These women of the arts hail from different disciplines, but they all have an indomitable spirit and a luminescent spark that makes them amazing human beings who are out there every day, doing amazing work.

Today we continue our series with Diánna Martin.

Of course you’ve heard of Diánna Martin – she’s one of our contributors!  But her connection to The Happiest Medium started in a much different place … back with The Oath: I was a reviewer for Neighborbee, and I was left emotionally drained by her performance as Deck.  I later met her socially at a few of the Off Off Broadway industry events before I was lucky enough to snag her as one of our writers here.

Now she is a dear friend, but in terms of the acting community she is so much more … She is the name and the face behind Martin Acting Studios – a legacy handed down from her father, Ernie Martin.  Today, we celebrate Diánna the actress, and the acting coach who is carrying on the tradition she was born into.  Here is her story.

Talk to me about being a woman who does what you do- just overall.

I come from an entertainment family. I was always a little ham who had a gift of gab and an outgoing personality…and a very active imagination. My life was a series of acting classes; life lessons were told many times with a preface: “Ya see, Diánna, it’s like in acting…” and I learned about Strasberg and Meisner technique and was on film/television sets and theatre rehearsal techs before I learned how to swim or ride a bike. I intended to be a writer, winning creative writing awards in high school and doing poetry readings in college; but I was always coming back to performing or being involved in entertainment, and eventually realized I had a gift for teaching. This has led to a personal renaissance over the last few years with my putting up shows with other artists, becoming involved with three dynamic and vibrant theatre companies, writing for this brilliant site (after a wonderful period of writing for The Fab Marquee), and becoming a staff member and judge for the Innovative Theatre Foundation. It’s all been fantastic.

My mother, Ann Wedgeworth, is a Tony-award-winning actress of film, stage, and television who studied with Sandy Meisner; my father, Ernie Martin, was one of Lee Strasberg’s top teachers and has gone on to have a nearly 40 year career thus far in teaching with a roster of students that fill the front rows of the Oscars (Dad, now 80, still coaches professional name actors who take time off from shoots for a refresher).

I love what I do. It’s a passion that grows the more I teach, the more I talk about acting, the more I am involved in the creative process or watch others do so. I literally fell into my parents footsteps on all counts…my mother is blown away that I’m directing more and more  shows and readings now…(she wasn’t surprised about the acting or the teaching), and so is Dad. They come to everything I do. It wasn’t a choice for me…it was something that just became – it was an evolution, actually. Hey, I’m an artist, not a businessman, and I’m still learning how to get that part right…*laugh*…but it’s been brilliant the way that people have jumped on board. Whether it’s to offer advice on how to set up class packages, to help me set up my game plan for a school, to my buddy Michael Marwit designing my logo, Antonio Minino helping me figure out a PR strategy, or students (beginners to professional actors) contacting me to study. It’s a blast when people recognize that you are someone whose opinion is valuable, whose knowledge of the craft and eye for human behavior is matched with an ability to express it to others in a way that can make a significant contribution. When people ask what I do, and I list all the arts and entertainment I’m involved with, or have been involved with (for five years I worked in live television and was a radio DJ) they are interested; when I say I teach, they often seem surprised when I say acting is the subject (unless they are in the business). Even then, there is a quality of “you teach acting?” that makes me laugh; I suppose it’s because I’m such a kid…some people equate a teacher as a more stoic figure than what I think one should be. If you are teaching people a craft where they have to follow their impulses and express their emotions, then it should be a much looser, more freeing environment.
I joke that I’m like the Jack Black from School of Rock meets a helluva lot of experience in the field of acting. I can talk academic from here until next week, but I find that a less formal approach blended in heavily is the best way to bridge the gap between an actor trying to learn a craft who is stuck in their head, and one who is free with their work.

I teach a combination of Strasberg and Meisner technique that was handed down to me by my father, and tweaked with all the glorious information I gathered from the other brilliant teachers/coaches I’ve studied with…molded into my own way of sharing it and exercises I think are appropriate for the students individually. Topped off with a sprinkling of my own personality, of course. Every moment I learn something new is, for me, valuable; I look at it as “how can I incorporate this into my teaching” if I find it helpful. This applies to everything, including martial arts training I’ve started this year learning Muay Thai. A fellow teacher felt the same way when he started Jiu Jitsu…It’s not like I’m going to teach my students how to do Thai kickboxing, but how can I get them to free their mind and relax their body so their intrument can be free to work, while still being focused on their objective?

Sometimes I do have a maternal instinct with my students, no matter if I’m teaching teens or adults…a den mother, if you will. Other times it’s simply as a mentor. For me, being a woman has nothing to do with it…it’s just being a creative human. But I may be way off base.

Are there days it makes a difference – good or bad?

Only if I haven’t had my coffee.

Are there barriers you fought against in the past that are now becoming easier?

I think my barriers are different than for some other people…as well as the open roads. Any issue I have had to deal with wasn’t so much about my being a woman, but about the apprentice/journeyman manner in which I learned to follow as a teacher, my pedigree and people’s prejudice in comparing me with my father. If you have a Master Acting Teacher/director as a father and an incredibly successful and brilliant actress as a mother, the standards are rather high (which is a good thing). However, sometimes people assume that you have fallen into this profession due to contacts or simply due to an unrealistic view of how good you are at what you do. There are a few who either studied with my father or know my parents who were quick to say “well, you’re no Ernie!” in relation to my teaching. The irony is that I have never said I was – I am simply his daughter who absorbed his lessons from teaching my whole life whereas many others only learned them in the studio. Although I quote him constantly, as he quoted Lee, and relate stories of what both my parents experienced to illustrate situations and concepts to students, I have my own style and my own way of teaching that works. I have my own methods, but I have taken the best seeds of knowledge from who taught me, and in the manner of any other journeyman/disciple I utilize what I learned. I’ve learned from fellow teachers and students of my father’s (like my friend, teacher/actor David Robinette) or from friends in the business (such as playwright/directors Alex Dinelaris and David Stallings) as well as my experiences with my students. It’s all a process. It’s teaching a craft, and in doing so there are also exercises and ways to teach it that have been proven incredibly effective, if you have an understanding of how that knowledge works. Some facilities/institutions I have taught prefer a specific degree for their teachers, for they don’t recognize the passing of the torch that many successful teachers have learned from outside of academic institutions. I find that frustrating, but not an insurmountable obstacle.

I have been rather fortunate, however. These “barriers” or issues have usually not been the case. People recognize that I do know what I’m talking about, that I have successfully taken the torch my father gave me to teach, and that I do have a gift for teaching and getting ideas across to students that can improve their work tremendously. Way more often than not, my pedigree is anything BUT a barrier; it has opened doors and people’s acceptance to at least listening to what I have to say. Then, once I have established my way of teaching and the craft I have to share, they decide if it’s for them or not.

