked Lily if her portrayal of Miss Delisle, who we agree is very manipulative with her authority over students, was inspired by any real-life experiences. 

"When she is tearing the students apart, that is definitely a real life thing," she told me. "Not all teachers, but some teachers, will use their power to scare you into things.... No teacher has ever done this to me, but I have seen it happen, teachers using their authoritative control. Miss Delisle used her power to get what she wanted in the end."

Lily is rightfully proud of decisions she and her production mates made in terms of the set. One such decision I absolutely loved was adding pet door in the set for a character named Mr. Demetri, Miss Delilse's vice principal and yes-man. It resembles a doggie door, and is used only by this character who acts like lap dog to the character. It is a perfect example of making a choice that is not in the script (largely because I would never have thought of it!) that heightens both the character and some of the more absurd and darkly comedic themes. "We wanted to play up the fact that Mr. Demetri is the complete minion of Miss Delisle," Lily said. "Whatever Miss Delisle has, he has the.. well, the Wal-Mart version, if you will.... and no one else used it but him."

I was very excited to hear some of the other choices the student directors and cast made to heighten the absurdist elements of the play. "In rehearsals we were laughing all the time as things became more and more absurd," she said, which is always good for me to hear. "Every character had an absurdist piece to their costume, and other wacky characteristics." She described a character with a tool belt that hand everything but a tool on it, as well as a teenage girl with a Santa Claus fixation, carrying a Santa bag, and sometimes sneaking in a "ho, ho, ho" on occasion, while she would replace props onstage with cans of Spaghetti-Os (that Lily then later opened up and ate uncooked with her bare hands). 

"I wish you could have seen it," she said more than once, and I wish I could have seen it, too. 

I think the most rewarding thing for me to hear was how Lily and her other student director were very much into collaboration with the rest of the cast. Giving the actors a chance to own their characters is so important, to encourage young actors to make choices and commit to them. That's is one of the most important things to learn as an actor.  And hearing that they engaged with what I was trying to do with my script while also having so much fun meant the world to me. 

Lily tells me that, like myself when I was a student, the one-act play competitions are her favorite part of the theater season. I always loved the bus rides, watching all the other plays from the other schools and meeting other like-minded theater students. My heart has gone out to theater students who haven't been able to have one-act competitions in the way they have always been because of Covid-19, and Lily, like most theater students, has felt the impact of these changes. Still, she is grateful that they found a way to put on a show and compete last winter, and she is all set to act and co-direct the one act play competition this year. 

Near the end of our conversation, I asked her a more general question about the importance of theater and the arts in her school. 

"It's so important," she told me. "Theater club has always felt like a very accepting and very safe space, and I think that's important for the school to see... I love going to theater club because it's like an escape from the rest of my day... you get to release a lot of negative energy by performing and discussing what you're doing. It's completely an awesome time."

That last sentence is also the perfect way to describe my conversation with Lily:  a completely awesome time. Hearing about her experience with her friends and cast mates was a lovely reminder of why I write plays and why I have spent so much of my life working with students. As the title from this post suggests, cliché or not, I learn more from them than I feel they could ever learn from me. It is also a reminder that, in my opinion, theater will never go out of style and will always be meaningful and vital for our culture. 

Thanks for reading my blog. If you want to read Confession: Kafka In High School or license it for a production, you can visit the Playscripts, Inc. website by CLICKING HERE.

  

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 #28 "Indians" by Arthur Kopit

 

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 #28

Indians by Arthur Kopit

If Arthur Kopit had stopped writing plays after his debut with Oh Dad, Poor Dad, Mamma's Hung You In The Closet And I'm Feelin' So Sad: A Pseudoclassical Tragifarce in a Bastard French Tradition, I would still consider him one of the most important American dramatists of his time, and, perhaps, of any time. That play proved to be prophetic about the sixties and the very notion of revolution, a theme shared in the brilliant one act play Madam Popov by Gladden Schrock. Fortunately for all of us, Kopit continued to write plays, including the brilliant Indians which I have finally read today. 

Again, I am glad that I saved it in a way, because the play seems even more relevant and tragic today as it did at the time it was written. Michael Patterson wrote in The Oxford Guide to Plays that Kopit "turned to a more serious political investigation of the white settlers' treatment of Native Americans," and that "Kopit's play was one of the first major pieces to confront the issue and to relate it to continuing genocide in South-East Asia." 

