WE TIRESIAS @ Capital Fringe 2012

a world premiere

Fort Fringe–The Shop/607 New York Ave, NW/Washington, DC 20001

Dates: Sunday, July 15 @ 6 p.m., Tuesday July 17 @ 8:15 p.m., Saturday July 21 @ Noon, Thursday July 26 @ 9:15 p.m., Sunday July 29 @ 2:15 p.m.

Tickets on sale June 18th

Starring: Chris Stinson, Melissa Hmelnicky, Steve Beall

Directed by: Matt Ripa

Assisted by: Mary Cat Gill

The play tells the story of the god-cursed life of Tiresias, the soothsayer who plays such a pivotal role in the story of Oedipus. Gifted with the ability to see the past and future as easily as the present, Tiresias was also cursed by Hera to live much of his life as a woman. Told from the perspective of Tiresias as an adolescent boy, a grown woman, and the old, blind man he would eventually become, the play examines one man’s relationship with his own destiny, and asks whether the future of mankind is ultimately a comedy or a tragedy.

Number Crunching My Own Work: a look at gender, race, and sexual orientation in my plays)

My all-women cast and crew of last summer's SISTERS OF ELLERY HOLLOW. Melissa Hmelnicky and Rachel Holt take center stage as director Jennifer John and SM/asst. dir. Mary Cat Gill look on.

The recently-announced very very white, very very male season at the Guthrie Theatre has sparked a lot of conversations about the role and responsibility of non-profit theatres to represent the diversity of their communities (Is there a responsibility? What do we mean by community? What do we mean by diversity? Etc?).

Inspired by that, as well as by other playwrights, including DC’s new Dramatist Guild representative Gwydion Suilebhan, I wanted to crunch the numbers in my own work. Not just gender, but race and sexual orientation as well.

The following looks at 15 of my full length plays that have been presented in some kind of public forum, either as productions or staged readings.

 Gender POV (through whose eyes is the story told?) Male: 2    Female: 8   Ensemble: 5

Sexual Orientation POV (primary lens the story is told through) Gay: 2   Straight: 9    Unspecified or Split: 4

 Characters’ Gender     Male: 40  Female: 47  Unspecified: 10

 Characters’ Sexual Orientation     Gay: 13   Straight: 56   Unspecified: 28

 Characters’ Race     White: 12   Black: 7   Unspecified: 78

 Directors (on the most prominent reading or production) Male: 7  Female: 8

The character gender and POV breakdown tells me little that I didn’t already know. I write for women. A lot. So much so that male actor friends regularly ask me when the Hell I’m going to write more roles for them.

Part of the reason for this is that I’ve always had more female friends than male. I get along better with women. The best man at my wedding was a best woman. I paid her back later by being her bridesman.

Another reason is that stories about women are underrepresented in nearly all storytelling mediums. So there’s a ton of unexplored territory. YA fiction, which I’ve become an expert in via osmosis from my wife, is an exception to this and is kind of kicking theatre’s ass when it comes to female protagonists.

Another reason is purely practical. During grad school, the women in the acting pool outnumbered the men by about 5-to-1. And that doesn’t seem to have changed much in my experience in professional DC theatre. I know a lot of very talented actresses who do not get nearly the amount of stage time they deserve due to lack of roles. Like A LOT. And I want to work with all of them. I’d love to see some number crunching on this for the DC area if anyone has a month free to do the legwork.

The sexual orientation POV and character breakdown was a little disappointing. The last few years I’ve made a concerted effort to explore LGBT themes. But I guess a 4-to-1 ratio of straight-to-gay isn’t so bad. And I’m happy to say that all of them pass Julia Harman Cain’s augmented Bechdel Test.

The numbers on race are a little harder to parse. It’s the 78 Unspecified that’s the problem. Because in an environment where the default lens for storytelling is white and male, when a character’s race isn’t specified, it defaults to white.

Not specifying a race in my script does not necessarily mean that casting directors will use that as an opportunity to explore diversity. It probably means they will dip into the usual pool of Caucasian actors.

So, that’s a goal for me. To go through my plays and, where a characters does not need to be a specific race, to spell it out in the character description: “Can be any race.”