The men that you interact with – do they treat you as an equal?

Most of the men that I meet in this profession have been tremendously helpful. I think that it’s rather telling that all of the people I have mentioned (who are but a few of the wonderful people who have helped me grow) with exception of my Mother (who offered a wonderful amount of insight about Sandy’s approach as well) are men. I think I have been very fortunate to know such gifted and giving individuals.

I think that the profession of teaching acting lends itself to more open-mindedness amongst people than not. There have been many female acting teachers, and one of the main schools of thought that came out of the Group Theatre was Stella’s. Women acting teachers offering important contributions to actors working today is not a new or novel concept.

That said, like most other professions, it is a bit of a boy’s club. I don’t think so much in the sense that women have to prove themselves but that there are simply more men teaching acting/running acting schools than women. But that seems to be changing. I can’t speak to issues such as any discrimination in purchasing space, long-term facility rental etc, or business practices, for I rent my space out from other facilites such as Night Owl Studios and The Abingdon Theatre Complex to teach (unlike my father who had a 5,000 sq. ft theatre/studio complex).

I was teaching before I knew I was going to actually start a business, and since I’m coming at it from the artistic point of view, I admit that I’m still figuring out all the logistics. I am a bit of that nutty professor. But there comes a point when you look to the people who have done it before you (and most of them are men, at least the ones that I know) and say “Hey, man – how did you do this? How did you make it work so you teach a solid craft AND actually walk away covering your expenses?” Hey, it’s all a learning process. I marvel at the men and women who have been able to create an acting school and have it rise like a phoenix. I am just trying to find the happy medium of how to do it effectively as a business for a continuous long haul.

I find men sometimes don’t know what to make of me. They have I have ways of expressing myself artistically and to my students that are not conventional ways a woman is “supposed to talk”. There are expressions I use that make me sound sometimes like a younger version of my father from the 70s when he taught for Lee. Many times I have heard from people who studied with both of us, who said they could hear my father as I spoke. It’s not my intent to sound like wee Ernie, but “Can you dig it?” is as much a part of my vocabulary as “Does that make sense?” and since I’m in the moment and expounding on things that I’m passionate about, it comes across.

Between teaching, acting, directing … writing … volunteering!  So much!  Tell us what’s up next for you Diánna.

In regards to acting itself, I think it’s important for actors and actresses to realize that no matter how good they are, they can never watch themselves work…so it’s still important to check in and get advice if you trust the source of the information. Al Pacino still studied and was coached by Lee after he became “Al Pacino” and I think it’s important, the same way a musican practices their instrument or a singer scales, an actor has to be on top of their instrument. No matter who they study with, it’s always good to go over the basics. I find this as an actress myself.
And it doesn’t matter what school of thought, ultimately, you choose. We all have our favorites that we utilize, but it’s always good to have a well-rounded craft and to keep in mind that we never stop learning – quantity, quality – and variety. Even if it’s to say “okay, that’s groovy, but it doesn’t work for me.” As long as you are passionate and you make the most out of a craft – and work hard at a craft, if it works for you, then mazel tov – it won’t matter what it is if it gets you where you need to be.

In regards to my current work: I took some time off this past year from teaching my private classes to focus on acting, directing, and my health but still taught at Hunter College and did private coaching. During that time I performed and directed three shows and two readings. I am currently in a play that opens at the June Havoc Theatre April 14, The Family Shakespeare by David Stallings, and then immediately after that I am directing Jim Tierney’s Carry On in June for Planet Connections. I will be starting class again this Fall, though, regardless of my acting/directing commitments; I have been itching to open a new monologue/scene study class for some time, especially in response to many students’ requests. I’ve been asked to do a few seminars as well, and will have my Hunter classes again, and hopefully a reading series I have been looking at getting underway for a long time will finally come to fruition…so Spring and Fall are going to be busy…as usual! I am getting everything in gear to focus on my school again, and find a way to juggle it with all the other commitments in the field that I have…for I often feel like something is missing when I’m not teaching my own class. I look forward to this coming year as I learn how to balance all of it, just taking it moment to moment.

Related Posts:

• A Day In The Life … “The Family Shakespeare” By The Numbers
• Special Edition Giveaway – Fringe Edition
• An Interview With The Creative Team Behind “Banshee Of Bainbridge” (Fringe Festival 2010)
• Oberon Theatre’s “Othello” And “Order” At Theatre Row: Interviews With The Madmen (And Woman) Behind The Curtain – Pt. 4
• Titus Andronicus: The Bard Would Be Proud, Methinks

We couldn’t let this month go by without offering a very special Fringe Edition of The Happiest Medium Giveaway. So even thought we already gave away tickets this month – we’re doing it again!

After graciously doing an interview, the team at Banshee of Bainbridge has offered to dontate 2 tix to some lucky winners.

Here’s all you have to do – answer the question correctly and the first person to reply to giveaways@thehappiestmedium.com will win (it’s usually a random drawing, but this is time sensitive!)

Q – What does the “bainbridge” in Banshee of Bainbridge refer to?

(Find the answer in the interview we did earlier this week).

First to answer gets a pair of tix to the performance of their choice at the Robert Moss Theater /440 Lafayette, NYC:

• Monday August 16th at 9:15 pm
• Saturday August 21st at 12 pm
• Sunday August 22nd at 6:30 pm
• Friday August 27th at 3:45 pm

See Contest Guidelines HERE.

Related Posts:

• An Interview With The Creative Team Behind “Banshee Of Bainbridge” (Fringe Festival 2010)
• Women’s History Month: Celebrating Women In The Arts – Spotlight On Diánna Martin
• Win Tickets To The Unfortunate Honeymoon Of Tony And Steve
• Win Tickets To An Ideal Husband!
• Oberon Theatre’s “Othello” And “Order” At Theatre Row: Interviews With The Madmen (And Woman) Behind The Curtain – Pt. 4

We’re very lucky here, at The Happiest Medium, to have such talented contributors.  Our very own Diánna Martin is on a roll – having just directed Good Lonely People for The Planet Connections Festivity she now is working with Jim Tierney’s gritty, gripping play, Banshee of Bainbridge, which will be part of this year’s Fringe Festival.  I was lucky enough to read this script and can only say that I was amazed – and can’t wait to see the show come to life.

I got a chance to find out a little bit more about what it feels like to be a part of Fringe, what Banshees are doing in the Bronx, and why the 1980s made for a lot of waiting around . . .

Congratulations on getting Banshee of Bainbridge into Fringe! What does it mean to you to be involved in this important Festival?

