[When I was a grad student
at New York University, I wrote a paper in May 1984 for a class called
20th-Century Mise-en-Scene, an examination of the staging techniques in modern
Western theater taught by the late Michael Kirby (1931-97).
The paper was a reconstruction of the Group Theatre’s Johnny Johnson, the company’s only musical, with book
and lyrics by Paul Green and music by Kurt Weill. The play ran at Broadway’s 44th Street Theatre
from 19 November 1936—83 years ago tomorrow—to 16 January 1937.
[In the course of my
research, I read all the reviews I could locate and as many accounts from
participants and later scholars as I could find. I pored over photographs of the production and
studied the ground plans of set designer Donald Oenslager.
[I made slides of the
photos and took them with me to Brooklyn (along with a rented portable
projector) to interview Tony Kraber, one of the few cast members then still
alive, so he could render commentary on the pictures, which I hoped would jog
his memory of the then-47-year-old production. I was also fortunate that at that time, I was
acquainted with Sam Leve, a retired set designer, who had been Oenslager’s
assistant. In the end, I pieced together
a description of the production from all these sources, picking out performance
and staging details wherever I could glean them.
[Kirby, then the editor
of The Drama Review, proposed
that I submit the paper to the journal, which was planning a Group Theatre
issue, and the reconstruction was published as “The Group Theatre’s Johnny
Johnson (1936)” in the winter issue of 1984 (28.4 – T104). It was my first published article.
[This post is a combination
of my original typescript and the TDR version.
I have also revised it a little for Rick
On Theater.]
Introduction
On Thursday, 19 November 1936, the Group Theatre (1931-41) opened its
only musical play. Johnny Johnson,
with book and lyrics by Paul Green (1894-1981) and music by Kurt Weill (1900-50),
played at the 44th Street Theatre on Broadway for a scant nine weeks—a total of
only 68 performances—closing after the matinee and evening shows on Saturday,
16 January 1937. It was an unusual play
in many respects, and certainly would have had a startling effect on its
audiences, who couldn’t really have known what to expect.
According to Green:
The story of the legend—that is what I like to call the play—is the musical autobiography of a common soldier whose natural common sense runs counter to a sophisticated civilization. The first act is a comedy, the second a tragedy and the third a satire. That sounds crazy and maybe I can’t get away with it but that is what I have tried to write.
The story of the legend—that is what I like to call the play—is the musical autobiography of a common soldier whose natural common sense runs counter to a sophisticated civilization. The first act is a comedy, the second a tragedy and the third a satire. That sounds crazy and maybe I can’t get away with it but that is what I have tried to write.
Green communicated his antiwar message in a succession of
expressionistic scenes, pervaded by songs, ballads, marches, and hymns by Kurt
Weill.
The play, subtitled “The Biography of a Common Man,” told the story of
Johnny Johnson, an honest, truth-loving fellow who volunteered to be a soldier
in the “war to end all wars.” Green
explained his choice of the leading character’s name in the News-Week review:
“The character is named Johnny Johnson because war records show that there were
30,000 Johnsons in the American Army.
Three thousand of them were John Johnsons.”
Johnny, a tombstone-carver, is introduced at the dedication
of a peace monument he’d carved, just at the moment President Woodrow Wilson
proclaims war. His romantic fiancée, Minny
Belle Tompkins, is enraptured by the glories of prospective martial heroism,
and Johnny goes off to enlist at the local recruiting office.
He’s put through army training with some difficulty and
shipped off to France. At the front, he
contracts a private peace with a young German soldier, whom Johnny sends back
to carry a message of peace and brotherhood to the other German soldiers.
Wounded, Johnny is sent to a hospital from which he escapes
with a canister of laughing gas. He
doses the Allied Supreme Command with the gas and temporarily succeeds in
calling off the war. He’s sent home to a
lunatic asylum where a mad psychiatrist diagnoses him with as suffering from
“peace monomania.” Finally released,
Johnny’s reduced to selling toys on a street corner—not very successfully,
however, since he doesn’t carry tin soldiers.
