29 March 2019

Dispatches from Israel 17

by Helen Kaye

[Earlier this week (26 March), I posted two of Helen Kaye’s reviews  from the Jerusalem Post, Sholem Asch’s God of Vengeance (1906) and :Paula Vogel’s Indecent (2017), both at the Cameri Theater in Tel Aviv.  A few days after Helen sent me those pieces, she sent me four more—from the end of 2018 and the beginning of 2019.  Here are those notices: one from the Habima Theater, Israel’s national theater (My Mika by Gadi Inbar); one from the Gesher Theater (Lolita/Jeanne d’Arc by Yeheskel Lazarov); and two more from the Cameri (Who’s a Jew by Jean-Claude Grumberg and One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest by Dale Wasserman).  It’s an eclectic collection of productions.  As for the rest, I’ll let Helen tell you.  ~Rick]

My Mika
By Gadi Inbar
Directed by Moshe Kepten
Habima Theater, Tel Aviv; 10 October 2018

“These are the songs I grew up on,” exuberantly declared a lady in the foyer of Habima, “this is the second time I’ve come to see the show.” The songs she speaks of are those by much loved song-writer Yair Rosenblum (1944-96), all 22 of them, plus a five-song medley that fuel the close to three hour overlong musical My Mika, a superbly conceived and executed revival of an epic melodrama that was first done at the Bet Zvi Drama School in 2003.

The story concerns a fraught period in Israeli history, stretching from just before the 1967 Six Day War, and the triumphalism that ensued, to the chastening aftermath of the almost disastrous 1973 Yom Kippur war.

Mika (Amit Farkash) and her friends are graduating from high-school, exhilarated by a future whose possibilities they anticipate. Then comes the ’67 war. Mika’s boy-friend Gidi (Nadir Eldad), deeply traumatized (PTSD) by it, repudiates her, his holocaust survivor mother Hanka (Miki Kamm) and all his friends, and decamps for America. When, after several years, he returns it is to find that Mika is about to wed Ari (Matan Shavit) who has become religious and divorced Noa (Revital Zalman), his childhood sweetheart. Kadosh (Ya’akov Cohen), Mika’s shopkeeper Dad, hovers approvingly. Venal, yet goodhearted Meni (Moshe Ashkenazi) and Debbie (Oshrat Ingedashet) are a happy family, and Elisha (Doron Brookman) observes – as he tends to do – from the edge. Then comes the Yom Kippur war and their world almost shatters.

Realising that adverse criticism may well be considered sacrilege, it still does not really do to take what is essentially a high-school level musical – perhaps to educate an oblivious generation to the time – and dress it up in adult trappings. That said, these are truly amazing from the intricacies of Eran Atzmon’s multilevel smoothly mobile set to Yelena Kelrich’s spot on period costuming, to Keren Granak’s dramatic lighting and to Shai Boder’s stunning video art. Oz Morag’s choreography achieves masterpiece level. That it and the music incorporate echoes of West Side Story are not coincidence as some of the musicals’ thinking is similar.

Above all, punctuated by wars as our existence here is, Mika shows the all but overwhelming centrality of the Army to Israeli life and values.

As always, when it comes to musicals Kepten’s direction soars and his actors take flight. It goes without saying that both Kamm and Cohen are superb. Indeed, Cohen’s sly humor has the audience giggling mightily. The rest, soloists and chorus are also very, very good, with a ‘but’ in there. As Mika and Gidi, Farkash and Eldad need to inhabit their characters more from within, and the same goes for Zalman and Shavit; Eldad, however, beautifully portrays Gidi’s self-absorption. Ashkenazi’s Meni is a steady and steadying presence, but most of the acting honors go to Ingedashet and Brookman whose empathic Debbie and principled, brave Elisha are very real.

This is a musical. A musical has songs and singing actors to present them. Unfortunately they were so over-amped that who knows what their voices, often pleasing despite the elevated decibels, actually sound like.

The Ammunition Hill number in Act I was breath-taking. Act II, the lead-up to the Yom Kippur War was tighter, more dramatic and stronger for it, and if you are not awash in tears by the powerful ending, then you have tungsten for a heart.

Fitting or not, quibbles or not, if you freeze dry this My Mika, then shrink wrap and export it as the distillation of what it means to be Israeli, perhaps we’d be better understood, not to mention that it’d sell out in a moment.

[Bet Zvi (or Beit Zvi as the school spells its English name) School for the Performing Arts in Ramat Gan, near Tel Aviv, is the first theater school in Israel that’s unaffiliated with an established theater.  Established in 1950, Beit Zvi emphasizes acting in real productions and established a theater at the school for graduates that mounts plays not staged by the country’s repertory theaters.]

*  *  *  *
Lolita/Jeanne d’Arc
Adapted, staged and designed by Yeheskel Lazarov
Gesher Theater, Tel Aviv; 10 December 2018

First of all, congratulations are in order to Gesher, Yekezkel Lazarov, Israel (Sasha) Demidov and Doron Tavori. To Gesher, which, since its first performances in the early ‘90s, has never been afraid to stick its neck out, to Lazarov for, on the face of it, a most unlikely combination of heroines, and to actors Demidov and Tavori for bravura performances.

Lolita follows the iconic book by Vladimir Nabokov on Humbert Humbert, an aging and mentally unstable pedophile’s (Demidov) obsession for the 12 year old daughter of his landlady whom he nicknames Lolita (the voice of Alona Tzimberg). Like the book, the play follows the uneven, exploitive, and ultimately fatal sexual and emotional relationship between the two and between Humbert and the other men (Tavori) in Lolita’s life, from a dogged detective to a famous playwright whom Humbert murders in a jealous rage, thereby leading to his own downfall.

Jeanne d’Arc deals with the trial for heresy in 1431 of Joan (Kiki, a robot with Tzimberg’s voice), canonized in 1920 as a saint. The Inquisitor (Tavori) tries every trick in the book to get Joan to incriminate herself but she eludes him to the end.

To say this pairing is unusual is to put it mildly. On the one hand we have Lolita, a not-so-innocent, conniving, perhaps even amoral, teen. On the other we have Joan, an illiterate 15th century peasant girl, burnt at the stake for heresy, whose (blatantly political) conviction was overturned in 1456, her innocence legally and morally confirmed.

Does it work? Yes. And no.

Yes, because of its daring, because of the staging, because of its two actors, because the juxtaposition of its characters is not a gimmick but a means, shockingly, to communicate ideas that we, the audience, need to acknowledge.

No, because at its worst, specifically in Lolita, it got a little self-indulgent, which is to say that what was needed is more ruthlessness and less dazzle, which Jeanne provided

And Dazzle there is. A group of girls dressed in white practices ballet at the barre. Those same girls bear witness in Jeanne. A white Cadillac convertible – here also the symbol of impermanence – dominates the stage in Lolita. Kiki (Jeanne) is white. White is the color of purity, and of innocence.

In Jeanne faith/innocence meets real-politik. Neither has a chance. In Lolita innocence never has a chance either, because there isn't any. Both the girl and the man are damaged goods. The one exploits the other. In the program Lazarov talks about morality but actually the key to both plays is innocence, also known as virtue, which has gone from the world – World War I took care of that in the previous century – virtue in its most literal sense that is. When last did we hear of someone who is deemed virtuous? The word itself arouses only a snigger nowadays . . .

