Stage Banter: The Arena Stage Blog

Waiting for Tea & Sex: A Discussion of Controversial Material

by Raymond Caldwell, 09/10 Community Engagment Fellow

Perhaps it was the controversial subject matter, perhaps it was the energy in the room, or perhaps it was the discussions of sex and sexuality, but needless to say Play Club was certainly exciting this week! As a new comer to the illustrious institution that is, I was excited to join and participate in the discussions that revolved around Clifford Odets’ Waiting for Lefty, Maxwell Anderson’s Tea and Sympathy, and Mae West’s Sex.

All three plays belong to an early period of American drama that is often forgotten. In a theatre community that constantly looking for the next big thing, I find we often forget about the rich history of American theater on which we were founded. We forget about a time in our theater history when things were simple and simple was okay. A time when words like “dame,” and “swell” were everyday and talking about prostitution and “the gays” was a surprise and yet exhilarating to hear. I write as though I’m 80 years old, but honestly, perhaps as we look for the next big thing, the next new trend in American Theater, an examination and understanding of our past is in order. As we question why seats in regional theaters are not being filled, perhaps we should look at how our predecessors were doing it.  

Each play captured the wonders and challenges of their respectable time period. We saw that which was deemed controversial or bawdy, and interestingly enough, each play still holds significant relevance today. Each had the unique power to transcend time. How brilliant it is to write a piece of theatre that can withstand the test of time, and I’d argue that in their works, all three playwrights have done this amazingly well.

In Odet’s Waiting for Lefty, we see an episodic call to action. A “fight the powers that be,” “beat the man,” “get up and fight,” message that in its day convinced men and women not to sit around and “wait for Lefty.” I find that we as Americans today are doing just that- waiting for someone to start a revolution, we’re waiting for Lefty. We’ve become complacent, and are content to complain about that which we don’t like. Odet’s message rings ever clear today- if only we’d listen.

Anderson draws us into a world that examines a societal and animalistic quest to define masculinity. Those seen as less masculine were deemed weak; and weakness was directly associated with homosexuality. What Anderson didn’t know as he wrote Tea and Sympathy was that 60 years later we’d still be attempting to compartmentalize sexuality, weeding out and persecuting those individuals perceived as gay.  Anderson’s message rings ever clear today- if only we’d listen

And finally West creates a fantastical world that in reading might appear dated, but in my opinion brings to life the magic of what theater was and more importantly what it can be. We’re taken on an unrealistic journey by perhaps the fiercest prostitute I’ve ever seen. The plot is fantastical; the language is reminiscent of old black and white movies; and there are about six songs that appear for absolutely no reason. But oddly enough what’s so perfect about this play is found in its imperfection. It’s not real. It’s an escape, and that’s what it can offer audiences today. You’re instantly transported to a distinct time period, and West in the writing and structure was unapologetic- and it’s brilliant. West’s message rings ever clear today- if only we’d listen; plus who doesn’t like a play about a prostitute?        

 All three of these plays brought the magic and passion of theatre to life in the room as we discussed them, and isn’t that what theatre is suppose to do? Reawaken something within us? Odets, Anderson, and West all had a passion for that which was controversial, and that passion rang clear as we sat down to read their work. But why were we passionate? It’s simple- because we had taken the time to listen.

Beyond the Bubble Sheet Options

by Genna Davidson, Development Intern

After reading Amrita’s blog post on April 20^th titled “Do we have to self-identify all the time?” I started thinking a little bit about race myself.

 

Over the years, I have come to think of race as an odd, nondescript classification and one that most of us don’t know how to use without feeling uncomfortable. And yet, the concept of race infuses our daily lives in the most ludicrous ways. How many races are there in the American vernacular? There's white, black, Asian, and Hispanic/Latino (which is really an ethnicity), right? That's how my American mind crudely divides us, and it's inane!