The Origins of the
Project
Johnny Johnson was a departure
from the Group Theatre’s usual realistic and naturalistic productions coming
“out of the Group Theatre’s suggestion, stimulation and actual
assistance.” The idea was spawned early
in 1936 after Kurt Weill arrived in America.
The Group had become intrigued with Weill’s The Threepenny Opera,
and they befriended him. Stella Adler (1901-92)
eventually suggested Weill write a musical play for the Group, and Weill
proposed an American version of Jaroslav Hašek’s The Good Soldier Schweik,
which had been done with some success in Germany by Erwin Piscator in 1927.
Harold Clurman (1901-80) visited Paul Green, who’d written the Group’s
first play, The House of Connelly (1931), at his home in Chapel Hill,
North Carolina. While he was there,
Clurman learned that Green had fought in France in World War I and “had an
intimate acquaintance with the American soldier of that day.” He passed on Weill’s proposal, and Green
expressed interest.
Returning to New York, Clurman told Cheryl Crawford (1902-86), who,
with Clurman and Lee Strasberg (1901-82),
made up the Group’s ruling triumvirate, that Green was the playwright for the
job. When Green definitely agreed to
collaborate, Crawford and Weill went to Chapel Hill to start work on the
scenario. Crawford served as
“coordinator” and the project became her “adopted child.”
Money being in short supply, the Group customarily spent the summer at
an adult camp. This time it was
Pinebrook Club Camp in Nichols, Connecticut.
Clurman was named managing director of the Group, assuming authority
over executive decisions. As he and the
Group tried to work out some internal problems, they awaited the arrival of the
playwright who’d promised them scripts.
When Green arrived with his
script of Johnny Johnson, it was still unfinished. It needed more work, and Green took it back
to Chapel Hill. At the summer’s end, Green
returned to Pinebrook with the finished rehearsal script, and work began only a
week or so before the Group moved back to New York.
The Music
The play that Paul Green wrote for Kurt Weill’s music was what he had
come to call “‘symphonic drama’ . . . a ‘sounding together’ in the true
meaning of the Greek word.” From the
very start, he said, “I wanted a musical score to be part of the script,” for
“without music there could be no war . . . . Music has always been an integral part of
fighting.”
Weill’s music, the first he wrote for the American stage, was based on
American folk and popular songs. It
ranged over several genres, but filtered through his own European
sensibilities. It was variously
described as “haunting,” “tuneful, gay and touching,” “lovely,” “seemingly
careless, really profoundly sensitive,” “weird,” and “dramatic.”
The musical style itself wasn’t as striking as the way it was
interwoven with the book. A Group
advertising flyer for the production explained:
While this is a play with songs, it is not a musical show. The singing arises naturally from the situations of the imaginative story and the verses of the song flow as simply as the prose of the speech.
While this is a play with songs, it is not a musical show. The singing arises naturally from the situations of the imaginative story and the verses of the song flow as simply as the prose of the speech.
In a theater more
accustomed to operettas (Jerome Kern and Oscar Hammerstein II’s Show Boat, generally considered the
first American book musical, was presented only nine years earlier) and revues,
such a production would doubtlessly attract attention. The Brooklyn
Eagle remarked, “All through the proceedings, the players stop at intervals
to sing . . .,” and the New York Post
called it “a new form in Broadway theatre . . . in that it introduces songs and
incidental music regularly through the performance in an artless, haphazard
manner . . . .” The clearest description
of how Weill’s music melded with Green’s script is provided by composer Marc
Blitzstein:
. . . Weill has practically added a new form to the musical theatre. It is not opera, although it partakes of the ‘number’ form of Mozart. And it is decidedly not revue-form. It owes something to the movies, but it is much more attached to the script. Take the spot where the exasperated Sergeant tries to put Johnny through all the military paces, and winds up saying—“and you won’t learn, and so the hell with you!” [Act I, scene 4]. As he starts (speaking), the music insinuates itself into his speech, and his enumeration of the maneuvers gains momentum and dash by becoming rhythmical and percussive—until the final expletive, when the music drops out.