Lolita also put a strain on the actors in terms of text. There is so much of it that both Demidov and Tavori gabbled to such an extent that a lot of the text was simply unintelligible, the brunt borne by Demidov.

That said, Demidov’s Humbert is a chronically restless, pathetic, uncoordinated, self-justifying, by turns craven, by turns full of bravado creature, all of which makes for a towering performance, a characterization that is utterly believable. The same may be said of Tavori whose various characters emanate slyness and corruption. As the Inquisitor in Jeanne, he is wonderfully intense and focused, so much so that one almost forgets – as one is supposed to – that his antagonist is a robot. Let us not forget the voice of Tzimberg that powers both Lolita (whom we never see) and Joan, both females, both abused by the male world, both in their way indomitable.

So, Lolita, a little flawed, a little prolix and Jeanne, terse, powerful – both worth seeing.

*  *  *  *
Who’s a Jew
By Jean-Claude Grumberg
Hebrew by Rami Baruch
Directed by Amir Wolf
Cameri Theater, Tel Aviv; 29 January 2019

Here’s all you ever wanted to know about being a Jew, belief versus atheism, the Occupation, the Jewish-Palestinian conflict, the difference between a Jew and a non-Jew, and more, all wrapped up in a smart, gloriously funny, marvelously French comedy. To top that Who’s a Jew? also has Rami Baruch as the Jewish neighbor, a playwright, and Shlomo Vishinski as his Catholic counterpart, retired, who’s quizzing his neighbor on behalf of his wife (she gets all her info from the internet), not that he cares one way or the other, of course.

Their encounters take place in the stairwell of their unpretentious Parisian apartment house deftly designed by Shiran Levi who also did the costumes, as unremarkable as the apartment of course. Amir Castro and Rotem Alro’i did the apt lighting.

At first neighbor Jew runs rings around neighbor Catholic, but gradually the boot gets transferred to the other foot, and then . . . . but why spoil the fun?

To say that Baruch (in a curly wig), and Vishinski are a perfect foil one for the other, to say that they hold the audience in the palm of their hand, to say that every line that comes out of their mouths is honed to brilliance is no more than the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Laughter, they say, is the best medicine, and we’re in dire need. Who’s a Jew? provides a 90 minute welcome alternative to the reality surrounding us.

*  *  *  *
One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest
By Dale Wasserman
From the book by Ken Keasey
Translated by Ilan ronen
Directed by Omri Nitzan
Cameri Theater, Tel Aviv; 25 February 2019

To paraphrase Dickens, Cuckoo’s Nest is wonderful, Cuckoo’s Nest is dreadful. Wonderful, because director Nitzan and his actors have avoided sentimentality to dig unflinchingly into the dark underbelly of mental illness, save for the (necessarily) mawkish ending, which is not their fault. Dreadful, because Cuckoo’s Nest is an indictment of the human race which gives no quarter, doesn’t allow us to wriggle off the hook as Nitzan’s chilling opening set to the Ode to Joy from Beethoven’s 9th Symphony, and which ends with a looming Mushroom Cloud, amply demonstrates. The play is an allegory with the mental hospital and its inmates as a microcosm of the world we live in.

The story concerns Randle McMurphy (Oz Zehavi), a pugnacious, charismatic non-conformist petty criminal who is sent to the state mental hospital for evaluation. There he comes into contact not only with a motley crew of voluntary and involuntary inmates whose overriding characteristic is fear, but with the manipulative and sadistic Nurse Ratched (Ola Shur-Selektar). The ultimately deadly conflict that develops between the two drives the events of the play. On her side Ratched (an interesting combination of ratchet and wretched) has and exploits the power of the System. On his, Mac (though definitely no angel), has an innate compassion and an irrepressible lust for life. He doesn’t stand a chance, poor sap!

Let’s face it. Despite the relatively enormous strides we have made in treatment of mental illness, we still understand only a very little about it. If we are to be honest, we flinch from it, we would rather not have to face it, let alone deal with it. The mentally ill themselves are still subject to comprehensive abuse, and if they complain ‘who’s gonna believe them? They’re nuts, right?’

These attitudes/ignorances are what Cuckoo’s Nest addresses.

Zehavi makes a persuasive engaging McMurphy, out to get his, to get the best of things and people, but not oblivious to the nuances he finds at the hospital. It’s Shur-Selectar’s unyielding body-language, the small vain touches to her person, the refusal to crank out a stereotype, that make her Ratched so compelling. Top marks too to Ruthie Asarsay for her loose-limbed, uninhibited, unself-conscious Candy – one of her best performances yet, while Mia Landesman cameos riotously as Sandra. Cameri stalwarts Ohad Shahar as Harding, Yitzhak Hiskiya as Scanlon, Ezra Dagan as Martini and Uri Ravitz as Ruckly lean hard on their roles, making each an individual whom we know is leaving so much more unsaid, except that Ruckly – basically a zombie - says never a word. Eran Sarel’s anguished Chief tears at the heartstrings and Moti Katz imbues loud-mouth Cheswick with a humor that would be funny if it weren’t so despairing. As Billy, Shlomi Avraham skillfully manages to be absent most of the time, until he isn’t, and your heart about cracks.

Adam Keller’s functional set and sad-sack costuming allow no illusions, neither does the music which unrelentingly bids “Hello darkness my old friend” (Simon & Garfunkle) amid the hard-hitting rest.

Cuckoo’s Nest is not fun. It’s hard, it’s necessary, and why, you have to ask yourselves are we watching this “j’accuse” in the Israel of today?

[It’s not terribly relevant, but I’ll note it anyway: I played Dr. Spivey, the hospital’s chief shrink, in a production of Cuckoo’s Nest back in 1975.  (It was the same year the film adaptation of the novel [1962] and play [1963] came out.)  It was my first role after getting out of the army in 1974 and attending the American Academy of Dramatic Arts for a year and studying at HB Studio.]

26 March 2019

Dispatches from Israel 16

by Helen Kaye

[On 21 March, I posted an article on “The Purim Play” on Rick On Theater.  One of the facts I learned while preparing the post is that the Purim play, which made its appearance in Europe around the 11th century and took its current form (more or less) in the mid-16th century, is considered the origin of the Yiddish theater that blossomed in Eastern and Central Europe (as well as the United States) in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.  In my discussion of this connection, I made mention of the recent (2017) Broadway production of :Paula Vogel’s play Indecent and the 1906 Yiddish drama on which it’s based, Sholem Asch’s God of Vengeance. 

[On 17 March, my friend Helen Kaye sent me two of the reviews she wrote last year for the Jerusalem Post, but I was busy finishing the new article and editing a contribution from another friend (which will be posted shortly).  I didn’t read Helen’s reviews until after “The Purim Play” was published.  I was gobsmacked to see that the two notices Helen sent me (she subsequently sent me four more, which I’ll post in a few days) were of Asch’s God of Vengeance and Vogel’s Indecent.  Some little coincidence, no?]