Which doesn’t mean that race doesn’t matter in the story. For example, the character of Samantha in THE AARONSVILLE WOMAN could be played by a black (or Latino or Asian or etc) actress. And that would add a whole new dimension to the romance between her and Evie—a lesbian AND interracial romance in a rural town. Which would be a challenge for the director and actors, but also an opportunity to tell the story from a slightly different angle.

So yeah. Goal for 2012: Solve racial disparity in American theatre. Check.

Now, on a lighter note, a breakdown of deaths in my plays.

 Deaths (on stage or in the wings)   Suicides: 4 Gutted by a machete: 1 Beaten to death: 1 Sword-thrusts: 2 Mass drownings: 1 Poisoning: 1 Cancer: 1 Chased down and stabbed by mother: 1 Self-immolation (also under Suicides): 1 Eaten by zombies: 1 (but it’s a dream) Killed by Ishtar, goddess of sex and war: 1 Consumed by living shadows: 2 Old age: 1 Turned into a tree: 1 Eaten by animated tree: 1 Chased off a cliff by giant wolves: 1

To be honest, I’m surprised the list is this short.

Theatre Is Not My Friend, It’s My Fuckbuddy: a short scene

A dramatized reenactment of a conversation about redefining the relationship between theatre and audience. The following occurred after a panel on new plays at George Washington University.

Three DC theatre professionals stand on a sidewalk outside the theatre at GWU. There has been wine and beer, but not as much as you might think.

JESSICA BURGESS (director about town and artistic director of The Inkwell): There’s been this big discussion about the need another word for “audience.”

GWYDION SUILEBHAN (DC playwright and new DC rep for the Dramatist Guild): I agree. The word is inadequate.

JESSI: And it’s just wrong. “Aud” suggests they only listen. They do more. What about playgoers?

GWYDION: How about congregation?

JESSI: There’s too much baggage with congregation. I think participants. Because they’re participating in the art that’s being created onstage.

GWYDION: That could work.

ME: Why not just call them fuckbuddies and be done with it?

(Much laughter from everyone, myself included.)

ME: I’m serious. Two people that mutually respect each other, who come together to share a series of intense, finite interactions that give each party pleasure. Fuckbuddies.

JESSI: This could work. I like that.

GWYDION: But why not “friends with benefits”? Same thing, and it might be more palatable.

ME: But it’s not the same thing. Friends with benefits means you’re friends that occasionally have sex. It suggests that the two parties were friends first, then began the sexual relationship. With a theatre and their audience, the “sex” comes first. A single artistic event that, if pleasurable, sets the stage for more.

JESSI: And with fuckbuddies, the primary motivation is the sex. The “fuck” comes before the “buddy.”

ME: To be honest, I don’t want to be friends with my theatre. I don’t want to sit down for brunch and tell them my problems.

GWYDION: You want to get together in a dark room and screw.

ME: Pretty much. We meet to fuck, and if we’re friendly off-hours, that’s fine.

JESSI: And you don’t want to be married to a theatre.

ME: Hell no. And “lovers” or “partners” doesn’t work, either. It suggests exclusivity. And I totally plan to see other theatres.

GWYDION: And the theatre has to be into it, too.

ME: Yeah. They can’t seem to be doing it just because they have to. Or because it’s what they think I’d like. I think we’d both feel cheap afterwards.

GWYDION: Absolutely.

ME: Are we stretching this metaphor too far?

JESSI: I don’t think we’re stretching it enough. Just like sex, both the audience and the theatre have to allow themselves to be vulnerable, and to recognize that the other is vulnerable. That creates mutual respect and compassion.

ME: And sex with each theatre would be different.

JESSI: Of course. Shakespeare Theatre would be a little S&M. You will watch the show THIS way and ONLY this way and you WILL enjoy it.

ME: And Woolly is like that Eyes Wide Shut mansion orgy. Everyone wears a mask, and you don’t know what’s behind each door, but you know it’s going to be weird and fun and people are going to talk about it the next day.

GWYDION: And Taffety Punk is like that girl you pick up in a bar. It’s fast and rough, but you always keep coming back for more.

ME: And it can hurt.