. . . Weill has practically added a new form to the musical theatre. It is not opera, although it partakes of the ‘number’ form of Mozart. And it is decidedly not revue-form. It owes something to the movies, but it is much more attached to the script. Take the spot where the exasperated Sergeant tries to put Johnny through all the military paces, and winds up saying—“and you won’t learn, and so the hell with you!” [Act I, scene 4]. As he starts (speaking), the music insinuates itself into his speech, and his enumeration of the maneuvers gains momentum and dash by becoming rhythmical and percussive—until the final expletive, when the music drops out.
As for the performance of Weill’s music, critics nearly
unanimously agreed that the Group’s actors weren’t trained singers. The New
York Sun said simply, “They act better than they sing.” The production’s intent, however, was to
present ordinary characters who sing—not professional singers. The Group had no intention of presenting, nor
did Green and Weill write, the usual sort of musical comedy. Green intended to make the music an integral
element of the play—his meaning of “symphonic drama.” Speaking of Roll Sweet Chariot (1934), his first attempt at this kind of play,
Green explained:
I found that in trying to express the inner lives and turmoilings . . . I was having to call upon nearly all the available elements in modern theatrical art . . . . Folk song and poetry were needed here. Likewise dance and pantomime and chorus voices.
I found that in trying to express the inner lives and turmoilings . . . I was having to call upon nearly all the available elements in modern theatrical art . . . . Folk song and poetry were needed here. Likewise dance and pantomime and chorus voices.
Lehman Engel (1910-82), musical director of the production,
described his encounter with the cast in rehearsal: “There were no singers in
the cast, and the songs were worked on chiefly from an acting point of view.” This, in fact, was precisely what Green
wanted and what Weill had written. As
proof of this, there are two independent pieces of evidence.
In the 1957 MGM Heliodor recording of Johnny Johnson, performers not
generally known as singers were cast in the lead roles. The record producers were probably trying to
be true to the Green and Weill’s intentions using people such as Burgess
Meredith (1907-97), who sang Johnny, over “legit” singers. In addition, Lotte Lenya (1898-1981)—who was
married to Kurt Weill—also sang on the record, and her unique performance style
sounds unmusical to the uninitiated, as were 1936 critics.
Even the musically knowledgeable
could misjudge this new this new style, as Lehman Engel noted with some embarrassment. He had just met the Weills, and didn’t know
that Mrs. Weill was Lotte Lenya. They
were having tea at Engel’s Greenwich Village apartment:
In my desperate need to make conversation, I spoke of The Threepenny Opera with sincere enthusiasm but added that the female singer on a recording I had was terrible! The Weills smiled indulgently and said that I must have the French recording. No, I persisted, I had the German one. It was then I found out that the singer was Lotte Lenya, my guest! In my young life I held pear-shape vocal tones sacred, and it was to be many years before I could comprehend any other kind of singing. When I did, I was to worship at the shrine of Lotte Lenya.
In my desperate need to make conversation, I spoke of The Threepenny Opera with sincere enthusiasm but added that the female singer on a recording I had was terrible! The Weills smiled indulgently and said that I must have the French recording. No, I persisted, I had the German one. It was then I found out that the singer was Lotte Lenya, my guest! In my young life I held pear-shape vocal tones sacred, and it was to be many years before I could comprehend any other kind of singing. When I did, I was to worship at the shrine of Lotte Lenya.
With this realization, it’s understandable that the Group would not bring in outside singers to enhance their vocal quality and that as “actors first and singers second, they would have delighted [Bertolt] Brecht with their lack of musical sophistication.”
The Sets
As soon as the Group returned to
New York, construction began on the scenery.
Donald Oenslager (1902-75), who’d been engaged as set designer,
determined that “the first act . . . required poetic realism . . . . The second act . . . employed expressionism .
. . . The third act . . . required
distorted settings.” There were
problems, however, putting his concepts into practice.
First, after Oenslager had made
plans for the set according to his own design principles—an outgrowth of the
New Stagecraft of Adolphe Appia and E. Gordon Craig—the Group directorate
insisted he reconceive the production from an expressionistic point of
view. This caused some difficulty for
Oenslager, who was not particularly interested in Expressionism.
