Skip to main content

The Revenge of the Dead Indians: In Memoriam, John Cage (1993)

By Joe Cillo

The Revenge of the Dead Indians

Directed by Henning Lohner

Reflections on Beethoven, John Cage, Music, and Human Connection

 

On the first page of his manuscript to Missa Solemnis, Beethoven wrote: “Music is communication, from the heart to the heart.”  By extension we might say in general that art is communication from the heart to the heart.  It is a very deep seated assumption of western cultures for millennia.

The Revenge of the Dead Indians (1993) is an excellent documentary introduction to the music and ideas of John Cage.  At the very end of the film John Cage was asked three simple questions interspersed among the credits as they rolled by.  The first was, “What is music?”  To which he responded, “Music is paying attention to sound.”   The second, “What is art?”  His reply, “Art is being attentive to everything that is there.”  And finally, “What is love?”  To this he answered, “We don’t know.”  These three answers to these simple questions are very telling and key to understanding John Cage’s music and what sets it apart from more traditional western music, represented par excellence, by Beethoven.   The film delivers a sympathetic and enjoyable presentation of his music and his ideas.   He was a charming, interesting, thoughtful man.  The crux of it, interestingly, came at the very end during the credits when these three basic questions about the philosophical foundations of his art were put to him.

The contrast between Beethoven’s concept of music as communication and Cage’s concept of music as attention to sound represents two different continents upon which music and art find themselves.  Beethoven’s view that music is communication, music is a language, means that music is a way to connect people to one another at the deep level of the heart, the emotional and personal center of each person.  There is one who creates the music in order to convey something of his inner self to an assumed audience who is receptive and capable of receiving its message.  By immersing oneself in a musical experience one merges one’s consciousness through sound and emotive resonance with that of others sharing the same experience.   Music is a social experience which creates positive bonds between people, inner resonances of emotion and psychic orientation.

Cage’s concept is entirely asocial, or I would say, narcissistic, in that music is the private experience, or we might say, the condition, of being attentive to all of the sound in one’s environment.  It is an attitude of openness and acceptance to all the experiences of sound that are available in the world rather than a communicative relationship to other people.  We might say that music is an attitude of the self as subject, rather than a bridge between the self and other selves.  Therefore music has nothing to do with the meaning of the sound or whether the sound originates in some human intention.

Not all sound communicates.  There are huge telescopes scanning the heavens right now listening for communications from other civilizations in far off depths of space.  These telescopes are picking up all manner of radio signals.  But they are not communication, at least not yet.  John Cage may call this music because it is attentive listening, but there is no meaningful connection being made to the origins of the sounds and therefore it is not music as far as Beethoven is concerned.  It is just sound.

Sound may have a meaning or it may not, but that is not important for John Cage.  Music is not about meaning or interpretation or connection.  Music is a way of being, that is, a way of experiencing the world of sound.  To try to “understand” it is already mistaken.  “Understanding” implies that there is some intention behind the sound.  In traditional classical music one attempts to grasp the composer’s intentions as conveyed by the printed score and then render those intentions to an audience in a musical performance.  This is how classical musicians are brought up and how they approach their art all their lives.  John Cage is a radical departure from this.  The composer’s intentions become irrelevant.   The sound created can be completely random.

He talks a lot in the film about chance and how important it is to be open to chance and to allow chance sounds to become music.  How do chance sounds become music?  Through our being attentive to them and accepting them, as opposed to filtering them out in order to hear something else.  It implies a calm acceptance of whatever is.  The sound of rain tapping on a window may create a feeling of warmth, soothing, calmness, anxiety, distress, or somnolence.  But it is not communication because there is no communicator originating the sound we perceive.  If a sound should give rise to an emotional response in us, it will be due to unconscious associations we make based on our past experience.  If someone recorded such a sound and played it for someone else hoping to signify something or elicit a response in them, then it would be music in Beethoven’s sense:  a chance sound could become music through selection and presentation by a human subject.

For John Cage the sound of the rain is a musical experience just by virtue of our listening to it, allowing it to occupy our attention.  Such openness and calm acceptance can be very liberating.  It disposes of the need to filter sounds in accordance with our likes and dislikes.   Being disposed to accept whatever may come does indeed reduce stress.  But it substitutes juxtaposition for meaningful connection.  It is very much a Zen Buddhist idea.  Yoko Ono immediately grasped the relationship between John Cage’s approach to music and Zen Buddhism as she stated during her interview in the film.

