Category: Uncategorized

Currently I’m working at the Great Dickens Faire in San Francisco CA. I am with the beverage department and will understudy Fred, Scrooge’s nephew in a Christmas Carol.
Before I talk about what I have learned let’s look at a little history.

My introduction to Faire came in the seventh grade when we had a group of performers come and work with us from the Patterson’s Renaissance Pleasure Faire in Black Point Forest. My class had a field trip out to the Faire, we got to come up with our own costumes and go through the Living History part of the Faire. I blame them for my love of period work.

The Patterson’s started something that took off in the US from early beginnings to the high points at Black Point. It was at the right time and place culturally and in CA has become the long-standing bar that is set for Renn Faires today. From this sprung the Dickens Faire. It had been a bit nomadic for a while but has settled into a home at the Cow Palace.

As someone who has produced theatrical work and been part of production teams I understand and have participated in the build and tear down of this event. It’s a monumental task watching a city come out of containers, put up, decorated, and worked in for five weeks, then put away again. Liz Martin is in charge of costume and quality control of all outfits worn by staff, and they must pass her requirements as to give the look of the citizens a cohesive feel. Decoration, plumbing, electrical, and carpentry all play their part. There at least 6 stages with constant performances that must be scheduled, live music, an amazing food court that must be plumed, vented and supplied with sufficient electrical power.

Why does it succeed? The Patterson’s have created a culture that they sustain in their approach to the work. Before we open, the vast crew of volunteers who come to work the Faire go through a series of workshops so that everyone is clear as to what we are trying to bring to life. They include history of the time, accents, manners, and improvisation techniques. What we build is a Dickens Christmas, not just a Victorian one. His characters and view of what London was is critical to how the work is presented. There are roughly about one thousand of us operating all aspects, many of these are volunteers. This is a great deal to manage and keep on an even keel. It works because they all want to be there, they are made to feel that what they contribute is vital to the Faire, and has created a community of its own. Something the production team is always aware of and works to sustain.

I’ve had the task of acting several times in this Faire and in a few Renne Faires, sadly not Black Point as this no longer operates. Many non-Faire performers look down their noses at what is referred to as “Faire Acting”. In many cases it is over-the-top, but not always. In the case of the Dickens Faire we not only have characters from his books, but the Adventurers Club featuring prominent historical figures of the time, art classes taught by performers playing the big hitters of the Pre-Raphaelite movement and so on. We even have a Queen Victoria and her brood of children that parade through the Faire.

How does it work? As a good friend of mine who plays Elizabeth the first at a local Renne Faire says “its all about how others respond to you, if you don’t give me status I’m just a lady in a big dress.”

It becomes a working exercise in giving and getting status from others, thinking on your feet, and knowing enough to respond according to the period and character you are playing. The minute the public enters you are onstage, it is basically an 8- 9-hour improvisation. This takes both physical and mental stamina.

What we build is a form of emersion theatre; you as the audience get to step into a set that has been carefully put together to sustain the illusion. We employ some of the simplest and basic theatre artifices and they are incredibly successful.

A few of my former company members have now been a part of this kind of work. When I produced Cymbeline for Butterfield 8 the theatre became a movie set so the performers had to play an actor playing a character in the play. They never left the public view, for some it was terrifying but a great exercise. So if you ever want to really challenge yourself as a performer, join the Dickens Faire for a season. It’s an amazing learning experience and will inform your approach to future work.

If you do come, make sure you attend the Morning Tableau as Mr. Dickens introduces characters you will meet on the streets. This takes place in Fezzywig’s warehouse and at the end Mr. Dickens tells the crowd “welcome to London” The curtain is pulled back to reveal the main thoroughfare of our London streets. Actors and street vendors are in place. It’s simple but still one of the most palpable moments of the Faire.

As a director and producer I have learned many lessons in this environment and employed them to different degrees within my own work. Faire has broadened my view of what theatre is and can be. If you come, say hello, I’m behind the bar at Mad Sal’s.

The history of queer film and characters can be traced back to and before the Haze code as we have seen in the documentary The Celluloid Closet. In many ways we have progressed from these early portrayals and in many ways we have not.

Television has actually led the way with how we see queer folk. In the late 90s and 2000s it was the territory of soap operas before these dramas all but vanished in the U.S. and are still alive in some form abroad. In the U.S. queer storylines could be found in Days of Our Lives, and As the World Turns. In the UK we had queer characters in Hollyoaks, Eastenders, and Emmerydale. Wales gave us People of the Valley. Germany gave us Verbotene Liebe, Spain The Heart of the City, France Les Bleus, Argentina Botineras, New Zealand Shortland Street. When we compare the examples of those made almost everywhere else the U.S. falls short with what they felt they could display on screen. How long did it take queer couples to finally kiss on the U.S. soaps?

However, I wonder if they they paved the way for Sense 8, Brothers and Sisters, Transparent, Six Feet Under, Orange is the New Black, and Greys Anatomy?

Traditional American media is very much one step forward two steps back, it is the pay-to-view channels that are taking greater risks. With all of this in mind what is happening with actual film and the cottage queer film industry?

In the last few years we have had two stand-out queer films take on the mainstream market; Carol and Moonlight. Runners up include Tangerine, a low budget film with a very nonromantic view of life as a trans girl of color trying to survive in LA−an unflinching perspective made on an IPhone with a brilliant sound track.
We also had Grandma with Lilly Tomlin, an out actor and theatre maker and The Danish Girl, which was problematic as to accuracy and casting.