Indeed, I kept thinking as I read the play how it should be required reading in every high school in America, whether in history or English classes, with discussions about a country built on white supremacy and a notion of exceptionalism. 

Unlike Oh Dad, Poor Dad, which Kopit reportedly wrote in five days (!), Indians took a number of years to research, write, stage, rewrite, re-stage and rewrite some more (Kopit admitted this could have been a process for his entire lifetime with this particular piece). 

Indians sets out to obliterate the American myths of the wild west, our culture of "Cowboys vs. Indians," with the great white roughriders saving innocent white folks from the bloodthirsty savages with their trusty six-shooters. The play deftly cuts between Buffalo Bill's Wild West Show (something that caused a great deal of damage with its mythic nonsense of cowboy heroes, as did the dime novels of Ned Buntline, also a character in the play) and a so-called presidential commission meeting with Sitting Bull to hear their grievances about the American government's lies and broken promises to his people.  And the play also deals with the massacre at Wounded Knee and makes no bones about the fact that it was a completely politically motivated act of genocide. 

While this theater blog and this project is not meant to be political, I cannot help but say for a moment that the history of America needs to be told in honest terms. I even know people who will say it is tragic what happened, but seem to say so with a tone that suggest that it had to be this way. As Indians helps to reinforce, IT DID NOT HAVE TO BE THIS WAY. The American Government chose for it to be this way. When cheating Indigenous People out of their land, moving them to reservations, refusing to help them as promised, when all this didn't work, then there were the smallpox blankets, the massacres, the notion of wiping them out as though they were just a speedbump in progress. It did not have to be this way. Sadly, what people aren't really saying is, "It had to be this way to maintain white dominance, supremacy, and expansion." 

But back to the theater...

Kopit's final script is brilliantly structure, powerful and heartbreaking. Like his other pieces, it is also wonderfully theatrical and moves along at an exceptional pace, with brilliant dialogue, visual mastery and moment of dark and ironic humor. He clearly researched this with his heart and kept working to make it the best version of itself it could be, and it shows. 

After productions in London and Washington (with rewrites after each), Indians opened in New York on Broadway in October of 1969. Theater heavyweight Stacy Keach played Buffalo Bill, and other greats like Manu Tupou, Raul Julia, Charles Durning, and Sam Waterston appeared in it. And as much as I loved reading it, I am sure it is even more powerful to watch. 

The play was nominated for the Pulitzer Prize and a Tony Award. In 1976, Robert Altman adapted it into a movie called Buffalo Bill and the Indians, or Sitting Bull's History Lesson, which did not fare well as the country was celebrating its bicentennial.

Aruthur Kopit would also be a Pulitzer finalist for his play Wings, which also received a Tony nomination for Best Play. He would receive another Tony nomination for Best Book of a Musical for Nine, an adaptation of the film 81/2. With his Nine collaborator, he wrote the book for Phantom, an adaptation of The Phantom of the Opera that was overshadowed by Andrew Lloyd Webber's, though many critics prefer the Kopit version with music by Maury Yeston.

Sadly, Mr. Kopit passed away just this last April at the age of 83. He had been living with progressive dementia prior to his death. 

He will always be one of my heroes, and reading Indians today only solidifies my feelings on the matter. 

If you are interested in producing the play, it is licensed by Concord Theatricals, and you can learn more about it by CLICKING HERE.

Thanks for reading, and feel free to comment with your thoughts on this play or on Arthur Kopit below. If you are looking for a great Christmas play, check out A Wicked Christmas Carol, by me, which combines the worlds of Dickens and L. Frank Baum's Oz books. You can learn more by CLICKING HERE.

30 PLAYS IN 30 DAYS: BONUS PLAY "Come Down Burning" by Kia Corthron

 

Today, I have another bonus play. I read a full-length, and, tonight, read a brilliant one act play called Come Down Burning by Kia Corthron. It is in a collection called The Best American Short Plays 1993-1994, which was given to me by my high school drama coach and dear friend, Tom Lyford. 

Kia Corthron has written many plays, as well as the novel The Castle Cross the Magnet Carter which won the 2016 Center For Fiction First Novel Prize. She also wrote episodes for the television series The Jury and The Wire. 