JESSI: Of course it can hurt.

ME: But it’s that good kind of hurt.

JESSI: It better be good.

ME: And if it’s not good, you just hope it’s awful. Because there’s nothing worse than theatre that you forgot you had the next morning.

(Much more laughter. Students passing us on the sidewalk stare.)

ME: Somebody has to make a blog about this.

GWYDION: I dare you.

JESSI: I double dog dare you.

GWYDION: A double dog dare? Now you have to do it.

JESSI: And you have to give me credit for the line about needing to be vulnerable.

ME: Done and done.

*this scene is by no means verbatim and has been created with the express permission (and delight) of its characters

 

Ask Not, etc.

Ask not what the DC theatre community can do for you; ask what you can do for the DC theatre community.

Let me explain.

In recent months, I’ve found myself part of an ongoing conversation. Sometimes that conversation is framed around the question “How do small theatre companies find and afford space?” Sometimes it’s framed around “How do we get larger theatres to share resources?” And sometimes it’s framed around “How do DC playwrights get produced in their own city?”

The latter was one of the questions asked at yesterday’s State of the DC Playwright panel hosted by Theater J as part of their Locally Grown initiative. I was a member of the panel for all of a hot minute before rushing off to rehearsal for Bright Alchemy (another blog post for another day).

Other questions were asked, but they all added up to the same thing: How do we turn the DC theatre community into an actual community (rather than, say, a “scene”), where the theatre artists that live here can work here. And can do so without busking on the corner.

Currently I’m in the process of scheduling a meeting of smaller DC theatre artists and companies to discuss ways we can organize, communicate, and help each other. There have been, I’m told, similar meetings in the past—meetings that, in many cases, came to naught. And one of the reasons for this (also told second-hand) is that these artists couldn’t agree on initiatives that benefited everyone.

Something similar came up in yesterday’s Theater J panel. Right before I had to dash, Inkwell producing manager Lee Liebeskind brought up the point that different playwrights need different support—some could benefit from writer’s groups, some could benefit from self-production, some from forming a company of their own.

And at the same time these conversations have been going on there have been other blog posts and articles about theatrical mentorship, about service and internships (see the latest issue of American Theater), about who has helped and inspired you in your career (one of the questions asked by Theater J of their Locally Grown playwrights).

All of this has swirled together in my head to form one derivative, possibly obvious, but still easily forgotten credo: Ask not what the DC theatre community can do for you, etc.

That means when another artist is looking for assistance, and you can provide it or know someone who can, do so or pass on some contact info.

When a producer has an actress drop out and finds herself in dire straights, comb through your Facebook friends to see who you might know that can fit the role.

When a playwright is looking to start a writer’s group, pass on the names of writers you know, even if you have no interest in joining.

If some student fresh out of undergrad asks you out for coffee to pick your brain about what it means to be a working theatre artist, you make it happen.

Because when people talk about their theatrical mentors, or the people who have influenced and helped them the most, there’s usually one thing in common: Those people didn’t have to help. Helping didn’t benefit them professionally whatsoever.

They did it because someone helped and supported them. They did it because that’s how you make new theatre artists. They did it because they knew that’s how you build a community. At least that’s why I like to think they did it.

A few years back I was privileged to spend two weeks at the Sundance Theatre Lab sitting in and observing the workshops, one of which was for Taylor Mac’s The Lily’s Revenge. One day in the meal tent, he mentioned that he was helping fund the initial production of the play (a glorious behemoth with 5 acts and 30+ actors and if you get a chance to see it, you absolutely should), and I asked him how he managed to do that.

And he sat and talked to me about how he went about applying for grant after grant and his successes and failures and basically opened my eyes to whole new possibilities of self-production. He did this even though he was in the middle of revising a 5-act play on the fly and I was, at any given moment during those two weeks, the least influential person in the room.

That little exchange sits in a place somewhere in my head or heart along with a hundred other similar moments and together they give me the inspiration and energy to get up in the morning and write (or devise or produce or blog).

So, this post is less for you than for me. More of a resolution for myself than any kind of doctrine for others.