When you scroll through one of the major carriers of queer film, TLA, we have an abundance of gay Rom-Coms, weird thrillers, and poorly made comedies. There is an endless supply of coming out stories and an endless supply of queer teens involved with prostitution and drugs. The voices are primarily male; primarily white and cis gender identifying.

Moving to Wolfe films we at least have categories for Gay, Lesbian, and transgender.
Breaking Glass Pictures website looks to carry primarily foreign queer films usually the strongest of the lot.

We still have a shortage of female voices, people of color, queer people over 30, and a plot line worthy of a full-length film.

Yes we have a ways to go to catch up with the amount of films out there representing queer themes, people, history and so on. Not every film can be Moonlight but do we have to have 6 sequels of Eating Out?

We started out with some amazing pictures in the renaissance of queer film. The UK took off with My Beautiful Launderette, Beautiful Thing, 4 Weddings and a Funeral, as well as Bedrooms and Hallways, and Another Country. The list is quite long.
Merchant and Ivory brought us Maurice, a major film with an A-list cast written by a queer icon E. M. Forester and brought to us by queer filmmakers.

Films dealing with the queer experience seen through race, Looking for Langston, Young Souls Rebel, Paris is Burning, the Watermelon Woman.

The films of Almoldovar not all queer themed, but always with a nod to queer culture and always through a queer lens. The Canadian films Lilies, and I’ve Heard the Mermaid Singing.

These were stories, ideas and performances that were worthy of the praise they have received and still hold up after all this time. There are some beautiful small films coming out of Spain, France, Germany, Mexico and the UK.

Where are the American Queer films worth watching?

We have a plethora of gym toned self absorbed white boys running around having some of the most superficial crises ever brought to film. These scenarios worked for the heyday of the Hollywood films driven by banter and personalities of the 30s and 40s. Most of the performances we get from these gay men are dead from the neck up. Bitchy isn’t a replacement for banter or wit, and if we wanted porn we would be watching it.

There have been some exceptions. Beginners deals with a man who is recently widowed and finally comes out to his adult son. Sordid Lives is a comedy whose main character is defiantly over 30. Also worth mentioning is Big Eden, and The Business of Fancy Dancing addressing what a queer native experience has been.

Topics that are being addressed in the bulk of American queer films is relationships and how the queer community navigates open relationships, and our own definition of family, that in many ways is a good thing. How we conduct our lives is different than the hetero-normative and we should be exploring this within our films and work

What this says is far more telling about queer culture in the U.S. The queer media, film, publications, and advertising are geared to white men of a certain age and financial demographic. This focus is on a group that looks to assimilation as some form of equality. Within these films we continue to minimalize those who do not fit the definition of passing in the hetero world: queers of color, lesbians, and trans, anyone over the age of 30 and certainly no gender fluid, gender queer folk.

As to age it’s not just the queer community that disregards anyone over the age of 30 as having a sex life, dreams and aspirations, or anything interesting to say it’s the media in- general’s approach to everyone.

We are smarter, wittier and much more creative than this. Especially now as we see the rise of the right again we need to stop navel gazing and start making work that looks outward with a queer perspective. As queer artists we need to be asking bigger questions of our audiences and ourselves. The time of making films just for the community is rapidly coming to an end. We need positive representations out there but at the same time we need to start addressing the things that create turmoil and disturbance within our own community. We should be brave enough to look at our failings in diversity and inclusivity. Where does this come from and what are doing or not doing about it? That would be a film I would go to see.

First, lets address the basic ignorance and amnesia the bulk of America have concerning the issue of slavery and the life of anyone in the U.S. who isn’t white.
I went to a public school for the bulk of my education. I learned who Fredrick Douglas and Harriet Tubman were, however, I had to read much later on my own about the Harlem Renaissance and discover writers like Zora Neale Hurston, James Baldwin, and Langston Hughes. I certainly wasn’t taught that people of color were not allowed to buy property in certain neighborhoods through the 50s and 60s. Nor was I ever taught about one of the largest blights of our nation, the history of lynching. Nor did we dwell on the real movement of The Black Panthers and our government’s role in their demise.

I am a white queer middle class cis man. No one I know ever had the “talk” with their children of color so they make it home alive should the police stop them.

I have been spit on for being queer and I responded with violence. I didn’t get arrested or even stopped.

I am not here to play make-believe about what our nation is. I am here to look at it in ugly florescent light and see all the imperfections that include two sets of justice: one for whites and one for everyone else.

Our privatized prisons are full of people of color. If your name sounds ethnic on your CV you will be overlooked. You can be fired for wearing dreads or braids. If you are brown and the victim of police violence it is guaranteed that the media will profile you as a criminal.

All of this brings me to the recent impossible announcement from HBO and the team from the Game of Thrones. To be clear, I am not a Game of Thrones fan, not even close. The show based on J.R.R. Martin’s series of books provided a strong base for a series that has taken off and employed many artists and technicians. The drivers of this work, Dan Weiss and David Benioff, are riding a wave of popularity and are the wonder boys of the moment. They can pretty much make whatever they want next. Of all the choices they could have made the last thing I was expecting was Confederate.

Many have compared this choice to other works that have been produced, namely Man in the High Castle written by Phillip K. Dick, one of the best Science Fiction writers of his generation. The problem here is that with High Castle they have an amazingly strong work to start from and even though I was not as happy with the outcome, it was still well put together. Although we don’t teach many aspects of this point in our global history WW2 was a war that was fought and finished. Recently we have had the release of a major film on a defining battle of WW2, Dunkirk. Here again we see the war through a white lens, one that tends to rewrite history. A great response to this film can be found here in the Guardian.