JIM: I’ve tried to get some of my work in the Fringe some years ago, but it wasn’t the right time for me. I think I was still trying to find my voice. So when I submitted Banshee of Bainbridge I wasn’t holding my breath. Obviously it’s a wonderful opportunity for a new playwright to get his or her work seen, but what’s great about the Fringe is that it’s going to have the opportunity to reach audiences that I wouldn’t necessarily have access to otherwise. I forget sometimes writing it is only half the battle and a brutal one at that. Having people listen to your words as you envisioned them is like nothing else, and so I’m thrilled that I get to have that experience this summer. That and it’s kind of one of them things that sits over your head. Any self produced playwright wants to eventually do the Fringe.

DIÁNNA: Thank you! I’m so delighted to be directing this play for Fringe because Fringe has become a staple of the theatrical community that lets a lot of wonderful theatre get produced, and hopefully because of the rich audience base, a lot of people will come see this play. I support it so much, and I’m so thrilled to be directing it because it’s one of the best plays I’ve read in years. It’s such an intense, dark character study…and it allows me to work with such talented actors and help bring out the rich characters within this shocking, funny, tragic piece. It pushes the envelope and doesn’t pull any punches.

Jim, tell our readers what inspired the title of your play.

JT:  The story came to me about four years ago. It started with this image of a grown man lifting weights to Barbara Streisand, it was the 1980’s and ironically…taking place inside the room I grew up in. I would toy around with certain types of music that would stir up an emotional response and Barbara, for me, is known for that, as it reminds me of my mother singing to her records back in the day. I really wanted to find a child-like character that wanted to be a hero for a world that wasn’t asking for one. The idea that through persistence, this nobody, was going to change the way things were fascinated me. At that time it was called “Super”. So I wrote a thirty or so page story on that, with full intention of turning it into a screenplay. It took me three years to materialize the screenplay, and it was when the protagonist starts to get hung up on banshees that I realized it should be called Banshee of Bainbridge. Because the character lives on Bainbridge Avenue in the Bronx.

Considering the constraints of timing for setup and scheduling that one often has for Fringe how did you deal with the challenges of costuming and special effects for Banshee of Bainbridge?

DM: Well, the play was set up already to have a very minimal set – just chairs, actors, and a few props, etc. That was given to me and was one of the things that was exciting and challenging to me as a director. When you strip away big sets, etc – and are left with just damn good acting, that’s where the meat and potatoes are for me (in all due respect to the brilliant set designers I love out there). So the set was minimal; but then yes, the time constraints offered a challenge in regards to lighting, sound, and costume…but that was achieved because we have brilliant designers. I had ideas that I brought to the table and they did as well…and then they found ways to incorporate them into the show (and set up in like 10 minutes) and have it still WORK. I truly believe it works, and I hope the audience does as well. The lights and music for many monologue aspects help us get into the mind of this man…and for costumes, we have several characters playing multiple roles, and so for me a costume would simply be throwing an apron on or a hat or glasses – which was then taken further by our costume designer. But the actors are on stage almost the whole show, so it had to be small changes – and I think we’ve succeeded.

Do you see The Banshee of Bainbridge as a solo show with a strong supporting cast or a normal ensemble piece with a a strong central character?

Mij

JT: I see it as an ensemble piece with a strong central character. Without the other characters, you wouldn’t get a sense of Mij’s world. You would only hear about it through his monologues. At lease with characters from the neighborhood coming in and out of the play you get a chance to see Mij’s uncomfortable association with the world around him. That helps alienate the character.

DM: Haha – well, that’s a good question. At times I refer to it as a solo show that then tells the tale with scenes carried out by the strong ensemble – and other times I say that it’s a play that is really all about all of the characters in the show – for they are all ghosts of this man’s life. To be honest, I love the monologues and the storytelling behind it (and Michael W.’s fantastic work, of course) – but it would not be the same without the incredible characters played by an amazing and incredibly talented cast that we get to see enmeshed in the telling within the scenes. The ensemble – and this is one of the strongest ensembles I’ve ever worked with either as an actress or director – brings so much together as a whole.

Diánna, does the structure of Banshee of Bainbridge give you some unique opportunities as a director?

It totally does. It allows me to tell a tale that forces the audience to go along on a ride of the imagination. It allows me to work with actors in such a way that we create entire locations and sets with just the reality that they bring to it. It allows me to do to different kinds of plays and then combine them into this unique tale. I get to work with one actor in the almost “One-Man-Show” aspect, like we mentioned earlier, which is a delight for me because I love working on monologues with actors. But to then to work on such a character as Mij, this dark and damaged individual, who we also root for and feel so sorry for, despite the things he does – to work a 180 degree turn on the audience like that whets my appetite. But that’s just one course. Because then I have these incredible scenes as well – with characters, who, although they may not have much stage time at each instance, are so strong that they are indelible to the mind whether they are hilarious or disliked. And within these scenes I have been able to use the same actors in multiple roles because of the versatility of the actors – and the writing.

I think that this play is so psychological; we see a breakdown of people in general from Mij’s perspective, that casting the roles and having the actors play different characters for the most part is another element to how the audience can see how he breaks down people into categories. To have a story told to us and then see what happened in the way that we do is wonderful.

Banshee of Bainbridge is a historical play set in the East Bronx in 1985. Did you write this more as a story to help us remember a past we should be happy to have escaped, or one with valuable lessons for the future?

JT: I think it’s a little bit of both. First off, I set it in that time period, because I grew up in that neighborhood at that time and drew from things I remember hearing and seeing. I had some older cousins that still tell me stories to this day that I don’t remember, so it’s not necessarily everyone’s version of Bainbridge Avenue in 1985, but rather what a damaged child like man experiences. Also, I wanted to place the story in a world that knew nothing about computers or CGI or advanced video games. There was this comic book shop that we had down the street and I liked playing with the idea that back then we still had to use our imagination. This is why I find myself writing a lot of pieces about the 80’s. Maybe it’s because I’m just really uncomfortable with how we have all become so dependent on knowing everything at all times and getting that information as fast as we can. Things were slower in the mid to late 80’s. Significantly slower to the point where it was harder to escape into a movie on your cell phone. I just remember a lot of waiting around and figuring out ways to keep myself busy with what was in front of me. I liked that about the play.

But I also think it’s about learning from our mistakes. Really, it’s about how one is a product of his environment, in relation to Mij’s upbringing. You see Mij is dependent on his mother to the point of becoming a burden to society. When his mother dies at the top of the play, he becomes everyone’s problem. When I got out of high school, I remember not fitting in anywhere. It was a freaky time, because you were amongst adults and youths alike and had to find a way to co-exist with all types of structures and rules and it scared the hell out of me. So in a lot of ways, Mij sees the outside world as a threat. A jungle that is looking to eat him alive.

Rose and Carlos

Jim, you don’t shy away from racial and ethnic tension in Banshee of Bainbridge … How have you taken special care to make sure the deeper messages of the play have been emphasized?