God of Vengeance
By Sholem Asch
Directed by Itai Tiran
Adapted by Tiran & Dani Rosenberg
Cameri Theater, Tel Aviv; 19 August 2018

Poor Yankl Shepshovich (Alon Dahan). He is torn between the need for heavenly grace and his evil side. His well-patronised basement brothel makes him a very good living but for 17 year old Rivkale (Joy Reiger), his only daughter, brought up in ignorance, chastity and innocence, he envisions a life of dutiful, joyous and fruitful womanhood, married to a pious and learned scholar. She will be the atonement for his sins, and as additional insurance, he will purchase a Torah for the community.

Except that lonely Rivkale, unknown to her father, has found a friend and confidante in Manke (Anastasia Fein), one of her father’s whores, a friendship that will be the tipping point for the tidal wave of events that will overwhelm all.

This God of Vengeance is a sort of  very over-the-top Jewish Gothic horror play – complete with tragic ending – that was presented a bit like a modern art piece with huge, loud splashes of paint tossed at a canvas, then manipulated, pushed and pulled on, depending on where they had landed. Both cast and audience were exhausted when it was over, the audience awed a bit too.

Eran Atzmon’s two level set contributed to the tsunami effect, as did the costumes by Moni Mednik, the music by Dori Parnes and Nadav Barnea’s unsettling lighting.

The set was on two levels: Rivkale’s chaste white bed was above, and above that, the Torah in a little glass enclosure; below the glass-walled rooms and ‘public’ area of the brothel.

The glass-walled Torah? The glass-walled brothel? Does anyone remember the man in the glass booth? One Adolf Eichmann, one of the architects of the Holocaust. Is the glass here just to ensure visibility? With Tiran as director, I don’t think so.

The whores, corset-straitened, are in various stages of undress. Rivkale goes from virginal white to a sullen bordeaux. Shloyme (Eran Mor), a pimp and an opportunistic thug, has an ascot and a velvet vest, like an ersatz boulevardier. The men wear the black gabardine of the observant Jew in the early 20th century where the play is set. Here the clothes are not the man but conceal him.

Dori Parnes eerie music flits in and out like remembered snatches of song.

Alon Dahan’s Yankl is never comfortable in his own body, perhaps because his soul is tormented or perhaps because Dahan has not yet completely made up his mind who Yankl is. Either way, his Yankl is oppressed, as is Helena Yaralova’s beautifully restrained Sureh, formerly his whore, now his wife and the mother of Rivka. Becoming a virtuous wife has not liberated her soul, and when her body is once more abused, she receives it almost as a matter of course.

Rivkale is hard to play because her sensuality toward Manke confuses as much as it fulfils her. Later brutality extinguishes her, but she is still alive. Reiger maneuvers between the two as best she can, but we need to feel for her more, and we can’t.

As Manke, Fein holds herself apart. Battered though she is, somewhere she is inviolable, and she holds onto that with such single-mindedness that even when Leib (Uri Ravitz) pleads with her, she cannot hear, yet at the end she too is broken. Both performances are finely muted, and both are touching and powerful thereby.

Mor’s Shloyme is not only a thug but a sadist and morally blunt. It’s to the actor’s credit that you want to hit him. As Hindel, his partner, Yardena Bracha vamps a little stereotypically but is also credible as the conventional-girl-wanting-a-home behind the whore. And a star to Neta Plotnik’s Reizl and Maya Landsmann’s buxom Basha for the comic relief.

Comic relief is needed because Tiran has made God of Vengeance deliberately brutal. There’s little let up which is a flaw, because a play cannot go full-throttle all the time, and for most of the time, this one does.

And this God of Vengeance asks another question. Is this hypocritical, violent, oppressed and oppressive society ours today?

[For those who didn’t catch it, Helen’s reference to “the man in the glass booth” above is an allusion to a novel (1967), play (1968), and movie (1975) by Robert Shaw, the English actor, novelist, and playwright.  The novel was inspired by the capture and trial by Israel of Adolf Eichmann, a principal architect of Hitler’s “Final Solution,” the total extermination of all Jews in Nazi-controlled territory.  Eichmann was tried (on charges of crimes against humanity, war crimes, crimes against the Jewish people, and membership in a criminal organization) and hanged in 1962, but in the novel, play, and film Arthur Goldman, the Eichmann character, was revealed to be neither a Nazi nor a war criminal.  During Eichmann’s actual trial and Goldman’s fictional one, the defendant sat in the courtroom inside a bulletproof glass booth for his own protection, hence the title The Man in the Glass Booth.

[In a coincidence of timing, the New York Times of 25 March reported the death at 92 on Saturday, 23 March, of Rafael Eitan, the Israeli intelligence officer who planned and executed the capture of Eichmann in Argentina on 11 May 1960.  The obituary was accompanied by a photograph of Eichmann in a Jerusalem courtroom, standing in his glass booth flanked by a pair of uniformed Israeli guards.

[Oh, in a later e-mail, Helen wrote: “Itai Tiran, who directed God of Vengeance, is something of a wunderkind.  As well as acting and directing, he’s also a concert level pianist, tho’ he doesn’t play professionally.”  FYI.]

*  *  *  *
Indecent
By Paula Vogel
Translated by Joshua Sobol
Directed by Yair Sherman
Cameri Theater, Tel Aviv; 21 November 2018

In 1923 Sholem Asch’s blistering God of Vengeance, the story of a Jewish brothel owner hoist with his own petard when his virgin daughter forms an intimate friendship with one of his whores, is playing on Broadway. Police halt the show, arrest the cast and producer who are then tried and convicted of obscenity, a conviction later overturned on appeal. In 2015 Vogel’s Indecent, the story of the play and its people preceding and following that trial, premiered at Yale Repertory theater, going on to win acclaim wherever it ran.

The very adept nine member cast – six actors, three musicians – play multiple characters in a multi-scene drama that goes from the first reading of the play in 1906 to its partial performance in the Lodz ghetto in 1941. It is set in a black box, Nadav Barnea’s lighting illuminating only the actors, against Nimrod Zin’s often enigmatic, - places, people, events barely remembered - ever-moving, rear-screened kaleidoscope of images whereon places and dates are also projected in Hebrew (to keep us straight on where and when we are).

Indecent also has comedian Shmuel Vilojzny as Lemml/Lou. Lemml is the narrator, the emcee, the play’s stage manager as it moves from triumph to triumph all over Europe prior to falling flat on its face in the Land of the Free.

With never even a hint of his usual schtick, Vilojzny plays Lemml with a gentle, courageous, laced-with-flashes-of-levity grace that humanizes and gives this fractured (undeniably skilful) docu-drama a lot of whatever depth it has. The rest of that comes from singer/actor/cellist Eli Gorenstein who plays all the Elderly Men with his usual understated authority. Dudu Niv also shines in his many versions of Adult Men, especially as crass Broadway producer Weinberger and, together with Esti Koussevitzky, in a poker-faced rendition of “Ain’t we got fun.”

And yet there is the inescapable feeling that the actors are rushing – “let’s get this over with” – and despite the introduction of quite a few scenes from God of Vengeance, if you don’t know the play, Indecent will lose you, and finally why bring it to us? Indecent tries to explain Jews and being Jewish to gentiles. We know all that. We’ve lived it.