Why the lack of Indian and African faces in Dunkirk matters | Sunny …
https://www.theguardian.com › Opinion › Dunkirk

“A vast, all-white production such as Nolan’s Dunkirk is not an accident. Such a big budget film is a product of many hundreds of small and large decisions in casting, production, directing and editing. Perhaps Nolan chose to follow the example of the original allies in the Second World War who staged a white-only liberation of Paris even though 65% of the Free French Army troops were from West Africa. Perhaps such a circumscribed, fact-free imagination is a product of rewriting British history over the past decades, not in the least by deliberate policies including Operation Legacy? Knowingly or not, Nolan walks in the footsteps of both film directors and politicians who have chosen to whitewash the past.”

With an incredibly clear view on this subject and the subject of racism you can find no better voice than this

Akala on Britain’s inherent xenophobia – Frankie Boyle’s Election …

▶ 8:35

With Confederate there is no outstanding novel for them to use as a base, even if there was it’s still problematic. Weiss and Benioff are going to write it. HBO has released a statement concerning the outcry.

“We have great respect for the dialogue and concern being expressed around Confederate. We have faith that Nichelle [Trampbell Spellman], Dan [Weiss], David [Benioff], and Malcolm [Spellman] will approach the subject with care and sensitivity. The project is currently in its infancy so we hope that people will reserve judgment until there is something to see.”

I don’t have such faith; in fact I am sure that these two are exactly the wrong two to drive any work on such a topic. They have been unable or unwilling to address the lack of diversity in Game of Thrones and as far as I can tell the only roles for brown people in this series are slaves and barbarians.

Networks across the boards are unable to cast with diversity; the roles for black actors are as follows: slave, servant, drug addict, or child of drug addict, pusher, pimp, and gangster. Film and Television are still casting on stereotypes so outdated its almost embarrassing if it weren’t so sadly predictable. If we are to go off what they have produced so far all of our worst fears will be realized.

My point is that we are still fighting the civil war on almost every front, a fact that has been known to people of color since the beginning. With the introduction of the Internet the white community has more visual access to what the African-American community experiences everyday.

Here is a quote from April Reign, one of the women who has launched the #NOCONFEDERATE campaign.

″The commodification of black pain for the enjoyment of others must stop,” Reign said. “Earlier this month, there were protests about taking down Confederate monuments. The prison industrial complex is bursting with black and brown people, disproportionate to the crimes committed. So, for some, ‘Confederate’ is not ‘alternate history,’ but a painful and recent reminder of how much further we still need to go toward equality in this country.”

Lilly Workneh Black Voices Senior Editor, HuffPost

What then is our responsibility as theatre makers, and how do we make our voices heard when it comes to something we feel we cannot control, such as casting and projects by major networks? Again an important point from Sunny Singh from the Guardian as to what our role is,

“All storytellers – and novelists, poets, journalists, and filmmakers are, ultimately, just that – know the power we hold. Stories can dehumanise, demonise and erase. Such stories are essential to pave the way for physical and material violence against those we learn to hate. But stories are also the only means of humanising those deemed inhuman; to create pity, compassion, sympathy, even love for those who are strange and strangers. Stories decide the difference between life and death. And that is why Dunkirk – and indeed any story – is never just a story.”
Why the lack of Indian and African faces in Dunkirk matters | Sunny …
https://www.theguardian.com › Opinion › Dunkirk

Lets take the example of Hamilton that has become a phenomenon; the musical has been called the 1776 of a new generation. How many people who are rushing to buy tickets get the fact that the cast, entirely ethnic except for the actor playing the king, is performing a point in history where they were not even considered people?

Here is a great quote from James McMasters on the entire experience

“The exorbitantly high ticket prices coupled with the perpetually sold-out status of the production prohibit most working class people of color from attending the show. Given that the production’s audience, then, is overwhelmingly white and upper-middle-class, one wonders about the reception of the show’s racial performance. How many one-percenters walk away from Hamilton thinking that they are on the right side of history simply because they exchanged hundreds of dollars for the opportunity to sit through a racialized song and dance? My guess: too many.”
Watching A Brown ‘Hamilton’ With A White Audience: Code Switch …
www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2016/03/08/…/a-brown-hamilton-a-white-audience
Mar 8, 2016 –

What I will say about Hamilton is that Lin-Manuel Miranda has shared the profits with the cast that helped build it. Miranda recognizes their contribution and the fact that the work wouldn’t be what it is without their artistry. As anyone working in live theatre will tell you, that is a refreshing sea change. Think about how the cast of A Chorus Line could have done had they been given a small percentage of what is basically a play about them.

Bottom line we are not vocal enough. We do not speak out when we should and we allow things to continue. I am not saying that everyone needs to carry a sign, or get in the face of casting directors. You do have power: your voice and your money. Write, tweet, email to the big guns in charge, and then write to their sponsors. Start voting with your dollar and stop buying entertainment that lacks integrity. Far too often I hear the excuse “ If I boycotted everything that upset me I wouldn’t be able to buy anything.” So you choose to do nothing and of course that’s how they win. As artists we need to build work that reflects the world we live in. Our work is about our dreams, desires, and our fears. Why do we think they are somehow only limited to a white experience? I am not asking you to take on the burden of responsibility for the entire system. I am asking you to change it by how you act now.

So I have responded to two blogs on this subject and felt like I needed to hash things out on my own turf. The subject has come up regarding several different productions and plays that I have either seen or directed myself.

First I want to address two Shakespeare works that Jeremy Cole addressed in his blog. I like Jeremy we have worked together before and I have seen several of his directorial works. He speaks of two works Shrew and Merchant. He states that both need to be shelved.