Come Down Burning centers around two grown sisters: Skoolie, the elder sister, who is paralyzed from her waist down due to a fall from tree as a child, and Tee, the younger sister with three children, who always needs help from Skoolie. It is established that Skoolie is the strong one, despite her physical condition, and she can move around fiercely in a wooden cart her father had made for her years ago, a cart with wheels on the bottom. Already, Corthron has inverted a cliche in a terrific manner by making Skoolie the one who takes care of the family. Tee has moved in with her three children, ages 9, 6 and a baby of just 3 months, and we learn it is not the first time that Skoolie has had to take Tee in and take care of her. Tee defers to Skoolie on most things, like how best to feed the baby, and how to deal with a mean teacher who is singling out her daughter, but this begins to build a kind of resentment--- in truth, a feeling that has probably been building in Tee for years

Skoolie makes money doing hair, and also performing illegal abortions on the side. Though Tee has three children is pregnant again, we learn two of her children had died, most likely because of malnourishment brought on by poverty. Class, race and poverty is dealt with in a strong manner in this play, though not in any way that feels preachy. Tee needs to make a decision about the pregnancy, and how to move forward, and if she can even move forward without her older sister's help. 

But even more than help, she wants Skoolie's approval. 

I will not go into the ending here, only to say that it was a very powerful piece and that Corthron packs a great deal of emotion into a a short piece. Her language is also poetic, yet still feels natural and real. 

Come Down Burning had a workshop production at the Long Wharf Theatre, and then premiered at the American Place Theater in 1993. To learn more about it, or to order a copy yourself, you can CLICK HERE.

Thanks for reading, and please feel free to comment if you have any thoughts about Kia Corthron's intense one act play, or with any recommendations for plays that I may not have read or discussed. If you would like to learn more about my published plays, please CLICK HERE. 

30 PLAYS IN 30 DAYS: BONUS PLAY "This Property is Condemned" by Tennessee Williams

 

I have given myself the challenge of reading 30 plays for the 30 days of September and to write about them here on my blog. Today, after reading the Summer and Smoke, I was so taken with the Prologue featuring the Young John and Young Alma, that I went back and read Tennessee Williams' short play, This Property is Condemned. And while I will not consider it one of my 30 plays for the 30 days of September (it's probably a 15-minute read, tops, probably closer to 10), I will still discuss it here briefly. 

While Tennessee Williams is primarily known for his full-length works that made him one of the most important American playwrights of the 20th century, (particularly A Streetcar Named Desire and Cat on a Hot Tin Roof,  both winners of the Pulitzer Prize for Drama), I have always been fond of a number of his short plays for their ability to pack some serious emotional weight while being short and precise. I think This Property is Condemned is maybe the best example of this gift. 

The two-character play begins with Tom, about 12 or 13, out with his kite, and a young woman of 13 named Willie is walking down the railroad tracks with a ragged doll in one hand and sorry looking banana in the other. Willie is dressed in clothes that are too old for her, and has childishly rubbed rouge on her face. She asks Willie to hold her doll and and not talk to her until she falls off the tracks--- which she does after a few more moments. 

As the two kids talk, it is clear that Willie is not in the best of circumstances. Since her older sister Alva's death, her life has crumbled. Her sister was promiscuous with the railroad men, or so it was said. Willie's mother ran off with a man from the railroad, and her father took to drinking and disappeared. She lives alone in their house now, which has a sign on it reading: THIS PROPERTY IS CONDEMNED. She is alone, though she says she has inherited her sister's clothes and her beaux. Tom has even heard that Willie danced for one of his friends, which Willie doesn't deny. She merely said she was lonesome at the time. 

Willie is a heartbreaking character, and the short play is a perfect portrait and duet for two talented young performers. I am happy tat Williams doesn't answer every question about Willie's life, and that we don't know exactly when she is lying and when she is telling the truth. It is a fascinating short piece. 

A full-length movie was made in 1966 that expands the story and dramatizes Willie's stories about her older sister Alva. And while I have heard good things about the film, I think I prefer the short, ambiguous, yet emotional piece written for the stage. I don't think we need to see Alva's story. It's about how Alva's story brought Willie to where she is now--- that's the engaging part of it for me. 

I hope you enjoyed this bonus discussion for This Property is Condemned. Please feel free to keep on coming back to my blog.  And if you're interested in a cool new Christmas Play, you can learn about my play A Wicked Christmas Carol that combines the worlds of Dickens and of L. Frank Baum's Oz books by CLICKING HERE. 