Beethoven, on the other hand, is nobody’s Buddhist.  Beethoven is about connection, striving, and struggle.  In the music of Beethoven we see life in all of its many incarnations of passion and struggle: the turmoil, the suffering, the longing, the triumphs, the moments of profound peace.  Music has intentionality.  Music can and must be understood, or it can be misunderstood.  In any case it must always be “interpreted.”  There can be disagreements over meanings and interpretations.

In John Cage’s music there can be no such thing.  There is no “interpretaton.”  There is only one’s openness to sound and to chance.  It can never be the same twice.  Whatever is, is ‘right,’ but the concept of right and wrong do not really apply here.   It is the state of being open that is paramount.  The act of selecting is already mistaken.

On a deeper level it is a repudiation of human intention and even of the human self. By selecting some sounds over others and imbuing them with meaning we assert ourselves and our personal needs and desires.  This is contrary to the Buddhist philosophy of simply being, without intention, without desire, without asserting oneself in the world, or toward other people.    This is really what John Cage’s music reflects.  It invites you to just be, to simply receive, to expand your awareness and acceptance of all ambient sound.  With John Cage each listener becomes a receptacle rather than an active interpreter.  The consequence of this is that one loses one’s grasp of music as a communicative language.

It is not an accident that John Cage answered “We don’t know” to the question “What is love?”  He doesn’t have a clue what love is, because love is about connecting with other people through need and desire.  But Zen Buddhism repudiates need and desire.  It embraces only being.  Love is a different world, a world of intensity, of need and hunger and longing and dreaming and desiring.   For Buddhism love is a world of futility and ultimate disappointment.  Most music in the western tradition is about expressing the nuances and varieties of this world of experience as an attempt to connect and resonate with others.  This was Beethoven’s understanding, which he took for granted.  Beethoven lived in a world of human connection intensely felt.  John Cage lived in a world of random sounds acutely observed but devoid of “meaning,” and indifferent to human connection.

Beethoven’s definition is the greater, I think, because it encompasses the human experience of connectedness, which has been crucial to our survival since humanity emerged as a species hundreds of thousands of years ago.  Cage’s music is severely limited by its indifference to the needs of human beings who create sound for their own purposes.  This is why Cage’s music will never be as popular or as great as Beethoven’s, because ultimately human beings need and seek connection.  It is our destiny from birth and throughout our lives.

Buddhism cannot be refuted in the sense that there is nothing to tell us a priori whether life is a good thing or it isn’t.  There was a time when we did not exist, but we came into existence, more or less by chance.  But how should we regard this condition?  Is it better to exist or not to exist?   This question cannot be answered except to say that everything that is alive strives to grow, increase itself, continue its life, and reproduce.  This seems to be hard wired into all living things.  We are thus accustomed to making the assumption that life is “good,” because we all struggle to maintain ourselves and continue living.  Buddhism calls this assumption into question.  It does not assert that life is a bad thing, that we should not exist, but it tells us that life is problematic and that the fundamental problems of life cannot be solved — in principle.  Therefore all the struggle and tumult of striving to improve our lives and create more of ourselves is fundamentally futile and will actually increase the suffering that is inherent in all of life.  John Cage made a series of oral recordings called, “Diary:  How to improve the world ( you will only make matters worse),” which is very consistent with this Buddhist idea of futility and passivity.

Buddhism is based on several observations that I believe are distortions and profoundly mistaken:  that all life is suffering, that suffering stems from desire, and that all of our striving to reduce or eliminate suffering only increases it.  These are some of the basic falsehoods that are the foundation of the Buddhist outlook.  While it is true that all things are transitory, this is not a reason to disengage oneself from life or relinquish all desire for things that must ultimately pass.  Transitoriness does not imply futility.  What Buddhism fails to recognize is that there is profound satisfaction in the transitory pleasures of life that give us a deep sense of fulfillment within ourselves as well as a sense of meaningful connection to our fellow human beings.  This enhances our sense of wellness in life and enables us to impart that sense of well being to others to whom we are connected.  We are naturally predisposed to experience life in this way.  And while it is true that all such satisfactions are transitory, it is also true that a life filled with those small satisfactions is better than one lived in deficiency and deprivation.  One must learn the indifference of Buddhism through long years of self discipline.  It does not come naturally.  Buddhism is contrary to everything that is natural in life, and it is very hard to learn this mode of experiencing oneself.