As to Shrew I have only seen it twice live and once in film. The first was back in the golden age of American Conservatory Theatre ACT in San Francisco, this was back when they had a in house repertory company and the work reflected it. They did the work in the Commedia dellàrte style, everything was exaggerated and physical, at the time I thought it was very entertaining I was much younger then. I saw the film with Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton; this was really more about their own volatile relationship then anything else. Then an all women’s cast which felt electrifying and subversive.

While at the helm of my own company Butterfield 8 Theatre, now B8 Theatre, we never produced this work, although several company members continued to push for it to be done. By this time in my life I could look at the work through very different eyes, here I agree with Jeremy I cannot find a way into the work and I cannot get past the perceived message of the work. I see it as misogynistic, no matter what spin I was approached with it still left a bad taste in my mouth.

I understand the argument of historical placement, cultural and so on, what does it say to an audience in 2017? I have yet to be convinced on any level that what we leave with isn’t what I want to put forward with my work.

As to the Merchant of Venice my view is quite different. I can only relate to how we as a company approached it. The work has so many different opportunities to frame the questions asked. What is the real cost of love, what are you willing to sacrifice?

I have always seen Shylock as the victim in the work; a man trapped in a world that on one level reviles him and the other uses his services. He is trying to keep his family and faith intact under a constant onslaught of violence and prejudice.

What is the true relationship between Bassanio and Antonio? Bassanio has always struck me as a player, but becomes a different person when he is faced with the fact a man he has used and most likely slept with will die because of the debt he caused him to take on. We had them kiss in the street scene after the courtroom and verdict release Antonio. Not as brothers but as what they had been, lovers.

Portia is an educated woman trapped in her own way to the verdict of her fathers decree. She is smitten with Bassonio but in the end does she realize that she may have picked the wrong casket? Her humorous rant about the ring in the last act has a sting of truth to it. The scene is playful but perhaps now she sees Bassanio as he truly is. In the script she exits alone, not on Bassanio’s arm, or even with him. Where as Nerissa and Gratiano leave together a more down to earth, no nonsense couple with less at stake.

This leaves Lorenzo and Jessica the two who have sacrificed the most to be together. Jessica has given up the most, her culture, family, friends, religion to be with this man. Lorenzo has gone against his culture, standing, and although not mentioned most likely the will of his family. They will never be truly accepted nor will their children. They have only each other.

The only thing we changed was Portia’s line about Shylock when she hands the pair the document giving them all Shylock’s wordily goods at his death. We changed it so that Shylock is in fact dead. I cannot see a point where Shylock chooses to live as a Christian.

This was, and still is my interpretation of the work. However the one point of view I cannot see it through are the eyes of some one who is in fact Jewish. Many feel that it is a stereotype and an overdrawn version of what it is to be Jewish.

My pale comparison is that of my own reaction to the series Will and Grace. Many straight friends, allies, and many queer folk love this show, think it is great and feel it changed perceptions. I find it to be the queer equivalent of Step and Fetch it. Broad stereotypes are paraded throughout the work and celebrated. If at the time of the work we had equal rights and representation across all media then perhaps there would be room for this form of humor. We didn’t and still don’t. This show was in no way ground braking.

So on some level I get it.

Next we come to Melissa Hillman a woman I hold in the highest regard for her writing and work in theatre. She recently posted on the upcoming production of The Glass Menagerie at Cal Shakes. First off it is an all black cast, the work is about family relationships and memory no race or culture holds a monopoly on these themes.

Secondly they have cast an actor who is physically handicapped as Laura; here is where I have a problem.

This echo’s the current production playing in New York; bellow is the New York Times review.

Review: Dismantling ‘The Glass Menagerie’ – The New York Times

For me this is the will of the director imposing his or her vision onto a work that cannot hold it. “My way no matter what cost” has never been a go to for me in directing. Will the text support your idea? If not find another text or devise your own.

Williams is considered to be one of America’s finest playwrights, his work is subtle nuanced and poetical. With all the talk about respect for the playwright where is the respect to his work, where do we draw the line when it comes to interpretation?

What is the play about? It is considered to be autobiographical on many levels and is called a memory play. William’s own sister was mentally fragile and in life is destroyed by a botched lobotomy he dedicated much of his profits to make sure she had a comfortable life outside an institution. Laura,  the theatrical representation of his sister in the play, we are told suffers from a limp brought on by a childhood illness that has also left her mentally fragile.

Its beyond a leap of faith to go from a limp to being confined to a wheelchair or suffering from acute MS. It simply isn’t supported in the text anywhere. The play then becomes all about her physical impairments and not about the journey that Tom (Tennessee Williams) is on and what it reveals about him and his relationships.

This feels more like sensationalism then a well thought out approach

When a role calls for someone in a wheelchair go out and find an actor confined to a wheelchair, or deaf, one that is deaf, or blind. There are things that non-impaired actors simply cannot convey, as hard as they try. This holds true for trans characters as well. Its not about ability its about visibility and opportunity as well as having a visceral understanding to what is being asked.

So in the end my interpretation of this play does not see Laura so physically impaired that she cannot walk unassisted, no wheelchair, no walker, it pulls me out of the trajectory of the work, it is so jarring that I have lost what it is the work itself is trying to convey.

This also challenges me as an artist, what are the limits I put on interpretation and can I see past my own prejudice to view a work in a different way?