The second problem developed when
Oenslager, in a hurry between appointments, left his new drawings in a drug
store. Having lost his second set of
plans, he quickly drew a third set in time for construction to begin. He felt his last-minute rush might have given
his designs some serendipitous spontaneity.
The production was
out-of-the-ordinary for the Group, whose reputation had been built on Realism
and Naturalism. Johnny Johnson was “the only
Group play that turned away from naturalism in all its elements . . . .” Lee Strasberg, however, maintained that this
was not as unusual as the public thought: “In many of our shows, we really used
the principles of abstract art . . . .
[I]n productions like . . . Johnny Johnson, we used modern art
forms.” The overall effect of
Oenslager’s “geometric setting”—which suited Green’s three-divisional
script—was striking:
The warped perspective created by the exaggeratedly raked floor
of the interior platform setting for this play, somewhat derivative of
[Nikolai] Akimov’s work in the Soviet theatre after the First World War, helped
create the mad whimsy of the play.
This, of course, was not how
every critic saw it. Blitzstein, who
admired the music so much, didn’t respond to what he called “the hodgepodge
scenic styles in the staging of the Group Theatre’s Johnny Johnson . . . .”
The scenery was mostly drab colors,
gradations of black and white with a “sepia tint.” The only sets with bright colors were the most
starkly mad scenes: the Allied Supreme Command at the Château de Cent Fontaines,
which had red, white, and gold appointments; the psychiatrist’s office, with
its “red and white desk slanting at an angle of forty-five degrees . . .”;
and in the forensic arena in the insane
asylum, also appointed in red and gold, and draped with American flags.
In the remaining scenes, color was mostly absent, except for the opening celebration scene where color accent was provided by costume pieces such as ribbons and bows, mostly on the little girls.
Furthermore, to enhance this subdued appearance, the show was spot-lit, illuminating small areas of the stage while leaving the rest in ambiguous darkness. Even the indoor scenes had the appearance of being lit from one source that pinpointed a particular spot on the set, such as the psychiatrist’s raked desk, with the rest of the stage in increasing shadows receding into darkness.
Furthermore, to enhance this subdued appearance, the show was spot-lit, illuminating small areas of the stage while leaving the rest in ambiguous darkness. Even the indoor scenes had the appearance of being lit from one source that pinpointed a particular spot on the set, such as the psychiatrist’s raked desk, with the rest of the stage in increasing shadows receding into darkness.
This shadow effect was
exaggerated by the vast stage at the 44th Street Theatre. By all estimations, the theater was too big
for the show. The large musical house,
with its 20- by 30-foot proscenium opening, necessitated that Oenslager design
sets too big for the play. Even with the
vast sets, however, the stage area had to be reduced for what was primarily an
intimate show, and this was done with lighting, enhancing the ambiguity of the
space surrounding the performers.
The Rehearsals
Shortly after returning to New
York, Clurman found that his duties as managing director as well as some
personal difficulties were overwhelming, and he relinquished the directorship
of Johnny Johnson to Lee
Strasberg. Rehearsals had already begun
at Pinebrook with the Group’s usual discussions about meaning and content with
Green and Weill, who were both in residence by this time. Sessions continued in New York at the Belmont
Theatre, a small house on 48th Street, with improvisations and experimentation.
The Group acting style, a heightened Realism,
had by this time been set, and Strasberg saw no cause to develop a different
style for Johnny Johnson. (It’s
worth noting here that Strasberg was one of the principle developers of the
Stanislavsky-derived acting style known as the Method.) Sam Leve (1908-99), Oenslager’s former student
at the Yale School of Drama and assistant for Johnny Johnson, recalled
that though the sets and physical production were heavily expressionistic, the
acting, for the most part, was realistic.
In fact, only the “eccentrics” of the play were in any way
exaggerated—the High Command, the psychiatrist, and the Brothers in the asylum
debating society.
The music, too, was rehearsed in the Group’s
usual manner. Lehman Engel recalled:
The preparation of Johnny
was
unique among musical shows, Since it was
done with actors saturated in the Stanislavsky Method according to the gospel
of Lee Strasberg, the show was studied, improvised, and dissected for period of about three months prior to the
beginning of actual rehearsals.