 

On the most recent Census Bureau form (2000) these were the race options: White, Black or African American, American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian Indian, Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, Native Hawaiian, Guamanian or Chamorro, Samoans, Other Pacific Islander, and Other race. Now, the Census Bureau also makes a footnote about the fact that a lot of these categories are a combination of racial- and national- origin groups. Okay. What’s the point? More importantly, what underlying message is being sent by routinely placing “White” at the top of the “race” list? Let’s make it alphabetical. But that’s large tangent I won’t go off on.

I don’t think that we should deny the inclination of the human-mind to classify, group, categorize, and find patterns. Some of the things I can't help but take account of when first encountering anyone or anyone’s writing are sex, gender, and a vague sense of race. These details are important and attention is given them because humankind’s history is filled with oppression, hatred and conflicts stemming from the dividing of peoples. I think we have to recognize and love the observable differences we see in each other. However, when we do not identify classifications that are fraught with error, we only perpetuate misunderstandings and stupidity.

    
I think the greatest thing going for us in the theater world is that via our art and the way we talk about our art, we can speak with nuance and detail about the spectrum of peoples and cultures in the world. We don’t have to fall in line with bubble-sheet options. If ignorance in the form of generalities and erroneous classifications find voice in our conversations, we can call it out and educate ourselves. When discussing the plays read at our last play club session (In the Heights, Night Train to Bolina, and Lydia), the group got fired-up talking about the ways in which racial and ethnic perceptions influence the interpretation of plays. It was noted that there is a burden on playwrights to self-identify through their writing even if that is not the most important or interesting thing they desire to illuminate through their writing. I think that it was the choice to group these three plays into one reading session that set us up to find commonalities in the Latino experience as expressed in each play. The plays we read cannot escape the context in which we, the reads, place them.

Do We Have to Self-Identify All the Time?

By Amrita Mangus, Allen Lee Hughes Dramaturgy Fellow

This question surfaced during our latest Play Club discussion as we delved into In the Heights by Quiara Hudes and Lin-Manuel Miranda, Lydia by Octavio Solis, and Night Train to Bolina by Nilo Cruz, and subsequently ignited a series of questions relating to self-identity in the field of theater. All of these accomplished playwrights and composers have been recognized as “Latino” or “Hispanic” playwrights, but does that limit the playwright in what they can present on stage? Are they somehow forced by theater’s perceptions to incorporate their culture into their work or does it emerge from an organic want or need? And why do we refer to them simply as Latino/Hispanic playwrights when they represent an array of cultural backgrounds – such as Puerto Ricans, Dominicans, Chicanos, Mexicans, and Cubans and different regions in America (New York, Texas, and Central America)?

I reflected on these questions, recognizing that they impact pretty much all of the ethnic minorities in the theater community. Ever since I became involved with theater, the topic of self-identity has lingered in my mind. My background is South-Indian, with my parents emigrating from Mumbai and Kerala in their early twenties, yet I was born and raised in America (Las Vegas, Nevada to be exact. I kid you not.) My cultural roots are connected to India, yet my upbringing, for lack of a better word, was extremely “American.” I would hang out with mostly people of a different skin color without even noticing it, prance around my living room and pretend to be leading ladies in Rodgers and Hammerstein musicals, and never felt like I was molded into a category because of my ethnicity. Suddenly, when I entered theater in high school, I was automatically labeled the “Indian girl” who would be knowledgeable in all the Asian theater (another limited category I have difficulty with). In college, the same assumption occurred during one of my theater history classes. Though I respect and admire my Indian heritage, and have an interest in different types of theater that go beyond the Western world, since when did I become the spokesperson of it? In addition to discussing my background, I wanted to express my love for and childhood experiences with William Shakespeare, Christopher Durang, Lorraine Hansberry, Stephen Sondheim, John Patrick Shanley, and Paula Vogel, yet I was expected to represent and be familiar with Asian theater.