30 PLAYS IN 30 DAYS: Play #24 "I Hate Hamlet" by Paul Rudnick

 

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 #24

I Hate Hamlet by Paul Rudnick

When I was accepted into the acting program of Boston University's School for the Arts, I was given a t-shirt that had an image of John Barrymore as Hamlet with a speech bubble proclaiming, "To B.U. or not to B.U."  I mention this not only because even after all of these years I am proud to have been accepted into such a competitive program (ah, the days when I really believed I had the talent to actually make something of myself--- but I digress), but to give you an idea how John Barrymore, of one of the big theatrical families (and yes, he is the same Barrymore as Drew) is considered one of the most famous American Hamlets. In fact, after his 101 performances as Hamlet on Broadway, he was called "the greatest living American tragedian." 

Thus, of course he appears as a ghost in Paul Rudnick's I Hate Hamlet. In a note before the text, Rudnick tells how the play was inspired because he answered an ad in the New York Times real estate section for a "medieval duplex", to find that the apartment had been occupied by Barrymore in 1917.  I Hate Hamlet is about a handsome, though somewhat bland television actor of questionable talent, Andrew Rally, who decided to audition for Hamlet in the park after his television series was cancelled. He has rented a new apartment in New York, and, lo and behold, it once belonged to Barrymore. After a wacky seance (that, truthfully, doesn't feel earned) run by his wacky real estate agent, Barrymore is summoned---- though what really brought him back was to help the young actor prepare for the greatest role in the English-speaking theater. And whether teaching him the best way to stuff his tights, or performing Hamlet's speech to the Players, he succeeds in teaching this nervous young actor the transformative power of the Bard. 

It's a witty play, with some genuine laughs and a truly New York state of mind--- it's no mistake that Andrew's old TV director shows up with his coarse Los Angeles views to try to save Andrew from this "theater thing." And while occasionally some of the characters seem a bit one-dimensional and over-the-top, tis can be forgiven as it is a play about the theater and being larger than life. And in truth, I am wired to appreciate a play that honestly believes there is a transformative power in the art of Shakespeare for any actor, or, indeed, any person. 

Paul Rudnick's first play was Poor Little Lambs about a female Yale student who wants to join the all-male Whiffenpoofs. I knew his play Jeffrey and the film adaptation, a piece that won him an Obie and a John Gassner Award, as well as comparisons to Oscar Wilde. He has also written some very witty movies like Addams Family Values, Sister Act and In & Out (which is really fun). 

I Hate Hamlet did well, but actually achieved some controversy when the famed actor Nicol Williamson (a famous Hamlet in his own right, and was said to be "touched by genius" by Samuel Beckett) in the role of Barrymore, began attacking his co-star Evan Handler too realistically and dangerously in an onstage sword fight. Handler left the production because of it. 

Full disclosure:  I hate seen a production of this play when I was in high school, but didn't remember anything about it. It must not have been memorable. But it made reading the script today fun.

30 PLAYS IN 30 DAYS: Play #23 "The Master Builder" by Henrik Ibsen

 

Henrik Ibsen, a master builder of plays

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 #23

The Master Builder by Henrik Ibsen

There is a reason that we call the great ones the great ones (hint: it's because they are great). Henrik Ibsen is the most frequently performed dramatist in the world after Shakespeare (his play A Doll's House was the most performed play in the world in 2006). The Norwegian playwright and theater director is rightfully considered one of the founders of modern theater as we know it. Although his early verse play Peer Gynt has some surreal elements to it, after that he largely was interested in writing only realistic prose. His influence is clear in writers like G.B. Shaw, Eugene O'Neill, and even James Joyce. he was nominated for the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1902, 1903, and 1904.

And yet, for whatever reason, I have not read all of his works. Before today, I had read his play Ghosts while a student at Boston University (a play in which we know a character has syphilis without the word every being said), Hedda Gabler (I don't know many people who have studied theater haven't read that one) and A Doll's House. 

I absolutely loved reading The Master Builder today. While it feels strange I that it took me this long, I also like to believe we read the things we read when we do for a reason, and it is possible that I might not have loved this play as much had I read it as a young man (or, younger man, right?) as an assignment. In many ways, Ibsen is the master builder, or at least the master craftsman, with so many playwrights like myself discovering that they are eager apprentices. 