Throughout the film we can see the very powerful impact of Buddhism on John Cage and his music.  His use of chance elements in his musical compositions “to free his music from his likes and dislikes,” is totally contrary to Beethoven’s approach to music, which is echoes Nietsche’s maxim in Twilight of the Idols : “the formula for my happiness: a Yes, a No, a straight line, a goal.”  Yoko Ono saw John Cage as a bridge between western and oriental cultures.  But how can there be a bridge between engagement in life and the repudiation of life as a fundamental value, which is what Buddhism does?  It is existence without “living.”  And the art that it gives rise to is limited and minimalistic and repudiates of all the reasons people create music with their voices, with instruments, and through the incorporation of random sounds.  Most people who embrace Cage’s music as a curiosity do not grasp its radical and profound rejection of the very foundations of human existence.  This is why it will never have more than a limited following and why Beethoven will continue to inspire and be embraced by people as long as they are able to play and hear him.

 

 

VIEW FROM ACROSS THE POND: SLOGANS

By Joe Cillo

SLOGANS

Our major obligation is not to
mistake slogans for solutions.
Edward R. Murrow

David Cameron made the headlines not long ago because he refused to wear a t-shirt proclaiming: THIS IS WHAT A FEMINST LOOKS LIKE.  I have no problem with his refusing to wear a slogan like that, because it is just a bunch of words that are meaningless until you act on them.

 

I wonder if people realize that a statement means nothing unless is indicates an action.   Wearing a sentence doesn’t make it happen.  I think we should pass a law that forces you to stand by what you say.  For example, if you are wearing a t shirt that says WELL BEHAVED WOMEN RARELY MAKE HISTORY you better get naughty or no one will believe in you anymore.

I have always loved: THE EASIEST WAY TO GET A HEALTHY BODY IS TO MARRY ONE because it gives me an excuse to have flabby arms and a sagging bum. If anyone sees me in that t-shirt, I always say, “That’s why I’m single.”

I am being an honest woman just like my mother said I should be.

Now you take the slogan: IF WOMEN WERE REALLY LIBERATED, WHO WOULD DO THE DISHES?  The only women that should wear that one are female executives who get up at 6 in the morning to pack the kids’ lunches and make a hearty breakfast for the family, rush off to the office to do important things and then, at five o’clock, slip off the high heels, don the sensible oxfords and drive to the supermarket to buy dinner.  They hurry home, run the vacuum as they rush upstairs to change into something comfortable and loose enough to handle pots and pans, dash downstairs, create a gourmet feast for everyone, light the candles rearrange the flowers on the table and call “Dinner’s ready.”  Yes sir. That is THE t- shirt for them.

Their husbands and children should bow down to these heroines of the modern world and present them with shirts that say MOTHERS ARE MIRACLE WORKERS.

If you wear a t-shirt that says: I DON’T NEED YOUR ATTITUDE, I HAVE MY OWN you better have a smart mouth on you.  Someone dressed in a shirt like that is telling everyone, “Watch out!  I don’t take garbage from anyone.”   Yet invariably, the person sporting that kind of slogan will be a skinny five-foot failed football player.  Doesn’t he realize he is wearing a lie?

I am a woman of a certain age and I am sick of people giving me t-shirts that shout things like I AM ONE HOT COOKIE because I am not, anymore (if I ever was..but that is another  story.)  And what about AGE IS JUST A NUMBER. No, it isn’t .  It is an accomplishment.

I have been shopping for a t-shirt that tells all you youngsters why I stay out late at night and don’t take good care of my liver and I finally found the perfect one: YOU CAN LIVE TO BE 100 IF YOU GIVE UP ALL THE THINGS THAT MAKE YOU WANT TO LIVE TO BE 100.

I bought it without even looking at the price.  I wear it when I go to the pub and I admit I flaunt it when I pass the gym and see those wild-eyed, determined people sweating it out on their stationary bikes.  “See this?”  I say as I stick out my chest and lap up my chocolate ice-cream cone. “I have discovered truth.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“Better Never than Late”–Contra Dance in Sebastopol

By David Hirzel

If you’re not familiar with Contra Dance (and bear in mind that I am only just barely so), think square dancing-mingled with line-dancing spun to the old-timey tunes of a three-piece acoustic band. On Saturday night last, the band Ruby Mt. String Band consisted of fiddle, banjo, and guitar, the tunes were long-winded reels and waltzes.

The outward-reaching contra dance community welcomes newcomers to the art, and so novices like me and Alice and Sharab are provided with a short introductory lesson 1/24/15 at Wischemann Hall in Sebastopol CA, in the very basics of the dance before the fun begins.