From self-identity emerges the oh-so familiar topic of how diversity is addressed in our society. My diversity in the theater was defined through my ethnic background as opposed to my regional upbringing, my diverse opinions and aesthetics, and my education. Why is it that those unique qualities are often shunned when referring to diversity? Maybe my vision is too idealistic, but I hope for a day when art functions with a more open-minded perspective of diversity; when artists can tell stories for the sake of storytelling, regardless of what inspires those stories.

Speaking of self-identity and diversity, our next play club topic features all female playwrights: Susan Glasspell’s Chains of Dew, Lillian Hellman’s The Little Foxes, Catherine Trieschmann’s Crooked, and Sheila Callaghan’s Fever Dream. Read along let us know what you think.

Race: That was so 90’s…I mean we just elected a Black President.

by Joshua DeMinter

Whoever said we were in a post race society must be unfamiliar with the works of our final three playwrights: Charles Fuller’s A Soldier’s Play, Thomas Gibbons’s Permanent Collection, and David Henry Hwang’s Yellowface. 

 Fuller’s A Soldier’s Play was the oldest of the collection in terms of both publication and content, but surprisingly enough had a resounding resonance with the group despite taking place in the 1940’s.  It gave a pervasive look at internal discrimination within the African American community that was devastating in its honesty.  The writing was superb and the tragic self-hatred of Sergeant Waters was warrant enough for the plays 1982 Pulitzer.

 By far the standout of the collection was Gibbons’s Permanent Collection.  Some playwrights aspire to hold a mirror to society in order to question it’s triumphs and pitfalls.  Gibbons constructs a mirror the size of the reflective pool at the base of the Washington Monument.  As I read the script I was forced to confront my own preconceptions.  As an artistic institution, the Play Club was also forced to confront our own internal policies concerning the promotion and development of works by, about, and for minority communities.  Suffice to say there was a lot of discussion. 

Yellowface expanded the conversation in a way that seems obvious to most, but is often overlooked when race gets discuss; David Hwang reminded us that race relations in the United States aren’t limited to the black-white polarization that discussions on race get pigeonholed into.  Asian-Americans have a voice in the discussion.  Surprise, surprise.

Unlike most “modern” discussions on race,these texts circumvented the conventions of PC culture and actually moderated meaningful dialogues on American racial and class dynamics.  As a collection, they provided an interesting panorama of the evolution of contemporary race relations both between and within individual racial groups.  Obama in the White House doesn’t mean the conversation on race is over; if that were the case these plays would not have been as striking as they were.

 Sadly, this was the final meeting for the inaugural Play Club season, but if this last discussion is a sign of things to come I can’t wait to see what the future holds.

Play Along Again: The Arena Restaged Play Reading Club New Reading List

By Amrita Mangus, Allen Lee Hughes Dramaturgy Fellow

The suggestions are in! Check out our reading list for the next session of the Arena Restaged Play Reading Club, starting in February and ending in July. Read along with us and blog your thoughts.

1) NEA Finalists: Damn, that's diversity! -- Is this today's American Theater
    Thursday, February 19th

•  Marcus or The Secret of Sweet by Tarell Alvin McCraney
• Bengal Tiger at the Baghdad Zoo by Rajiv Joseph
• The Hard Weather Boating Party by Naomi Wallace
• Concerning Western Devices from the Distant West by Naomi Iizuka

 2) Comedies: 2,435 years old and still can’t get no respect!
     Thursday, March 12^th

• You Can’t Take It With You by Kaufmann and Hart
• Chapter Two by Neil Simon
• The Drowsy Chaperone by Lisa Lambert, Greg Morrison, Bob Martin, and Don Mckellar.

3)  Latino Playwrights, Do we have to self-identify all the time?! 
      Thursday, April 16^th

• In The Heights by Quiara Hudes and Lin-Manuel Miranda

• Lydia by Octavio Solis

• Night Train to Bolina by Nilo Cruz

 4) Female playwrights: Gender! Gender! What about it? 
     Thursday, May 14^th

• Chains of Dew by Susan Glaspell
• Little Foxes by Lillian Hellman
• Crooked by Catherine Trieschmann
• Fever Dream by Sheila Callaghan

 5) Tony Award Nominees: Oscar's little theater brother!
     Thursday, June 4^th

• Have the group select 3-4 Tony award nominees to read for play club after the nominees are declared. The 2009 Tony Awards will occur on Sunday, June 7^th.