The play was first published in 1892, and while it continues his quest for realism, it is also deeply infused with symbolism. Halvard Solness is the title character--- a middle-aged man, desperately afraid of the younger generation of builders, to the extent that he has kept one in his employ to clip his wings and keep him from rising, going so far as to encourage the young man's fiance to fall in love with him to use her to keep him in his employ. Solness lost his two young sons in what he thinks is the direct aftermath of a fire--- a fire he believes he may have had the power to will. In fact, Solness believes that he has this power in other ways, to bend people in a sense because of his will. That the "trolls" and "devils" help in this way. 

Along comes Hilda Wangel, who I have learned is a character who appeared in Ibsen's earlier play The Lady From the Sea as well. I hope to read that play, too, because I think Hilda is an amazingly drawn character. She talks of having seen the Master Builder when she was but a child of 12 or 13, when he climbed to the top of a church, to the highest tower, to adorn it with the traditional wreath upon completion of the project. She also tells Solness how he had promised to make her a princess one day and had even kissed her (gross). He told her in ten years he would come and take her away. And now she has come to him for the kingdom he promised her. 

The dynamic between Solness, afraid of his middle-age and relevancy and Hilda, the one aspect of the younger generation he is drawn to, is the heart of the play. And while sometimes Hilda's motivations seem a bit inconsistent--- does she want him to find happiness by being more grounded, or is she the temptress bird of prey who wants him to build the castles in the sky even if it means crashing down?--- it is often "quite thrilling" (as Hilda would say) to read their back and forth. 

There is much more I could write about this play, but I encourage you all to read it for yourselves if you haven't yet. You'll be glad you did...

One last note:  The play has very obvious biographical elements, as Ibsen had a brief affair with an 18 year-old woman who apparently delighted in stealing husbands (but he was in his early 60s, so maybe it was more his responsibility), of who he said gave him a "high, painful happiness". And while she didn't "steal" him, he said he stole her--- for his play. 

30 PLAYS IN 30 DAYS: Play #21 "One Flea Spare" by Naomi Wallace

 

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 #21

One Flea Spare by Naomi Wallace

One Flea Spare  is set in a plague ravaged London in 1665, which is perhaps why it is perfect reading for today, for right now, this minute. I have read that Naomi Wallace was inspired by Daniel Defoe's Journal of the Plague Year and the acquittal of the four officers who beat Rodney King. According to Laura Michiel's essay Times of Contagion: The Social(ist) Politics of Plague in Naomi Wallace's "One Flea Spare", to Wallace, "these events became linked, because spatial barriers broke down, obliging the rich and poor to share a common space." And indeed, this play is very much about class, particularly in the time of a mass illness. Lower-class guard Kabe at one paint preaches, "you will see who it is that dies, their mouths open in want, the maggots moving inside their tongues making their tongues wag as though they were about to speak. But they will never speak again in this world. The hungry. The dirty. The abandoned. That's who dies. Not the fancy and the wealthy..."

One need only look today to see things have not changed a great deal in this regard. The effects of the current pandemic (as well as upcoming disasters such as climate change) do effect the poor by a very noticeable margin. And while this project isn't necessarily about making any kind of political statement, I think it is worth mentioning how art, even historical art, can be a powerful reflection of our present-day lives. 

The story centers on a wealthy couple who are about to flee London to try to outrun the plague, but are forced to stay and quarantine (literally forced--- boarded inside and guarded) when a sailor, Bunce, stumbles into their house thinking it is empty. A young girl of 12, Morse, has also become a stowaway in the house without them realizing. Because these uninvited guests were spotted by guards getting into the home, the wealthy couple, the Snelgraves, cannot leave. The four are stuck together. 

And Wallace is very good at showing how this quarantine-by-force breaks down the usual societal norms as time passes. And as one may notice in the quote above, Wallace does not shy away from the sad and the gruesome details of death, whether describing the pits where the dead are thrown, or those waiting to die and the "tokens" on their skin, black boils of pain. 

The meat of the play is how the characters interact, and Mr. Snelgrave, the master of the house, immediately keeps his "rightful" place and makes Bunce and Morse his servants. But structure cannot last forever. Not in quarantine. There is emotional and physical manipulation, violence, and odd desire. 