The dance is made up of squares of four, interweaving with each other as they move in opposite directions, so that every sixty-four beats or so, you have a new partner with whom to run through the same figures. The figures include “balances” and “do-si-do’s” and “hays” and “swings” two or three or four times during the course of each reel. Since you might have six or eight squares constantly moving through each other, caller Celia Ramsay‘s admonition “better never than late” is particularly apt.

The music is fast-moving, as are the twenty-four or so dancers. If the newcomer gets behind in the beat (we always do), there is no chance that by moving faster he will recover and be in place when his new partner is reaching out, balancing, or getting ready to swing. Don’t even try. “Better never. . .”

Now, in my view the best thing about contra-dance, indeed all the social dances of a bygone era, is this: every two minutes you get a new partner. And two minutes after that another. And you get to interact with each in a prescriptively chaste manner, with the “swing” a closed box with only two occupants, each holding the other around the waist or at the shoulder. “Swing” is a vigorously rhythmic spin to the music. The key to not getting dizzy is to look into your partner’s eyes.

Now, picture this. You are spinning across the dance floor and looking deeply into the eyes (is there another way?) of a complete stranger. Behind that stranger’s face the whole world is spinning. To your own new eyes it appears as though you are the lead actor in a romantic movie, and your partner is, well, your partner. And, from sheer joy, you are both laughing like hell. There is no other way you will become so intimate with a total stranger in under two minutes. And in another two minutes, you will have another with whom to become so engaged.

And everything about this moment is so completely chaste.

And you won’t get to have this moment, if you don’t make it happen. So, in this case it’s “better late than never.” But when you’re the newcomer on the Contra Dance floor, it’s the other way around. You could say that’s the magic of it. . . . And if you’re lucky like me, you get to leave the dancehall with the one you came in with.

Info and calendar:  North Bay Contra Dance Society

Review by David Hirzel

 

Football’s heavy toll examined in ‘X’s and O’s’

By Judy Richter

Baseball may be America’s favorite pastime, but football runs a close second or maybe comes up in a tie.

Playwright KJ Sanchez with Jenny Mercein explores part of the lure of football in “X’s and O’s (A Football Love Story)”. Berkeley Repertory Theatre is presenting its world premiere under the astute direction of artistic director Tony Taccone.

Much of the play focuses on the sport’s risks, especially brain injuries, specifically chronic traumatic encephalopathy, or CTE. “CTE is a progressive degenerative disease of the brain found in people with a history of repetitive brain trauma, including symptomatic concussions as well as sub-concussive hits to the head that do not cause symptoms,” according to Wikipedia.

Football players are susceptible to it because the sport involves so many hard falls and violent collisions between players. The problem has been in the news with a suit by former players against the National Football League as well as other incidents, including the suicide of Junior Seau, a retired player, in 2012.

The play touches on other aspects of football, such as its history and evolution of equipment, but barely mentions other issues such as domestic violence and other criminal behavior, racism, commercialism and big business. “There are certain issues that are really hot topics … that we felt just couldn’t fit in one play. A lot of these subjects deserve their own plays,” the playwrights say in the program.

They also say that most of the dialogue comes directly from people they interviewed for the play, but they changed the names.

An excellent ensemble cast of four men and two women portrays a range of characters. Bill Geisslinger first appears as Frank, a retired running back, while Dwight Hicks is first seen as George Coleman, a former defensive back. Hicks may be most familiar to local audiences as a former standout member of the San Francisco49ers.

Among others, Anthony Holiday plays Addicott, a former defensive end, while Eddie Ray Jackson is a young fan and player. Marilee Talkington is authoritative as a team physician who talks about the physical and psychological aspects of CTE. Co-creator Jenny Mercein (daughter of former pro player Chuck Mercein) completes the cast in several female roles.

Although all of the play is fascinating, one of the most effective scenes comes near the end when three family members — played by the two women and Jackson — talk about how their loved ones, who were former football players, declined mentally and then died at tragically young ages.

Scenes that might need some tweaking occur in a sports bar where three fans, played by Holiday, Jackson and Mercein, talk about their attitudes toward football while watching a game.

Production values are strong with Todd Rosenthal’s flexible set enhanced by lighting and videos designed by Alexander V. Nichols. Meg Neville’s costumes suit the characters (such as Geisslinger as a rabid Raiders fan). The sound is by Jake Rodriguez, while John Sipes served as movement director.