JT: I wanted to display characters that would talk and react in ways that were real and truthful. A lot of racist people out there and it’s coming from every direction. What I wanted to play with is the things that make that racism come out. For one character it’s because he’s felt rejected by them, for another it’s because he’s different, and for the protagonist, it’s because he’s always known that from his upbringing. He’s convinced that Puerto Ricans are bad because he’s heard it all his life. In this play its common language. The characters use it in a way that simply identifies tribes if you will. I keep in mind the idea of a jungle. An overcrowded, hot uncomfortable jungle. Where the tension is high and yet it seems like no light is shined on it, in terms of hope. It’s a train wreck of an existence.

DM: If I may, I’d like to mention that I think the racial and ethnic tension of Banshee is really important…because it’s real. Everything that happens in this play happened in real life, one way or another – regardless of the biographical standpoint for Jim. I grew up in New York City in the 80′s, and I think that anyone can see this and walk away with their own feelings about how the tension has been portrayed, but I am half Puerto Rican and half English/Irish…and I was in this city back then…and it’s a truth of New York that a section that was all Irish became something totally different in the 80′s and never returned. The same can be said for so many neighborhoods all over for various ethnicities.

But all of that aside – what we see is a damaged, lost, individual who is trying to make his way through the maze of the world and deal with the world on its terms, not his; and his terms were always sheltered and distorted. Take sheltered, distorted, and abused, and drop it in the middle of New York City 80′s Bronx and you have a strong story no matter what you do. It just so happens that Jim is a brilliant playwright.

What’s the one thing you’d like to leave The Happiest Medium readers with about Banshee of Bainbridge?

JT: That we are a product of our environment. The ugly sides to people come from some place. That’s not to say their behavior is acceptable, but I wanted to show the ugly side to a person that is damaged. Not evil. A play by play of how a guy like this gets to a place like that. I don’t know if that answers your question but it’s the best I can do for now.

DM: I want audiences to be haunted. I want them to experience the strange sensation of feeling so sorry for this man but yet recognizing him as someone that if they heard him talking about the things he talks about they would either call him insane, racist, or have him arrested. I want them to see the dichotomy of who he is and then take the audience on a journey to experience a range of emotions and feelings about him and the characters he came into contact with. I want them to experience his sense of loss and his joys while wondering who they know might be like him. Oh, but you asked for one…

So, I guess haunted would be it.

Related Posts:

• Special Edition Giveaway – Fringe Edition
• Women’s History Month: Celebrating Women In The Arts – Spotlight On Diánna Martin
• Friday The 13th Unlucky? Nonsense! It’s Opening Night For Fringe 2010!
• Oberon Theatre’s “Othello” And “Order” At Theatre Row: Interviews With The Madmen (And Woman) Behind The Curtain – Pt. 4
• Titus Andronicus: The Bard Would Be Proud, Methinks

Austin Pendleton (photo by George Hartpence)

In the fourth and final installment of our Oberon Theatre Ensemble Rep Interview Series, we’ve got a treat – actor, director, and teacher Austin Pendleton. With a body of work on stage and screen that has spanned several decades, Austin is a vocal and active member of the Off-Off-Broadway community, who has championed the need to recognize the importance of theatre at all levels. Austin is the director of Order, now extended until July 3rd at Theatre Row.

Austin took some time out of his insanely busy schedule to answer some questions about his work both with Oberon and his long career.

Austin, the first time I saw you on stage was in “Doubles” back in the 80’s with my parents as a youngster. I’ve known your work and followed your career throughout the years, and one thing that always sticks out as a wonderful aspect of who you are is that you are always fighting for the little guy – in respect to theatre. You always strive to embrace the needs of the Off-Off Broadway community and promote the recognition of its importance as a lifeblood. What was something that happened in the course of your career that made you champion that cause?

I think what happened with me and off-off-Broadway was that at a place in my work when I’d sort of lost my way as an actor I found  myself asked to play some very great roles with fine actors and directors there, and with great freedom, roles I never expected to be asked to play.  Great Shakespearean roles, for example: Hamlet, Shylock, Richard III, Richard II, Claudius and the Ghost (in Hamlet).  Stuff like that.  And I realized the value and excitement of off-off-Broadway, and how that exact value and excitement could not be found anywhere else.

What is it about a play that draws you to it to the point that you feel you MUST be involved?

I have no idea what draws me to a play and what doesn’t.  I just know when I’m drawn, somehow.

Order (Brad Fryman, Ryan Tramont, Gabe Bettio)

How well did you know the members of Oberon Theatre Ensemble before coming on board? You have worked with or trained some of them before, have you not?

I’d worked with Ryan Tramont and William Laney in Richard II, at Frog and Peach.  And I’d seen (because of these guys) some Oberon shows, including Eric Parness’s beautiful staging of A Winter’s Tale.

What was it like being able to work with this stalwart of the Off-Off community, and bring your knowledge to the table?

It was wonderful working with Oberon. They are completely supportive, and they get what you’re trying to do.

What were some of the things that drew you to Order and allowed you to play and have fun with the piece?

Order is fun to play with because it’s so boldly all over the place.  It tries all these different approaches into its scorching subject matter.  You have to be very flexible with it.  I like that.  Also, it’s brilliantly written.

What do you think is the most important link between the two plays in Oberon’s Rep, Othello and Order, and how do they relate to the state of the human condition?

Both Order and Othello are about what happens to you if you meet the wrong Demon for you.

I was fortunate enough to see an earlier reading of this play, and it is quite different now. What has the collaborative process been like between you and playwright Christopher Stetson Boal?

It’s been an amazing collaboration with Chris.  It’s never felt like there were hidden agendas.

Do you see Order as more of a dark comedy or more of a tragedy about a man who is run over by everything in his life, and why?

I see it as either a dark comedy or a funny tragedy.  I like to give the audience a little room to figure which of those ways they would like to go with it.

Who are your greatest inspirations in the industry – regardless of medium?

I’ve got about a hundred inspirations in the industry.  Almost everything I’ve ever worked on has had at least one.

If you had to pick a character from a play, book, or film to be for a day, who would it be?

My God.  Who?  Whatever I’m working on at any given moment, that’s who I’d like to be.

What’s next on your agenda? Do you have a play or project brewing that we’ll be lucky enough to see? We would expect nothing less from a man who is involved with everything in the theatre industry and gives it his heart and soul.

I’m directing a new play, Detroit, by Lisa Damour at Steppenwolf, in August.  I’m playing Kroll in Ibsen’s Rosmersholm, at the Pearl Theatre here in NY, this fall, directed by Elinor Renfield.  I’m directing Three Sisters this winter at CSC here in NY with a lot of great people in it.  And I’m involved in a new musical called A Minister’s Wife, music by Josh Schmidt (Adding Machine), which was done last year at Writers’ Theatre in the Chicago area (Glencoe), a theatre that commissioned me to write the script for the show (based on Shaw’s play Candida), and which will be done next year by Lincoln Center in the Newhouse Theatre.  Also, I’m still teaching (acting) at HB Studio here in NY.