Which is not to say that the play is without humor and beauty. Naomi Wallace is also a poet, and her dialogue is lyrical and effortlessly descriptive. My favorite character is Morse, a challenging role no question, for any young actress. She was a servant girl who watched her mother get the "tokens" of the plague, and saw her master throw her mother in the cellar behind a locked door, and gave her no food or water. From then, she was on her own, until locking down as part of this very strange, intense group.

The title One Flea Spare comes from a poem, The Flea, by John Donne, and Wallace uses this and the Brecht quote "Corruption is our only hope" as epigraphs in the printed version of the play. The play originally premiered in London in October of 1995, then was part of the Humana Festival in 1996. It  opened in New York at the Public Theater in 1997, and won an Obie award for best play. The cast included Dianne Wiest  and a young Mischa Barton. The play also won a Susan Smith Blackburn Prize, the 1996 Joseph Kesserling Prize, and the 1996 Fellowship of Southern Writers Drama Award.

This is my first introduction to the works of Naomi Wallace, and I anxiously look forward to learning more about her work. She is a MacArthur Fellow who has written many plays and several screenplays. I hope to learn more about her work soon. In the meantime, I highly recommend this play, though it may not be for the squeamish. 

30 PLAYS IN 30 DAYS: Play #20 "Tea and Sympathy" by Robert Anderson

 

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 #20

Tea and Sympathy by Robert Anderson

When reading Tea and Sympathy today, I couldn't help but feel this successful Broadway play from 1953 (it ran for over 700 performances) is certainly dated. But the fact that the play made me angry and sad also demonstrates what no one can deny--- it is still relevant. It shouldn't have to be--- one wishes it were a relic, something for people of today to look at and say, "Wow, can you believe people used to be like this?"  But it's not. It is still timely in its way. 

Tom goes to a an all-boys private school. He has a huge crush on Laura, a house mother at his dorm, who's marriage to Bill, a real "man's man" who wants to be headmaster someday, is not what she hoped it would be. Right at the beginning, bully Ralph has spread a rumor that Tom and a teacher named Mr. Harris were discovered swimming naked together--- it is not true. Mr. Harris, in his only scene, asks Tom if he told the Dean something had happened, but Tom is completely in the dark. Harris is going away. 

Laura, upset about these rumors that will affect Tom, and have gotten Harris fired without proof, confronts her husband, only to be told that men know when other men are off. And for the rest of the play, Tom is miserable, trying to prove that he is a man, even though his well-meaning roommate Al tells him he needs to cut his hair and "not walk so light". But even Al fails his friend, and, after pressure from his dad, intends to move out of the room. 

Bill, unprofessionally, spreads rumors about Tom, perhaps even jealous of the lad, because his wife has an interest in his well being. 

This play is tough: it is an early example of an American play dealing with sexual orientation, even though Tom is not gay, just sensitive and in love with Laura, who he can't be with. It talks a lot about when it means to be a "man" and criticizes what is known today as toxic masculinity. It criticizes notions that bullying is actually good for young men and helps them grow up. It criticizes the notion that men cannot be sensitive, cannot weep from emotion, cannot be different. These are all pretty impressive traits for a play in 1953. 

It was hard for me to read it at times, as I was called homophobic slurs constantly in high school, and had rumors spread about me being gay. Fortunately, I have always known that being called gay isn't an insult, even if it isn't true. There is nothing wrong with being gay. I would rather be mistaken for gay than be mistaken for being a misogynist, homophobic jerk. And even though the character Tom doesn't have that luxury, I do think the play is trying to send that message. 

The ending of course, which I won't spoil here, is perhaps problematic, but still, much better than I expected it to be. Laura is a great female character, very well rounded, and while not all of her motivations ring true, I imagine she was quite ahead of her time. 

As I wrote above, the play was a big success, directed by Elia Kazan and starring Deborah Kerr, Leif Erickson, Dick York and John Kerr (no relation). The play was then made into a movie in 1956, with Deborah, Leif and John reprising their stage roles. 

30 PLAYS IN 30 DAYS: Play #19 "Fences" by August Wilson

 

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 #19

Fences by August Wilson

The first play assigned for my Script Analysis class at Boston University was August Wilson's Joe Turner's Come and Gone, which still stands as one of my favorite contemporary plays, and a play that really opened my eyes. Growing up a little white boy in a very white town, I certainly had a great deal to learn. 