Many of the songs, in fact, were
not even assigned to specific actors until just before performances began. The whole cast learned and rehearsed the
score, except a few songs that had been specifically written for certain
performers, such as Private Harwood’s “Cowboy Song: The Rio Grande,” which had
been written for Tony Kraber (1905-86).
The ensemble work that the Group
had established over the five years of their existence was evident in their
rehearsals, as well as the subsequent performances. Again, Lehman Engel recalled that the company
members “were especially considerate of each other’s neuroses and
idiosyncrasies, which were legion.”
Then the production moved from
the 500-seat Belmont to the 1400-seat 44th Street Theatre. Lehman Engel described the consequences:
I recall one dress rehearsal when the actors had to encounter
Donald Oenslager’s scenery for the first time.
The chief problem suddenly became one of self-preservation in climbing
out of World War I trenches and of making costume changes with no allowable
time. The acting problem then became
secondary despite the protest of the director.
In this state, Johnny Johnson went into
previews.
The
Previews
The show was conceived and rehearsed on an
intimate scale. Spectators at Belmont
rehearsals were “very moved.” In the
smaller theater, “the production seemed charming: informal, unpretentious and
sweet.” But the company had no
choice—only the 44th Street Theatre was available. Johnny Johnson moved in and was “suddenly
dwarfed and the light-handed informality of the performance lost its
effectiveness.”
Clurman’s fears of the effects of the larger
theater were borne out: “Our actors’ voices sounded so small they were
occasionally inaudible; Donald Oenslager’s sets . . . now appeared monstrous;
the performances now looked amateurish.”
The move to an unfamiliar space, the large
set—19 scenes—and the Group’s financial problems all conspired to make the
previews a disaster. The orchestra was
under-rehearsed, the actors got lost; “after the first five minutes . . . half
the audience left. By the end of the
performance there were no more than twenty people in the auditorium.”
The opening was delayed for two days. Musical numbers were cut and sets were
abandoned (“New York Harbor” and “A road somewhere in France”). The company stayed up every night till early
morning “polishing, cutting and revising . . . .” According to Clurman, the show improved each
night, and by opening night had gone from 19 scenes to 13. Clurman was astounded: “The performance went
smoothly, and the audience appeared wildly enthusiastic.”
The
Response
The press response to Johnny Johnson ”was critically
favorable, but discouraged all but the cognoscenti from seeing it.” The audiences, however, generally enjoyed the
show so much, many returned several times.
In the words of the New York Post
reviewer, the audience “stood up and whooped loud applause for a good ten
minutes . . . when the curtain fell on the opening of ‘Johnny Johnson’ . . . .” Paul Green came out on stage to more
applause, and Clifford Odets, Walter Huston, and Burgess Meredith were
“overheard bellylaughing at the gags.”
Of course, not everyone was this
enthusiastic. Some didn’t care for the
comedy that ran through the play. Some
found the play touching; some laughed at the humor. One reviewer said that “like a revue-goer,
you enjoy some [scenes] and are bored stiff by others.”
The
Performance
The diversity and strength of the reactions
from both reviewers and theatergoers was due as much to the production’s
uniqueness as to its quality. Paul
Green’s new form—the “symphonic drama”; Kurt Weill’s “non-musical” score; the
ingenuousness of the performance, particularly the singing; and the three-styled
expressionistic sets combined to make an event unprecedented on Broadway. Like it or not, it was different. In a promotional piece, Lee Strasberg wrote:
We
meant to do an American folk legend, full of the humors of old vaudeville and
the provincial family album, sharpened with poetic comments on the madness of
contemporary life. We felt that fantasy,
extravagance, and dramatic music were intrinsic to such an exciting and
ambitious experiment.
An advertising flyer for the show concluded
that “the Group Theatre believes Johnny Johnson to be the most unusual
and entertaining play it has presented thus far.” There’s little doubt this was the case.
Paul Green’s attempt to combine various
theatrical elements while juxtaposing dramatic genres didn’t always sit well
with spectators. The New York Post
complained that “the play . . . leaps from straight drama to the maddest sort
of farce and hence into pure fantasy with great abandon.”