* * *

That sounds like a great line-up. I hope we get a chance to see some of his work this coming year! Order runs through July 3rd at Theatre Row’s Kirk Theatre.

Related Posts:

• Oberon Theatre’s “Othello” And “Order” At Theatre Row: Interviews With The Madmen (And Woman) Behind The Curtain – Pt. 2
• Oberon Theatre’s “Othello” And “Order” At Theatre Row: Interviews With The Madmen (And Woman) Behind The Curtain
• Everything Is In “Order”
• Oberon Theatre’s “Othello” And “Order” At Theatre Row: Interviews With The Madmen (And Woman) Behind The Curtain – Pt. 3
• The Knocking Within: 4 Things To Know About The Show Before You Go (Times Square International Theater Festival 2012)

I was just having a conversation with a fellow actor who is also the Literary Manager for one of my favorite theatre companies, and we were discussing how incredibly difficult it is to stage a successful production of Titus Andronicus. Considered by most to be Shakespeare’s most bloody and violent play; one based on the many faces of revenge while still maintaining the despair of an almost Lear-like character whose mistakes compound upon one another to bring about the demise of his family and himself, ultimately. Despite the gore, the mutilation, the madness – American Globe Theatre’s production of Titus is remarkable in its simplicity and ability to tell one of my favorite tales in a manner that is palatable and WORKS.

Overkill is a word that is so often synonymous with attempts at mounting this production. From the amount of blood, the losing of limbs, necessary set changes and even a baby; not only is it technically difficult, but there is often a thin line between being able to do it well dramatically, and not having it turn into a circus freak show. This production exceeds expectations, and anyone (including Artistic Directors and actors) who has reservations about a viable production of  this play should come and take notes. Not only has director John Basil been able to tell the tale in the most serious of voices and provide the audience with as much of the full effect of said issues without going over the top; he has also directed the actors to maximize the use of the language of the Bard while engaging in difficult physicality that is not trite or expected.  I really was blown away.

I am familiar with the work of a handful of the actors, and expected a good show on their part; but kudos to the choices that were made to find the humor as well as the pain – and again, not at the expense of artistic integrity. Some standouts for me were the sexy and sultry Tamora (Elizabeth Keefe) whose murderous intent is quite believable;  a stoic Lucius (Jon Hoche) whose emotional pain is a brilliant contrast to the comedic roles I’ve seen him in (most recently Fight Fest);  Nick Vorderman’s comedic timing of the whining and annoying Saturninus (some of the delightful moments of the play); Aaron (Lamont Stephens) as the diabolical Moor whose only weak spot is the love of his son – whose use of the language was fantastic. Another wonderful pairing was Demetrius (Gabe Bettio) and Chiron (Adrian Saunders), both of whom showed different colors to their depravity; while Bettio’s full choices in his work kept him the more reserved until completely unleashed, Chiron was obscenely gleeful. They complemented each other well and made what could have been a distasteful rape scene into a well-choreographed horrific event.

Erica Knight’s Lavinia was so tragic, and I felt the actress carried the role quite well. I did, however, have moments where I was wondering if she was making specific choices of being in shock to the point that she was often devoid of the emotion that one might think a person who had lost her husband, was raped, and mutilated would have. It didn’t distract me to the point of not enjoying most of her performance, though. I actually look to the director with questions about those choices. Richard Fey’s portrayal of Titus Andronicus was, for the most part quite moving; however, I think I may have come on a night when it just wasn’t cooking for him as well as it could have been. The man’s talent is not to be questioned, nor his ability and mastery at Shakespeare’s work; however, I honestly felt it took him a good third of the play to really get cooking and for me to believe the snap he has as he sinks lower and lower into madness. Often I felt that he was pushing for emotion instead of allowing it to happen; that moments that might have happened on another night were being chased after. That said, I truly, truly enjoyed the show very much.

Hats off to Vincent A. Masterpaul’s set design; combining a spartan rotating stage, video projections (although they were sometimes a bit distracting), and stairs/cubbyholes, he created a world where all of this was possible – and where many other shows have tried and failed.

I look forward to seeing more productions by Basil’s American Globe, “Times Square’s longest-running Off-Off Broadway theatre.”

Richard Fay, Jon Hoche and Rainard Rachele

~~~

Related Posts:

• Macbeth, Aquila Theatre; Macbeth, Epic Theatre Ensemble
• The Knocking Within: 4 Things To Know About The Show Before You Go (Times Square International Theater Festival 2012)
• Women’s History Month: Celebrating Women In The Arts – Spotlight On Diánna Martin
• Special Edition Giveaway – Fringe Edition
• An Interview With The Creative Team Behind “Banshee Of Bainbridge” (Fringe Festival 2010)

Leslie Goshko

Storytellers. Monologists. One-Woman Shows. The lines blur in the art forms because they are often one in the same. Sometimes the difference is subtle, and I find that sometimes it has to do with how much is taken from personal life stories. An actor (hopefully) personalizes the choices he or she makes on stage; but when you are actually sharing personal tales of your life, then you are no longer acting; you are re-living those events, and hopefully, enlightening the audience with how truly bizarre/beautiful/hilarious/tragic those events are. I found Vodka Shoes (written and performed by Leslie Goshko) to be a really beautiful piece that went beyond the story of an alcoholic father and somewhat dysfunctional family; it was about how that family survived through its love – and all the little things that kept the our narrator, Leslie Goshko, sane along the way.

The show starts off with Goshko at a keyboard piano playing a hilarious ditty about her father teaching her dirty songs while he was drunk when she was a child – oblivious to everything and heartily singing along copying her father – until mother came home. Then begins the storytelling format of the art of the monologist – narrating a tale of family, dysfunction, and heartwarming (and heartbreaking) moments throughout her upbringing. Having had a close relative who was an alcoholic, who could also be an amusing drunk when he wasn’t laying things to waste in his path, I could relate to some of the moments she was recounting. I think anyone who has had a family member who was either an addict or a far-out eccentric (her mother, a bible-thumper of the highest order whose zealotry nearly outweighed her husband’s antics, had her moments) could relate to Goshko’s tales that painted a tapestry of her life, weaving in and out of each other. I found especially endearing and yet tragic the relationship with her sibling who, after being cared for for an illness and nursed back to health, took off without looking back until years later – much to the confusion of the sister who was left behind.

Anyone entering this theatre expecting simply an evening of amusing stories of drunken fatherly antics is in for something much, much more. To begin with, as a one-woman show, we as an audience should hope (expect) to be drawn in, to feel what the character is feeling – in short, to share an event, not simply see a performance. One thing I love about the resurgence of monologist art form (you see it in Slams/contests/open mics and various venues all over town more and more) is that it allows artists to share their lives. I mean, let’s face it; who knows how much of these tales are fact or fiction? – but they are presented as a slice of their lives. From the start of Goshko’s Vodka Shoes to the very triumphant end of a young woman coming out on the other side of dysfunction a better person – mostly because of the very people that caused that dysfunction – was moving and fascinating. My only complaint was that we didn’t get more keyboard songs.

Sun Ra once said something to the effect of: “History is his story; mystery is my story. What’s your story?”  I think in this situation Goshko made sure that she was never a mystery; her life’s story is an open book. It’s what we do with that open book that remains the mystery.

