Showing posts with label Theater for Young Audiences. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Theater for Young Audiences. Show all posts

08 April 2026

Career Prep for the Arts, Part 3

 

[This is the third and final installment of the “Career Prep for the Arts” series on Rick On Theater.  Parts 1 and 2 were posted on Thursday. 2 April and Sunday, 5 April, respectively; I invite you to read them if you haven’t already. 

[Part 3 consists of two more articles from the teaching issues of American Theatre magazine.  The first one, from 2026, is about the changes in the Kennedy Center in Washington, D.C., since Donald Trump has assumed control—in particular, the effect his leadership has had on the educational and children’s programs at the Center and the consequences of those alterations,

[The second article, from 2025, is about the changes occurring in graduate academic programs across the country due to funding issues and shifts in the various administrations’ visions for post-graduate theater training and education.] 

WHAT’S LEFT STANDING OF
KENNEDY CENTER EDUCATION AND TYA?
by Daniella Ignacio 

[I’ve included the article below, posted on the American Theatre website on 9 February 2026, in my mini-series on “Career Prep for the Arts” because it reports on aspects of that topic even though it’s not part of either the 2025 “Teaching Issue” of the magazine or the 2026 “Learning Curves” issue.

[Under Roger L. Stevens (1910-98; theatrical producer, arts administrator, and real estate executive), the founding Chairman of both the National Endowment for the Arts (1965-69) and the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts (1961-88), the Center established a number of projects and offices concerned with the education of leaders in the arts, including theater and the performing arts, in the United States (see, for example, “Michael Kaiser: Man of the Arts” [21 December 2016]) and “A Master’s List” by Sofía Barrell in “Arts Administration, Article 6” (14 December 2020).]

The Center’s roles as an incubator of new work for young audiences, and as a generous host for the American College Theater Festival, will be hard to fill.

Among my community of D.C. artists, something that has always inspired me is our ability to place art and joy directly next to anger. That is life here. Our latest source of the fire: Come July 4, according to President Trump, the Kennedy Center will be closed for renovations for two years. In a gesture that coincides with America’s semiquincentennial, or 250th birthday, the president announced on Sunday, Feb. 1 via a TruthSocial post his plans to close the Center for about two years for unspecified construction (though it had an expansion and renovation as recently as 2019 [see “The Kennedy Center Expands” (5 December 2014) and With Newly Expanded Campus, Kennedy Center Aims to Make Art an Experience for All’” by Jeffrey Brown (8 September 2019)]). This move comes after cancellations and internal discord since Trump’s takeover of the Center last year, including his rebranding of the building in his name.

[Donald Trump (b. 1946; 45th President of the United States: 2017-21; inaugurated as 47th President in 2025) was elected chair of the Kennedy Center’s board of trustees on 12 February 2026, after Trump had dismissed the appointed board members and replaced them with his own. In May 2026, the board changed its rules regarding eligibility to vote, eliminating the ex officio trustees and permitting only Trump appointees to vote.

[This led the way for a long list of changes (including some that were unintentional, like cancellations of scheduled performances and appearances. On 18 December, the voting trustees authorized the change of the Center’s name to The Donald J. Trump and The John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts. On 1 February 2026, Trump announced that the Center would close on 4 July for two years of renovations.]

If the board approves the closure, it will be a disaster not only for the National Symphony Orchestra, which offers an average of 150 concerts a year at the Center, and for a slate of theatre, dance, and music tours, but also for the Center’s day-to-day staff and programs that employ local and national artists, including Kennedy Center Theater for Young Audiences (TYA), which has developed and produced more than 120 unique productions since 1986. 

Kennedy Center TYA’s staff had already downsized, with all its full-time leaders departing in October 2025, including David Kilpatrick, who’s now at Folger Theatre [founded in 1992; not to be confused with the former Folger Theatre Group, formed in 1970, which eventually became Washington’s Shakespeare Theatre Company], Maribeth Weatherford, now at Signature Theatre [an Arlington, Virginia, company, founded in 1989, that is unrelated to New York City’s Signature Theatre Company, founded in 1991], and Michelle Kozlak. The remaining staff are part-timers. The Center’s education department relies on Department of Education funding for $7 or $8 million out of its $13 million budget, as well as philanthropic and education grants. With that largesse, they managed to reach two million educators, administrators, and students across the U.S., Puerto Rico, and 12 additional countries in one year alone, according to a 2023 annual report.

If the program was already on life support even before the latest announcement, now the question is, what will happen to TYA shows that were scheduled to be developed at the Center during the planned two-year closure? One former staff member who spoke to American Theatre on background confirmed that, based on their knowledge of the contracts, artists might be able to take their shows elsewhere. But where? KCTYA was one of the only TYA companies in the U.S.—and the only one in the D.C. area—that solely produced new works, from commission to premiere to tours to national licensing, and its loss creates “a big void,” said the former staffer, who wondered what other sizable new-work incubator space could possibly take KCTYA’s place.

Of this year’s programming, a Seattle Children’s Theatre co-commission of Keiko Green’s Young Dragon already withdrew its Center run to focus on its Seattle premiere [12-29 March 2026]. Fishing for Stars, a theatre for the very young production by a collective that includes Megan Alrutz, Claire Derriennic, S. Elliot, Renita James, and Xinyue Zhang, comes up as a 404 on the website; another former staffer confirmed that the show, originally announced for a March run, won’t be happening at Kennedy Center. The same goes for a previously scheduled repeat tour of Sesame Street the Musical, which played the Center in summer 2025, as well as Fraggle Rock: Back to the Rock. According to an interviewee on background, no budget is currently allotted for next season in TYA, and next year’s season “doesn’t exist.” A former staffer guessed that the focus would have been on bringing in groups or pre-existing scripts, prior to the closure announcement. 

There is one more TYA show scheduled to go up before the July closure, which one former Center staffer called “one of the most creative scripts I have read in a long time”: the world premiere of The Sea Beyond the Ocean by playwright Doug Robinson, who was raised in northern Virginia and is now based between D.C. and New York. Set to run Feb. 28-March 15 [2026; it did], it follows a boy who searches for the missing ending to his favorite unfinished book. Featuring an all-Black cast, it is a Black fantasy in a register akin to Octavia Butler [1947-2006; African-American science fiction and speculative fiction writer] that “allows for the possibility of something different” and “invites people to imagine a better world,” said dramaturg Gabrielle Hoyt.

Robinson said he wanted to write a play for his father, who read books to him over the phone when he went on business trips. It’s “a play for kids who like to read, who find that reading is the safest place for them to be,” Robinson said. “Working through imagination is a way to build the end of the story you want to have. Imagination is the key to seeing a future that has never wanted you there, right? So it’s a play that says a child’s imagination can create a whole world where the characters come out, they tell stories, they learn, and they move forward. They’re not static. They’re not like, ‘We had an adventure, and now we’re going home.’ The world is changed by the imagination. That matters.”

Robinson first pitched Ocean when former staffer Sean-Maurice Lynch introduced him to the KCTYA team. Since being commissioned in late 2023, Ocean received two Kennedy Center workshops: one with Ashleigh King, and another with KenYatta Rogers, who directs the world premiere. Over the years, what has deepened and grown the most is Robinson’s understanding of what endings mean to a child. As Hoyt put it, “It’s become a really moving discussion of how to talk to kids about endings.”

One real-life ending: the exit of Kennedy Center TYA staff. When Michelle Kozlak departed, Robinson said, she called him personally; his play was what kept her there for as long as she could stay. Conversations about who would take over her work were had. “Not gonna lie, it was scary to have that transition,” said Robinson. “But I have never felt those fears come to reality. I have never, for one second, felt a lack of intentionality or support from Kennedy Center TYA.”  

For now, the company is in rehearsals, and the room has been an “intentionally and actively joyous” place, Robinson said. For the actors, staying focused on the art is important. Many were reluctant to speak for this article prior to opening out of fear that the administration would retaliate against the show. Said Robinson, “Simply put: the Kennedy Center commissioned me to write a play, and they’ve paid me all my money before the first rehearsal. I can pull the play and I’m not missing a dollar. It’s not about that. It’s about what we as a group want to do.” 

He recalled a conversation with the company on the first day in which they spoke about their feelings and why they were choosing to stay. “That was heartbreaking, hearing the individual inner life that people had to contend with,” Robinson said. “But they all still came to the conclusion that telling this story in what is historically known as Chocolate City, to kids, in a time where people think representation is only in service of some DEI language . . . How could we not?”

The joy they’re finding, Robinson said, is also in direct relationship to a kind of resilient protest. “Do we stand up for our home? Do we stand up for a place that I went to as a child wearing ill-fitting dress shoes with my mother?” Robinson said, recalling his first visits to the Kennedy Center. “If, and I hope this is not true, if the last new work produced by Kennedy Center TYA is The Sea Beyond the Ocean, I am grateful that the last group on that stage is a group of homegrown actors, homegrown designers, and homegrown storytellers. Because, the Kennedy Center is, yes, a symbol, but it’s also a local theatre.”

On the day that it was announced that Center would be closing for two years, Hoyt said, the staff spent the day making sure that the company was getting paid in a timely fashion. “They were responding to emails of mine within 5-10 minutes, about my direct deposit details, when they didn’t know if they had jobs anymore,” Hoyt said. “What they were doing was making sure that the contractors and artists in their building were being, like, financially, taken care of and safe. It was wild. I do not know if I would have had the fortitude to do that that day, but they did.”

“It really has become an all-hands-on-deck situation,” Robinson said. “Everyone is stepping up in ways that both I appreciate and also wish that they didn’t have to. It is a both-and situation, right? It is brilliance in the face of difficulty—not that difficulty has made the place weaker, if that makes sense. The building is the people. The storm can rage around them and they’re saying, how do we keep as many people safe as possible? How do we ensure that this is not a place of more chaos, but the eye of the storm? That this place can be calm and still, and we are going to make it through?” 