Others found the mélange pleasing: “The piece
is built of dialogue, movement, scene, music, all together. It is a promising—and needed—example of
theatre that passes from one to the other of these with equal ease.”
Despite the diversity of material and the
number of scene-changes—which rose from 12 to 13 between opening and closing—an
attempt was obviously made to keep the production in motion. An
unidentified reviewer in a weekly review of current plays called Margaret
Wentworth's Sign Post remarked on the “quick-changing scenes” and Douglas
Gilbert of the New York World said, “Lee Strasberg has staged the piece
with a feverish continuity that matches the script.”
The show’s pace seems due in part to a
revolving set. Though no reviewer
mentioned this fact, the Alfredo Valente photographs of the set and Donald
Oenslager’s floor-plans clearly show a turntable. The sets shown in the drawings were
specifically designed for a revolve with several back-to-back scenes
indicated.
Oenslager’s sketches suggest that sets were
changed behind a blind—a painted backdrop, simple drape, or tall piece of
constructed scenery—while a scene was in progress on the other side. Sam Leve confirmed that this was the case.
What the audience saw was a central set
piece—ranging from the complete, realistic front porch of the Tompkins home in
Act I, scene 2, to a simple ramp with a painted backdrop for the camp
drill-ground in Act I, scene 5—with the rest of the stage closed off by returns
and two sets of wings.
In more complex sets, such as the porch, the
recruiting office (Act I, scene 3), and the front-line trench (Act II, scene
1), small set pieces were run out from the wings. It’s obvious from this set-up why
spot-lighting was both necessary and desirable to close down the huge stage of
the 44th Street Theatre.
The scenes changed so quickly that Russell
Collins (1897-1965), who played Johnny, couldn’t completely change from his
civilian costume in Act I, scene 3, to a full uniform in scene 4. Photographs clearly show he was still wearing
his civilian trousers under his military tunic until Act II. It’s possible that some scenes might have
revolved into view as the previous scene was ending. Some photographs of Act I, scene 1, are taken
with the scene 2 front porch in the background.
(This isn’t confirmed by any source. Another explanation, perhaps more likely, is
that some photographs of this scene weren’t taken in performance, and for one
reason or another were shot before the scene 2 set. Remember, though, that Lehman Engel recalled
actors “making costume changes with no allowable time” in dress rehearsal.)
The acting, as has already been suggested,
was primarily realistic. Like Sam Leve,
who witnessed several rehearsals, critics found this detracted from the
performance when too much Realism “inhibited freedom of treatment”: “A certain
heaviness was apparent in the production of Johnny Johnson, and despite
the fine fantastication of Lee Strasberg’s production idea many performances
seemed slack and pedestrian.” The most
blatant indictment of this problem came from John Mason Brown, who felt the
Group Theatre’s actors
.
. . set about the business of being funny with as much self-consciousness as if
they were . . . a Greek chorus . . . .
They
reach for the ridiculous with a grim seriousness which does not add to the
lightness of the lighter portions of “Johnny Johnson.” They are all desperately in earnest.
The play opened on the dedication of Johnny’s
monument to peace. The script describes
the scene: “The ground is covered with a carpet of green grass, and at the
right a quaint young arbor-vitae tree is growing.” Photographs of this scene show little of such
realistic touches. A certain backdrop
bisected the turntable, and except for the Mayor’s bunting-draped “soap-box,”
the stage was bare. Several shots of
this scene, including the Mayor speaking from his soap-box, and the
confrontation of Johnny and Minny Belle with his rival Anguish Howington, were
taken in front of the porch set for scene 2.
There was no documented explanation of this occurrence.
The porch setting was apparently substituted
for the living room location described in the script. The little evidence afforded by photographic
records indicates the scene proceeded predictably in all other respects. Both the setting and performances appeared
essentially realistic in detail.
The same was true of scene 3 in the
recruiting office, except that the office was number 596673 in performance,
instead of 18659 as indicated in the script.
(This change was apparently also made after the previews, as the 17
November program used the same number as the script; the opening-night program
made the alteration.)