~~~

Vodka Shoes has ended its run.

Related Posts:

• 4 Cents Review: Late Nights With The Boys – A Grown Up Fairy Tale (Frigid Festival 2010)
• It or Her: Madness Reigns Supreme (Frigid Festival 2010)
• Lickin’ With Bricken – An Interview With Bricken Sparacino
• Women’s History Month: Celebrating Women In The Arts – Spotlight On Diánna Martin
• Women’s History Month: Celebrating Women In The Arts – Spotlight On Penny Pollak

4 Cents Review – When 2 reviewers each give their 2 cents.

LATE NIGHTS WITH THE BOYS: confessions of a leather bar chanteuse Pictured: Alex Bond in 1977

Today Diánna Martin and Karen Tortora-Lee give their 4 Cents about Late Nights With The Boys: Confessions Of A Leather Bar Chantuse which is part of this year’s Frigid Festival.

Late Nights With The Boys: Confessions Of A Leather Bar Chantuse was presented as selections read by Alex Bond and David Carson from Ms. Bond’s novel, but aside from that we both didn’t know what to expect.  The Frigid blurb promised that the reading would transport you to Dallas 1977, a magical time before HIV/AIDS, but not before ignorance and prejudice so we were eager to watch this story unfold.

Karen: I really didn’t know what to expect from Late Nights With The Boys, and almost immediately I was charmed.  Didn’t you sense their warmth right away?

Diánna: Absolutely – there was something very natural and calm about Alex Bond and David Carson that affected the audience. I think the fact that they didn’t dim the house lights was interesting toward that end …

Karen: Definitely. I mean, I felt they were having a conversation with us (the audience) as much as with each other, and that sense of immediacy happened automatically.

The story begins with Anna Zander interviewing prospective autobiographer Craig to see if he would be a good fit, not only as someone who is a good enough writer to capture her story, but if he’s someone she’ll feel comfortable with so that her story will be able to come forth naturally.

Karen: First of all, I loved how Anna greeted Craig at her front door with  “Are you gay? Come on in … but only if you’re gay” because it set a tone for the piece right away.

Diánna: Yes! It did – it got everyone laughing, but it also let you know, as an audience member, kinda what you were in for … and you immediately got a sense of who her character was.

Karen: Which is so important because on first sight she’s anything but, to put it bluntly, a fag hag so it was even more endearing when she says it right up front with all her southern charm.

Diánna: Right? It really was – and it was done so simply.  Really truthful honest choices were made in the acting by both actors, so we got to see them as the people they were – and not caricatures. It would be easy to fall into that trap with this play if they were actors who were “acting”.

Karen: I agree.  I think Craig said it best when he said of Anna, “She was a great lady AND trailer trash. HOW did she do that?” Because of course you knew exactly how he meant it when he said it. It was said with love and got a great response from the audience . . .

Diánna: EXACTLY.

Karen: It showed that she was elegant AND spunky . . . that she could be wicked and had no problem bringing that side of herself out. This way, when it starts becoming revealed that this genteel southern lady was a leather bar chanteuse, it’s not so inconceivable anymore.

Diánna: Absolutely – because despite the southern belle aspect, she is more an independent woman who has these different sides to her that are all so interesting. You totally buy it and that’s even if you don’t have any idea of what you’re seeing …I went in blind about some things – and still went with it – but more on that later.

Karen: Right, you absolutely buy it, because as Anna takes you on her journey you can see the wide-eyed innocent she once was, and you can see all these defining moments that she was open too, these things that maybe other girls of  her social circle might have been shocked by and would have turned away from.

Instead, she embraced it all, and by doing so, she widened her mind, and her world, and suddenly it makes so much sense to see the woman you see before you with all her gentility and her wickedness at once.

Diánna: Yes! You see her transformation that was fed by being surrounded by people who cared about her…and despite the stigma that a lot of people, regardless of their point of view, have about homosexuality, would not be able to deal with, she was not concerned with any of that. She opened herself to it all – because it came from such a positive place.

Sitting there watching it and hearing her relive her tale reminded me of myself when I was living in St. Louis. It really took me on a trip down memory lane, and I think that’s something that really strikes a note with the audience – going back to the comfort level the actors create – because most people coming to see the play will know a little about it from the title; and in doing so, might very well have an experience of their own that is comparable – their “first time.”

Karen: It’s so true. As Anna was describing her first time in a leather bar, all wide eyed and innocent, so sweet and naive, I remembered all those days of being 18, 19, and going to gay bars here in New York City for the first time with my friends who were just coming out. It was all so different and exciting, and quite frankly, it really was much more of a bonding experience than just going to a sports bar with “regular” guys. I have nights from 20 years ago that I remember more vividly than what I did last weekend!

I think many others will be doing what we did as they watch this show – going down memory lane!

Diánna: Oh, absolutely. I think that’s what also allows for such an emotional connection between the actors and the audience. I mean, here you have two people reading mostly descriptions that are out of a novel, really, with dialogue between them, of course, but still some of that was even done in the third person. The ability for them to hold us in the palm of their hand like that was amazing – for the audience to really be there with them. And I think so much of it has to do with the fact that the audience becomes so involved because they are reliving their own experiences. I saw many heads nodding and people dabbing their eyes…I know I wasn’t the only one!

Karen: I was too! It really struck a chord, especially when she started talking about some of the sadder aspects.

Diánna:  And the descriptions – of the bar, of the people – it was all so vivid. It was amazing – and again, being done in the third person makes it so important that it was so rich in the way it painted the picture so that we would remain engaged. I have not been that affected by a reading in some time.

Karen: And I’m glad it was all inclusive, because while her joyful times were fun and funny, her journey really had tinges of sadness too. As she said, “carefree was replaced with caution and cadavers” and I think that’s the crux of this whole story. That she is not just that she was a naive girl who got some education about the leather bars and the underground gay scene of 1977.

Diánna: Absolutely!

Karen: But that she also unfortunately had to then bear witness to so much sadness, starting with seeing (or hearing about) her dear friends being gay bashed, and continuing on with watching her friends fall away one by one:  all victims of an epidemic which swept through the early 80s and claimed so many beautiful souls.