Adding to the atmosphere on opening night, the Cal band played in the courtyard before the game, and the ushers and other workers wore striped referee shirts.

This is a play that deserves a wide audience as it explores a serious issue regarding the role of football in our culture and the toll it takes on its players and their families. As one character says, NFL actually stands for “not for long.”

“X’s and O’s (A Football Love Story” will continue through March 1 on Berkeley Repertory Theatre’s Thrust Stage, 2025 Addison Ave., Berkeley. For tickets and information, call (510) 647-2949 or visit www.berkeleyrep.org.

 

Hillbarn Theatre stages ‘Amadeus’

By Judy Richter

Although the title implies that Peter Shaffer’s “Amadeus” is about Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, the central character actually is Antonio Salieri, a fellow composer inVienna.

After the tragically untimely death of Mozart (1756-1791), it was rumored that Salieri (1750-1825) had poisoned him. It’s more likely that kidney failure was to blame.

Hillbarn Theatre’s production, directed by Leslie Lloyd, features Jerry Lloyd (the director’s husband) as Salieri and Ross Neuenfeldt as Mozart.

Shaffer’s fictionalized take on their relationship focuses not on Salieri’s having poisoned Mozart but on the elder composer’s doing everything in his power to thwart Mozart’s career. In the process, Mozart is reduced to abject poverty while most audiences at the time fail to appreciate his genius.

Salieri, however, recognizes it immediately and realizes that Mozart’s music is far superior to his. He regards it as a gift from God. Thus, Salieri is rankled to his soul, for as a young man he had promised God that he would live an upright and virtuous life if only he could become a great composer.

This approach works for quite some time as Salieri achieves fame and fortune, earning a lucrative position in the court of Emperor Joseph II (Ray D’Ambrosio).

Hearing Mozart’s music and meeting the young man causes Salieri to renounce his vow to God and instead to undermine Mozart. In the meantime, Salieri pretends to be Mozart’s friend and ally. When Mozart advances despite Salieri’s efforts, the hypocritical Salieri takes credit.

Making Salieri’s hatred for Mozart even greater is that while his music appears to come straight from God, the man himself is callow, shallow and uncouth. Salieri privately calls him an obscene child.

As the play opens, Salieri is an old, feeble, guilt-wracked man in November 1823. He then recounts the events from 1781 to Mozart’s death in 1791.

Hillbarn’s production runs three hours and 15 minutes with one intermission. Part of that length comes from the script, which could use some judicious cutting. For example, the opening scene with Salieri in his wheelchair goes on too long.

Perhaps the other part of the length comes from the direction and the differing levels of acting ability. Lloyd, the only Equity (professional) actor in the production, is superlative. Likewise, Neuenfeldt as Mozart is excellent, making him a more sympathetic character than seen in some productions and believably navigating his physical and mental decline. Also noteworthy in the cast is Lauren Rhodes as Constanze Weber, who becomes Mozart’s wife.

The set by Kuo-Hao Lo is flexible but unattractive, and some missed cues in Matthew Johns’ lighting design don’t help. Lisa Claybaugh’s costumes and the wig and hair designs by Aviva Raskin evoke the era. Sound by Jon Hayward features tantalizing snippets from great Mozart works like “Cosi Fan Tutte,” “The Marriage of Figaro,” “The Magic Flute,” “Don Giovanni” and others.

The play holds some fascination not only for its music but also for its exploration of the man-God relationship, something that Shaffer also examined in his more successful “Equus.”

“Amadeus” will continue through Feb. 8 at Hillbarn Theatre, 1285 E. Hillsdale Blvd., Foster City. For tickets and information, call (650) 349-6411 or visit www.hillbarntheatre.org.

 

Strong Cast and Direction Steers “Impressionism” at RVP

By Flora Lynn Isaacson

The New Year gets off to a great start at RVP with the romantic comedy Impressionism by Michael Jacobs and directed by Billie Cox.  Impressionism raises the question: Does art imitate life, or does life imitate art? 

The playwright, Michael Jacobs has written for Broadway and television.  For many years, Director Billie Cox has been a director, playwright, composer, lyricist, and sound designer.  

The setting by Malcolm Rodgers is a small art gallery of Katharine Keenan (Mary Ann Rodgers) where Thomas Buckle (Tom Reilly) has been employed for the past two years.  Thomas brings Katharine coffee each morning and tells her his stories.  These stories lead to flashbacks that have led to the present state as well as a relationship to the art that hangs in the gallery.  Both people use the gallery as a “hiding place” to separate themselves from a world which has wounded them – Thomas, by his time as a world-traveling photojournalist, and Katharine, by many failed relationships. 

