From
Issue #4, Winter 2004
The Politics of Readers Theatre
by Mary McDonald-Lewis
Co-Artistic Director
Readers Theatre Repertory
Portland Oregon
Readers Theater
is a wonderful medium for children¹s tales, and sweet stories of
love and laughter. We¹ve gone further with challenging adult stories,
some pretty dark. Audiences have responded warmly, and enthusiastically.
But, could we stage
controversial political Readers Theatre successfully? Or, would it scare
off our demographic and set back a company that¹s taken us three
years to build?
Readers Theatre
Repertory is housed in an intimate art gallery in Portland, Oregon.
The gallery is the city¹s oldest artist collective, with different
groups of two or three artists exhibiting their shows every month.
Every month the
art show is different, and every month, on some level, we as a theatre
company must respond to that: by blocking our shows around the art,
if it is sculptural and takes up floor space; through our design of
entrances and exits, using the collective¹s moveable walls (and
the paintings on them) creatively; and by treating the art as set pieces.
Sometimes a canvas is a window to the busy street below, other times
a painting of a flower vase is treated as actual blooms in a home, imagined
on a sideboard or dresser. I recall a watercolor rendering of a tea
set on one wall referred to when one character invited another to tea,
and our real cups and saucers became part of the larger image just behind
it.
All of these opportunities
have allowed us to expand our simple theatre, which is comprised of
the gallery floor, the three large moveable walls, two benches, two
chairs, some white rectangular pedestals of varying heights, and four
black stools and music stands. To these few pieces we add light, sound
effects, music, some scant props, minimal costumes, creative audience
seating (traditional rows, in the round, at a diagonal, randomly chaotic
- we¹ve done all that and much more!) and the stage is complete.
Of course, a great story must lie at the heart, or all the bells and
whistles in the world, or lack of them, will not make viable Readers
Theatre.
In early January
we learned that the artist hanging his show in April, Harry Widman,
had themed his exhibition "Greed, War and Deception," designed
to be a scathing condemnation of the Bush administration. As a company
we don¹t have a political position, but we had an idea.
What if we held
a play writing competition to respond to Widman¹s art in some way,
and then staged the winners? We had legitimate worries. though. We might
put off our audience. We might not get enough play submissions. We might
offend the artist, or the gallery. Worst of all, we might fail dramatically,
with poor works that neither entertain, nor reflect Widman¹s show.
We persevered, however,
believing that if we dedicated ourselves, we would have a good chance
of staging something deeply exciting and profoundly legitimate. But
the stakes were high, as disaster was also a possibility. We were willing
to bet on the idea, but losing the gamble would be a tremendous setback.
Using our local
theatre chat list, a call was put out to the play wrighting community,
detailing the competition, and inviting all interested to a meeting
with Widman and RTR. Eight playwrights joined us at Blackfish Gallery
on January 20th, where Widman showed slides of his work, and talked
about his vision for the art show. The writers asked questions, and
we shared the perimeters of the plays they could submit: the shows had
to suit the simple space; they had to be no more than 20 minutes long;
they needed to rely on ideas rather than effects, large casts, elaborate
sets, costumes, or props. Most of all, the stories had to respond to
Widman¹s show. We made sure the playwrights understood that it
didn¹t matter if they agreed or disagreed with Widman, that RTR
wasn¹t demanding a particular political position from them, but
rather whatever personal reaction they wished.
There was no pay
involved other than royalties of $15 per play, per performance for the
ones we selected to stage. Deadline for submission was March 1st, just
over a month away.
By deadline we had
ten plays to consider. One or two playwrights chose not to submit, and
others, who did not meet Widman at the gallery, did. A few submitted
more than one play.
Out of the ten,
we would use no more than 5, depending on length.
March 15th was the
company¹s deadline to read all the plays and vote for their favorites.
As we worked on this, we also cast and prepared to mount our production
of Brian Friel¹s Lovers: Losers, set for March 14th and
15th (we always stage Irish theatre in March.) To say we were busy is
an understatement!