[For the record, God of Vengeance was written in 1906 and, after it was greeted with less than enthusiasm by his writer friends in Warsaw, Asch took the play to Berlin, where it was first staged in 1907.  It was directed by the great Max Reinhardt at the Deutsches Theater and starred Rudolf Schildkraut.  It ran for six months, a long run for those days.  Later that year, Asch brought the play to New York City; it was booed and ignited a war of words in the city’s Yiddish press.  The conservative Tageblatt called the play “filthy,” “immoral,” and “indecent”; the radical Forverts called it “moral,” “artistic,” and “beautiful.” 

[In 1922, American producer Harry Weinberger presented an English translation of God of Vengeance in Greenwich Village and then moved it to the Apollo Theatre on Broadway in February 1923.  Schildkraut directed and appeared (as Yekel Shepshovitch) in the production, along with such theatrical lights as Morris Carnovksy (Reb Aaron) and Sam Jaffe (Reb Ali).  (Note that the characters’ names in English transliteration vary greatly from one translation to another, as well as from Helen’s renderings above.)  It ran for six weeks before city authorities arrested Weinberger and the whole cast on charges of obscenity.  Weinberger, as it happened, was also a prominent lawyer and represented the company, but, as Helen Kaye points out above, the defendants were convicted.  Weinberger fought on, however, and eventually overturned the guilty verdict on appeal. 

[Despite its troubles in the United States, Asch’s God of Vengeance was popular in Europe.  It was translated into many languages and was performed across the continent in German, Russian, Polish, Hebrew, Italian, Czech, Romanian, and Norwegian, among other translations.  It’s had at least three Off-Broadway revivals in the past 30 years, including a 1992 production by the now-defunct Jewish Repertory Theatre that included my former acting teacher Lee Wallace (Yankel) and his wife Marilyn Chris (Sore) in the cast.  (An earlier Off-Off-Broadway mounting, in 1975, featured my then-acting teacher, Carol Rosenfeld, as Sarah.  I went to Brooklyn to see her perform in the show.)]

21 March 2019

The Purim Play


[Back on 31 December, I published “Sight & Sound” by my friend Kirk Woodward.  For those who don’t know the post, it’s about the productions of religious spectacles by the titular theater troupe, a Christian company.   When I read the article about a month earlier, one of my responses was:

I had a recurring thought while reading [“Sight & Sound”].  I was wondering, as I read this, what the relation of what you describe here as “religious drama” and the Purim play in a Jewish congregation is.  They don’t seem to be the same, and not only because Purim plays are traditionally performed by children.  (I’ve never seen, nor even heard of, a Purim play given by adults, or even teens.)  The answer, I think, is the evangelism—altho’ I don’t know that all religious theater is intentionally evangelistic.  The Purim play isn’t an inculcation of a religious principle but a (fun) way to teach children the story of Esther and Haman, considered part of Jewish history (even tho’ it may be mythical or legendary in reality).

[I began to think about the Purim play, and even did a little research on it.  A little less than a week later, I wrote Kirk again, telling him:

I’ve just learned that, at least in Eastern Europe, there are Purim plays given by adult “actors,” but they’re usually satirical and comedic (the kids’ plays are usually serious—at least ours were—as far as little kids can be “serious”).  I’ve even read that there are puppet Purim plays by both adults and kids for an audience of children.  I never knew that.  That may also be a European practice.  (Given the breadth of American Jewish culture, it wouldn’t surprise me that there are some of all these variations—and others, like musical performances and performances in Yiddish or even Hebrew—somewhere here.)

[I was intrigued and decided I’d look into the subject more thoroughly.  Below is the result of that self-edification.  I learned a lot I didn’t know—and maybe you will, too. 

[This year, Purim started at sundown yesterday, Wednesday, 20 March, and runs till sundown today, Thursday.  ~Rick]

Purim, also known as the Feast of Lots, is a holiday that commemorates the Jewish peoples’ deliverance from their enemy Haman, royal vizier, a high-ranking political advisor or minister, to the Persian King Ahasuerus in the 5th century B.C.E.  According to the Old Testament Book of Esther, Haman had planned to kill all of the Jews in Persia because Mordechai, a prominent member of the Jewish community, had refused to bow to Haman.  (The alternative name for the holiday, Feast of Lots, comes from the notion that Haman drew lots to determine the date on which he’d carry out his extermination.)  When Queen Esther, who was Jewish and Mordechai’s cousin, told Ahasuerus (probably Xerxes I, aka Xerxes the Great, 519-465 B.C.E.) of Haman’s plot, the king  instead ordered Haman’s execution on the very gallows on which Mordechai was to have been executed.   

The historical truth of the story of Esther is disputed, and many scholars believe that Purim is a palimpsest on a pagan holiday marking the Babylonian New Year.  The holiday was celebrated with “masks, dances, and Mardi Gras shenanigans,” observes humorist and Yiddish lexicologist Leo Rosten.  Both Jews and Babylonians enjoyed this festival of abandon and license when conventional restraints and common pieties were set aside (this would be during the Babylonian Captivity of 597-539 B.C.E.).  Later, when the Jews of the Levant (Eastern Mediterranean) wouldn’t give up this “unseemly deportment,” the rabbis took the colorful story of Esther and Haman and slapped it onto the festival to which they couldn’t put a stop and the celebration of Purim took on the frivolous and profane aspects of the Babylonian festival.  

Rosten contends that “Purim is the closest thing to the carnival in Jewish life.”  As a result, Purim isn’t like the solemn observations Jews conduct at Pesach and Chanukkah; it’s observed with a general eat-drink-and-be-merry approach and even drunkenness.  (The Talmud even admonishes: “One must drink on Purim until that person cannot distinguish between cursing Haman and blessing Mordechai.”)  In Israel today, Purim is one of the most widely celebrated festivals, with costume parties, mummery, masquerading, busking, street fairs, and, in many towns and cities, parades with floats—and drinking.  Think Mardi Gras/Carnival/Fasching or St. Patrick’s Day.

Traditionally, in Jewish congregations around the world, one of the ways in which Purim is marked is the annual recitation in the synagogue of the story of Esther, called the Megillah.  In the Mishniac Era (10-220 C.E.), from which the first mentions of a Purim observance date, the reading of the scroll was formal and solemn.  Later, parody and satire was added to the reading and, as they do today, both children and adults booed and jeered loudly and shook groggers (ratchety noisemakers) whenever Haman’s name was mentioned, and, of course, today everyone munches on hamantaschen, the traditional triangular pastry usually filled with poppy seeds that resembles the distinctive three-cornered hat that Haman is supposed to have worn.  (The hat may, in fact, be apocryphal, but the belief and tradition persists nevertheless.) 

Another tradition at Purim is the Purim play, which grew out of the reading of the Megillah.  Also called a Purimspiel or Purimshpil (from the German Spiel and Yiddish shpil for ‘play,’ as in both an amusement activity or a theatrical presentation), the Purim play is usually a comic dramatization of the story of Haman and Esther, the narrative that describes what transpired on Purim and why it is celebrated as an important Jewish holiday.  Because it’s a comic, often satirical and farcical rendition of the story, with great liberties taken with the plot and characters, it’s not usually performed inside the synagogue, where such levity and low humor is considered vulgar and frivolous, but outdoors in a courtyard or lawn. 