Hoyt agreed: “The D.C. arts community has lost a lot of funding. Institutions have closed. Institutions are going to keep closing. For me, I did not want to cause more loss, just because I would feel a certain way going into a certain building. Doug’s play is beautiful, and kids and families should get to see it if they feel that they can go there.”

Another KC program for young people had already left the building: Last Dec. 22, American College Theater Festival (ACTF) suspended its affiliation with the Kennedy Center after 58 years of partnership with the Kennedy Center. KCACTF was the oldest program at the Kennedy Center (indeed it predates the Center’s official opening, in 1971). In a Facebook post, ACTF shared that “our affiliation with the Kennedy Center is no longer viable . . . We want to assure you that this change does not mark an end—but a new chapter . . . ACTF will continue to serve as a ghostlight—a beacon of joy, a sanctuary for all, and a place where every artist feels seen, safe, welcomed, celebrated, and beloved.”

[For those who’re not of the theater and don’t know what a “ghost light” (or “ghostlight”) is, see “Ghosts, Curses, & Charms: Theater Superstitions – Part 1” (14 August 2020).]

According to Kelsey Mesa, who has managed the national program with Gregg Henry for nearly a decade, ACTF held an emergency meeting the day after the Trump Kennedy Center” name change announcement at which the national board voted overwhelmingly to separate immediately because “there was no way to move forward.” They had already cut Kennedy Center-run intensives for 2025 and 2026, after being told to cut $1 million with four months to go in the Education department’s fiscal year, and the intensives were the only budgeted item left. 

[The Kennedy Center offered various training intensives for young artists, though recent reports indicate potential significant changes or closures to these programs for the 2025-2026 seasons. Historically, these intensives have provided specialized, high-caliber training across a number of artistic disciplines.

[Intensives are high-speed, immersive training programs designed to make significant progress in a short amount of time. Unlike a standard weekly class or a one-off workshop, an intensive typically involves all-day training over the course of several days or weeks.

[The instruction by established professionals is usually highly specialized to hone technical skills and artistry, offering networking and mentorship opportunities. Many intensives require students to live on-site to fully immerse themselves in the professional lifestyle.

[At the Kennedy Center, these programs acted as career-development tracks for young artists, moving them beyond basic classroom learning into the essence of their chosen field. They were geared toward pre-professional students or emerging artists looking for a "gateway" into professional companies.]

One silver lining: The KCACTF National Committee and its regional conferences have operated under a separate nonprofit organization, ACTF Management, Ltd., so ACTF can continue in a different form outside of the Kennedy Center. Its regional conferences, run entirely by volunteers who work at universities and have their own artistic careers, continue to thrive, with four for 2026 already under their belt. 

The national festival presents a steeper challenge. Finding a space isn’t the issue; the biggest costs are travel, accommodations, and continued learning opportunities, which were covered by the Kennedy Center. ACTF had already planned to hold the national festival in Minneapolis, with Twin Cities theatres like Children’s Theatre Company, the GuthrieMixed Blood, and the Playwrights Center offering space, keynote artists, hotel recommendations, and more. But their split from the Kennedy Center means that the ACTF nonprofit doesn’t have enough funds and so will not host a national festival this year. (The decision was made before the recent ICE takeover of Minneapolis.) Also at risk in the shuffle: an ACTF fellowship that allowed budding theatre journalists to attend the O’Neill Critics Institute.

[The National Critics Institute (frequently referred to as the O’Neill Critics Institute) is a two-week intensive workshop for arts writers and critics held at the Eugene O’Neill Theater Center in Waterford, Connecticut. It’s designed as a “boot camp” in which mid-career professionals and emerging voices hone their skills through rigorous writing assignments, mentorship from veteran critics, and immersion in the O’Neill’s National Playwrights and Music Theater conferences. Through the Kennedy Center American College Theater Festival, top student critics from across the U.S. have been able till now to win a fully funded spot at the summer institute.]

In the future, said Mesa, we may see “a version of ACTF that omits the national festival but gives young people opportunities to bridge their careers.” It also may be possible to partner with other organizations to host the festival, but the price of putting it all together can run to half a million dollars, a big cost that is not always evident to potential hosts, Mesa explained.

Students are still showing up for local ACTF gatherings. In attending Region 1 [New England states] and 2 [Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania] this past January, Mesa said that one play that particularly touched her, during the National Playwriting Program’s 10-minute play event, was Plums by Sarah Galante, an MFA candidate at NYU. Mesa called it an “intense, grey-area, loving” conversation between two lesbian mothers whose 6-year-old daughter comes home with bruises on her arm, spurring questions about harm and protection. It was a quintessential ACTF moment: A Region 1 co-chair of the National Playwriting Program, Cassie Seinuk, had won the national 10-minute play award at KCACTF in 2015 with her play Occupy Hallmark, which was also Mesa’s first experience with KCACTF, in a reading she directed for the National Festival.

As ACTF still hopes to provide opportunities for community colleges, small arts colleges, and MFAs alike, they are actively accepting donations to stay afloat and sustain national opportunities. “This work is for students who do not come with privilege, and gives them the chance to be theatre artists,” Mesa said. “I want the field to step up for it.” 

Calls to action within the D.C. theatre community have been swift. In a statement, TheatreWashington executive director Amy Austin said the Center’s closure “will have widespread ramifications for the D.C.-area performing arts community and everyone who benefits from a culturally vibrant region.” The service organization urged folks to donate to its Taking Care Fund, which supports D.C. arts workers through tough times, and encouraged displaced arts workers to use the fund.

[From “The Story of Theatre Washington”: 

In the early 1980s, the Washington Theatre Awards Society was founded to recognize and encourage excellence in professional theatre in the Washington, DC region through the presentation of The Helen Hayes Awards,

. . . .

In 2011, with the encouragement of a wide range of stakeholders, a stronger and more robust organization evolved – theatreWashington (one word, lower case t, capital W). It was a call to evolve from an Awards presenter to a more layered organization to serve the community. Presently, working in tandem with the community, Theatre Washington (two words, capital T, capital W) is evolving into a full partnership organization in service to the community with multiple year-round, core programs.

[“Theatre Washington is an alliance of theatre organizations, theatre-makers, and theatre supporters that promotes and nurtures a creative, equitable, healthy, and diverse regional theatre community.”]

Last Tuesday, Kennedy Center Arts Workers United, representing Actors[’] Equity, SDC [Stage Directors and Choreographers Society, the union that represents theatrical directors and choreographers], IATSE [International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees, the union that represents stagehands, technicians, artisans, and craftspeople in TV, film, and stage], and more, spoke out. “A pause in Kennedy Center operations without due regard for those who work there would be harmful for the arts and creative workers in America,” the union said in a statement. “Should we receive formal notice of a temporary suspension of Kennedy Center operations that displaces our members, we will enforce our contracts and exercise all our rights under the law. We expect continued fair pay, enforceable worker protections, and accountability for our members in the event they cannot work due to an operational pause.”

Hoyt, who lived in D.C. for five years as literary manager for Round House Theatre [Bethesda, Maryland], reiterated the respect that she has “for every artist who was supposed to come through Kennedy Center this year, who did come through Kennedy Center this year, or who did not come through Kennedy Center this year. Saying no is an act of profound bravery, and it’s really necessary. That we made a different choice, I think, does not negate theirs, and does not imply that theirs was wrong, or invalid, or created harm of any kind. The theatre community has to have solidarity right now. We have such respect for a lot of amazing artists who are faced with terrible choices. There are no good choices. This is a bad situation.”

It’s also true, she noted, that the DMV area [a local appellation for the “District (of Columbia), Maryland, Virginia.”]  “is a great place to be a kid who loves theatre,” citing education programs and productions at Imagination Stage [Bethesda], Round House TheatreAdventure Theatre MTC [DC], Theatre Lab [DC], Educational Theatre Company [Arlington], Shakespeare Theatre CompanyArena Stage, and many more. “It is hard for me to imagine that the Kennedy Center’s ability to serve young people is going to end this year,” Hoyt said. “I just, I don’t—that cannot be, under my personal cosmology.”

[Daniella Ignacio, a writer, theater artist, and musician based in Washington, D.C., is a contributing editor of American Theatre magazine.

[Ignacio’s report on the effects on the D.C. area of the changes being wrought at the Kennedy Center is very personal to me.  I was born in Washington and have often admitted to being something of a Washington chauvinist.  Even though I haven’t lived there since I went away for high school in 1961, my parents lived there almost their entire married lives (the exception being a five-year period when my dad was a Foreign Service Officer abroad). 

[I returned to D.C. frequently for the rest of their lives and, since they were theater-lovers, one of our frequent activities was going to the Kennedy Center, the National Theatre, Arena Stage, and many of the small houses that arose in the area after 1980.  I watched Washington grow from an almost theater desert in the ’50s and ’60s into a thriving and vibrant theater town.  (I wrote a little about this in “Stages in DC’ (Summer 1985)” [25 December 2011] and “Washington’s Arena Stage: Under Construction” [26 November 2011].)

[The Kennedy Center wasn’t even there until 1971 (I was out of the country in the army when it opened and didn’t get back to Washington until 1974), but the change it effected on the D.C. area’s theater was remarkable.  Within 10 years, our own little “Off-Broadway” burgeoned.  My parents and I were in hog-heaven.  To see it in jeopardy now because somebody’s sticking a monkey wrench into the works disheartens me—and makes me angry.]

*  *  *  *
DEGREES IN THE SHADE?
by KJ Sanchez

[This article appeared in American Theatre’s annual training issue, “Learning Curves” (Winter 2026 – volume 42, number 3); it was posted on the AT website on 16 February 2026.]

With some MFA theatre programs closing and others opening, an educator talks to colleagues about the state of the academy.

I never thought I would be a professor. And I never imagined I would live in Texas. I was born and raised in New Mexico, and—well, we New Mexicans had some opinions about the Texans who came to ski our mountains.