Because I know how tunnel-visioned I can get. How narrow my focus can become, especially when I’m working on three projects at once and a day job besides. It’s easy to just think about my work and how I can get it finished and whose hands I can get it into and who will be most likely to produce it. And if someone sends me an e-mail asking for advice or asking if I know someone who can do X or asking me to take part in a symposium, it can be really easy to say no.

And sometimes I should say no. For my own mental health if for nothing else. But my goal for the coming year is that if I am able and capable, I will try my best to help.

Because I keep having this conversation about how big theatres need to be less insular, less tunnel-visioned in their own work, and more open to sharing. This idea that a rising tide lifts all boats. And how can I get big theatres to listen to that message if I don’t do my best to take it to heart myself.

Same thing with small companies and solo artists. There will never be a single initiative that benefits everyone. There is no silver bullet. There will be a thousand little things that we can do to help each other. And maybe five of them will impact me directly, but I resolve to do my best to help the other 995 happen.

 

 

Theater J Locally Grown Artist Festival

Check out the reading of my new play Cold November Light, premiering January 23rd as part of Theater J’s Locally Grown Festival. Also check out work by a host of other DC playwrights, including Renee Calarco, Jacqueline Lawton, Gwydion Suilebhan, and performance artist Laura Zam

SISTERS OF ELLERY HOLLOW (REDUX)

WE’RE BACK! Because we just couldn’t get enough, we’re remounting the hit 2011 Capital Fringe show, Sisters of Ellery Hollow, at fallFringe.

Elsie and Abby lead a hard life but survive by transforming their painful childhood into tall tales: their impossible birth; their strange caretaker; and the discovery of a secret that threatens to destroy their tiny family.

Don’t miss your latest chance to see the show that DC Theatre Scene called “a must-see.”

directed by Jennifer John, assisted by Mary Cat Gill

starring Rachel Holt & Melissa Hmelnicky

@ Fort Fringe–The Shop

607 New York Ave., NW

Washington, DC 20001

Saturday, Nov. 5, 4 p.m.
Tuesday, Nov. 8, 9 p.m.
Thursday, Nov. 10 6:30 p.m.
Thusday, Nov. 17, 7 p.m.

tickets are $20 ($15 with a 2011 Fringe button) and can be purchased at www.capitalfringe.org or by calling (866) 811-4111

This production is presented as part of Capital Fringe’s 2011 fallFRINGE Nov. 1-20

SISTERS OF ELLERY HOLLOW Tickets on Sale

The Capital Fringe box office and schedule went live this morning. So, begin making your schedule now. And don’t forget to pick up tickets for SISTERS OF ELLERY HOLLOW. It’s one of my favorite scripts and it’s shaping up to be a fantastic show. It’s also the most children-friendly piece I’ve written outside of Imagination Stage. So, feel free to bring your little ones (probably from 10 yrs of age on up). They’ll love the fantastic stories, and all the dark subtext will fly right over their little heads.

What Do You Think Of When You Say “Theatre”?

Synetic Theatre

In recent months I have found myself mired in the same discussion (or argument, or Twitterfight) over and over again. At its heart are the questions: What is a play, and what is theatre? On the surface, they seem like the sort of academic questions that, given time, you can write a really good, slightly boring term-paper on. At the very least, you could come up with a viable answer.

The challenge, and the reason I continue returning to the same argument over and over, is that people keep coming up with different answers to those questions. And I’m not talking about nuance. I mean that theatre professions seem to have fundamentally different ideas about what theatre is, about what a play is.

I think it began with Black Watch, which played for a limited run at The Shakespeare Theatre here in DC. Gwydion Suilebhan (another DC-based playwright) and I were tweeting back and forth on the production. He thought it lacked a clear central narrative and that made it a bad play. I thought the narrative was very clear and wondered in 140 characters or less what he was looking for when he looked for narrative. There was also some discussion about its use of dance and music, and how both were only filler for a weak story.

Eventually the discussion turned to the question of where the boundaries are of “play” and “theatre” and “performance.”

Then someone tweeted that the argument was a paper tiger and that there were more important things to be debating about theatre. And admittedly, we were going in circles, or possibly in spirals, but I didn’t defend it, and Gwydion and I ceased.