The satiric Purim play is drawn from the so-called Purim Torah, a parody of Talmudic learning and logic that depends a great deal on a travesty of pilpul, the intense disputation used to analyze and interpret the Torah among Talmudic scholars and yeshiva students.  The marshelik, a kind of MC or interlocutor/narrator, specializes in this kind of verbal comedy.  Aside from that, different parts of the Jewish diaspora have different ways of presenting the Purim play.

In the United States, the Purim play is mostly performed by children for one another or for their parents.  When I was a boy, we did our Purim play in our Sabbath school classroom—ostensibly not part of the synagogue itself even though it was the same building—but, of course, ours was a reformed congregation.  (The children’s version, of course, was also less irreverent and not at all profane.  It was a more-or-less straight telling of the story of Esther and Haman, not unlike the children’s nativity plays put on in Christian churches.  It was seen as a lesson about Jews and other persecuted peoples triumphing over their oppressors.)  In other countries, the performers are adults, leading to a more profane and less faithful rendering of the story. 

Another tradition in some European communities is for the play to be performed by puppets, most likely in the style of 19th-century Punch-and-Judy shows.  It appears that the Purim play tradition, in whatever form it takes, is mostly observed today in Ashkenazi (that is, Central and Eastern European) Jewish communities.  (The Sephardim, the Jews of southern Europe and Holland, apparently also stage Purim plays, but from what I’ve gleaned, the impulse seems to have derived from the Ashkenazi tradition.  One oddity: at least some of the performances were in Hebrew rather than Ladino, the language of Sephardi Jewry; that would have been anathema to Ashkenazi Jews who’d never use the liturgical language for a secular purpose.)  Hasidic communities, both in the U.S. and abroad, continue to present elaborate Purim plays (though the vulgarity is severely suppressed).

Historically, the Purim play is considered the “only genuine folk theater that has survived a thousand years in European culture.”  (The European Passion Play dates from around the mid-14th century at its earliest.  Some Asian folk performances that are still enacted are older.)  It bears striking resemblance in many of its iterations to the medieval mystery or morality plays of Europe.  Integrating texts, theater, music, dance, songs, mime, and costumes, the Purim play is considered to be the origin of Yiddish theater.  Avrom (or Abraham) Goldfadn (1840-1908), the “father” of Yiddish theater, acted in Purim plays at his rabbinical seminary in the Ukraine from 1857 to 1866.  (For more about the Yiddish theater, readers are directed to my two-part post, “National Yiddish Theatre – Folksbiene,” 23 and 26 August 2012.)  The term Purimspiel became common among Ashkenazi Jews as early as the mid-16th century.  (The German word is frequently used even in English because, apparently, it was German Jews who first developed what we recognize as the modern Purim play.) 

There are really two strains of the Purim play: one a religious rendering of the Biblical story (the Akhashveyresh-shpil, or Ahasuerus Play), the other a far more profane version, deviating widely from the Megillah.  From its very beginnings, the performative presentation of the Esther story included a farcical, irreverent, and melodramatic telling of a tale of escape from an existential threat, told with masks and disguises, costumes, songs and dances, pageantry, and mime.  It was and is a story of rejoicing over the defeat of an enemy—and has often, in its adult incarnation, even been accompanied, as I’ve noted, by drunkenness.  As Leo Rosten puts it, “[I]t tells [Jews] that tyrants and fanatics can be defeated.  In a larger sense, it signifies that evil cannot prevail forever.” 

The origins of the play go back to the Levantine Jews of the early centuries of the Christian Era when the east end of the Mediterranean Sea was under first Roman and then Muslim rule.  Jews commemorated the defeat of Haman and their escape from his plot to exterminate them by beating, hanging, and burning him in effigy.  It’s reasonable to assume that this event was accompanied by rejoicing and raucous singing and dancing and probably some spontaneous acting out of episodes from the Megillah.  (In an ironic twist, the Catholic Church of the day reported these celebrations as actual hangings and even crucifixions, thus provoking anti-Semitic attacks on Jews and synagogues.)

The true Purim play, however, didn’t take shape until the Middle Ages in Europe, when the cultural phenomenon of folk theater spread around the continent.  The term Purimspiel or Purimshpil appeared about 1500, according to historians.  This often referred first to dramatic monologues or poetic recitations, which then grew into narrative presentations performed by several actors.  These might be performances of not only the Esther story but other tales from the Hebrew Bible as well as, such as the selling of Joseph and David and Goliath.   

The performers might also add episodes from the Torah and stories inspired by Talmudic commentary.  Like the Italian Commedia dell’Arte, the Purim play might also satirize the local figures of authority like the rabbi, cantor, leaders and well-known members of the community.  (During World War II, Purim plays in the Jewish ghettoes of Germany and Nazi-occupied countries frequently portrayed Haman as Hitler.)  In keeping with the rise of minstrelsy in Jewish communities, Purim players borrowed from liturgy, folk traditions, secular Jewish songs, or non-Jewish musical sources.  The plays increasingly presented satirical commentary on economic, political, and social issues and topics of faith and contemporary life. 

The reference to Commedia isn’t entirely accidental.  The Purim players told secular stories as well, borrowing some of them from the Italian folk theater that was popular all over Western Europe from the 16th to the 18th centuries.  Often, the stock Commedia characters were blended into the characters of the  Megillah and composites developed: King Ahasuerus might become Pantalone, the foolish old man; Esther, his young queen, might be portrayed as La Signora, the old man’s wife who habitually cuckolded him; and Mordechai might morph into a clownish character like a Zanni, perhaps Brighella.  Jewish folk caricatures like the clown (lets), the fool (nar), and the jester (badkhen) were often added; a master of ceremonies (payats or marshelik) also appeared. 

Commedia, which was improvised and performed in the streets, was topical and often extremely vulgar, and the Purim plays influenced by this form could be sexually suggestive and loaded with double-entendre—so much so that at times, rabbis banned the performance of Purim plays altogether.  The bans never stuck, of course, because Purim had become the one time in the Jewish calendar when irreverence and even vulgarity were tolerated—possibly thanks, first, to the Babylonians and later, to the Renaissance Italians.

Unlike the improvised Commedia performances, Medieval and Renaissance Purim plays were carefully rehearsed.  Performances, often by students or craftsmen, and also by local musicians, dancers, and acrobats, were staged at yeshivas (religious schools) or in the homes of wealthy citizens.  The rehearsals were conducted in secret and the performers, called shpilers (‘players’), wore heavy make-up and costumes (and sometimes masks) to keep their identities hidden.  The troupes, which were restricted to men and boys (again, unlike the Commedia, which included female actors), went from home to home, often trailed by crowds of onlookers, especially children who would climb up to the windows of the houses to see the performances.  The performers were paid after the play in cash or food and would go off somewhere to pool their take and eat while regaling each other by parodying their wealthy patrons.