So no its not a fad its been going on since theatre started. There are many arguments and stances about how we cast regarding gender especially concerning Shakespeare. The Globe wants to do what they refer to as traditional or historical casting of the female roles If they stayed true to historic accounts they would be casting boys no older than 17. We do not cast in this way so we say we are casting in the “spirit” of the Elizabethan theatre. Fine, and then do the same with an all female cast. The audience can come and see the work in two very different ways and find something new in each rendition.

What does casting in this way open up or allow the actor to experience? And again why not start to do it in reverse as several theatres have done and continue to do.

 

Shakespeare Trilogy review – Donmar’s phenomenal all-female …

https://www.theguardian.com › Arts › Stage › Theatre

Smooth Faced Gentlemen: the all-female Shakespeare co.

smoothfacedgentlemen.com/

 

How do we apply this concept to contemporary theatre? Currently the company that I founded and now is in the process of moving forward in a new space is about to launch an all female cast of Glengarry Glenn Ross by Mamet. The stipulation from Mamet is that they present themselves as women and not portray the characters to be men. So this is cross casting in a contemporary setting.

Keri Gudjohnsen the director has been wanting to do this project for more than just a little while. I asked why, as those who know me know my views on this playwright, her answer was very clear. “No one writes this way for women.” She is right no one does, there are some great women playwrights out there and some write very gritty and forceful roles for women but nothing to my knowledge of this veracity.

Viewing this world through a different gendered lens opens up a great deal of the content and relationships and brings fresh life to the work.

What does this accomplish? It gives us a window into how we view gendered behavior and what that says about us as a whole in society. Our self imposed gendered boxes get pushed out of shape for the evening and we have to listen and adapt to the work being offered.

The concept of a binary gendered system is being broken down by a new generation of human beings who do not see themselves or the world in a two-color palate. As artists we should be embracing this movement not only to keep theatre relevant to the world we function in, but also to challenge the actors to explore their craft with roles and concepts that challenge them and make them stronger artists, and hopefully people.

As to the production of Glengarry Glenn Ross I have great faith in Keri’s ability to bring this to life, she is driven to do so. I have had the great opportunity to work with her not only as a company member but also under her direction in film. She is focused and clear, I have no doubt the production will be as well.

http://www.b8theatre.org/home.html

 

As artists and builders what is our role in the current world order with fascism on the agenda for America and across Europe? Do we play our instruments and entertain as the ship sinks or we are marched to the camps?

There are many who do not want to cause trouble they see their role as entertainers and nothing more. They choose to be a distraction from the world’s ills I understand this position laughter can be a great balm in dark times and the need to escape even for two hours is a gift. Unfortunately this has been the thrust of American theatre locally and nationally.

Our national government collectively has never supported the arts with any real enthusiasm since the WPA movement. Now the NEA, a political bowling ball, will cease to be altogether and the US will be one of the few western nations that doesn’t support and encourage the arts as a part of their culture or national identity. This is nothing new we have seen the result in our education system and the toll it has taken, shameful doesn’t come close to describing it.

So what do we build, and to what end?

Build work that provokes, challenges, and above all sparks debate and discussion. We cannot continue to perform to the enlightened we need to entice both sides in and start a discussion. We need to make the work relevant to today’s world, even when we are reflecting something from the past. How do we draw the similarities and point them out to our audiences with out bashing them over the head with it?

This is our job.

 

Here are some suggestions of works that can be brought forward with clear parallels made

 

Blitzstein’s The Cradle Will Rock

Behan’s The Hostage

Miller’s All my Sons and of-course the Crucible

Ibsen’s   The Enemy of the People

David Hare’s Plenty, Stuff Happens, The Absence of War, A Map of the World

Kushner’s Homebody Kabul, Angels in America

Rickman/Viner My Name is Rachel Corrie

Akhtar’s Disgraced

Brant’s Grounded

 

Build new work that touches local history, or the community around you and how it has changed. What are the biggest issues facing the community you live in and how can you bring them forward onto the stage? Be thoughtful don’t just show one side or bias the work to “send a message” use the work to provoke debate and engagement. The idea that we can do nothing is the first and largest hurdle we all face.

 

Lisa Drostova a former Butterfield 8 company member and fellow maker has this to say,

 

Political Theatre Today – Theatre Bay Area

www.theatrebayarea.org/news/299177/

 

 

The Guardian has several articles on where theatre stands today

 

Political theatre | Stage | The Guardian

https://www.theguardian.com/stage/political–theatre

 

The way we make now is vital, how we engage with the work and each other. Yelling at one an other gets us no where we have to listen to each other even when what the other is saying repels us we have to listen and discern what is at the heart of their argument, and address that. Above all go out and make some art and most of all make some trouble.

 

What is the definition of Drag? According to Wikipedia it is as follows:

A drag queen is a person, usually male, who dresses in drag and often acts with exaggerated femininity and in feminine gender roles. Often they will exaggerate certain characteristics such as make-up and eyelashes for comic, dramatic or satirical effect. While drag is very much associated with gay men and gay culture, there are drag artists of all sexualities. There are many kinds of drag artists and they vary greatly in dedication, from professionals who have starred in films to people who just try it once, or those who simply prefer clothing and makeup that is usually worn by the opposite sex in their culture. Drag queens can vary widely by class and culture. Other drag performers include drag kings, women who perform in male roles and attire, faux queens, who are women who dress in an exaggerated style to emulate drag queens, and faux kings, who are men who dress to impersonate drag kings.

 

Do we consider cross -dressing in the theatre (plays and operas) as a form of Drag? I do not; to me drag is about creating your own persona and making something out of scratch not filling a role requirement in a some one else’s work.