For 25 years I lived in New York. I ran American Records (my theatre company), wrote plays, and directed across the country. In 2015 I was invited to Austin to be a guest respondent for student productions at the University of Texas at Austin (UT Austin). The works were part of the Cohen New Works Festival, a biannual week-long festival where audiences can see up to 40 productions, tucked into every nook and cranny of the Theatre and Dance building, featuring work created, curated, and produced by students. On my first visit to UT Austin, I moved from show to show, gob-smacked—how had I never known about this magical land where the students were on fire and the teachers seemed to truly like each other?

Playwriting professors Steven Dietz [b. 1958; playwright, theater director, and teacher] and Kirk Lynn took me for a cup of coffee and asked if I’d be interested in spending a semester in Austin as a guest instructor. That semester turned into a teaching gig—and now here I am a professor, and I lead the school’s MFA in Directing program.

Yesterday was a fairly typical day for me: My first class was at 9 a.m. It’s called Spectacle as a Political Tool. Two graduate directors and I teach 60 undergraduates (most in their first year) from colleges across the UT campus about how spectacle has historically informed self-governance. After that, I had meetings with grad students to talk about the classes they’ll take next semester: One will take a sound design class, another is excited about a choreography course offered by our dance program.

In the afternoon I joined the graduate designers in their studio class to discuss the art of iteration. That evening I sat in on techs: a three-person all-femme adaptation of Macbeth [27 October-2 November 2025] and an all-the-bells-and-whistles-we-can-muster staging of Cabaret [30 October-9 November 2025].

A long day. But a wonderful day. Because I am feeling extremely grateful to have this job. Even though I never thought I would be what Kirk Lynn calls an “indoor cat,” every day I understand more deeply what the academy can offer . . . and every day I worry about what might happen to any one of similar graduate programs across the country.

I don’t think I’m alone in that when I hear of another MFA program closing or pausing, I fear a trend. Social media postings give us anecdotal information about these closures, but I am cautious about generalizations without comprehensive data about how many programs have closed versus how many have been created within a certain time frame. Perhaps this “wait until complete data is in” approach is simply an attempt to remain stubbornly optimistic. (Quite likely.)

That said, I reached out recently to two educators in the midst of great change: Luis Alfaro [b. 1961; Chicano performance artist, writer, theater director, and social activist], associate professor of Dramatic Writing and director of the MFA in Dramatic Writing program at the University of Southern California (USC [Los Angeles]), and Seth Gordon, professor of Directing and Theatre Management at the University of Oklahoma (OU [Norman]). Maestro Alfaro posted recently that his beloved MFA program, which has been in existence for more than 30 years, will be “sunsetted” after this school year is done. Meanwhile, Gordon plans to reopen an MFA in Directing program at OU, which shuttered about 20 years ago.

The first takeaway I gleaned from conversations with both Alfaro and Gordon is that none of the three of us think graduate school is the only way to advance a playwriting or directing practice, nor do we think graduate school is for everyone. A perfect example is Alfaro himself, a MacArthur Fellow who is in a very special group of educators who have received tenure due to extraordinary commensurate experience. Not only did Alfaro never get an MFA himself—he never went to college.

“I went straight into the field in the ’80s,” he recalled. After studying with playwright María Irene Fornés [Cuban-born American; 1930-2018], Alfaro worked as a poet and performance artist. “The weird thing about being at USC,” Alfaro told me, “is I was raised in abject poverty in one of the poorest, most violent neighborhoods of L.A., which is where USC is.”

How did he get from there to here? “I’m a child of the apprenticeships, the internships, the fellowships, all of that,” he said. “I wrote a ton of letters to people, and said, ‘Hey, I love your work and I would love to meet you.’”

One of those meetings was with Mark Russell [b. 1955; experimental theater producer/curator/”programmer” (his word)], who ran New York City’s P.S. 122 (and would later run the Under the Radar Festival), and who steered Alfaro to such spaces as DiverseWorks in Houston, Hallwalls in Buffalo, New York, and Guadalupe Arts in San Antonio, Texas. “I went everywhere, right?” Alfaro recalled. “Instead of going to New York, I got to go around the country. And that circuit was full of amazing people.”

One of Alfaro’s favorite spaces was Boston’s The Theater Offensive, where artistic director Abe Rybeck [b. ca. 1956] would “pair me up on these double bills with these veteran artists that were extraordinary.”

As I listened to Alfaro describe his on-the-job training and apprenticeships, it dawned on me: The days of a broke emerging artist being able to afford to travel the country and learn from veteran artists are gone. The cost of living has made it essentially impossible. This is where some graduate programs are taking up the slack. Yes, graduate schools are cost-prohibitive for far too many, but where an artist like Alfaro once moved from city to city seeking mentorship, we now bring the elders and leaders of the field to our graduate programs to meet our students, to offer workshops, feedback, and mentorships. An additional benefit of this new model is that our guest mentors see the work of and also interact with our undergraduate student body. What once served one emerging artist at a time is now serving many.

Alfaro and his colleagues were told by USC leadership that the reason the MFA program was closing was due to a pivot to a “revenue-based model.” This news was particularly surprising, given that USC made their Acting and Dramatic Writing programs tuition-free starting in the 2024-25 school year. I asked Gordon about this: How would he respond if OU mandated that he create a program centered on revenue?

“We are a Research 1 University, as are you,” Gordon said. “So the fact that we will have the kind of impact on the field that I hope we’ll have is what we’re all about. I am assuming that if I am ever told we are switching to a revenue-based model, the subtext of that is, ‘We’re not an R1.’” The philosophy that guides both of our programs, as Gordon put it, is about “how we are going to contribute to our field: by providing it with the people that the field needs to lead it responsibly into its next chapter.”

Alfaro has trained many such leaders, with students going on to become the next generation of writers in live performance, TV, and film. He said he tailors each student’s program of study to best prepare them to lead in their own unique way. “I can see what each one means in the field,” he said. 

Because USC has been accepting two writers on average per year, Alfaro explained, “You can diagnose and build a program for them. ‘What do you need?’ What we’re doing is spending time to figure out how to find them the right mentors, to connect with the right people. Then every year, there’s one that’s sort of extraordinary, and you have to build something special for that one student. That’s what graduate school can do.”

That may sound shocking. In fact, one rationale Alfaro was given for the program’s end was that this model—of many instructors hired to serve a very small number of students’ needs—is financially untenable. The fuller picture, though, is that Alfaro and his colleagues teach and mentor all across campus.

“I teach undergraduate courses, I teach in acting, I teach in critical studies,” he said. “Right now, I’m teaching a Latinx course—packed—and I’m teaching the Playwriting 1 undergrad. So I’m teaching courses that are not in my MFA program, but that bring a lot of money into the program.”

Not only are we faculty teaching across degrees and areas of specialization, so are our graduate students, who teach many of the introductory courses that bring in large numbers of students. Another common part of our work as graduate faculty is to bring our research into STEM spaces. Here at UT Austin, I watch in awe as my colleague, associate professor Kathryn Dawson, area head of the Drama and Theatre for Youth and Communities program, has been leading a cohort of theatre and dance faculty and graduate students who have been collaborating with UT Austin STEM researchers on a multi-year grand challenge involving over 100 Principle Investigators (project leads) across 40 departments, as they study various aspects of climate change and resiliency.

I asked Seth Gordon why he decided to lead the charge in restarting a long-dormant graduate program. “I don’t think we really understood at the time the degree to which we were filling a void that appears to be developing,” he admitted. “We just figured there’s a need in this part of the country.”

Gordon received a grant to study graduate programs in his region—which is larger than you might think. “Oklahoma, the states that touch Oklahoma, and the states that touch the states that touch Oklahoma—that right there is about 10 or 15 states,” he said. Even within that larger region, Gordon found only two comparable theatre directing MFA programs: UT Austin, where I teach, and the University of Arkansas.

His ambitions aren’t just that OU’s MFA students work in the theatre field. “I’m hoping that this program will allow people to find themselves as leaders as much as directors,” Gordon said. “My hope is to expose them to the field of directing, but also to the field of nonprofit leadership.”

Part of Gordon’s mission with this new MFA program is to nurture new companies that form among student cohorts, having already seen some success along these lines with former undergraduates, who have formed a theatre company called Co.Arts Theater Co. (formerly Collective Arts Productions). That company has also welcomed current students into its ranks, so that they’re “forging that first level of connections.”

Another gap in the field that the academy has taken up: providing space and resources to work and bridges to cultivate relationships. When I moved to New York in the early ’90s, not only was I able [to] work in theatre for next to nothing because my rent (in Chelsea, no less!) was $250 per month, but I and my colleagues could work in grungy but cherished hole-in-the-wall venues like Todo con Nada on Ludlow Street, because those venues were affordable to self-produce in. Emerging artists today are often priced out of similar opportunities to build their oeuvre and hone their craft. They may instead get that chance in graduate school. As Alfaro notes, at a well-funded university, those resources can be extraordinary.

“Last year, I had all the second-year stage managers, mostly women and people of color,” said Alfaro. In a single year they got to work on “a big, fat musical, and then Angels in America [1991; Tony Kushner; 18-27 April 2025], and Marat/Sade [The Persecution and Assassination of Jean-Paul Marat as Performed by the Inmates of the Asylum of Charenton Under the Direction of the Marquis de Sade; 1963; Peter Weiss (German); 18-27 October 2024], and a site-specific space. Where are they going to get that training and that capacity, on that level, in the way that they’re doing on campus?”

[nb: USC staged only Angels in America, Part One: Millennium Approaches in this season.]

Don’t get me wrong: Graduate programs are not perfect. I often reflect on the times I have not been the ideal mentor that a student deserved. And I am fully aware of how expensive graduate programs can be, even when tuition is waived and students get paid to teach or work as research assistants. With the cost of living, it’s still a massive investment.

But one thing I know to be true: Graduate programs are contributing to our field’s future in so many ways. Our biggest challenge at the moment is to make those contributions visible.

Though his MFA program will no longer be accepting new graduate students, Alfaro is not going anywhere. First he has his current graduate students to serve—and I’d lay down good money that these current students are going to get some of the best teaching of Alfaro’s career. He’s working every day, building new collaborations and devising new systems to keep serving all his students, now and into a new, if uncertain future.