 6) "Hello American Theater...The typed play script is not everything!"
      Thursday, July 16^th

• Paris Commune by the Civilians

• The Rude Mechanicals (specific piece TBA)

• Arabian Nights by Mary Zimmerman
• Theatre de la Jeune Lune (specific piece TBA)

Playing with your words

by Ronee Penoi, Alan Lee Hughes Directing Fellow

I’d like to riff on Amrita’s post below, and highlight a point of discussion today that was particularly interesting to me. The title for today's Play Club session was ‘The Bio Play!’ One of the first comments that emerged, however, was how these plays could be brought together by many other categorizations as well. One, that they are all by women playwrights, or that they all grapple with women and illness. Most interesting to me, is how each play used language to further their artistic goals. All of the female leading characters in these three plays are nimble with words, own them, and utilize that skill – both as shields and weapons. We discussed the question of whether the sometimes elevated nature of this language and the characters’ skill distanced us from the characters or story, or whether it drew us even closer. It was particularly exciting to me to think about this on a larger level - about the many ways in which plays can talk to one another, and what can come of that conversation. Looking forward to Play Club 2009!

Another Play Club Meeting; Another Great Discussion!

By Amrita Mangus, Allen Lee Hughes Dramaturgy Fellow

 The final play club meeting of the 2008 year (sad to say, but don’t fret. We’ll be back with flourish in 2009!) ignited a round of dynamic conversations on “The Bio Plays”, plays inspired by historical, iconic figures or events that integrated universal themes and attributes. The plays featured were Legacy of Light by Karen Zacarías, Wit by Margaret Edson, and The Psychic Life of Savages by Amy Freed.

 Similar to the plays, our conversations began with focusing on the more “intellectual” aspects of the plays, such as structure and meaning, but then delved into a more emotional response to the issues surrounding them. The group initially commented on the plays’ intelligent and beautiful use of imagery and rhetoric. Both Wit and The Psychic Life of Savages featured exquisite poetry that connected with the major themes of the plot. The group then transitioned into discussing the poignant and relatable subjects in the plays that touched their hearts rather than their minds, from parenting and legacy in Legacy of Light to cancer, power, and humiliation in Wit. The personal responses were tremendous and heartwarming.  We had a new father relating to Legacy of Light through his recent introduction to balancing his role as a parent and his career in the theater.  Many members also expressed how their experiences with cancer or illness colored their reactions to Wit. It was the perfect conversation to end a successful year of play club meetings.

 Read along with us in January as we explore “Race Riot”, featuring A Solider’s Play by Charles Fuller, Permanent Collection by Thomas Gibbons, and Yellowface by David Henry Hwang.

Playing Along: Suggestions for the Arena Stage Play Reader's Club

By Amrita Mangus, 2008-2009 Allen Lee Hughes Dramaturgy Fellow

With the inaugural session of the Arena Stage play reader's club coming to close, we are eagerly compiling the topics and selection of readings for the next play club session (beginning in February of 2009) and would love to hear from you! For those of you now joining us, here's a brief description of how play club works. Every month or so, members of the play club read a specific selection of plays umbrellaed by a topical genre, and discuss their thoughts about the plays over lunch. The play club exposes all of us to plays that may be outside of our regular programming, widening our scope to plays produced throughout the United States.

Have you read a play recently that might tickle our fancy? Is there a playwright you adore whose work we must read? Have you seen a play at another theater company that Arena should be introduced to? Send in your suggestions and we'll keep you posted on the final selection for the next play club session.