Now to look at this question I am also not going to include ancient temple cross dressing priests or those who lived as the other gender that is another topic. Drag as performance is what I want to discuss and how we define it, and what it does. The world of what has been referred to in several ways as Drag or female impersonators. This tradition goes back to music hall days and has as many stars both renowned and infamous like Fanny and Stella who went on trail before Oscar Wilde and went on to continue their stage career after being acquitted.

This kept up through the 50s and 60s with clubs featuring “acts” Finoccho’s, Club My oh My and many others most performers would sing and dance, before the world of lip-syncing arrived

. https://youtu.be/W6EsOPozjdk

There is a lot written about the history of the art form, and yes I do consider it to be an art form.

 

The idea of a man shedding his power in a male dominated society and culture to dawn the manners and appearance of the opposite gender one that is viewed as weaker and less than is in fact an act of empowerment for them, we see this time and time again. Is it less for Drag Kings who are emulating the ways and manners of men? It’s possible as we view a man’s sexuality very differently than we view women’s sexuality. The rules for men are still fixed in the binary system. As to how doing drag affects the performer from everything we are told by these performers and artists they feel complete in a way they hadn’t before, as gender expression and playing with the binary system weather or not that’s what they are doing intentionally its what’s happening. The role of drag within the community has also changed as the fight for equality has shifted to conform to the hetro- normative model.

 

Drag queens, fems and non – conforming queer folk historically have been in the forefront of the fight for equality, they are not the queers who sit politely and ask permission as we look to our history it’s the drag community that started the riots in New York and San Francisco. It is this fight surrounding drag and gender identity within the community that continues the discussions of Hetro and Homo normative and how drag is viewed within our own community, how we wish to be perceived, and the idea of there no longer being room for non- conforming.

 

In drag the performer has the permission to say and do almost anything they want. It gives them a platform to tease and to say things they never would say (for the most part) to anyone who is in the line of fire.

 

Drag is a transformation; it is also a form of art where your body is your canvas. It has gone from presenting as the other sex to high performance art.

We go from the performative with in bars and nightclubs to the Ball culture of the 80s and 90s. More and more Drag queens and Kings are pushing the boundaries taking bigger risks and squewing our idea of what gender is suppose to resemble, sound like, and act like.

Looking at Rupaul and his sheer force of will, the first drag queen to be the face of a cosmetic, and liquor add campaign he has had several iterations of talk shows and now a game show on top of Drag Race.

With the sudo mainstreaming of RuPual’s Drag race I wonder what is the affect this show has had on the drag culture? We look to the contestants who have taken the crown; we see performers in the traditional sense with Del Rio, Jinx, and Bob the Drag working in the mainstream of classic entertainment singing and stand up. The first pushing of the boundaries of what we consider to be proper drag with Sharon Needles, and a gender bending Violet who strips down to practically nothing and is clearly male and yet clearly not all at once.

https://youtu.be/l_w7wTn-WYs

 

Drag is not a conformative art form. So it will be interesting to see if the real mainstream culture will try to co -opt it and just how that will go.

 

The reaction to faux Queens has been interesting and hostile in some cases. Can women be drag Queens?

https://youtu.be/VJYaq_XnjaQ

 

In the spirit of Drag I think absolutely women can do drag the very nature, culture and history support it. I am curious as to what is spawning the hostility? Why is it a threat?

Women pushing boundaries within and commenting on femininity can be act of defiance so I’m all for it and clearly it pushes buttons that’s what is at the heart of drag.

 

Drag is a performance art, one that makes you question what the boundaries of gender are, and should we have boundaries surrounding gender in the first place?

 

The spirit and world of drag has influenced theatre and has taken from theatre. How can we, as theatre makers, take more of this on in how we present theatre? The courage and risk taking is at the heart of drag and it is this that we should be bringing back into theatre. We have fallen into a complacency that does little service to the audience and the work. We need to make bigger choices and have the courage to stand behind them.

 

 

So recently in the news is the story of Pennsylvania Ballet and their new Artistic director Angel Corella. He has fired (let’s not quibble about dancers on contract, in ballet there is an assumption that dancers will stay with their contracted company) 12 artists. Five more are walking or being pushed. This is nearly half of a company that only employs 43 dance artists. If a dancer is not having their contract renewed, it is vital to give them notice earlier rather than later so the artist can look for a new position before seasons start.

 

Corella, according to The Inquirer has used the following excuses for his actions:

 

The reasons Corella gave that contracts were not renewed included: Dancers were not chosen by choreographers for new ballets; dancers were able to dance only certain styles; dancers had trouble adjusting to the new leadership; dancers were of a height that made partnering a challenge.

http://www.philly.com/philly/entertainm

 

“It’s always a difficult process for everyone” when contracts are not renewed, Corella said. “It’s the hardest part of being an artistic director.”

http://www.philly.com/philly/entertainment/arts/20160426_Pennsylvania_Ballet_to_leave_or_be_let_go.html#p0oJkygEbXqe5YMr.99

 

As an artistic director you are hired to come in and work with an existing company, if it isn’t something that you have built from scratch you are stepping into a pre-existing culture of work and relationships. Artistic Directors must realize that the people there are there because they also love the company and what they do. They are brought in for change and growth, and to bring fresh eyes to the work and company.

 

Corella’s statements about the “process” ring quite shallow when you look at the actual size of the company and the ease with which his ‘issues’ could have been addressed.

 

First off “dancers were not chosen by choreographers.” Well, as a freelance choreographer I have to work with who is in the room. I should have access to the entire company but that is what I have to work with. If you cannot rise to that challenge what are you doing in the business? Do you think every company is ABT? If your work has been picked up by a company you think cannot do the work you have the right to say no, if you don’t it is your job to get the work out of these artists. Grow up and do what you have been commissioned to do.