Over the years, many of Mr. Wilson's plays, but, for whatever reason, I had never read Fences until today. The play premiered at Yale Rep in 1985, and moved to Broadway in 1987 with nearly the same cast (including the likes of the great James Earl Jones, Courtney B. Vance, and Mary Alice) and still directed by Lloyd Richards, who writes the introduction for the edition of the play I own, and who was a truly wonderful theater artist (he was a guest professor at Bennington my senior year, but I didn't have a class with him, sadly). The play ran for over 500 performances, won the Pulitzer and a Tony for Best Play (Richards, Jones, and Alice all won Tonys, too). 

Fences is the sixth play in what is called Wilson's "Pittsburgh Cycle", and is set in the 1950s at the beginning of the play. The epigraph from my edition:

"When the sins of our fathers visit us
We do not have to play host.
We can banish them with forgiveness
As God, in his Largeness and Laws"
----August Wilson

And indeed, this play is very much about the sins of our fathers. It is also about forgiveness. These days, it is hard not to use the phrase "toxic masculinity," as, in all honesty, that seems to be protagonist Troy Maxson's tragic downfall. It is about what is inherited, and what we can rise above. Troy Maxon left his abusive father at the age of 14, spent time in jail, then did his best to shake away the sins of his father and start a life with Rose, who knows his faults but does her best to look deeper--- though she is too strong a character to be a made fool of. Troy has his family, and wants to take care of them the best he can, vehemently taking responsibility like he believes a man ought to. But there is that place inside of him, the same place where his stories come from, that is a kind of dark and bitterness. The man who could have played baseball, but felt it was denied him, so he denies his son a chance at any sports scholarship. The man who admits his wife is the best woman he could ever hope for, but who also indulges on the side, and feels little guilt for it.  Troy is a complex character who is often not very likeable--- mainly because we all know such contradictions honestly exist in every human.

Viola Davis, who starred with Denzel Washington in the film adaptation of the play, said of August Wilson's writing: "He captures our humor, our vulnerabilities, our tragedies, our trauma. And he humanizes us. And he allows us to talk."  Washington, for his part, has been very involved in bringing Wilson's plays to the screen, saying, "The greatest part of what's left of my career is making sure that August is taken care of."

Fences is  a quick read because Wilson is a great storyteller, and it is also lyrical, because he is a poet. There is no question we lost a giant when he passed in 2005 at the age of 60. But talk about a legacy he left behind. 

30 PLAYS IN 30 DAYS: Play #17 "Jack and Jill: A Romance" by Jane Martin

 

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 #17:

Jack and Jill by Jane Martin

Jane Martin, often called the "mysterious Jane Martin" because she never wants to be seen in person, first came to attention with the collection of female monologues, Talking With. Her play, Keely and Du, which deals with the controversial subject of abortion, was nominated for the Pulitzer Prize, and won an American Theatre Critics Association Award for Best New Play. The award was accepted on her behalf by playwright Jon Jory. Jon Jory also directs the original productions of  most of her plays. 

Because Jane Martin is (most likely) Jon Jory. 

I am not telling tales out of school here, though Jon Jory has never publicly admitted to being Jane Martin (though even his Wikipedia page mentions that he is rumored to being Jane Martin). My playwriting professor at Bennington, Gladden Schrock, who knows Mr. Jory and worked with him, flat out told us that Mr. Jory wrote as Jane Martin when he wanted to explore themes that dealt a great deal women and gender issues. 

Whether Jory is Jane Martin or not (he probably is), or whether maybe it has become like Andy Kaufman and Tony Clifton and others can take over, is not really a big deal. If a writer feels freer to explore certain things through a pseudonym, more power to them. I wouldn't take it away from anyone. 

And really, it has nothing much to do with my reading of Jack and Jill: A Romance, except, at times, one begins to wonder about certain tropes that Jill espouses, that sometimes feels like a male feminist writing from the point of view of what they perceive a feminist's mindset to be. Or maybe I just feel that way because I know the rumors about Jory being Martin, who knows? 

But I don't think so.

Jack and Jill: A Romance premiered at the Humana Festival directed by (surprise!) Jon Jory. It is a two-character play, with dressers who help dress the actors onstage. Jack and Jill meet at a library, begin a relationship, marry, divorce and meet again. It moves fast with accessible dialogue that is often witty and clever. Both Jack and Jill have monologues directly to the audience throughout, giving us more insight into their characters, but, really, it is the back and forth between characters that is most engaging (at least when Martin restrains from some of the preachiness). 