At least temporarily.

Then the subject came up again. And again. And again. And I began to think that, for a paper tiger, this subject really gets around.

For example, there was Synetic Theatre’s showing at this year’s Helen Hayes Awards. There is a perennial argument that pops up every year around award season time about whether what Synetic does is actually theatre. Here’s their mission statement. Here’s a recent review of their King Lear.

The argument will start when someone says that, because much of Synetic’s work is silent, and that it’s all heavily choreographed, with story being told primarily through movement, that it’s not theatre, it’s dance. And because it has no spoken words, it’s certainly not a play.

I will respond that they tell stories using the language of theatre—crafting very distinct, concrete narratives—and that dance is a far different, and far more abstract language. I’ll also contend that a play does not require spoken words and that the text of a play extends to all of its elements.

And then we pull out the knives.

Okay, not really. But if you want an example of this back-and-forth, check out the comments section of Gwydion’s post on the Helen Hayes awards.

And then there was Sleep No More. I bussed up to NYC a couple weeks back in what is becoming a necessary pilgrimage among my DC theatre friends to experience Punchdrunk Theatre’s 4-floor, full contact interpretation of Macbeth. (Don’t worry, no substantive spoilers here).  I left in awe of what Punchdrunk has accomplished—not just the experience they provided for me, but the industry that went into it.

And as I was making the late night walk back through Chelsea to my shitty shitty midtown hotel, I was thinking: Was this theatre? I answered almost immediately: Yes.  But I knew that others would feel the exact opposite.

The next morning, I met for lunch with friend, dramaturg, and as-of-now the Audience Enrichment Manager at Shakesperae Theatre, Hannah Hessel. We talked about Synetic, and Sleep No More, and Black Watch, and about the fundamental divide between those who thought of such work as plays, those who thought of such work as theatre but not plays, and those who thought they were neither. And something she said struck me. She said that it’s very much like a religious debate. That the views being defended are something very fundamental to each person’s belief in what theatre is and their role in it.

Is that true? Is this constant debate about whether this show or that is theatre more than just a paper tiger Twitter fight, or award show semantics? Is it one of the axis that helps define the course of my, and other playwrights’ art; that helps define what art is and what is our place in it?

It feels like it’s true. Because this doesn’t feel like the kind of argument where either side can be swayed, or wants to be swayed. Which is why I didn’t spend the last 10 paragraphs talking about what I think a play is, or what I think theatre is. (That’s what the comments section of Gwydion’s blog is for). I’m more interested in broaching the question.

What I’m really interested in is how do these questions define the parameters of you as an artist? As a playwright, if you think that all plays have to have spoken text, are you more interested than others in creating reproducible, printable work? If you eschew the idea of a single narrative as the goal of a work of theatre, are you willing to create something where story becomes subservient to individual experience, as in Sleep No More? Does how you define theatre determine how you answer the sometimes-controversial question of whether you consider yourself a “playwright” or a “theatre-artist”?

I welcome your thoughts. But first, let me go get my knife.

Fringe marketing and why Photoshop is eating my life

Every time I co-produce or self-produce, I end up designing the marketing images. And every time I do that, Photoshop starts to eat large chunks of my life. But in a good way. This is (I think), the finished postcard front for Sisters of Ellery Hollow, which will premiere at the Capital Fringe Festival this July.

They Grow Playwrights in DC, Don’t They?

After three years of volunteering at Theater J as a literary assistant and occasional dramaturg, I finally get to be attached with this theatre that I love so much as a playwright. Theater J has commissioned me, along with three other DC-based playwrights, to write new work for their Locally Grown Festival this January/February. The festival will coincide with their production of The Religion Thing by Renee Carlarco, also a DC playwright.

Gwydion Suilebhan, Jackie Lawton, and Laura Zam are the other three commissioned playwrights (along with Jon Spelman, who will be contributing a new solo performance piece), so I’m in excellent company. And if you want to know why I volunteered for Theater J for so long, you can read this wonderful post by Gwydion.

My play, Cold November Light, will be presented in a staged reading on Monday, January 23rd, 7:30 p.m. You are all invited. Now…I should probably get to writing it.