What we all understand is that we have no theatre if we have no new plays. And Luis Alfaro—hands down one of our greatest living playwrights—has always been a mentor by nature. His dedication to passing the torch is true, and is sure to carry on in whatever form comes next.

“I feel like a drug dealer,” he quipped. “I’m gonna make you love writing a play. You won’t even realize we’re gonna write a whole play, but we’re writing a whole play.”

As Kimberly Belflower, a UT Austin playwriting MFA from 2017, put it, “What starts here changes the world.”

[KJ Sanchez is a director, playwright, and author of The Radical Act of Listening: Making Documentary and Investigative Theatre (Routledge, 2025).  She founded American Records and leads the MFA Directing program at the University of Texas, Austin.]


21 February 2021

Theater for Young Audiences

by Kirk Woodward 

[Mega-contributor Kirk Woodward’s next topic, following his look at the craft of writing plays, is, as he points out below, what used to be called “children’s theater.”  Both Kirk and I have been involved in theater for young audiences since the 1960s; it’s something that we both think is an important artistic endeavor.

[I’ve published two previous articles on this blog about TYA: “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow: Children’s Theater in America” (posted on Rick On Theater on 25 November 2009), which was initiated by my attendance at a performance of one of Kirk’s own young person’s plays, and “Missoula Children’s Theatre” (25 August 2009), which I wrote when I was impressed by a report on MCT on television,

[That last post was followed many years later by another, entirely serendipitous guest article.  My friend Oona Haaranen sent me “Nobody Wants to See a Tired Bat on Stage” (9 January 2014), about her young son’s first theater experience with MCT in their Long Island hometown.  Oona’s a dancer, choreographer, dance notator, and dance teacher and I’d been trying to get her to write something about her field for ROT, but she kept putting me off.  Then she sent me this wonderful piece about her son and the visit of MCT.

[Kirk writes that theater for young audiences is sometimes still dismissed as “kiddie theater.”  Back in the late 1980s, I did a one-year leave-replacement stint at the State University of New York College at Oneonta where I found that it had a children’s theater course.  It was the only one I’d ever heard of, so I sat in on one class and it seemed quite good.  I don’t know if SUCO still offers it, but Kirk reports, “Looking at Google, there seem to be at least a few schools that offer something from a class to a program now.”

[I’ve told Kirk this, so it shouldn’t surprise him to see it again:  I think he’s a good and, what’s more, interesting playwright.  I especially enjoy his mystery plays—probably because he’s such a devotee of the genre.  (Kirk has a three-part post on ROT on Perry Mason, 19 and 22 February and 19 March 2018, and he took great delight that an office where he worked for several years was in walking distance of the Manhattan building that occupies the site of the fictional home of gourmet detective Nero Wolfe.)  

[But, I’ve said to Kirk and others, I think his plays for young viewers are truly special.  I tried to convey this feeling in “Sleepy Hollow,” referenced above, and every time I read or see one of his young people’s plays, I’m more and more convinced of this.  (I’m further convinced when I see or read many of the other authors’ children’s scripts.  There’s just no comparison.)]

“Theater for young audiences” (TYA) is the accepted term today for what used to be called, when I was first involved in it, “children’s theater.” Why the name change? In part, I’d guess, the reason is that “children’s theater” might sound like it meant “theater by children,” and although there’s plenty of that, in the theater companies I’m writing about here, adult actors perform for children.

There are a number of good books and articles about TYA (e.g.: TYA: Essays on the Theatre for Young Audiences by Moses Goldberg [Anchorage Press Plays, 2006]; TYA Today magazine [http://www.tyausa.org/publications/tya-today-magazine/, a membership organization] has regular articles on the subject), and from them one can get a good idea of the history of the field, since although its antecedents go far back in time, basically it took shape and prospered beginning in the Twentieth Century.

I don’t intend to retell the story of TYA here, but only to describe my own experiences with it, to talk about some issues involved in writing for it, and to try to convey my enthusiasm for the form, with some reasons why I feel that way.

I was introduced to TYA – then “children’s theater” – some 59 years ago by my friend Perry Baer, who was working at what was then called Louisville (Kentucky) Children’s Theater (LCT). It was founded in 1946, just after World War II.

When I joined the LTC, the theater was still, as it had been since its founding, a completely amateur operation except for a paid director. A much respected leader, Rick Schiller, had moved on to Texas at the end of the previous season; the current director was a man named Claude Astin (1939-2003).

Perry brought me to a Saturday morning “tech day,” which on that particular Saturday was devoted to straightening up the clutter in the basement below the stage of the old University of Louisville (U of L) theater, an historic wooden structure that still exists, although it’s now been moved to a different location on campus. Later Saturdays were devoted to building sets, assembling costumes, and the like.

LCT was a somewhat uneasy guest of the University theater, because they both used the same space. There was some movement between the two, especially on the part of the unofficial leader of the LTC group, David Semonin (1941-2010), about whom I have written elsewhere on this blog (see “Saints of the Theater,” posted on Rick On Theater on 30 December 2011). David was enrolled at U of L, as were some of the others of our group. I was dazzled by the talent in the group, and I wasn’t wrong; several continued with fine careers in theater.

Males are often in short supply in community theaters, so I was cast in a show called Seven At One Blow and then in another called Robinson Crusoe (I am not sure who wrote either of them, but they were published scripts). The other production I remember best from those days was an original musical called Reckon With the River, with a score by Nelson Keyes (1928-1987) and a book by Clark McMeekin, a pen name for two ladies named Dorothy Clark (1899-1983) and Isabel McMeekin (1895-1973).

I go into this detail because plays written for TYA often fall into these three categories: plays based on folk tales; plays based on stories or books; and original works. Any of these can be either musicals or “straight plays.”

TYA has changed enormously since those early days, and LTC is a good example: it is now called StageOne Family Theatre, and it is a well-known and respected professional operation with its own theater space at the Kentucky Center for the Performing Arts in Louisville.  For some years it was led by Moses Goldberg (b. 1940), an outstanding figure in TYA both as an author and as a director.

There is now an umbrella organization, TYA/USA, with over a thousand members including “theaters, organizations, and individual artists.”  (TYA/USA, or Theatre for Young Audiences/USA, is the U.S. affiliate of the International Association of Theatre for Children and Young People, known by its French initials, ASSITEJ.  TYA/USA—which sometimes goes by the initials USA/ASSITEJ—is a membership organization and publishes TYA Today for its members; the biennial publication is available in some libraries.  The organization’s website is at http://www.tyausa.org/.)

For me the experience of working at LCT was formative. I’ve loved TYA ever since (although I only recently learned not to call it “children’s theater”). After college, in Rockbridge County, Virginia, I directed my first venture with a “children’s show,” an adaptation of Twelfth Night for children (see “Directing Twelfth Night for Children,” 16 and 19 December 2010).

I’ve had many wonderful experiences with TYA. Here are a few: I wrote and directed several TYA productions for the Attic Ensemble in Jersey City, New Jersey. The first came about when I was asked to direct a play based on the Aladdin story, and I realized not only that it was a terrible script, but that it had almost no roles for women. I wrote a new version, which has since been produced a number of times.

Mona Hennessy and I created a professional company for which we both wrote and performed. I remember David Semonin asking me why I thought the world needed another TYA company. I said I thought we could write some worthwhile things, and we did, including a Christmas play (Waiting for Christmas) that was produced as recently as this past holiday season.

Elsewhere I directed TYA shows wherever I could, usually writing the shows as well. I acted and played piano for a year for Pushcart Players, an outstanding New Jersey company, and led the TYA wing of 12 Miles West, a professional company in Montclair (later moved to Bloomfield), New Jersey. More recently I’ve directed TYA for the Theater League of Clifton (New Jersey).

As a matter of fact, a commentary on one of the TYA plays I wrote, a musical version of The Legend of Sleepy Hollow, has appeared on this blog, as has a fascinating piece about the Missoula Children’s Theatre, and links to both articles can be found in the comments at the beginning of this article.

As I pointed out, TYA is a much more vigorous field than it was when I began working in it. Nevertheless it is still something of a last resort for many actors – often seen mainly as a way of getting their Equity cards – and for theaters, who may have a sort of “second unit” TYA for apprentices, prospective company members, and students in the theater’s training wing.

Many times I have had to scratch for actors to cast in children’s plays. Lenny Bart, the artistic director of 12 Miles West, would try to nudge performers toward our productions by telling them their prospects of joining the main acting company would be much higher if they used TYA to demonstrate what they could do. No soap.

Part of the problem – assuming that the same thing has been and is a problem for others – is the notion of TYA as “kiddie theater,” a notion encouraged by an impressive number of badly written plays, often badly produced. One cringes at the memory of all the TYA plays in which two actors, walking backward toward the center of the stage, bump into each other and scream in mock alarm. One wouldn’t see that in a play by Ibsen!

And that’s the point: TYA demands the same respect for audiences that a play by Ibsen does, and that any other kind of theater does. A sloppy script, poorly directed on a minimal set and filled with acting shtick, deserves exactly the amount of approval that the same things would receive in a play by Shakespeare.

There are differences, of course. In the first place, a young audience isn’t monolithic. (Neither is an adult audience, but ordinarily the distinctions are less clearly defined.) An audience of, say, kindergarteners through third graders is not the same as an audience of, say, up to seventh graders, or tenth graders. As a result, many TYA theaters specify in their advertising the age range for which a particular play is written.

“Writing down” to an early elementary school audience is certainly not a good option. Instead, the playwright must focus on vivid action and clarity of ideas – a good thing no matter what the age of the audience.

Another issue in writing for TYA is that in many cases up to half the audience is likely to be adult – that is, parents and caregivers who, however unwillingly, have accompanied the children to the play. One of the pioneers of TYA in the United States, Charlotte Chorpenning (1873-1955), in her seminal book Twenty-One Years With Children’s Theatre (Children’s Theatre Press, 1954) noticed this situation and advised playwrights to be sure to consider the adults now and then.