In Impressionism, we’re informed by artwork wonderfully projected onto the gallery’s rear wall.  Katharine can’t bring herself to sell her merchandise, and Thomas is a photographer who seems to be suffering from the photographer’s version of “writer’s block.” 

In the end, the audience is taken on a journey through which a love story shows Katharine and Thomas, that, just like the impressionist art on the walls, the more they step away from the canvas of their lives up to now, the more they realize their future together might hold more depth than the past that has led them to each other. 

The two lead actors – Tom Reilly and Mary Ann Rodgers – give professional performances.  They’re supported by an outstanding cast, including Ellen Brooks, as Julia Davidson; Phillip Percy Williams as Chiambuane, and also as Mr. Linder;  Dale Camden as Douglas Finch; James Montellato as Ben Joplin; Alana Samuels as Nicole Halladay; and Elena Gnatek (Juliana Postrel and also alternating as young Katharine).

Impressionism is a gentle romantic comedy which weaves a spell that will remain with you long after you’ve seen the show.

Impressionism runs January 16 through February 15, 2015, with performances on Thursdays at 7:30pm; Fridays and Saturdays at 8:00pm; and Sundays at 2:00pm.

 Please note there will be no matinee performance on Super Bowl Sunday, February 1st, and there will be two performances on February 14th: at 2:00pm and 8:00pm.

All performances take place at the Barn Theatre, home of the Ross Valley Players, 30 Sir Francis Drake Blvd. in Ross CA.  To order tickets, telephone 415-456-9555 ext. 1, or visit www.rossvalleyplayers.com

Coming up next at Ross Valley Players is A Month in the Country, a tragi-comedy adapted by Brian Friel from Turgenev, from March 13 through April 12, 2015.

Flora Lynn Isaacson

TREE is a “should see” at SF Playhouse

By Kedar K. Adour

Didi Marcantel (Susi Damilano) looks on as Mrs. Jessalyn Price (Cathleen Riddley) and her son Leo (Carl Lumbly) argue.

TREE: Drama by Julie Hébert.  Directed by Jon Tracy.  San Francisco Playhouse, 490 Post Street (2nd Floor of Kensington Park Hotel,  San Francisco. (415) 677-9596. www.sfplayhouse.org.  January 20 – March 7, 2015

 TREE is a “should see” at SF Playhouse [rating:4]

In the past 4 days two plays have opened in San Francisco just a few blocks apart in which letters written in the past are integral to plot, shrouded in mystery, and define character. The first was A.C.T’s staging of Tom Stoppard’s Indian Ink and the other is Julie Hebert’s Tree unfolding on the San Francisco Playhouse stage. Both deal with inter-racial love but there the similarity ends.

Tree had its world premiere in 2009 at the Ensemble Studio Theatre-Los Angeles and since has played in only in two other major venues (Chicago and Atlanta) in 2011even though it is a prize winning play (Pen Award) and requires only four characters. However those characters represent three generations and the author suggests a two level set that may be too much of a challenge for most small theatres. That challenge is well met by the San Francisco Playhouse that is noted for producing problematic plays.

The opening scene introduces a black man, Leo Price (Carl Lumbly) caring for Jessalyn Price (Cathleen Riddley) his aging mother who has dementia living in a past world of her confused mind. Into this setting arrives Didi (Susi Damilano) a white woman with packet of love letters written by Jessalyn to Didi’s recently deceased white father.  Those letters indicate that Leo and Didi had the same father and are half-brother and sister. Didi desires to be part of Leo’s family but he is resistant.  Didi’s persistence is intrusive and Leo’s rejection becomes volatile allowing author Hebert to inject an “in vino veritas” scene with the stimulus being beer rather than wine.

As the stand-off between Leo and Didi continues there are intriguing scenes where Mrs. Price has poetic flights of fancy intermingled with child-like rants that eventually make sense. On one of her trips down the staircase from the upstairs bedroom out to the porch she semi-bonds with Didi creating a thought provoking situation that softens Leo reticence.

That reticence is further eroded when Leo’s college age daughter JJ (Tristan Cunningham) hesitantly accepts Didi as her aunt and helps search for the “other side of the story” represented by letters written by Didi’s father to Jessalyn. The readings of those letters define a beautiful love that persisted years after inter-racial animosity caused a physical separation.

