convergence-continuum

Saw The Boys in the Band last Friday at convergence and enjoyed myself thoroughly.

Overview

The play, written by Mart Crowley, first appeared in 1968 and in some ways you can tell that it is dated–and not in the more obvious aspects–set, exposition, etc., but in the real concerns confronting the characters. This is not to say that it is not very powerful: it is. And powerful in ways you might not expect. Although the issue of homosexuality concerning the men might not be as biting today as it was once, the other fears and concerns that the men express certainly resonate: aging and the heart rending realization that your best years are not only behind you, but lost forever and only memories; finding meaning and value in one’s life, accepting who you are and learning to move forward in the best possible way. For these characters, though, in 1968, there was piled on top of these more “common” concerns, the very real stigma and abuse associated with being homosexual.

Description

The Boys in the Band, in essence, is about a group of gay men coming together to throw a birthday party. As the party goes along, and the men drink more and more, it becomes apparent that the life-long battle with the social stigma that has been attached to their sexual orientation has brutalized many of the men’s self image and, coupled with the issues I mentioned above, leads to scathing and terrible personal attacks as self-hatred and loathing is projected (by some men) and returned, and volleyed around like a tennis ball. It is important, I think, to note that the men are each representative of a certain type and not all of the men hates himself.

The play gets off to a slow start at the apartment of the host, Michael, (Curt Arnold) who is getting dressed and preparing the apartment for the party. His lover, Donald, (Zac Hudak) arrives (he’s a librarian) and through a rather lengthy stretch of exposition we receive the information that will drive most of the rest of the play: the disillusion that Donald and Michael have with the gay scene, the fact that each is seeing a shrink, that Michael has always had a difficult time with this parents, his identity, and has recently stopped smoking and drinking. The final piece of the expositional puzzle is a telephone call to Michael from Alan (Jim Jarrell) an old college chum (conceited, supercilious, pretentious) who is also straight–perhaps. Alan is drunkenly weeping into the phone and has something to tell Michael; he will only tell Michael in person, and insists on coming over to Michael’s apartment. One-by-one the guests arrive and the play really picks up steam and energy: Emory (Clyde Simon) is the quintessential fairy who lightly floats about making snarky, often lascivious, comments; Bernard (Bobby Williams) the only black gay man in the group; Larry (Scott Zolkowski), a truly lascivious gay man who cannot abide monogamy, much to the chagrin of his lover Hank (Dan Kilbane) the token “married” gay man in the group; a gay prostitute/midnight cowboy (Benjamin Gregg); and finally, there is Harold (Jonathan Wilhelm) in whose honor the party is being thrown.

With the party in full gear the drunkenness and back-talking begins. All is well until Alan shows up forcing Michael to request that the gay men all behave and pretend to be what they are not, culminating at the end of act one with Alan punching Emory for one-too-many snide comments and Michael falling off the wagon and chugging vodka or scotch from a carafe.

The second act builds on the first with drunken boisterousness rising and rising alongside the anger and self-loathing of Michael who now takes careful target at virtually everyone in the room–with only Harold, the star party guest, showing the capacity to match Michael’s sparring.

Conclusion

I’ll not bore everyone with a book report of the play, but suffice it to say the play becomes very raw and dangerous at this point, exposing what I can only imagine to be the circa 1960s/70s psychological damage that was done by the constant degradation of these men by the societal and cultural attitudes toward who they in their very being were. Despite the lightness, the airs, the joking; one can see that the damage and relentlessness of it on the psyche and health of these men was severe and Crowley’s play does an excellent job of laying bare this reality.

Production Notes

Douglas Tyson-Rand does a very good job directing and keeping the pace of this play up and driving constantly forward; Cory Molnar designed a great circa-1960s set for the play that, as always, is comfy cozy in the close-up world of The Liminis theater space.

If you haven’t seen this play, do yourself a favor and check it out. It runs through Saturday, October 29th at convergence.

Wanted to quickly throw up some mock-ups that Michael Roesch, CPT’s designer, created using Google Sketch-up for Patterns. These are pretty much spot on for what you would have seen had you been in the space (for those of you who were not). I thought Roesch did a fantastic job, even staying one day for 14 hours to get the lights correct–using myself, Jarod, and Beth Wood as the cast had gotten antsy and left hours before.

 

There are slight differences, of course. Looking at the slightly elevated view below: there were four chairs upstage on either side.

These were for the cast members who were inactive at any given moment; or the chairs were moved down center when a scene required. Up left there was an additional clothing rack which held the costumes for the women actors, while the men used the up right rack. The dress form or figure was down left and, of course, had a dress that was being constructed on it. There were three cameras on tripods at left, up-center, and right which were displayed on the TVs at right (there were three).

 

The use of the cyc for silhouettes was the solution used given that the triptych called for in the script was not constructed, but it was yet highly effective to the same purpose and Michael did some fantastic lighting at the back which added a certain something to the overall effect. The pictures painted against the cyc were those of the king/queen and Frau Holda as well as those of the Mom/Ed characters, and used by the “model” when Harry Collins was on stage. That is to say, they weren’t quite as ‘disco’ as portrayed in the sketches. I’m also including Michael’s ground plan for the set as well.

 

Earlier today I was asked by Gilbert Doho to come and talk with his theater class. That was a first for me. Doho is teaching a course on Theater and Identity and wanted me to speak to my identity in theater and in this particular play. I was quite surprised by how much I could speak to that topic, having not quite considered the play in that way. For instance, the main character Aisa, who is, throughout, constructing or reconstructing, her identity: with the dress and play aspects serving as a metaphor for that process. Throughout she is resistant to the past that she has been dealt: alcoholics, dysfunctionals, etc. So, besides actively resisting on the one hand, she is actively constructing on the other.

 

I talked quite a bit about my own family background, which, interestingly, I have not explicitly explored in theater. It was curious to listen to the students in the class who understood my conundrum and articulated it clearly themselves: that as an x # of generations in American the ethnic and cultural identity that we possess is American and not anything else. I framed this against possibilities, for instance, my father’s side of the family came over from Ireland in the late 1800’s. It would be easy for me to be a Catholic who joins the Ancient Order of Hibernians and insists that my children learn to dance and speak Gaelic. Yet I have avoided that path as being something that, to my mind, is “put on” and not an organic extension of my own true American identity. I also explored the well-publicized tiff that occurred several years ago between August Wilson and Robert Brustein. This was used to frame the conversation, as Wilson was very entrenched in his opinions regarding his own ethnicity, race, and identity; something that I don’t share. To what extent this is because I represent the “dominant” culture and race in this country (for now) I do not know, but assume that this has something to do with it.

A very interesting day that has lent itself to some possible routes for new play creation.