Obviously the attention spans of children differ from those of adults. (Some might say they are longer!) I use a school assembly program as a standard for the length of a play for a young audience. Many plays for adults, of course, are also too long and could use the discipline one gets from writing for children.

As a friend of mine says, then, good advice for someone writing a play for a young audience is: “Cook with a wine you like.” You wouldn’t drink a wine you didn’t like; why would you write a play that you wouldn’t want to see?

A crucial issue in writing plays for TYA is the question whether or not such a play should deliberately teach a lesson, a moral, a principle, or a belief. In many cases the answer is “yes.” There is a great deal of excellent writing on the subject, much of it available through the Educational Theatre Association (“shaping lives through theatre education”), supported in part by the National Endowment for the Arts.

Theater is a valuable tool for education. I have written instructional plays for both school and church, and have also taught and used what is sometimes known as “creative dramatics” (see “Creative Dramatics,” 30 September 2013), described by The American Association of Theatre for Youth as “an improvisational, non-exhibitional, process-centered form of drama in which participants are guided by a leader to imagine, enact and reflect upon human experience,” often with an emphasis on learning something specific.

Few would disagree with the idea that education for children is important, and that theater can be an effective tool for teaching when guided by people skilled in the field. There are definitely things we want children to learn. Of course, whenever theater is used as a tool for teaching, something specific is being taught. For example, I would want children to learn about the prevalence and the danger of racism.

However, theater as a tool can be used for varied purposes; it could, for example, be used to promote racism. This is not inconceivable. (Some in fact would claim that any use of theater to educate and train is necessarily oppressive and inevitably is going to be culturally biased. I find this position overstated but important to consider.)

Starting out to teach a lesson is not necessarily the best approach for a playwright anyway, and not necessarily better for an audience either. As an audience member, do you enjoy a play more when you see its point coming at you a mile away? And as a playwright, do you feel at your most creative when writing as though you were following a recipe?

I realize that, as George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950) says, every play that’s not the merest tissue of effects must have some kind of idea behind it. But often that idea emerges, both for the audience and for the writer, from the interaction of the characters in the play. (Shaw himself, although a fervent Socialist, makes almost no mention of Socialism in his many plays.)

My conclusion is that there is a place for TYA plays deliberately designed to educate, but that there has got to be an important place as well for TYA plays written out of an unforced artistic impulse. Children can gain as much from such plays as adults can from similar plays written for them. The many works of the outstanding TYA playwright Aurand Harris (1915-1996) substantiate this claim.

Earlier I said that the major categories of TYA plays are plays based on folk tales; plays based on stories or books; and original works. Most but not all of the fifteen produced plays for TYA that I’ve written belong to the first two categories, usually to the second, plays based on folktales or books, including, among others, The Bremen Town Musicians, Alice in Wonderland, The Legend of Sleepy Hollow, and Aesop’s fables.

I love the discipline of adapting books and stories for young audiences – the requirements of time, and the demand for a clear storyline and characters. The storyline doesn’t have to be linear either – Alice in Wonderland certainly is not. Working with an established author on material in the public domain is like working with a brilliant collaborator who trusts you.

Mentioning the public domain reminds me that the expansion of TYA goes hand in hand with the expansion of literature for children. The two face many of the same issues, and many stories written for children can make terrific theater – only, of course, if the author grants rights to the playwright, or writes  the plays herself or himself.

One final thought: in an era in which electronic entertainment is rampant, young children still enjoy seeing a play, and that enthusiasm may continue into later life, if it’s encouraged by exciting and interesting theater experiences. If only for the sake of providing an alternative to mass produced experience, TYA is an important and valuable asset for our society.

[Aside from performing in school plays in elementary and middle school (and seeing at least one memorable children’s play, recounted below, in the mid-1950s), my involvement with theater for young audiences didn’t start as early as Kirk’s.  My first real experience with theater for children was in the spring of my senior year at college (1969). 

[I’d been active in the university theater program from my freshman year (which is when I met Kirk, incidentally), but during that final spring, the wife of the university theater director and another faculty wife put together a performance for children that was to tour elementary schools and local libraries in Rockbridge County, Virginia.  

[The production was a version of The Emperor’s New Clothes, though I don’t recall the writer of the published script.  I played the villain.  As much fun as it is to play a bad guy—Iago was my dream role and I played Don John in Much Ado About Nothing—playing a children’s villain is even more fun!

[After I graduated from college, I had several months to wait before reporting for active military duty. The university theater director offered me a gap job in the theater shop, so I was back in Lexington, Virginia, for the fall. When the two women who’d produced ENC proposed a children’s acting workshop, I took a third-grade class.  This was my first experience teaching any kind of theater or acting.

[In the army, after I arrived in West Berlin in the summer of 1971, I became involved in the Berlin Brigade theater activities at the Berlin Entertainment Center.  Then a small group of us formed a theater group independent of the BEC.  One of our members was an air force tech sergeant and he got the Tempelhof NCO club to sponsor us.  (Tempelhof was West Berlin’s main airport at that time, and a U.S. Air Force base.)

[We called ourselves the Tempelhof American Theatre, or TAT, and our first show (21-22 December 1972) was a children’s play, The Wonderful Tang by Beaumont Bruestle (1905-89).  It was a fairy tale set in China and I played a character, The Chorus, who’s like a children’s version of Our Town’s Stage Manager. 

[The show was a huge success.  TAT was invited to do a cut-down version of the play on a Saturday morning children’s show on Air Force Television that was taped in Berlin.  The AFTV show also included some interviews—children’s style—about who TAT was and what we did and what the play was about and so on.

[After the army, I came to New York and went to Rutgers University for a Master of Fine Arts degree in acting from what became the Mason Gross School of the Arts.  During my second year at New Jersey’s state university (1976-77), I signed on as touring stage manager for The Brave Little Tailor, a children’s musical by Aurand Harris that traveled around Middlesex County throughout the school year.

[During the summer following my second and final year at Rutgers, some of the MFA students put together a traveling children’s theater, which we called the Loose Caboose.  We had a rep of two shows which schools, summer programs, libraries, and community centers could book.  One was The Dancing Donkey, a children’s musical by Erik Vos (b. 1929).

[The other show was a story-theater piece all about animals we assembled from a number of sources.  It included an African folk story about Ananse, the trickster spider; a couple of Thurber fables; and the Bremen Town Musicians.  (I don’t remember for sure anymore, but I think I was the hound dog.) 

[This wasn’t Kirk’s script of The Bremen Town Musicians, which is a musical, since I’m pretty sure he hadn’t created his yet.  I believe, however, BMT is my favorite of Kirk’s young-audiences plays—but that may be solely because it contains a song called “You Can’t Stay Mad at a Dog.”  You see, both Kirk and I are dog-lovers.  If you’re a dog-lover, it’s just plain true: you can’t stay mad at a dog!

[I directed a December 1978 production of Kirk’s Aladdin for the American Theatre Arts Project, which was working out of the Provincetown Playhouse near Washington Square in Greenwich Village.  That’s  the historic theater where Eugene O’Neill (1888-1953) had gotten his New York start (there was still a permanent cyclorama on the stage which he’d helped build and which bore his initials!). 

[I talked to some of the ATAP leaders about starting a children’s theater program and they were receptive.  I chose Aladdin for our first full-length children’s play.  As Kirk mentions in his article, men are scarce in TYA, and I ran into this issue when I was casting Aladdin.  I had to break one of my own rules and take a part in a play I was directing because I couldn’t get enough male ATAP actors to audition.

[I also cast the Genie as a woman because I didn’t have enough men.  I think that was fine, but I had to drop the Groucho Marx imitation Kirk had written into the part because I didn’t feel it worked with a woman doing it—it didn’t make sense.  (Groucho, 1890-1977, had just died the year before, but I was still pretty certain that the little kids in our audience wouldn’t see the joke anyway—even if the adults with them might.)

[Kirk talks about “exciting and interesting theater experiences” in childhood spurring interest in theater later and I’m reminded of an anecdote I’ve told before (in “A Broadway Baby,” 22 September 2010).  When I was very young, under 10, I’d say, when my family spent part of the summer on Cape Cod, we used to go at least once a season to the Cape Cod Melody Tent in Hyannis.  One show I remember, with one scene in particular, was The Wizard of Oz.  It was more than 65 years ago, but I still have an image of that scene, which I described thus:

I still remember being astonished at a production of  The Wizard of Oz there when, after a tornado generated by the techies, the lights came back up—and there was Dorothy’s house on stage, on top of the Wicked Witch, her legs sticking out from under one side!   It was impossible!  How did that house get there?  It was magic!

[Obviously it made an impression on me that lasted over six-and-a-half decades.  I’ve always seen it as my earliest experience of live theater that stamped me for life.  I think I may have been on stage at a younger age at school.  One time was the dramatization of a folktale or traditional story—I don’t remember which one; maybe the Pied Piper—and I had a speech down front . . . and I went up! 

[I absolutely froze, so much that when people off stage tried to prompt me, I couldn’t pick up what they were saying and I just stood there.  I remember it as minutes, but I imagine it was actually only seconds—and you’d think that would have cured me of being stage-struck.  Nope!  (But that never happened again—at least not that way.)]

06 March 2020

Yevgenii Shvarts: Biography & Literary Criticism


[In 1984 and ’85, I served as literary advisor for the Off-Off-Broadway StageArts Theater Company in New York City.  My responsibilities included, among other things, establishing a script-reading and -evaluating process, creating a reporting format, and advising and assisting the artistic directors in matters of script selection.

[StageArts had reached a certain level of success in its five years of producing, but it wasn’t attracting the kind of attention the artistic directors wanted—and needed if the company was going to advance in the very competitive and crowded field of professional theater in New York.  The artistic directors wanted my help to find the kinds of scripts that would attract critical and funding interest.  One way to accomplish this, they observed from the theaters like theirs in the city, was to present new plays.  They wanted me to help them start a program for finding and evaluating new scripts for StageArts to produce.