Diánna: I really appreciated the way that was laid out. The AIDS epidemic was mentioned/hinted at very early on and we knew that she had lost the myriad of friends she had lined in picture frames. And intermingled in the funny moments or the excited revelry, a small hint would be dropped again. But the main sad point, that was discussed for its own scene was the gay bashing – which was so sad, and made many of us cry in the audience; but the show, instead of taking an easy way out and going through a scene where she’s at a friend’s bedside when they’re dying of AIDS, she chose to focus on how incredible they were when they were alive – and so when they are talked about as dead, there is even so much more of a void, and it strikes home – without going over the top or getting sappy – where it could have.

Karen: That’s right. It’s one thing to talk about someone who’s dead … it’s another thing to talk about someone as if they were still alive … to see the gleam they still manage to produce in someone, to see that effect on someone makes their passing all the more poignant. It’s true. And whenever Anna spoke of her friends, you could see the years melt away, and she looked so much like a young girl again. That’s not just the power of acting. That’s the power of one person’s mark on another person, and like you say … the obviousness of that void is then just so much more heart wrenching.

David Carson and ALex Bond in DFW Fringe Festival

Diánna:  I wanted to also make note about David Carson’s performance – the same way that we saw in Alex’s face the joy and love that she had for those friends that she had lost, David had such a personalization in his love for her character. It really was just so lovely – it made me smile.

Karen: It’s so true. I think there’s a lot of nuance that would be lost without him; he’s got a tough role … he’s got to be the straight man (well, the gay straight man!) but the truth is, if this were just a one woman show I’m not so sure it would have played as well. They both come alive in each other’s company … and the story itself is so much about how people affect you and come into your life and rearrange you … that to do this piece solo wouldn’t have worked. So I agree, David does some of the hardest work in this piece, sometimes by simply letting Anna (and Alex) shine. He’s like the light that illuminates her.

Diánna: Well said – it really is a piece that makes for the characters to have a symbiotic relationship, and they do indeed feed each other, both to the actors and characters as well as the audience. Now, what is the history behind this? Is this an autobiographical tale that was a book, made into a play about a book?

Karen: Yes, there’s even a part in the beginning of the show where she’s talking to the man who’s about to write her book and says “lets write it in the 3rd person” and I think that’s why the play is about “someone else”.

Diánna: Ahhh…yes, that’s true. So they have written that in there so it just falls naturally.

Karen: Which is very magical in some ways, to take your life and hand it over.

Diánna: I suppose that was the decision to do it as a “reading”, instead of trying to bring it out as a staged piece – it wouldn’t have worked, trying to re-create her life as staging. The magic happened in a much subtler fashion.

Karen: Right, so unexpected. You don’t expect it to come to life as much because you’re expecting to hear someone reading a biography. Then, everything falls away and suddenly you’re transported, because the story is so powerful, and charming, and wonderful.

She really is a bit like Dorothy or Alice or … who else?

That chick in Narnia? … Going through the other side of the closet!

Diánna: Hahaha right!

Karen: Since back then everyone was still IN the closet, so the only way to understand the gay world, was to go INTO the closet!

Diánna: Very much like Alice. There is very much a fable/fairy tale thing going on – they even talk about that.

Karen: It’s nice to think that this is what Alice would be like grown up, telling her story to someone else of this time.

Diánna: All the leather and glitter; the trapeze and the world of queens, princesses . . .

Without a doubt, anyone who is interested in seeing the story of a young woman entering a world of unexpected delights and unimaginable experiences, but with a grown up twist, should then go see Late Nights With The Boys … it will transport you to a never-never-land  of fairy tales.

Related Posts:

• Vodka Shoes Fit All Sizes (Frigid Festival 2010)
• It or Her: Madness Reigns Supreme (Frigid Festival 2010)
• Lickin’ With Bricken – An Interview With Bricken Sparacino
• Women’s History Month: Celebrating Women In The Arts – Spotlight On Diánna Martin
• Women’s History Month: Celebrating Women In The Arts – Spotlight On Penny Pollak

Brian McManamon as Andrew

Frigid Festival has really stepped up their game this year, is what I was thinking as I descended down the stairs from the Red Room, still reeling from the one-man show It or Her by Alena Smith. The medium of madness is one that has so many artistic possibilities, and when performed well it can be a goldmine for the audience. Nuances and colors of the human condition can be given a larger leash with which to run. Nothing is as delightful, for me, as a luscious character study set into a well-told tale. This production is all that and more.

We are introduced to Andrew in the dark, admonishing some people for whispering. All we see is a flashlight beam cutting a line in the darkness. When he turns the lights on in his basement, we find a disheveled man in long johns and glasses holding court with about 30 figurines, not people, as he struggles to place them in The Ultimate Arrangement.  And so begins the audience’s love affair with this production, a black comedy about a man whose inability to relate to people causes him to turn to objects instead, and ultimately lose himself in his fantasy world. As we learn more about Andrew, from his one-sided dialogue (or is it?) with his “devilish coquettes” – the porcelain female figures that he collects – we slowly form another picture of what his life was really like before he became the creepy guy in the basement.

McManamon’s physicality was genius. He completely took control of the stage. I found myself amazed, over and over, how this man could not only create such an amazing physical life of a neurotic and over-the-top character, but also have such grace on stage to constantly move about or even break into dance, and not break a single figurine. What’s genius is not that he didn’t break one, but that he kept his emotional life going the whole time. I didn’t see an actor thinking he had to be careful to not break any props;  I saw the character thinking that he had to keep the things he loved safe. As it should be. Regarding the performance as a whole, whether the  moments were Andrew being hilariously ridiculous, or tender reflection on how he wished he had a child, the actor was always throwing himself completely in his work – and enjoying every minute. This kind of artistic joy is not lost on the audience.