Of the plays, two
or three just weren¹t good theatre. Another one or two were off
topic, which brought us down to six or so to choose from. As we began
to juggle the shows, it soon became apparent that certain plays "wanted"
to be staged with others. There was a way to build the evening logically,
ways the shows fit together, that eliminated the last few that just
didn¹t work with the arc of the production.
Becoming a Bag
Lady, by Ginny Foster, is the story of an elderly woman who fears
her thrifty habit, and poverty, has turned her into a bum. Ellen West¹s
My Hat tells the tale of a mother and daughter isolated from
a perceived enemy, and what happens when one is encountered. Behind
Enemy Lines, written by Ebbe Roe Smith, is the fever dream of a
traumatized soldier, and Francesca Sanders¹ Uncle Dickie¹s
Funhouse is a crazy carnival of a kid¹s TV show, featuring
Dick Cheney as the host, with special guest George Bush appearing as
a sock puppet.
We had our plays,
which in total produced just over an hour of storytelling. We called
the project The State of the Union.
I was the director
of two plays, my colleague Jamie Miller two. Casting was completed,
with 8 actors filling the roles. There was a bit of script doctoring
to do between March 15th and April 4th, our first table read, with the
playwrights eager to oblige. Press releases were shipped to our usual
media outlets, and the local Pacifica station, intrigued by the concept,
invited the artist and me to appear on its theatre program to talk about
the show. Another P.R. windfall: one of the cast members is a producer
for a Clear Channel radio station. He cut a :30 PSA about the show and
shipped it to Air America, now broadcasting in Portland, where it ran
31 times.
We had our traditional
two rehearsals, attended by the playwrights and artist Harry Widman.
Our sound designer, company member Bob Martin, suggested that we have
no music between plays, except for the transition from the horrifying
Enemy Lines to the satirical Uncle Dickie, and that instead
of our stagehands changing the sets, we use the actors from each play
to set the scene for the play following it. The silence and smooth transitions,
with no interruption from outside the world of the plays, would create
a seamless "whole" of an evening. Jimi Hendrix¹s "All
Along the Watchtower" would cap off the night as curtain music.
We were ready, or
as ready as we could be. Recalling our earlier concerns, we wondered:
this was Easter weekend. Are we going to enrage our audience with these
inflammatory plays? Would they work as theatre as well as amplification
of Widman¹s art?
Reservations started
coming in, via phone and website (readerstheatrerep.org). Folks were
even calling the gallery, which directed them to me (I¹m also the
company box office!) When we set out our chairs on April 9th, there
weren¹t enough. We added more, and that Friday we had 43 in a house
that usually holds 30.
On Saturday, we
had 57.
Standing room only!
On both nights,
after the show, the audience refused to leave, but engaged in passionate
conversation with each other, the playwrights, the artist, the actors,
and the company. Instead of our usual 30 minute strike, we were there
for over an hour! Some people found Enemy Lines offensive. Others
felt it was tragically accurate, and asked for a copy of the script.
One woman approached playwright Sanders, and about Uncle Dickie
said, "This is the first time I¹ve been able to laugh, thinking
about September 11th. Thank you," she said, with tears in her eyes,
"Thank you."
One thing was certain:
no one left without a strong opinion of the evening.
Lessons learned?
Don¹t be afraid to take a controversial stance and stage it. Make
sure it¹s a powerful story, not political polemic, and works as
a play alone, separate from its position. Trust that the audience appreciates
challenging theatre, that they hunger for it, in fact.
Future plans? To
see what is being exhibited next season, and determine if we should
produce another show in response to it. We¹re also considering
an Original Oregon Playwrights¹ month, with a specific month in
the Spring always reserved for the competition.
We grew as a company
in April, with an expanded reputation and audience growth. Personally,
I¹ve learned how to organize play writing competitions; how to
analyze original plays; how to work side-by-side with playwrights, directing
their work to our needs; how to mount brand-new theatre. The stakes
were high indeed, but happily RTR had a winning hand.
(HOME)