Of course, the common language of the Purim performances was Yiddish, until modern times when local vernaculars (including Hebrew in Israel, something that would never have been tolerated in earlier eras because Hebrew was the language of faith alone, not daily commerce of any kind) came into common use.  It is partly for this reason that the Purim play is seen as the source of the Yiddish theater that blossomed in the 19th and early 20th century.  It’s not a direct line of descent, but the popularity and increasing secularity of the Purim play led the Jews of Central and Eastern Europe to adopt and adapt the form to more expansive themes and purposes.  

The Purim plays, though not improvised like the Commedia dell’Arte scenarios, were not written down but passed on in an oral tradition from generation to generation and from troupe to troupe.  There are no existing texts or scripts of Medieval or Renaissance Purim plays—prepared scripts are available today, however, including on line—but the Yiddish theater has a pantheon of playwrights and dramatists whose works are still performed today and are available in translation.  (Some may remember the 2017 Broadway production of Paula Vogel’s Indecent which was about the 1922-23 Broadway staging of The God of Vengeance by Sholem Asch, 1880-1957.  God of Vengeance was a play from New York’s Yiddish theater in 1907.)

As Europe modernized and Jews mixed with the dominant culture (despite expulsions, ghettoes, and pogroms), the Purim play took on the characteristics of the local secular theatrical entertainments.  In the mid-17th century in Italy and southern France, for instance, where Commedia dell’Arte was very popular, the Purim play adopted the parodistic grotesqueness of the improvised comedies.  In Germany, by the 18th century, the Purim play became heavily influenced by opera.  In the 20th and 21st centuries, Purim plays have taken on the contemporary culture, adapting pop and rock music and even hip-hop to satirize the current political and social scene, especially within the Jewish community. 

The Purim play grew larger and more elaborate over the decades.  From a brief, small-cast performance in people’s houses, by the 17th century, it became a large production with many performers, music and songs, several acts, and scenery,  The performances were staged in public places, including theaters, and the shpilers charged admission.  The vulgarity and satire remained and even increased and in the 18th century, the civic authorities in some cities banned all Purim plays from being performed on the charge that they violated obscenity laws.  (In some cases, there were also objections that the plays contained anti-Christian content, which was sometimes true, and that they insulted government officials and local royalty.)

There are dozens of contemporary versions and adaptations of the story of Esther, inspired, obviously, by the traditional Purim play.  One, for example, is The Megile of Itsik Manger, a Yiddish musical which débuted in Israel in 1972 and was presented in 2014 by New York City’s Folksbiene (music by Dov Seltzer; book by Shmuel Bunim, Hayim Hefer, Itzik Manger, and Dov Seltzer; lyrics by Shmuel Bunim, Hayim Hefer, Itzik Manger, and Dov Seltzer).  Another popular version is The Megillah According to the Beatles (1999) with book and lyrics by Norman Roth.

[When I was in middle school, we had to write periodic book reports.  The assignments were each for a different type of book: a book on sports (I remember reading about football—the first time I encountered the word gridiron, which I had no idea how to pronounce!—one on history, and so on.  The one assignment I remember specifically was biography.  We had to read and report on a book about a real person.  My first choice was Esther.  I had learned about her in Sabbath school and thought she was an amazing person.  My teacher nixed the idea, though, because there was no proof Esther ever really existed—she wasn’t a historical figure, but a mythical one like Paul Bunyan or King Arthur.  I was very disappointed—and I don’t even remember whom I read about instead.]

16 March 2019

Ten Years On


Today, 16 March 2019, is the tenth anniversary of Rick On Theater.  I wrote the first post on this blog on Monday, 16 March 2009, an introduction to what I thought ROT would be like called “A New Venture” (http://rickontheater.blogspot.com/2009/03/new-venture.html).  At the time, I had no idea where this endeavor would go or how long it would last.  That it has survived for a decade, weathering computer glitches, breakdowns, and replacements; travels and other absences from home; the death of my pet dog after 15 years of companionship; local, national, and international disasters; the final illness and death of my mother (during which period I essentially moved in with her near Washington); and many other ups and downs, is astonishing to me. 

In that opening post, I explained the origins of Rick On Theater and tried to project a little of what I envisioned it would cover—including the fact that I would probably go off track and post about subjects unrelated to theater or even the arts.  That turned out to be correct.  I didn’t predict, at least not on the record, that I’d also be publishing writing by contributors and articles from other publications that I liked and found interesting or provocative.  Many of those latter have been examinations of stage professions about which most theatergoers know little, such as “Stage Hands” from Equity News and “Two (Back) Stage Pros,” a pair of articles from the New York Times and the Washington Post about one of the American stage’s most renowned and respected set designers and the designer and maker of the hair pieces worn by many actors (both posted in 2014).  Some of these republished articles look at theater theory or opinion (“‘Reworking the Classics: Homage or Ego Trip?’” by Robert Brustein, from a 1988 New York Times and posted in 2011) or theater practice (“‘How great plays are (eventually) made’” by Jessica Goldstein of the Washington Post, published on ROT in 2013).

Among friends and acquaintances who’ve contributed posts, my friend Kirk Woodward has been especially generous as a guest blogger (84 articles as of this writing—he’s just sent me a new one—including 2016’s five-part “Re-Reading Shaw,” 2013’s four-part “Reflections on Directing,” and 2018’s three-part “Perry Mason”), and I have mined the New York Times (Phillip Lopate’s “‘Draft: The Essay, An Exercise In Doubt,’” 2013), the Washington Post (Little Dancer, Inspired By Degas Sculpture, Premieres At Kennedy Center,” various articles in two installments, 2016), Equity News (“‘The Art of Being Seen: Perspectives on the Casting Process’” by Doug Strassen, 2018), Allegro (“Making Broadway Babies,” several articles posted in 2013), 60 Minutes (“‘Historic 1906 Film Captures S.F.’s Market Street,’” 2013), PBS NewsHour (Jeffrey Brown’s “How High-Tech Replicas Can Help Save Our Cultural Heritage,” 2017), and other news outlets for articles, interviews, or reports to republish on ROT (all fully credited to their original writers and publications, of course). 

The contributors not only have different ideas than I do, expanding the blog’s coverage and adding different voices to the mix, but they can write about topics I could never cover.  Kirk wears many hats, as you’ll see, among them, that of a musician, and writes about jazz, pop, rock ’n’ roll (with special emphasis on Bob Dylan and The Beatles), and theater music for ROT—and I’ve gotten pieces from people with backgrounds in dance (Oona Haaranen, a dance teacher and choreographer), a friend who writes about theater in Israel (Helen Kaye, who lives in Tel Aviv and covers theater and culture for the Jerusalem Post), and a couple of college teachers who’ve written about theater in academia (“The Theater Problem in Education” by Robert B. Youngblood, Professor Emeritus of German at Washington and Lee University, 2011, and “Teaching What Shakespeare Didn’t Write: A Dramaturg’s Perspective in the English Classroom” by William Hutchings, Professor of English at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, 2014).

I should say a further word or so here about Kirk’s participation.  I’ve contacted most of my friends and former colleagues and solicited articles for the blog, and many have come through with some really terrific additions to ROT (“Nobody Wants to See a Tired Bat on Stage” by Oona Haaranen about her 6-year-old son’s first stage experience, 2014, and “The Cheapening of the Standing O” by Erin Woodward, Kirk’s daughter and an actor, director, and theater teacher in the New York City public schools, 2015), but Kirk, who’s an actor, director, theater teacher, playwright, and composer-lyricist (among other accomplishments), has been far and away the most forthcoming with contributions. 