Cathleen Riddley delivers a tour-de-force performance as Jessalyn giving substance and credibility to her shifts from reality to confused mental recollections.  Carl Lumbly’s understated acting is a joy to observe and his one burst of physicality is a classic Jon Tracy directorial conceit. Susi Damilano gives substance and veracity to the character of Didi and demonstrates great comic timing in the few scenes that add a bit of humor to the evening filled with tension.

This play does not demonstrate Jon Tracy’s directorial skill that may be the fault of the script. It is performed without intermission lasting (on opening night) about 2 hours even though there is a natural break in the action. He is not aided by Nina Ball’s fantastic multi-area set surrounded by boxes giving a surrealistic patina to what might benefit from a more realistic setting.

The last paragraph is not a criticism but an observation. The total production is best described    as a “should see” evening.

CAST: Carl Lumbly as Leo Price;  Cathleen Riddley as Mrs. Jessalyn Price;  Susi Damilano as Didi Marcantel; Tristan Cunningham as  JJ Price.

CREATIVE CAST: Nina Ball (Set design); Michael Oesch/Kurt Landisman (Light design); Theodore J.H. Hulsker (Sound design) and Abra Berman (Costume design).

Kedar K. Adour, MD.

Courtesy of www.theatreworldinternetmagazine.com

 

Didi Marcantel (Susi Damilano) looks on as Mrs. Jessalyn Price (Cathleen Riddley) and her son Leo (Carl Lumbly) argue.

Berkeley Rep docudrama probes whether NFL can outlive head injuries

By Woody Weingarten

[Woody’s [rating: 4]

Ensemble cast of “X’s and O’s (A Football Love Story)” features (from left) Marilee Talkington, Anthony Holiday, Eddie Ray Jackson, ex-49er Dwight Hicks, Bill Geisslinger and Jenny Mercein. Photo courtesy of kevinberne.com.

Dwight Hicks (left) is spotlighted in “X’s and O’s (A Football Love Story)” as Marilee Talkington tapes up Eddie Ray. Photo courtesy of kevinberne.com.

Did the National Football League mutate into a life-threatening disease?

Is the sport too lethal to survive?

An ensemble cast tackles such questions head-on in “X’s and O’s (A Football Love Story),” a world premiere play at the Berkeley Rep.

And not unlike 320-pound offensive linemen relentlessly pounding the weakest links of a defense, it repeatedly bellows that if the NFL doesn’t radically change, it will become extinct.

Soon.

If I hadn’t previously agreed with that conclusion, the docudrama wouldn’t have convinced me — because its Gatling gun approach, covering every angle while targeting the league, blunts its punch.

The play focuses on head trauma.

On CTE, chronic traumatic encephalopathy, a degenerative disease of the brain that can only be diagnosed post-mortem, actually.

But it also probes other life-altering injuries, ever-changing rules, fans’ mindset, financial inducements, segregation, class warfare.

All serious topics.

Director Tony Taccone makes sure, however, to inject humor that mitigates the heaviness.

Using clever slo-mo pantomime.

A bevy of one-liners.

And sight gags — with the funniest, in my eyes, being a foul-mouthed caricature of an Oakland Raiders-type fanatic cloaked in football gear (accented by a skull on his chest).

“X’s and O’s” was written by super-fan K.J. Sanchez with Jenny Mercein, one-sixth of the acting ensemble and daughter of NFL running back Chuck Mercein, best recalled for his Green Bay Packers’ stint in the 1967 “Ice Bowl” championship game when the wind-chill factor registered minus-48.

They based their piece on interviews.

With players and their kin, parents of young hopefuls, fans, physicians and academics.

While nurturing the commissioned play in The Ground Floor, the repertory theater’s arm that develops new work, the playwrights changed names to protect the innocent.

And, I’d suggest, the guilty.

The ironic title titillates me, considering that the play boldfaces the negative. But the “love story” is distinctly a torrid affair between fans and a league that generates $10 billion a year while maintaining its status as a nonprofit.

Dwight Hicks, 58-year-old ex-San Francisco 49er safety who earned two Super Bowl rings and played in four Pro Bowls, is the show’s box-office draw.

The athlete-actor faltered several times opening night as if struggling to remember dialogue. But he, like the others, portrayed multiple characters and otherwise acquitted himself well.

Acting wasn’t the show’s decisive factor, though.

The mood was.