Born to be Bad? Inside the Arena Stage Play Reader's Club

by Amrita Mangus, 2008 - 2009 Allen Lee Hughes Fellow

I just arrived from a fantastic and heated discussion at our latest play reader's club meeting, focusing thematically on "American Kids Gone Bad" and featuring Stephen Karam and PJ Paparelli's Columbinus, Rajiv Joseph's The North Pool, and Kenneth Lonergan's This is Our Youth.The discussion skillfully interwove our personal experiences with the events in these plays, our guttural responses, and our artistic analysis to create a very rich and meaty dialogue.

Immediately, members of the play reader's club identified similarities within all of the plays: a specific focus on the youth male perspective, the parents were primarily absent, the majority of the youths received privileged upbringings. These similarities sparked a slew of introspective questions. What is the role of the parent?  Are the parents to blame?  And ultimately, have these kids really gone bad?

The docudrama Columbinus produced a profound effect on the members of the play reader's club, with the Columbine massacre still harshly resonating in our minds. While finding the play extremely disturbing, many members agreed that they appreciated the many perspectives and viewpoints showcased throughout and felt the play honestly represented the social hierarchy of high school. A few members distinctly remember seeing the production of Columbinus at Round House Theatre a few years ago and provided strong insight into the imagery and bare-bones staging of the play.

This Is Our Youth arguably possessed the most controversial title of the three and ignited the argument of who's youth is truly represented in the play. Background into the play's  site-specific opening in Upper Manhattan and Lonergan's experiences helped delineate the foundation of the play from our modern perceptions of it. The play was commended on Lonergan's raw writing and strongly-developed characters.

We ended with The North Pool, which raised conversations about the whether the attitudes toward our youth are guided by the false perceptions that spurn them or if our youth is innately corrupt. Some argued that the youth in the play was victimized by authority, while others felt the authority was justified. Many enjoyed the play's continuous sequence of twists and overall atmosphere of uncertainty.

Leaving play reader's club, I don't know if our initial questions were answered and it doesn't matter. The plays and the discussion that followed revealed the "gray" area that exists within our culture and diversity of our opinions.

Stay tuned for updates from our play reader's club meeting in December on "The Bio Play", featuring Karen Zacarias' Legacy of Light, Amy Freed's The Psychic Life of Savages, and Margaret Edsom's Wit. Read along with us and blog your thoughts!

Play Along with Us: A Look at The Arena Stage Play Reader's Club

by Amrita Mangus

Wednesday, October 1st- The hustle and bustle of Arena Stage employees flocking to the conference room fills the halls of our Crystal City Administrative Offices. Members from practically every Arena Stage department chatter excitedly upon their arrival, eager to dive into a hearty discussion as we nosh on our lunches. It's certainly not your typical meeting. This Wednesday was the second get-together of our newly inaugurated Arena Stage Play Reader's Club.

Here's how it works: Every month or so, members of the Arena Stage Play Reader's Club read a specific selection of plays umbrellaed by a topical genre, and discuss their thoughts about the plays over lunch. The Play Reader's Club exposes all of us to plays that may be outside of our regular programming, widening our scope to plays produced throughout the United States.

The latest topic, "Produce Locally, Think Nationally", featured Lisa D'Amour's Anna Bella Eema, Lydia Diamond's Stick Fly, and Peter Nachtrieb's Hunter Gatherers. Each play highlighted a specific regional voice, ranging from San Francisco to the heartland of the South.

Responses to the plays were guttural, pragmatic, and astute. Ideas flooded the room, with members from different departments sharing unique perspectives from their individual expertise ("How could we market this play?" from the Marketing department; "What would the developmental process be like for the play?" from the Literary Department).  Eventually, the conversation about the plays expanded to our opinions about the theatre circuit in Washington DC and America. We ended the Play Club session inspired, exemplifying that it's important to always converse, question, and reflect.

Interested in reading along with the Arena Stage Play Reader's Club and sharing your thoughts on the plays? Our topic for next month is "American Kids Gone Bad", featuring Stephen Karam and PJ Paparelli's Columbinus, Rajiv Joseph's The North Pool, and Kenneth Lonergan's This is Our Youth.