Director Jessi D. Hill took care to not fall into the trap of stereotypes, nor of playing for laughs (which was not necessary with McManamon’s shrill crooning over the objects of his obsession). I enjoyed the staging; Hill brought all of the complexities of this tragic character out in the open using a minimalist space of a trunk and three fluorescent wall lights. Overall a fabulous show, with a yummy twist at the end that surprised even this reviewer. Yes, Frigid has definitely stepped it up.

~~~

Related Posts:

• Vodka Shoes Fit All Sizes (Frigid Festival 2010)
• 4 Cents Review: Late Nights With The Boys – A Grown Up Fairy Tale (Frigid Festival 2010)
• Virtual Solitaire (Fringe Festival 2011)
• Lickin’ With Bricken – An Interview With Bricken Sparacino
• Women’s History Month: Celebrating Women In The Arts – Spotlight On Diánna Martin

Lauren Roth as Clair and Tyler Hollinger as Chris

What do you get when you pair a narcissistic, yet emotionally fragile sex addict with her wanna-be-normal husband, whose penchant for punishing women is taken out on his wife’s lover’s girlfriend? The result is something even more bizarre and difficult to follow than that opening sentence. Kaleidoscope Theatre’s “Sex and Violence” did its best to shock the audience into submission, but unfortunately it really just backfired because all of the sex and violence in the world won’t fill in the enormous gaps in the plot, script, acting and character development.

Where do I begin? Let me start by saying that it was extremely difficult to become connected to this piece even early on, because the characters were mostly so unlikable that by a quarter of the way through I realized I had no interest in anything that they did or said. It’s not because most of the characters are evil or bad; some of the most diabolical or horrid wretches of human beings portrayed have been the most fascinating (Iago is the first to come to mind). This apathy was caused by mind-numbing dialogue and lack of character development. Despite most of the characters either being sex maniacs with major hang-ups or people who were completely lying to themselves and sadistic (neither all that unique), they were just not that interesting.

To make matters worse, the amount of gratuitous nudity, sex, and rape that was thrown in for shock-effect value began to have a seriously? quality to it; it went beyond possibly being absurdist theatre and just became absurd.  Situations were contrived to keep up parallels between two different scenes going on at the same time, but nothing was really done to further the script and the story. Characters were forced, like square pegs into round holes, to further plot lines that were ridiculous. Not too many people would normally hang around to hear life stories of their assailants when there was a possibility of escape, nor would others be up for a romp of oral sex just after they were raped. Just because characters did in this play does not make them interesting or artistic.

The actors had a great load to carry, but that still doesn’t let them off the hook. Having to listen to Jimmy (Jake Millgard) shout for the majority of the first act about the atrocities committed against him by his wife would not have been so bad if the actor hadn’t been acting to himself most of the time. Despite a talented cast, the play was mired in acting problems. I find this to be as much the director’s fault, for actors cannot watch themselves work, and at some point the director has to step in. One stand-out performance, however, was a monologue by Molly (Kendall Rileigh) at the beginning of the second act. It was delivered simply, truthfully, and was a beacon of pure emotion in real circumstance. Unfortunately it was over too quickly, transporting us back to the rest of the show; and one monologue was really not enough to hold up an entire production.

~~~

This play is for mature audiences only

Remaining shows:

Related Posts:

• Women’s History Month: Celebrating Women In The Arts – Spotlight On Diánna Martin
• Special Edition Giveaway – Fringe Edition
• An Interview With The Creative Team Behind “Banshee Of Bainbridge” (Fringe Festival 2010)
• Oberon Theatre’s “Othello” And “Order” At Theatre Row: Interviews With The Madmen (And Woman) Behind The Curtain – Pt. 4
• Titus Andronicus: The Bard Would Be Proud, Methinks

Christina LaFortune and Vince Gatton

Henry James’ novella The Turn of the Screw is one of my favorite works committed to paper, being a wonderful macabre pastime that my Grandmother and I used to share together, acting out the roles as we read along. I feel it is truly one of the most important staples of Gothic Literature. With every read or artistic version (such as the film The Innocents) a new strata of possibility can be found in the characters, who are as fascinating now as ever. Two Turns Theatre Company’s amazing adaptation of this piece has put their finger on the pulse of these characters, and found an innovative way to share a classic tale.

The story centers around a young Governess (a riveting Christina LaFortune) who is hired to care for two young children by their wealthy uncle (a brilliant Vince Gatton, in one of his several roles of the evening) who lives in London. While captivating the young woman with his charms (“There. I’ve seduced you!” he exclaims when she agrees), he makes it clear that he does not want to be disturbed or informed about anything to do with the children, and the young governess is sent off to Essex where the niece, Flora, is being cared for by the housekeeper, Mrs. Grose. Flora’s brother Miles, arrives home soon thereafter, apparently from being kicked out of school. Soon, the governess begins to see a mysterious man and woman on the grounds of the estate and in the windows, staring at the children – and begins to believe that the ghosts of the former governess and her lover have come back to steal the children away from her.

Vince Gatton

When I was informed that the play was only two actors (one of whom would be playing at least four roles) and only 70 minutes, I was curious how they were going to pull it off, mostly in relation to the time frame. This whole novella, as a play, in so little time? I didn’t have worries about the multiple roles. Vince Gatton, one of my favorite actors, is very familiar with playing multiple roles in a show (having played 35 separate characters on stage in two different plays before). His ability to use physicality is remarkable.  In this production he plays male and female roles, including Mrs. Grose and Miles.

Let me just go on the record and state that this production WORKS, and all in just over an hour. Two Turns and director Ken Cerniglia totally sell this – and playwright Jeffrey Hatcher’s one-act adaptation is thrilling to watch and experience. LaFortune ‘s  slow descent that blurs the line between her sanity (or lack thereof) and the supernatural is a joy to watch. Critics of the original novella were always divided on whether the governess was mad or the ghosts were real; I very much enjoyed Hatcher’s version, which gave the character a new dimension and asked even stronger questions about the bizarre relationship between the children and their previous caretakers. Gatton’s portrayal of the 10-year-old Miles was profoundly eerie, and the show overall was very suspenseful, even after having been very familiar with the original story.

Instead of a theatre, the play is performed in the Merchant House Museum on East 4th Street, a 178-year-old home that is a preserved landmark that maintains its 19th century integrity inside and out. Proceeds from the production go to help generate income for the non-profit Victorian home. From the moment you enter the building, you are greeted by the quiet hush that comes from incredibly old homes. The fact that the historic dwelling is rumored to be haunted only adds to the luscious ambiance. Upon being seated in an upstairs parlor surrounded by the ornate furniture, drapes, gorgeous mirrors and gaslights, one realizes that the home is also an actor in the piece – it’s more than just a set. When you think about it, if this story was being told back in the 19th century, people would have acted out the roles by candle light or oil lamps, in much the same manner. The way the show is deftly staged in the space by Cerniglia, allowing the actors use of both ends of a narrow playing area so that all the audience can see them and effectively tell the story, was a learning experience for me.

Ah, They've Seduced Us.

The fact that the company has made it its mission to give back to the community by donating the majority of the proceeds from their productions to non-profits such as the Merchant House (while showing off the home in such a delightful fashion) is wonderful. The idea is becoming more prevalent nowadays, thankfully: create theatre in ways that can help the community while maintaining artistic integrity. I only hope that Turn of the Screw, which only ran for six performances, returns soon for a longer run.

Related Posts:

• Interview – Peter Sabri, Co-Star of Penang
• The Duchess Of Malfi: Beauty & Horror With The Barest Essentials
• Women’s History Month: Celebrating Women In The Arts – Spotlight On Diánna Martin
• Entrevista: Aaron Wigdor Levy Writer Of “Monroe, Illinois: Over Here/Townie”
• Stinky Flowers, Sweet Thoughts