[While the new-play tactic had been effective for some years by this time—it really started with the origins of Off-Off-Broadway in the Greenwich Village of the 1960s—by the ’80s, the New York theater scene was glutted with small companies presenting original plays.  I advised the artistic directors that just doing new plays was not going to get them what they wanted.  What I didn’t say was that the two women, one an actor and one a director, who founded StageArts were partial to somewhat old-fashioned plays, well-made, Realistic  plays with upbeat endings. 

[I broached the idea of finding some older plays that had been forgotten or overlooked because they were unusual.  I pressed this notion while I was soliciting and reading the original scripts the directors wanted and occasionally gave them reports on older plays by authors I thought were noteworthy but ignored—especially foreign authors who weren’t well known on the U.S. and British stages.

[One such writer was a wonderful Soviet-era playwright of whom I’d become a fan (though I’ve only read his plays; I’ve never seen one on stage), Yevgenii Shvarts (whose names are both transcribed many different ways, unfortunately: Eugene Schwartz; Yevgeny Shvarts, Evgenii Shvarts, Evgeny Shvarts, plus, mix-and-match).  He’s the author of 25 plays and the screenplays for three films, plus poems, short stories, ballet libretti, and circus sketches..

[A playwright who flourished briefly in the 1930s and ’40s but was soon blacklisted by the Soviet authorities (he was posthumously rehabilitated in the ’60s during the post-Stalin Thaw), Shvarts (1896-1958) wrote several terrific (in my opinion, of course) plays based on Russian and international fairy tales.  The plays, which are for adults even though they contain a lot of magic, include The Naked King, The Shadow,  and The  Dragon, and I’ve always wanted to persuade someone to produce one.  (Shvarts also wrote realistic plays for both adults and children, but they are of less interest.)

[Most people don’t know Shvarts but I think his plays are wonderful.  They used to get done in U.S. regional theaters, particularly The Dragon, from time to time back in the ’80s, but they never caught on big, to my disappointment.  They’d catch on nicely, I was sure, if presented well at a theater where large audiences and a more widespread press could see them—such as in New York City.. I never did persuade the StageArts leaders to mount one, however.

[Below is a short profile of the playwright, followed on 9 March by the three script reports I prepared for the StageArts artistic directors.]

Yevgenii L’vovich  Shvarts (Russian: Евгений Львович Шварц) was born on 21 (in the modern calendar) October  1896, in Kazan, Russian Empire (510 miles east of Moscow, on the Volga River), to Lev Borisovich Shvarts (1874-1940), a physician, and Maria Fyodorovna Shelkova (1875-1942), an obstetrics student (one source said she was a midwife).  Lev Borisovich was from a bourgeois family of liberal Jews who converted to Russian Orthodoxy in 1895, before his marriage.  Maria Fyodorovna’s family was Russian Orthodox.

(At his baptism, Lev Borisovich changed his patronymic to Lev Vasilyevich.  Vasilii, or Basil, is a saint’s name in the Russian Orthodox Church, especially Basil the Blessed, namesake of Saint Basil’s Cathedral in Moscow’s Red Square, a symbol of the Russian nation.  Basil the Blessed, c. 1469-1552 or 1557, is buried in the cathedral.  For a brief explanation of Russian patronymics, see my Rick On Theater post “Michael Chekhov, Part 1,” 2 November 2019.)

The Shvarts family was especially gifted and talented. Yevgenii L’vovich’s brother, Valentin L’vovich  (1902-88) became an engineer and his grandson was the poet Andrei Olegovich Kryzhanovsky (1950-94).  His cousin Anton Isaakovich Schwartz (1896-1954), with whom he was close their whole lives, was an Honored Artist of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (RSFSR – that is, Russia). 

Yevgenii L’vovich’s father was an accomplished surgeon and played the violin superbly and all his Shvarts relatives were musically talented and arranged evenings with recitations and performances.  The Shvartses were renowned as improvisers and wits—loquatious, bright, hot-tempered. 

His Shelkov relatives, restrained and thoughtful, were no less artistic: the whole family played in the amateur theater of Ryazan, a city about 500 miles west of Kazan (where the Shelkovs were from), and Yevgenii L’vovich’s mother, Maria Fyodorovna, was praised in the local press as a commanding actress.

Discovering that their son Zhenya (that’s Russian for ‘Gene’) not only lacked a musical ear, but was also incapable of simple recitation, his parents didn’t hide their disappointment. Without his family’s support, the shy, timid teenager could only resign himself to his certain fate.

Yevgenii L’vovich  described his father as a strong but ordinary man; he enjoyed playing the violin, singing, and taking part in the impromptu performances.  Nevertheless, Lev Vasilyevich was arrested in 1898 for revolutionary agitation among factory-workers in Kazan; he was sent into internal exile in Maykop (nearly 1,100 miles south of Kazan in the northern Caucasus), a town of about 30,000 people at the time.  This is where Yevgenii L’vovich  grew up. 

By the time he was eight, Yevgenii Shvarts knew he wanted to be a writer . . . except that he had terrible penmanship and was embarrassed to turn in completed work.  In diaries Shvarts kept in the 1950s, he wrote that his attempts at writing annoyed his teachers and that his parents, especially his father, “had already decided firmly that nothing would come of me.”  His mother often told him: “People like you grow up as losers and commit suicide.”

Shvarts finished his secondary education in natural sciences and mathematics in Maykop in 1913 and went on to study law at Moscow University from 1914 to 1916.  In Moscow, he was introduced to theater and his interest in poetry and drama sidelined his focus on the law.  Yevgenii L’vovich  began spending all the money his parents sent him on tickets for the circus and the opera—theater seats were impossible to come by, he complained.  By the end of 1916, the money had run out and the impecunious student went home to Maykop.

In the fall of 1916, Shvarts was drafted into the Russian army for the First World War (1914-18); he was destined for the front as a private, but in August 1917, he was sent to a military school for officer training,  Graduating in October, he was promoted to ensign, the army’s lowest ranking officer, a sort of under-lieutenant, established for officers commissioned through a crash course in wartime. 

The Great War was interrupted in the Russian Empire by revolution in 1917: first the February Revolution (so-called because of Russia’s old-style calendar; it actually occurred in March), which overthrew the imperial regime and declared a republic; then the October Revolution, also called the Bolshevik Revolution (November 1917), which established the communist Soviet Union.  The Russian Civil War broke out in November 1917 between the Reds, the forces of the communists, and the Whites, the forces of a coalition of anti-Soviet forces.

By the beginning of 1918, Shvarts had joined the Whites and he ended up in Yekaterinodar, the city in far-west Russia from which his father’s family came (now known as Krasnodar).  In the first major combat between the Red and White Armies, the Battle of Yekaterinodar, part of what was known as “the Ice Campaign,” was fought from 10 to 13 April 1918 and, as a consequences of the severe concussion received in the battle, Shvarts suffered shell-shock, lost several teeth, and acquired a tremor of the hands (which some sources identify as Parkinson’s Disease) that plagued him for the rest of his life. 

After a stay in the hospital, Shvarts was demobilized and in 1919, he enrolled at the university in Rostov-on-Don, where he also began working in the Theater Workshop of young experimental director Pavel Veysbrom (1899-1963; his name is sometimes also transliterated as ‘Weisbrom’ or ‘Weisbrem’), a troupe of amateurs.  In May 1920, he joined the political department of the Caucasus Front of the Red Army as an actor and theater instructor.

Also in 1920, Shvarts married actress Gayane Nikolayevna Khalaidzhieva (1898-1983). The marriage would last a decade and produce a daughter, Natalya Yevgenievna (1929-95), Shvarts’s only child.

Veysbrom’s Theater Workshop (Театральная Мастерская, also translated as Theater Studio) toured the Russian provinces and in October 1921, it moved from Rostov-on-Don to Petrograd (later Leningrad, 1924-91, and then Saint Petersburg, its original name from 1703) in an effort to turn professional.  The troupe gave its first performance in Petrograd on 8 January 1922, Gondla by Nikolai Gumilyov (1886-1921).  In the spring of 1922, however, the Workshop ceased operation, though Shvarts and his wife stayed in Petrograd, performing in sketches in fairground booths. 

The couple lived from hand to mouth on their take of the admission charge.  Shvarts also played in small theaters, but he had little acting talent, so he supplemented his meager earnings by working as a salesman in a bookstore.

During this period, Shvarts met with a group of writers called “The Serapion Brothers” (Серапионовы Братья)—the name’s a reference to a collection of short stories by the German fantasy and Gothic horror author E. T. A. Hoffmann (1776-1822)—and began to write short satirical articles, essays, and reviews under various pseudonyms. 

In 1922 and ’23, he worked as secretary to Korney Chukovsky (1882-1969), one of the most popular children’s poets in Russia, sometimes compared to Dr. Seuss (Theodor Seuss Geisel, 1904-91).  Shvarts soon became known as a brilliant storyteller and improviser. 

Shvarts left for the Donbass in the Ukraine with his friend, writer and memoirist Mikhail Slonimsky (1897-1972) in the summer of 1923, where he began to write.  Both men were invited to work on the miners’ newspaper All-Russian Stoker (Всероссийская кочегарка), published in the city of Bakhmut (renamed Artemivsk the next year, but returned to its original name in 2016).   

At first, Shvarts just processed readers’ letters, then he began to turn his responses into small stories, which began to gain popularity among readers.  The novice writer published a literary supplement to the newspaper called Slaughter (Забой).  In the editorial office of the newspaper, he met Nikolai Oleynikov (1898-1937), an editor, avant-garde poet, and playwright with whom Shvarts later became a friend and collaborator.

Through Oleynikov, Shvarts became close to the literary group OBERIU (ОБЭРИУ – Объединение Реального Искусства; Union of Real Art), a short-lived collective of avant-garde Surrealist, Absurdist, and Futurist writers, musicians, and artists.  Like the Serapion Brothers, the formalist experiments of the Oberiuty—as the members of the group were called (singular, “Oberiut”)—appealed to Shvarts.