 

Next “dancers weren’t able to dance a certain style and the heights made partnering a challenge.” You are also a dancer and now the head of a company. Your challenge is to bring the company to a new level. I understand the ballet aesthetic varies from school to school, but this is the company you have been brought into. These dancers have been faithful to the company and deserve a chance to learn as artists and, more importantly, these are the artists you knew were there when you took the contract.

 

This reminds me of the debacle of Oakland Ballet. That company grew out of nothing. The dancers body shapes were not the standard, which allowed them to do early work such as The Green Table and Nijinsky’s Rights of Spring with an authenticity few companies, could claim. The dancers were incredibly loyal and it was their efforts when the company was in turmoil that kept the company afloat. The new artistic director was a disaster. She caused rifts and fired many of the dancers who had helped keep the company alive. She tanked the company in a very short time, and the board did nothing to stop her. She tried and failed to make Oakland Ballet something it was never intended to be and in so doing destroyed what she was brought in to shepherd. That company is on the mend, but has a great way to go.

 

Ballet companies are little fiefdoms. Most look on the dancer as a cog not an artist unless they are principals and even then it’s not always a win for the artist. The companies and boards refer to them as artists when it suits them. The culture of ballet is old, hierarchical, and hasn’t really changed in quite some time. Smaller boutique troupes, can be run quite differently. Ballet receives major funding from the state and big grants organizations and donors in the US and elsewhere. This means money is always there on some level to explore and reshape, not just hack and slash. The problem with this type of funding of tradition is no one is building tutu ballets anymore. The vast majority of new choreographers are rooted in contemporary movement. The dancer/artist today must be versatile, adaptable, and versed in as many styles as possible. This occurs far more in European companies than in the US.

 

Audiences for this medium are also changing. Many don’t want to be danced at, they want to feel a connection to the performer or at least be acknowledged by the performer. How ballet is performed is in need of change. It is this change that Mr. Corella could have addressed with his new company. He could have challenged them to step up to the task at hand. This appears to have been too difficult for him, so like a little tyrant he is destroying to build something out of the ashes.

 

“Angel’s stock answer is that certain people haven’t been on board,”

http://www.philly.com/philly/entertainment/arts/20160426_Pennsylvania_Ballet_to_leave_or_be_le

 

Your job as artistic director is to communicate as best you can and to build with the artists in the room. The days of Balanchine are hopefully on their way out. You build in his way at your peril. Opera and ballet are striving to remain relevant in an arts world that sees them more and more as performance that is for a certain class of people. Ballet has several advantages: there are training facilities everywhere, there is a huge sense of romance connected to it, and the skill required is high. Ballet dancers are seen as athletes, but should also be seen as artists with a voice. The same is true of opera but opera does not have the same saturation as dance.

 

Some amazing things are happening in both of these mediums, but change is hard and challenging. The money that these industries rely on is being challenged by more contemporary art forms that speak to a 21st century generation.

 

I wish the dancers/artist leaving the company all the best and I hope that Mr. Corella will learn something from this, but I doubt it.

Pina along with Merce Cunningham, Martha Graham and others laid the ground- work for many artists who followed. This isn’t to say their work is easy, or as potent as it was when it was first made, however they paved the road that many artists travel now.

 

A topic of discussion among my colleagues and I has been about theory and its practical application in theatre and dance. The audience shouldn’t have to know your theory to be able to understand or get something out of the work. As I watched Pina’s company perform the other night I realized that we have retreated from the thinking audience. Work should challenge the viewer, make them think, question and debate what they have seen. Most mainstream work long ago stopped asking larger questions of their audiences and choosing instead simply to entertain. This is part of the function but not the only one. A balanced season or performance will catch you out, make you consider something you hadn’t thought to question.

 

If, however, you are driven by theory and think your audience should know this theory to get everything they need to out of your work, you will play to empty houses. The early artist of contemporary/modern movement didn’t always work with theory but with a visceral idea that others later built a theory around.

 

So as I sat in the audience for the New Zealand Festival’s big event, I was surrounded by people of a certain age (ticket prices were quite high). They came to see art with a capital A. So Pina has become mainstream. Something that would have seemed impossible when she was first starting out. Müller left them somewhat bewildered, although during the interval people had questions “what did it mean?” was one and “what did you think?” was the other.

 

The work itself uses the Café her parents ran when she was growing up as a jumping off place. It is not an easy work to experience. Watching it however, I saw the roots of other works by other artists. Pina opened a door for them, took the big risk and in so doing shaped the form of things to come. Bowie and Almodóvar both credit her as a large influence on certain works of their own. A segment of Müller appears in “Talk to Her” Almodóvar’s film with similar themes as that Pina addresses in her work.

 

Rites of Spring

There are many iterations of this work by many choreographers, each with their own take on what Stravinsky was trying to provoke or illustrate with his score. As a dancer I have had the opportunity to dance the original choreography by Nijinsky. It was one of the most difficult pieces of music I have ever moved to. Of the many versions I have seen Pina’s is the pinnacle. There is a sense of danger in the work that I seldom experience in dance any more. The movement echoes the score as it drives to the ending, leaving the one woman who has been chosen to move in a solo that at times cannot match the score. Will they kill her? Eat her? Rape her? All of the above? You really don’t know, and just as you are about to find out the work is over.

This work has more structure and more recognizable dance movement then much of her other work, and was received with loud cheers and applause. Justly so, it is a break-neck work that never really stops to take a breath.