Scene 4 seems to have been added in
performance (or deleted from the published script). It was set at an army training ground:
But
the army takes [Johnny]. Then we see him
being made into a soldier. He can’t
learn very well because the regulations sound silly to him, and besides he’s
left-handed. Everything is harder in the
Army for a left-hander . . . . He is
finally taken off to war, against the better judgement of the whole army,
because he seems to have won more favors from a favor-dispensing woman war worker
than his sergeant and his captain.
The set for the scene was a virtually bare
stage, with a raked platform across the center of the turntable, bisected by a
drop painted with a row of military barracks.
The Statue of Liberty scene, originally scene
4, was cut after previews but reinstated sometime during the show’s run as Act
I, scene 5. In the scene, after Johnny
sang a declaration of his peaceful intentions and his faithfulness to Minny
Belle (“Johnny’s Speech”) to the Statue, the Statue sang a response of haunting
sentiment (“Song of the Goddess”). The
song was omitted from the published version and there are no photographs of the
scene.
In Act II, the first scene, set on “A road
somewhere in France,” was apparently cut as a separate set, and the
moment—virtually without dialogue, but with a column of wounded French soldiers
returning from the front (“Song of the Wounded”)—was performed as part of the
next scene, “The front line trench.” In
this new scene 1, an English Sergeant sang about “Tea.” The program and published script list Jules
(later John) Garfield (1913-52) as having played the part.
As photographs clearly show, and Kraber
clearly remembered, the role was played by Luther Adler (1903-84), and at least
one reviewer recorded this reaction to the moment: “. . . and one perfectly
atrocious [performance] by the Group’s best actor, Luther Adler. He is for a few terrible moments a Cockney
sergeant.” The scene ended with Johnny
in the trench with his company, who “. . . writhe their limbs in troubled
sleep. [while] three great cannon bathed in green light rise over the parapet,
and ghoulishly croak a lament . . . .”
In the hospital (Act II, scene 3, in
production; scene 4 in the script), the set was minimal: a folding screen and a
hospital bed set on the forward quarter of the turntable backed by the same
drape used to divide the stage in Act I, scene 1. The rest of the space appears ambiguous,
though one photograph shows empty beds protruding from behind the drape
divider.
The Château de Cent Fontaines (Act II, scene
4), set of the Allied Supreme Command, was the first brightly colored set in
the show. A very stylized drop of red
and gold panels and a set piece resembling a large fan at the center rear
formed the back “wall” of the set, bisecting the turntable. The commanders all sat in plush-covered
chairs of ornate design as they outbid each other for the number of casualties
their forces would suffer. There was an
apparent attempt to make the actors in this scene look like their historical
counterparts—although the characters are not named either in the script or in
the program.
The scene designated in the scripts and the
preview program as scene 7 didn’t exist as a separate scene by opening. It may have been incorporated into the
previous scene (“The edge of a great battlefield”). This scene was a striking visual and musical
moment that Charles Dexter of the Daily Worker described: “. . . in the
climax, an English [sic – the script and program both say “American”]
and a German minister [pray] as the bayonettes flash in the dark . . . .”
In fact, the two priests chant and sing the
same prayer in counterpoint, each in his own language. (Only the English version of the prayer is in
the published script, though the stage directions indicate that the German
Priest utters the prayer in German.) By
opening night, this was the last scene in Act II. The second New York Harbor scene was dropped
and remained deleted throughout the run.
Act III opened in the State Hospital in the
office of Dr. Mahodan: “. . . The examining psychiatrist was barricaded behind
an enormous, crazily-aslant table and, as played by [Morris] Carnovsky [1897-1992]
with deliberately jerky and angular gestures and body movements, seemed
decidedly crazier than the patient . . . .”
This was the second scene with bright colors. The raked red-and-white desk, placed in the
set’s left front corner (on the turntable), sloped from five feet on the rear
left down to three inches at center stage.
The lighting was very bright only on the desk; the rest of the set
dimmed considerably.
The third colorful scene was Act III, scene
2, set in “the forensic arena in the house of balm.” The set, with its sharply angled rear wall,
was festooned with flags and brightly lit.
As the Adelphi Debating Society engaged in its discussion “Albert Van
Deckers [sic - Dekkers] . . . as a mad gentleman . . . knits while the
Senate is in session . . . .”