(OBERIU, whose members also included actors, musicians, and filmmakers, was a sort of amalgam of Larry Kramer’s late-1980s ACT UP without the socio-political-sexual agenda and Ken Kesey’s 1960s Merry Pranksters without the drugs.  They were declared “literary hooligans” and deemed “the last Soviet avant-garde.”)

When he returned from the Donbass, from the second half of 1924 to October 1925, Shvarts worked as executive secretary of Leningrad magazine, an illustrated literary magazine published by the Leningrad branch of the Russian Association of Proletarian Writers (RAPP).  Then he went to the Rainbow (Радуга) children’s book publishing house, where he worked until 1928. 

Between 1925 and 1931, Shvarts also worked in the children’s department of the State Publishing House (Госиздат – Gosizdat) under the leadership of Samuil Yakovlevich (S. Y.) Marshak (1887-1964), a poet, playwright, translator, literary critic, and screenwriter who was also the author of popular children’s books.

In 1924, Shvarts’s first children’s book, The Story of the Old Balalaika (Рассказ старой балалайки), a collection of poems, was published in the July issue of Sparrow (Воробей; renamed New Robinson in August 1924), a children’s almanac (an ongoing series of literary, artistic, and/or popular science works, united by any criterion).  

After 1925, Schwartz became a regular contributor to the children’s magazines Hedgehog (Ёж – abbreviation of Ежемесячный Журнал [Monthly Magazine]; ёж is also the word for ‘urchin’) and Chizh (Чиж – ‘siskin,’ a kind of finch; I’ve also seen this title rendered as Canary, a variety of finch), and his first story as a separate book came out.  Later, there were other books for children: The War of Parsley and Shaving-Chisels (Война Петрушки и Стёпки-растрёпки, 1925), Camp (Лагерь, 1925), Balloons (Шарики, 1929), among others.

On 21 September 1929, the Leningrad Youth Theater (Ленинградский Театр Юных Зрителей or ЛенТЮЗ – officially the State Theater for Young Audiences [LenTYUZ]) staged Schwartz’s first play, Underwood (Ундервуд), about a witch who steals a typewriter but whose plan is foiled by a brave little orphan girl.  The audience received the play well, but the responses of Daniil Ivanovich Harms (1905-42), an Oberiut, and Marshak, who was his boss at Golizdat, were cold.  Nonetheless, Shvarts continued to write for the stage and the Leningrad Youth Theater mounted his plays Island 5-K (Остров 5-К, 1932) and The Treasure (Клад, 1933).

While he was associated with LenTYUZ, Shvarts began collaborating with Nikolai Akimov (1901-68), an experimental theatre director and scenic designer, to write contemporary plays based on the folk and fairy tales of Danish storyteller Hans Christian Andersen (1805-75).  Among these adaptations are The Princess and the Swineherd (Принцесса и свинопас, 1934 – parts of the story is from “The Swineherd”),The Naked King (Голый Король, 1937 – from “The Emperor’s New Clothes” with elements of “The Princess and the Pea”), The Shadow (Тень, 1940), and The Snow Queen (Снежная Королева, 1948), reworked and adapted to contemporary—often political—reality.  (Shvarts’s stage versions of The Snow Queen and The Shadow were made into movies in 1967 and 1971, respectively.  Akimov was the scenic and costume designer for Shvarts’s 1947 film of Cinderella.)

In 1930, changes took place in the writer’s family life: he left his first wife and their six-month-old daughter and married Yekaterina Ivanovna Zilber (née Obukh, 1904-63), whom he met in May 1928.  They were both married to others at the time they began their liaison, and they divorced their spouses to be together.  Shvarts dedicated the play An Ordinary Miracle (Обыкновенное чудо, published 1956) to Yekaterina Ivanovna, whom he called Katya.  His first wife, Gayane Nikolayevna, became the prototype of the stepmother in the 1947 film Cinderella (Золушка – Zolushka [zola is ‘ash’ or ‘cinder’ in Russian]; written 1945).

In the years after his remarriage, Shvarts wrote a lot and was very successful, composing novels, short stories, poems, plays for children and adults, funny captions for drawings in Hedgehog and Chizh, satirical revues, libretti for ballets, comic sketches for the circus, puppet plays, and movie scripts.

Shvarts attained recognition as a children’s author: on 1 July 1934, he was admitted to the Union of Writers of the USSR.  After the magazine Chizh was shut down (for being apolitical and bourgeois), Shvarts wrote mainly plays and screenplays.  Uncharacteristically tough when it came to principles, Shvarts refused to renounce his convicted friend, Oberiut poet Nikolai Oleynikov, in 1931, and helped the family of another friend who’d been arrested, poet Nikolai Zabolotsky (1903-58). 

When asked about his literary activities, Shvarts commonly responded: “I am writing everything except denunciations.”  In 1940, he wrote the play The Shadow, which was banned immediately after its première on 12 April at the Leningrad Comedy Theater (Ленинградский Театр Сатиры и Комедии – literally, Leningrad Theater of Satire and Comedy).  The Shadow is anti-Fascist political satire and the Soviet Union had entered into a non-aggression pact with Nazi Germany the year before.

The Shadow, based on Andersen’s tale of the same title, tells the story of a young scholar who falls in love with a princess, only to have his Shadow, an evil force, separate itself from him and seek the Princess for itself.  Through various machinations, the Shadow also gains power over government officials and uses them for its own ends.  Then the Scholar begins to wonder if the Shadow could survive if he died.  Told with considerable wit and irony, this fantasy also raises questions about the relationship of power to those being governed.  Could it survive without their acquiescence? 

When Germany invaded the Soviet Union in June 1941, the pact was terminated and World War II (1939-45), known as the Great Patriotic War (Великая Отечественная война) in the USSR, came to Russia.  Shvarts tried to join the militia, the reserve of the armed forces convened during the war as a home guard.  The writer hid his shaking hands behind his back, but when Shvarts went to sign the papers, the local military commissar noticed his hand tremor, which precluded him from firing a rifle, and Shvarts was rejected for militia service. 

When Leningrad was besieged by the forces of the Third Reich (from 8 September 1941 until 27 January 1944), Shvarts spoke at recruiting stations and wrote anti-Hitler sketches and plays for the radio.  At night, on the roof of the Writers’ Skyscraper (Писательский небоскрёб – also called the Writers’ House)—where he served as a civil defense warden, he and Yekaterina Ivanovna were on duty: Shvarts made sure all “lighters,” as they called incendiary bombs (зажигалка/zazhigalka is the Russian word for ‘cigarette lighter’), were extinguished and his wife set up an aid station for the wounded. 

Between July and December 1941, Shvarts broadcast from the Radio Center (Радиоцентр) and in August 1941, the Leningrad Comedy Theater premièred Under the Linden Trees of Berlin (Под липами Берлина), an anti-fascist play about the projected capture of Berlin by the Soviet troops Shvarts wrote with Mikhail Zoshchenko (1894-1958). 

On 11 December 1941, the Executive Committee of the Leningrad City Council decided to evacuate Shvarts and his wife from Leningrad by plane and airlifted them to Kirov, 860 miles east.  For the evacuation, the baggage limit was 22 pounds per person so Shvarts took a typewriter with him, and burned the diaries from his youth and his manuscripts—his entire archive, accumulated over 45 years of life.  After the siege, Shvarts was awarded the Leningrad Defense Medal.

In Kirov, the writer worked for the regional theater until July 1943.  During this period, he wrote the plays Far Land (Далекий край, 1943), about children in an orphanage evacuated from Leningrad, and One Night (Одна ночь, 1944), about the defenders of Leningrad.  He also started working on The Dragon (Дракон, written 1942-44), arguably, his most popular play abroad. 

The Dragon is a political satire aimed at totalitarianism in all forms and was banned from the stage by both Joseph Stalin (1878-1953), the head of the USSR from 1922 till his death, and Nikita Khrushchev (1894-1971), Soviet leader from 1958 to 1964.  The story of the effort of Lancelot to liberate people in a land suffering under a dragon’s brutal rule, the play wasn’t fully staged in the Soviet Union in Shvarts’s lifetime. 

In 1943, LenTYUZ was evacuated in Dushanbe, the capital of Tajikistan (then officially called the Tajik Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic and the city was named Stalinabad until 1962), and Shvarts went there and served as literary manager of the theater. 

In May 1944, he moved to Moscow with LenTYUZ and in August, the première of The Dragon was staged there with Akimov directing and designing the sets and costumes.  Ostensibly, the play was about Hitler and totalitarianism, which wrenched the souls out of people; this was the power of the Dragon after death.  However, any Soviet citizen would have recognized the Dragon as Stalin—and after only three performances of the début production in Moscow, the play was banned.

(The Dragon’s toady, the corrupt Mayor, was seen by Russian audiences as Nikita Khrushchev, one of Stalin’s closest advisers at the end of the Soviet leader’s tenure.  In the play, Heinrich, the Mayor, takes over after the Dragon is slain—there is no true relief from tyranny—and, as if predicting the future, Khrushchev did succeed Stalin as head of the USSR in 1958, following a caretaker premier.)

The Dragon wasn’t properly mounted in the Soviet Union until 1962 (in Leningrad), 18 years after it premièred and four years after Shvarts died (and nine years after Stalin died).  Stalin’s death initiated what became known as the Khrushchev Thaw (Хрущевская Оттепель), a component of the new premier’s de-Stalinization reforms.  (A filmed version of the play, To Kill the Dragon [Убить дракона], was produced in 1988.)

After the war, Shvarts again began to keep diaries.  Along with events of the day and memories, he recorded notes for plays.  From these notes, the writer compiled the Telephone Book (Телефонная Книга) with almost 200 portraits of Shvarts’s contemporaries drawn from his memoirs.  According to Shvarts’s script for the film Cinderella (1947), it was shot from a screenplay based on these notes and character sketches, as was Don Quixote (Дон Кихот, 1957) and others.