Carol is a visually sumptuous film that captures the New York of the fifties. It’s on the verge of ‘something coming’, but still steeped in the fifties formality. Todd Haynes’ direction isn’t heavy handed, he gives the actors room to fill moments, the dialogue is sparse but so much is clearly said.

 

I like the film for many reasons the sheer beauty of it, the fact that it’s an unapologetic queer story, and that it isn’t trying to do too much. We follow the characters as each makes major changes in their lives; in the end the world is full of possibilities.

 

When I look at Carol I see a film intrinsically different from Brokeback Mountain. There was nothing new in Brokeback, the acting was beautiful the cinematography breath taking, but in the end Hollywood sings the same old tune, two men fall in love, act on it, so of course one of them has to die. There was nothing ground-breaking other than it came from a big studio and big names worked on it.

 

Carol, based on a book by a queer woman and directed by a queer man, unashamedly tells the story of two women and has a feeling of self-ownership and hope.

Unlike so much coming out the big studios these days Carol is a thinking person’s film, it’s not a big story, but it is an important one. The director was in charge and was given room to work; the result is a film that will last much longer than most of what’s running out there.

 

Tangerine

This is a list of firsts, filmed by Sean S Baker on an IPhone 5 it is the first “fictional” movie filmed in the US where we have trans actors playing trans people. This may not be pleasant to watch, but is a real situation for female to male transsexuals out there living on the street or just getting by. It doesn’t judge. It puts you in an unknown world that we would usually avoid at all costs. It isn’t for everyone, but there is a wonderful raw quality to the work. The acting isn’t groundbreaking but in most cases honest, the world they occupy is limited and has its borders, as well as being broken. The sound track is pulled together by a quilt of indie musicians, some only 17.

 

It will be interesting to see what he makes next.

 

With trans folk being in the media so much right now with Orange is the New Black, The Danish Girl, About Ray, and Transparent, we have many depictions some honest, some romanticized, some missing the mark. With all of this comes a constantly repeating question: who should play these roles?

 

As a queer artist I am torn on the question of whether queer actors should be first in line for the roles. On the rare occasion we see queer people playing queer characters on screen we see a depth that is sometimes missing from other performances. Am I reading too much into this? Quite possibly it’s hard to judge. Looking at Ben Whishaw, for instance, in London Spy there is a visceral connection to the understanding of the relationship.

 

With trans roles I want to see a trans performer bring something only they can viscerally know to the work. An example of this is the French film Wild Side. The film cast Stephanie Michelini as the lead portraying a trans women living in Paris. There is something mesmerizing about her performance in the quiet looks and silent moments, her sense of exhaustion and her non-apologetic decision to live her life as she does. Filmed in 2004 you see immediately how far we have to go to catch up with this kind of filmmaking. Living as a queer man, just like living as a queer woman or trans has its own history and has informed us in ways straight people do not experience.

 

On the other hand, as a theatre maker I want to see the character not the performer. It shouldn’t matter who the actor is sexually “in real life”, it is the actor’s portrayal of the given role that is important. This is the current argument amongst artists in the field today. We are all human, we all experience joy and sorrow, we should be able to portray any character without the actor’s personal orientation being brought into question.

 

In a perfect world that is true, I have no doubt that the straight and non-trans actors working in these roles are striving to be as authentic as they can be.

 

We don’t live or work in a perfect world. Hollywood and American media especially have no idea how to break out of stereotypes and poor writing choices, not only with queer characters but with pretty much any minority character depicted on small and big screen. What’s even more disturbing is that they don’t see there is a problem. One has only to look at the merchandizing for the Star Wars film to see that they are clearly out of touch with the public of 2016.

 

We still hear the argument that those who are out will never get work. We see less of this in the music industry. At present more and more recording artists are coming out, and making videos that depict their sexuality without apology. As musicians they are their work so a sense of authenticity and acknowledgement of who they are can only help as they create their own brand.

 

For actors, and especially, let’s be clear, male actors, the fear that being out is a career killer is still quite real. In other parts of the world this is not necessarily an issue, they do the work and get on with it. I don’t want an actor to sacrifice their career just to be out, but I would love to see more queer actors demanding a more adult approach to the work and how we are portrayed.

 

It is here the American movie industry is years behind Europe and the independent scene not only on what is produced and who portrays whom, but how the films are viewed. I will acknowledge that HBO and Showtime have made great strides in this area.

 

Do I think it is different for women than it is for men? Yes I do. We have a different view of women’s sexuality as a culture. Women have been objectified and marginalized within the arts world as well as all walks of life. How a woman looks and dresses, does she wear make-up, all the mundane sexist crap that women deal with daily. This is changing, but very, very slowly. A woman’s sexuality isn’t seen as her own, it is about the straight male gaze and she has little agency. A man’s expression of his orientation reflects directly on how he is viewed as a man. People see queerness as a feminized weakness, he is somehow soft. These are not manly qualities in the western cultural view. This too is being challenged and rightly so.

 

All of this is going on within the discussion of who gets to play gay on screen. So the conversation isn’t an easy one or one that has a clear answer. As a director I want an actor who is right for the role. If it’s a queer role I will do my best to cast a queer actor because there is less to translate. Do I think straight cannot play queer? Not at all. Desire, passion, and love do not know boundaries in the real world. Would I want to see an actor labeled and unemployed because the powers that be don’t think the audience will buy a queer man playing straight? It’s been happening for a long time you just didn’t know about it.

 

At the end of the day for me no matter who the actor is, did they treat the subject with respect and integrity? Is it a three dimensional character or a flat one-dimensional stereotype?

 

These are the battles still being fought.