Kirk may have a greater incentive to help keep the blog up, however: it was largely his idea.  In “A New Venture,” I explained that I had been writing e-mail reports on the plays I’d been seeing for a small group of friends and acquaintances who used to live in New York City but moved away.  The reports grew over the years, and I also started sending Kirk copies as well.  My correspondents often suggested that I try to get the reports published and Kirk joined the chorus, but I didn’t think the effort was likely to succeed.  Kirk at that time was working in information tech and had a familiarity with the world of computers that I didn’t, and he suggested starting a blog as an outlet for the reports. 

Since I had no experience with that scene, Kirk volunteered to look into the field and scope out some possibilities.  Finding a likely host site that guided users through the process of creating a blog, he sent me the link and I logged on.  Before I knew it, I had a blog site all set up and was ready to post my first entry.  That was 16 March 2009, ten years ago today, and my introductory post was “A New Venture.”  So, my name’s on this blog, but Kirk’s a part-owner both in fact and in spirit.  I can’t actually read Kirk’s mind, but I suspect that he so avidly sends me potential posts (I have yet to reject one, it’s probably needless to add) because he feels a certain proprietary interest in Rick On Theater.  (He and I even have a private nickname for ROT that Kirk prompted.  I won’t reveal it—it is private, after all—but it has to do with the title’s initials, which I often use as shorthand on the blog.)

All told, this anniversary message will make 763 posts on ROT.  (There are something over 200 play and performance reports, some from years before I launched ROT, and some by other writers than me.)  That’s more than 76 posts a year—almost seven posts a month or one to two a week.  Not bad for a one-man operation, even if I do say so myself.  It’s been a challenge and sometimes way too much work for a non-paying occupation—but mostly it’s been fun as hell.  I’ve learned a lot writing and reading the posts on Rick On Theater, keeping an eye (or ear) out for possible posts or ideas for posts, and I feel a sense of accomplishment getting the blog on line each time with a new post. 

Picking a few representative articles from over 750 posts is impossible.  The play reports alone run the gamut from classics (Jean Racine’s Phèdre starring Helen Mirren, posted in 2009; Friedrich Schiller’s Mary Stuart with Harriet Walter and Janet McTeer, 2009; Gotthold Ephraim Lessing’s Nathan the Wise with F. Murray Abraham, 2016) to standards (Oklahoma! at Washington, D.C.’s Arena Stage, 2011; John Osborne’s Look Back in Anger reported by Kirk Woodward, 2012; Design for Living by Noel Coward at the 2006 Shaw Festival, 2012) to experimental and avant-garde work (Jack Gelber’s The Connection revival at the Living Theatre, 2009; Ivo van Hove’s staging of Pier Paolo Pasolini’s film Teorema for the Toneelgroep Amsterdam, 2010; the British troupe 1927’s Golem, 2016).

I’ve also covered the awful (“Perfect Crime,” an execrable Off-Broadway mystery play that’s been running since 1987, and “Have a Nice Life (2010 New York Fringe Festival),” about which the less said here the better) to the wonderful (“The Hairy Ape,” 2017, and “Boesman and Lena,” 2019) to the astonishing (The Orphans’ Home Cycle,” 2010, and “A Disappearing Number (Lincoln Center Festival 2010)”). 

Plays covered on Rick On Theater are mostly current productions like By the Way, Meet Vera Stark by Lynn Nottage, which just closed at New York City’s Signature Theatre Company on 10 March, and Athol Fugard’s Boesman and Lena, running at STC until 24 March (both posted in March 2019).  The next show I have scheduled will be Marc Blitzstein’s The Cradle Will Rock, a famous labor musical from 1937, opening at the Classic Stage Company from 25 March to 19 May; my report is scheduled for posting on 15 April.  Other reports are ones I wrote before I launched ROT, such as La MaMa E.T.C.’s presentation of Andrei Serban’s Fragments of a Trilogy from 1976 (2011) and 2009’s recreation of Living Theatre’s The Connection.  They’re from what Kirk calls my “archive,” reports I wrote before ROT.

I’ve reported on many productions from abroad, often in foreign languages, such as Anton Chekhov’s Ivanov by the Katona József Theatre of Budapest, Hungary (2009), and Carlo Goldoni’s Arlecchino, Servant of Two Masters from Italy’s Piccolo Teatro di Milano as originally staged by the great Giorgio Strehler (2012).  Some of these productions, like Arlecchino, have been special experiences because they were presented by national companies performing the classic plays of their native theaters, like the Abbey Players of Dublin doing John Millington Synge’s Playboy of the Western World (2019); the Royal Shakespeare Company of London and Stratford-on-Avon with The Tamer Tamed, John Fletcher’s sequel to Shakespeare’s The Taming of the Shrew (2019); or the Comédie-Française presenting Molière’s The Imaginary Invalid (2019). 

Beyond the performance reports, which were the impetus for starting ROT and is its meat and potatoes, I’ve blogged on theater history, some of it obscure, like “The Group of Hissed Authors” (2009), an article about five 19th-century French authors (really four French authors and an “honorary” Frenchman) who had all seen their initial forays into the world of theater booed off the stage.  In 1874, Émile Zola, Gustave Flaubert, Alphonse Daudet, Edmond de Goncourt, and Ivan Turgenev formed a fraternal group for enjoying food, drink, and wit.  I also posted the two-part “Dueling Brechts” (2014) about the cultural tumult resulting from the simultaneous Off-Broadway production in 1962 of two versions of Bertolt Brecht’s Mann Ist Mann.  The theater press had a field day reporting not just on the two productions, one from the Living Theatre (Man Is Man), directed by Julian Beck and featuring Judith Malina and Joseph Chaikin, and the other (A Man’s A Man) staged by John Hancock with Olympia Dukakis and John Heffernan, but also on the rivalry of the productions and the two translations of different versions Brecht wrote of the play. 

In 2013, I published a history of “Performance Art” in two parts and in 2018, a history, also in two installments, of the “Caffe Cino,” the progenitor of Off-Off-Broadway.  (Kirk contributed a bit of obscure theater history, too, with an article on “Theatre Alley,” 2013—a real street in lower Manhattan, not to be confused with Shubert Alley, a private street in the Theatre District, or Tin Pan Alley, which isn’t an actual street name at all.) 

Occasionally, I editorialize when an issue arises that piques my attention—or my ire.  When a Newsweek columnist railed against the casting of an openly gay actor as a romantic lead in a play, I posted “Gay Actors” (2010), for instance, and when the producers of Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark kept performing the play in “previews,” postponing the opening over and over again, preventing reviewers from publishing criticism of the play, I wrote “Reviewing the Situation: Spider-Man & the Press” (2011).