In the last period of his life, Shvartz wrote several more plays, among them An Ordinary Miracle, which premièred in January 1956 at Moscow’s Theater Studio of the Film Actor (Театр-Студия Киноактёра) and then played at the Leningrad Comedy Theater in April.  In March 1956, the Main Directorate of Arts of the Ministry of Culture of the RSFSR (Главное Управление по Делам Искусств Министерства Культуры РСФСР) approved Yevgenii L. Shvarts for membership on the artistic council of the Leningrad Comedy Theater.

After suffering several heart attacks, when the doctors prescribed him bedrest, the writer fell into apathy and stopped working in anticipation of his death, which he called “a day of incredible length.”  He joked darkly that he’d subscribed to the 30-volume collected works of Charles Dickens (1812-70) and wondered on which volume “this will happen.”  It happened at the third, his beloved Pickwick Papers: on 15 January 1958, Yevgenii L’vovich  Shvarts died in Leningrad; he was 61 years old.  His last words were: “Katya, save me!”

Shvarts is a hard fellow to suss out.  He was timid and easily frightened, even avoiding “dangerous” places of novels and stories he was reading.  After he’d read War and Peace as a teenager, for instance,  he didn’t know how the duel between Pierre Bezukhov and Fyodor Dolokhov ended because he’d skipped over it!  Even in his own writing, he avoided despair; in his play One Night, about the Siege of Leningrad, he gives the audience hope. 

Yet he fought in World War I and the Russian Civil War and tried to volunteer for the militia in World War II.  Instead of evacuating the city during the Siege of Leningrad, he served in the fire brigade in his building and stood watch on the roof.

He was committed to anti-totalitarianism, which is why he fought for the Whites against the Bolsheviks in the Civil War, but he went to work for the Red Army in Rostov-on-Don, served the Soviet Union in the Siege of Leningrad, and took jobs at Soviet state agencies and on state-controlled journals.  (He also joined writers’ organizations such as RAPP, which were government sanctioned and controlled, but in totalitarian states like the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, membership in such unions was a requirement in order to work in the profession represented.) 

During the Second World War, Shvarts participated in propaganda activities like his radio broadcasts and even wrote an essentially propagandistic, anti-Hitler play in Under the Linden Trees of Berlin.  Before the war, however, he’d bravely stood up for friends who’d run afoul of Stalin’s authoritarian regime. 

He was an anti-communist—but he was a Russian patriot.  During the war and the Siege of Leningrad. Shvarts wrote a number of other Realistic, patriotic plays.  I’ve mention Under the Linden Trees of Berlin and, earlier, One Night and Far Land, but Brother and Sister (Брат и сестра, 1940) and Our Hospitality (Наше гостеприимство, 1941) also extolled the courage and resourcefulness of the Russian people.

His writing was full of such dichotomies as well, of a more literary nature, to be sure.  He composed eccentric fiction that on one level dramatize fairy tales suitable for children, yet on another, contain political commentary.  He wrote for both adults and children but when he addresses children, adults carefully listen to him and whatever he wrote for adults, regardless of its depth, is accessible to children’s understanding. 

The writer’s dramaturgy also has a split personality.  He mixed startling visual effects, acrobatic movements, contrasting moods, and moments of improvised humorous dialogue like Commedia dell’Arte.  He used a wide variety of literary devices to create his dramas, blending fantasy, irony, parody, lyricism, and lampoon, often one after another but sometimes together in a scene.  Indeed, the action of his plays is marked by swift transitions from one tone to another. 

Shvarts didn’t engage in direct allegory in his fairy tale plays.  He preferred to mix or muddle his sources so as to obscure his intentions.  He generates an ambiguity so engaging that the official censors can’t easily suss out his criticism—at least not as it pertains to the Soviet regime.

In this way, his plays and stories are simultaneously witty and wise adult fairy tales that are straightforward yet evocative socio-political satires, unique fare during the era of strict Socialist Realism.  He took familiar fairy tales and legends and transmuted them into satirical parables about contemporary life.  He used fairy-tale characters and a fantastic environment to comment on the international scene, the Soviet system, or human nature In general.  In Shvarts’s world, fairy-tale heroes and heroines don’t just “come to life” as in a Disney movie.  They meld organically with the real world.  

This was how Shvarts communicated his contemporary themes without literally spelling them out.  One of the playwright’s most unique attributes was that while, in his political commentary, he was ostensibly writing against Fascism and Hitlerian authoritarianism, Russian audiences could see, without being told, that his criticisms simultaneously fit Stalinism and the Soviet state.  It’s part of what compelled the Soviet authorities alternately to ban and permit the publication and production of his work:  They were often unsure what he was up to!

(This always reminds me of the Antigone of French playwright Jean Anouilh, 1910-87.  Staged in 1944, during the German occupation of France in World War II, it was a thinly disguised indictment of the Nazi occupiers and their French enablers—but the German occupiers didn’t twig to Anouilh’s message.  Stalin’s repressors in the Soviet Union often fell for Shvarts’s similar deception.)

One trait of his dramaturgy was his base language, a sort fable-speak reminiscent of Aesop.  (Another practitioner was American humorist James Thurber, 1894-1961, who also wrote short fables—of a more directly humorous vein.)  This somewhat artificial language made Shvarts’s meaning rather elastic—much to the consternation of the official minders. 

The playwright’s socio-political critiques were openly aimed at Hitler and Nazi totalitarianism, but they were equally, though less obviously, applicable to the USSR’s capitalist allies (that is, principally the United Kingdom, France, and—after 1941—the United States), as well as, by implication, to Stalin and his authoritarian regime.

Among Shvarts’s main inspirations were the fabulists Hans Christian Andersen, E. T. A. Hoffmann, and Frenchman Charles Perrault (1628-1703; his 1698 version of Cinderella was the basis for Shvarts’s film script); he also drew on indigenous Russian folktales.  He stubbornly revived an interest in fairy tales at a time when they were viewed with skepticism and disapproval by the state for being bourgeois and incompatible with socialist practicality and rationality.

Philosophically, he was influenced by the late-19th-century French symbolists, who believed in the duality in life as expressed in the “correspondences” described by French symbolist poet Charles Baudelaire (1821-67): the pairing of the natural and the supernatural, the visible and the invisible, the material and the mystical.  The Shadow is a study of this “doubleness,” displaying one person’s capacity for both good and evil and honesty and duplicity.

With respect to style, Shvarts borrowed from another great theatrical contemporary and fellow Russian, Yevgenii Vakhtangov (1883-1922), a director and actor who helped found the famed Moscow Art Theater.  The Vakhtangov principal Shvarts’s plays (as well as his poems and stories) adopted was “Fantastic Realism” (Фантастический Реализм), which manifested a joyful theatrical dualism. 

Fantastic Realism can be seen as a blending of Stanislavsky’s psychological Realism with Meyerhold’s extreme stylization.  Vakhtangov saw that Realism is capable of revealing only that part of truth which can be perceived by the five senses, while the more profound aspects of truth are seen in mystery and myth, expressed by chimerical and dreamlike figures rather than the flesh-and-blood characters of the material world.

While Vakhtangov devised Fantastic Realism for stage production, Shvarts adapted the concept for his dramaturgy.  Vakhtangov would add this vision onto a script such as Erik IV by August Strindberg (1849-1912), but Shvarts wove Fantastic Realism into his scripts and screenplays.

Shvarts liked to play with words, twisting them into puns, taking idioms literally, reviving old meanings of words and expressions, and much of the humor in his plays comes from this tactic.  He frequently took a fairy-tale cliché, and adapted its literal meaning to the plot or took an everyday phrase and put it into the mouth of a fairy-tale character. 

Cinderella, the 1947 film, is a model of this practice.  As with all Shvarts’s fairy-tale scripts, familiar fairy-tale stereotypes transform and spectators accept the new conditions of fairy-tale life.  For instance, the Stepmother (the character, you’ll recall, modeled after Shvarts’s first wife, Gayane Nikolayevna) is indignant with the King, scolding him: “And put on the crown!”  Such behavior is more like the old lady from next door, not fairy-tale characters.  The King in Cinderella isn’t a crowned monarch seated majestically on a throne, but an ordinary guy who simply works as a king and talks about his workaday problems:

Here, for example, Puss in Boots.  Nice guy, smart, but when he comes in, he will take off his boots and sleep somewhere by the fireplace.  Or, for example, Tom Thumb [literally, “Finger Boy” – Мальчик-с-Пальчик]. Well, he’s playing hide and seek all the time.  And try to find him.  It’s a shame!

Is this the pathos of a royal personage?  These are just the day-to-day complaints of royal life.  In another scene, the Fairy [Godmother] says, “It’s bad for your health not to go to the ball when you deserve it,” and in another, the Page quips, “I’m not a wizard yet, I am only a pupil.”  Here are some more samples of dialogue from this script (courtesy of IMDb):

King: [to Prince] Why won’t you talk?
Prince: [Smitten by Cinderella] I can’t.
King: [to Cinderella] Don’t believe him, he can talk!  He talks very well.  He even recites poetry.

Cinderella: I have to go!
Prince: [Blocking her way] No, please don’t!  I’ve been thinking it over and I’ve decided that after the ice-cream was served, I’d tell you that I was in love with you.

(As this snippet from Shvarts’s Cinderella demonstrates, I think, there are considerable echoes of his style and approach in the popular 1959 musical Once Upon a Mattress [music by Mary Rodgers, lyrics by Marshall Barer, and book by Jay Thompson, Dean Fuller, and Marshall Barer], based on Andersen’s “The Princess and the Pea.”  Mattress has a very similar satirical and irreverent take on the fairy tale itself, but lacks Shvarts’s political critique.  Without an extensive search, I haven’t seen any acknowledgement that Rogers, Barer, Thompson, and Fuller deliberately took inspiration from Shvarts—or, indeed, even knew of his work.)

[My evaluation reports on The Shadow, The Naked King, and The Dragon will be posted on Monday, 9 March.  The reports were written in 1984, though I took this opportunity to up-date the history notes, but not the assessments themselves, to include information I didn’t have at the time.]