Finally released from the asylum, Johnny was
reduced to selling toys “along a street symbolically leading nowhere.” The stage was very dimly lit and nearly bare,
with only a banistered flight of steps at the front right and an unlit lamppost
at the front left. The light seemed to
have emanated from off stage in the rear right corner, leaving the playing area
in deep shadows.
The floor plan of the scene shows the
slanting rear wall was the same as the walls of Act III, scenes 1 and 2. It bisected the turntable from eight o’clock
to two o’clock in all three scenes, giving further evidence of the use of the
revolving stage.
The play’s final moment is indicative of how
blackouts were used between the many scenes:
The
Paul Green-Kurt Weill musical Johnny Johnson borrows the [Charlie]
Chaplin fade-out as its hero, momentarily defeated, goes off whistling, “a
little more clearly now, a little more bravely” or (on the record) singing
“We’ll never lose our faith and hope and trust in all mankind . . . .”
Conclusion
Visually, thematically, and musically
unusual, Johnny Johnson was undoubtedly a controversial event, even
among those who simply didn’t care for it.
It spawned discussion among leftists, pacifists, humanists, and
adherents of many other causes and philosophies, each espousing Johnny
Johnson’s point of view as their own.
Audiences were less confused by the play than critics: “Almost everyone
who saw Johnny Johnson was charmed by it. . . . [I]t had a subtlety and wit which were
thoroughly engaging.”
Had the theater been smaller, the success of
the production would probably have been assured, not only from a financial
standpoint, but a critical one as well: “In a theatre suited to its scale, it
would have come across with much greater bite; on that huge stage, it seemed
weak.” (Kraber estimated that the
production came within $1,000 of its “nut” every week. They just couldn’t fill the 1,463 seats of
the 44th Street Theatre.
Johnny Johnson was an excellent example of Paul Green’s feeling
that “The narrow confines of the usual Broadway play are not fitted to the
dramatic needs of the American people.
They cannot contain the richness of our tradition, folkways, singing,
dancing and poetry.” It’s ironic that
the thing most responsible for Johnny Johnson’s failure wasn’t a theater
too small to contain it, but one too big for it to fill.
[The original production of
the Group Theatre’s Johnny Johnson included a number of company members who went on to
become well known on stage and on film. Among
these, in addition to those named in the article above, were Phoebe Brand
(1907-2004), Lee J. Cobb (1911-76), Elia Kazan (1909-2003), Will Lee (1908-82),
and Sanford Meisner (1905-97).
[After the original 1936-37
production of Johnny
Johnson by the Group Theatre, there were several revivals of the play. From 21 October through 28 October 1956,
there was an Off-Broadway production presented at the Little Carnegie Playhouse
at Carnegie Hall directed by Stella Adler and starring, among others, James
Broderick as Johnny Johnson and Gene Saks as the Mad Psychiatrist. A Broadway revival directed by José Quintero
opened, after 10 previews, on 11 April 1971 at the Edison Theatre, and closed
after one performance. The cast included
Ralph Williams as Johnny and Alice Cannon as Minny Belle.
[Johnny Johnson was staged
by the Royal Shakespeare Company on 6-15 August 1986 at the Almeida Theatre,
London, directed by Paul Marcus. In
2009, a concert version was staged in London by the Discovering Lost Musicals
Charitable Trust, with Max Gold in the title role.
[The ReGroup Theatre
Company presented two staged readings of the play directed by Estelle Parsons
at the 47th Street Theatre in New York on 12 December 2011. In November 1956, the MGM recording I
mentioned above (which was unrelated to the contemporaneous Off-Broadway
staging) was released and in November 1996, Erato Records released another
album of Weill’s score for Johnny Johnson.
[I’ve written a little
about this research and the writing of the report twice before on ROT. First, because it was my first published
essay, I included it in my discussion “Writing,” posted on 9 April 2010; then I
included it in a compilation I called “Short Takes: Research Coups” on 5 August
2011 because I made a discovery in my research—Oenslager’s use of a
turntable in the set design.]
No comments:
Post a Comment