In the area of non-theater, I report on art exhibits such as Washington Art Matters (American University, 2013), Jackson Pollock: A Collection Survey, 1934–1954 (MoMA, 2016), and History Keeps Me Awake At Night (David Wojnarowicz at the Whitney Museum of American Art, 2018).  I’ve also profiled some artists whom I found especially interesting, such as Inuit artist Pudlo Pudlat (2009), David Wojnarowicz (2011), and printmaker Lila Oliver Asher (2014).  (My article on “‘The Sculptural Drama’: Tennessee Williams’s Plastic Theater” in 2012 includes a detailed section on Hans Hofmann and his theory of plasticity—so there are cross-overs.) 

Beyond the theater and art coverage, in the category of what might be called “fascinating miscellany,” are some posts on personal matters, especially biographical.  I published a two-part bio piece called “An American Teen In Germany” (2013), examining the years my family and I lived abroad from 1962 to 1967, and an eight-part recollection of my two-and-a-half years as a Military Intelligence officer in West Berlin from 1972 to 1974 entitled “Berlin Memoir” (2016-17).  I also researched the history of a small Washington modern-art gallery in which my parents were partners from 1958 to 1962 in “Gres Gallery” (2018).  Kirk contributed a number of personal articles as well, such as “A Lawyer and a Life” (2010), Kirk’s memoir of his grandfather, a frontier lawyer in Kentucky during the first two-thirds of the 20th century, and a sort of exposé of his army tour of duty in Korea between 1970 and 1971, “A Year in Korea” (2011).

There are lots of other little surprises and lagniappes tucked away in the archive, including many guest posts.  My friend Rich Gilbert spent a year in Spain and Western Europe in 2014 and 2015 and I posted his e-mails as “Dispatches from Spain” throughout the year.  My friend Helen Kaye (who’s also a director and actor) occasionally sends me copies of her reviews and other pieces on her activities (“Acre (Acco) Festival, Israel,” 2012) and wanderings (“A Trip to Poland,” 2015); the JP reviews are posted periodically as “Dispatches from Israel”  (and she’s promised me more soon!)

As things evolved on ROT, my posts seem to fall into a number of identifiable categories.  First, of course, are the play reports (which I see as a sort of record, so they incorporate several elements that don’t go into standard reviews, which is why I don’t call them that); then other posts are history articles, usually based in part or in toto on research, and the production pieces, about how theater happens.  I’ve mentioned the editorial posts, which are opinion pieces in which I advocate for one position or another, such as funding for the arts, advocacy for arts in education, first-amendment freedoms and free artistic expression; and other issues of the day. 

I give myself permission to write about or post other authors’ articles on any topic that strikes my interest, whether or not it has any connection to theater or even the arts.  In 2009, for instance, I published, “Sailor on Horseback,” an article on Samuel “Powhatan” Carter, the only man in the United States to have held a commission as an admiral in the navy and a general in the army at the same time.  In 2012, I posted an article on New York City’s “High Line Park,” the elevated, landscaped walkway that runs along Manhattan’s west side, three stories above the streets of Chelsea.  One of my favorite posts is an article, from 2016, called “Ragamuffin Day.”  It’s about a uniquely New York celebration that occurred from the turn of the 20th century till about the end of World War II, in which children went about their neighborhoods dressed as hobos and bums and begged door to door for candy and change.  Sound familiar?  But this street event took place on Thanksgiving, not Halloween (which hadn’t become popular yet).

I make only one guarantee, unwritten until now: I will write something on every public theatrical performance I see.  I reserve one exception to that promise: I won’t blog about a show in which someone I know well is involved—as writer, performer, director/choreographer, designer, or producer; I feel it’s a conflict of interests.  For this reason, I haven’t written about any of Kirk Woodward’s shows—except to use some as points of departure for discussions of something wider, such as “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow: Children’s Theater in America” (2009) and “Dinner Theater” (2015).  Kirk, however, has written about some of his own work, especially productions on which he worked in the past—for example, “Kirk Woodward’s King Lear Journal” (2010) and the two-part “Directing Twelfth Night for Children” (2010).

My main criterion has been to post things that are interesting; the second consideration is that the article be informative or revealing, especially about theater.  Of course, I’m the judge of what’s interesting and informative because . . . well, Rick On Theater is my blog and this is a one-person shop.  I’m sure I’ve made misjudgments, but the criteria remain in effect nevertheless.  That doesn’t mean everything is serious all the time.  I have, for instance, two posts called “Short Takes: Russian Jokes” and “Short Takes: German Humor” (both 2010)—the subjects, I think, are obvious.  I also republished Kyle Smith’s New York Post film review of Jackass 3D, “’Dante update neither divine nor comedy’” (2010), because he took such a humorous approach to his task. 

That’s just a taste of the previous 762 posts on Rick On Theater.  I have no plans to change things, though evolution is inevitable.  Overall, I expect ROT to continue pretty much in the vein in which it’s been operating up to now.  I have some articles in progress and in the planning stages.  Aside from the upcoming play report on Cradle, I started a small series of profiles of interesting people that began with Rudolf Steiner, the founder of Anthroposophy who had a profound influence on actor-director-teacher Michael Chekhov.  The profile was posted on 20 January and will be followed by a biographical post of Aleister Crowley, a British occultist and student of magic, who began his own religion he called Thelema.  The last name on the current list is Michael Chekhov himself, the nephew of the playwright Anton Chekhov and an important innovator of 20th-century theater and an influential acting teacher in Russia, England, and the United States. 

I’ve also been working on an article, sure to be posted in multiple parts when it’s finished, drawn from the letters exchanged by my future parents between their first meeting in January 1945 and my father’s release from the army after World War II in December that year.  (They were married in January 1946 and I came along the following December.)  This project has become a long task because not only are there nearly 200 pieces of correspondence I have to read closely, but each one usually requires me to go back to one or more previous letters, to pore through other family documents or mementos, or look something up—or some combination of all of those.  (Did any of you know, for instance, that Tax Day wasn’t always 15 April?  It was 15 March until 1955.  Mother mentions that in one letter.  Or how about that President Franklin Roosevelt’s birthday, 30 January, was celebrated from 1934 until his death on 12 April 1945 with a President’s Ball on U.S. military bases.  They were fund-raisers for the March of Dimes, which Roosevelt had founded to fight polio; the president had contracted the disease in 1921.  My dad wrote about preparing for the 1945 ball at his battalion at Camp Hood, Texas—which would turn out to be the last one.  I had to look all that up.)

Kirk, the co-founder of ROT, remarked when I reminded him that the blog’s tenth birthday was coming up:-

Rick On Theater’s value for me is that it is both comprehensive and perceptive.  I can’t imagine a better source for learning about the theater of the past ten years, and of course it’s not limited only to theater—anything cultural is fair game, and “cultural” covers a lot of territory.  But the heart of the blog is the reporting of performance art, and for me it’s unequaled. 

I’ll continue to try to live up to Kirk’s estimation and expectations.  I’ll also continue to stretch the limitations seemingly imposed by my own chosen title.  As the tag line beneath the blog’s title on its webpage states: “My unmediated impressions and thoughts on, especially, theater and perhaps other topics of interest to me.”  That covers multitudes—my only restrictions are that I won’t be covering sex, religion, and politics—the three topics you’re not supposed to discuss at dinner parties.  At least not directly.

So, see you around in Year 11 . . . and beyond.  As we say in the business of show: Break a leg!

~RICK