I don't think there is anything new about Jack and Jill: A Romance, and there wasn't anything new in 1996 when it premiered, not even the uncertain ending. The theme is about men and women connecting. The edges that overlaps and the areas that we don't understand about one another. 

But just because something is familiar territory, doesn't mean it isn't told in an interesting, entertaining manner. I imagine that this show could be quite the crowd pleaser with the right cast, and a director who knows how to keep the action moving between the many scene changes (this would die onstage with too much time between scenes... absolutely die). And to its credit, the piece attempts to explore relationships and issues between the genders, and for the most apart avoids certain stereotypes. 

I can't help but say that, in the final analysis, I found the play pretty much harmless. I could watch it and be fine and enjoy myself. 

But I can't imagine it sticking with me. 

30 PLAYS IN 30 DAYS: Play #16: "Morning, Noon, and Night" by Israel Horovitz, Terrence McNally, and Leonard Melfi

 

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 #16

Morning, Noon, and Night by Israel Horovitz ("Morning"), Terrence McNally ("Noon") and Leonard Melfi ("Night")

This trio of one-act plays that comprised a full evening by the Circle Square on Broadway must have seemed very strange to the audiences... for one, these do not particularly feel like Broadway shows of that era (1968), but rather the type of plays you might find Off-Broadway or Off-Off-Broadway. In fact, Clive Barnes in writing about the production (which he liked, and included in the "Best American Plays 1967-1973) called it an "invasion" of Off-Broadway onto Broadway. The three playwrights had certainly garnered some attention previously, Isarael Horovitz with The Indian Wants the Bronx which starred a young Al Pacino (who would collaborate with Mr. Horovitz again, including on an underrated movie I really like called Author! Author!.... side note: Horovitz is the father of Adam Horovitz, the Beastie Boy), Terrence McNally, the only one who had been on Broadway before, with And Things That Go Bump In The Night, and Melfi who had had plays produced all over the world. 

The show was not successful on Broadway, closing after 42 performances. Each play is for five actors, and the five actors were Charlotte Rae, Robert Klein, Sorrell Booke, John Heffernan, and Jane Marla Robbins. Despite the fact that the show was not a huge success, Charlotte Rae was nominated for a Tony. 

Clive Barnes wrote that the theme of each play was "Outrage"... I definitely agree in terms of Horovitz's Morning. The play is about a black family that has taken a miracle pill that turns them all white. While I understand the satire, and how Horovitz is intentionally playing with stereotypes, I cannot imagine this play being produced today without controversy. While one can appreciate the fact that the play, perhaps, is trying to give white people a mirror in which to see what the black experience in America may be like, it is tough to read stage directions saying things like "acting really black." Don't get me wrong--- I am a big one for satire, and I do think this play is not punching down, but taking shots at white culture liberal lip service... but it is still tough. I can't imagine watching a production with a group of white actors doing stereotypical voices as the play often suggests without feeling completely uncomfortable. 

On a side note:  Mr. Horovitz, before his death in 2020, was accused of sexual harassment by six different woman when they worked for him in the early 1990s (years after this play). He apologized, and his son, Adam, sided with the women, saying he believed them. 

Noon may be the most accessible of the three one acts. It is no secret that the late Mr. McNally (dying in 2020 of Covid-19, sadly) was very funny, and this short play is a sexual farce of sorts, with people answering a personal ad for a sexed-up afternoon with the mysterious "Dale", who never shows up. We have a gay young man, a stuffy uptight academic, a bored, married young looking to give steamy French lessons, and a married couple into Sado-Masochism. Hilarity and confusion abounds when they all realize Dale perhaps has brought them all here as a kind of prank. 

Night by Leonard Melfi is a strange (really a strange) night funeral scene. Though not explicitly stated, the attendees appear to be his wife, his mistress, his boyfriend and perhaps a friend. The deceased, a "cocky little bastard" named Cock Certain apparently wanted a night funeral. And he got one. A very strange one, that is ultimately interrupted by a man in a white suit burying a dog. 

So, yeah--- definitely an Off or Off-Off-Broadway invading Broadway, as Mr. Barnes suggested. And I think that's very cool. 

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.