The docudrama’s imaginative high-tech set helped. It featured a canopy and walls with, first, a diagram of a football play (with its traditional X’s and O’s), then myriad projections of the game’s history, violence and popularity.

Despite its core being prickly, the show sometimes felt tedious (though only 80 minutes long).

Aficionados knew the facts.

A program article by Madeleine Oldham, dramaturg and director of The Ground Floor, referenced the 1990s when ex-players “seemed to be exhibiting things like memory loss at relatively young ages, mood swings, or personality changes.”

Evidence “of a link between football and brain injury reached a tipping point” in 2005, she wrote, after an autopsy on 50-year-old Pittsburgh Steeler ‘Iron Mike’ Webster showed “the inside of his brain mirrored that of a much older man.”

Many NFL alumni, Oldham added, “were often dealing with headaches, depression, the inability to remember simple things, lack of focus, substance abuse, or thoughts of suicide.”

“X’s and O’s,” like football itself, doted on statistics.

My online search verified them: More than 5,000 player-plaintiffs quickly signed onto 250 concussion-related lawsuits against the league. Add 1,000 if you count spouses.

Numbers aren’t at risk, though.

Human beings are.

That, of course, is the point of the play, in which I found numerous memorable lines.

Such as, “I love watching someone suffer” and “How do you go from superman to man to nobody?”

Sportscasts have recently been riddled with endless speculation about “Deflategate” and which New England Patriots player or employee let air out of the championship game balls.

Somehow I believe questions raised by “X’s and O’s” are more imperative.

 “X’s and O’s (A Football Love Story)” will run at the Berkeley Rep’s Thrust Stage, 2025 Addison St. (off Shattuck), through March 1. Night performances, Tuesdays, Thursdays, Fridays and Saturdays, 8 p.m.; Wednesdays and Sundays, 7 p.m. Matinees, Thursdays, Saturdays and Sundays, 2 p.m. Tickets: $14.50-$79 (subject to change). Information: www.berkeleyrep.org or (510) 647-2949

Contact Woody Weingarten at voodee@sbcglobal.net or check out his blog at www.vitalitypress.com

Dead playwright, old actress, antique play still delightful

By Woody Weingarten

[Woody’s [rating: 4]

Appearing in touring company of “Blithe Spirit” are (from left) Sandra Shipley, Charles Edwards, Susan Louise O’Connor, star Angela Lansbury as Madame Arcati, Charlotte Parry and Simon Jones. Photo by Joan Marcus.

Susan Louise O’Connor (left) shines in small role alongside Charles Edwards and Charlotte Parry in “Blithe Spirit.” Photo by Joan Marcus.

I thought deceased playwright Noël Coward was so yesterday.

And I feared 89-year-old Angela Lansbury might fit into that pigeonhole, too.

But “Blithe Spirit,” which originally debuted on Broadway in 1941, proves my pre-show presumptions were way off.

All three are charming — despite their antiquity.

In the small but crucial role of second-generation medium Madame Arcati (at the Golden Gate Theatre), Lansbury is an absolute rib-tickling marvel.

It’s a part that earned her a Tony Award for the 2009 Broadway revival.

Opening night in San Francisco, I found the character actor’s physical comedy — as well as her ability to zoom her vocal elevator from squeaky to bass and back again — delightful.

But major kudos also are due Susan Louise O’Connor, whose comic antics in a secondary part are honed so finely they virtually steal the show.

As maid Edith, she manages to transform her earliest lines of  “Yes, mum,” “Yes, mum” and “Yes, mum” into comedic diamonds.

Laugh-aloud gems.

She’s so good at it, and in becoming a mousey creature stuck alternately in fifth and slo-mo gears, she almost outshines Lansbury in the slapstick-with-pinpoint-timing department.

Almost.

Lansbury had the opening night audience in her palm before the curtain went up.

Director Michael Blakemore deserves recognition, though, for acutely and cutely layering the manifold moments of shtick — and for making at least the first half of a protracted 115-minute two-act play move swiftly.

I can offer shout-outs, too, to Charles Edwards as an ultra-correct, ultra-British Charles Condomine, who asks the medium to conduct a séance in his living room so he can use it in his novel, and Jemima Rooper as Elvira, the churlish, lethal dead wife he summons despite remembering “how morally untidy she was.”

Such phraseology may seem archaic in print, but when used on stage it holds up.

Astonishingly well.

“Blithe Spirit,” which followed otherworldly films such as “Topper” and “The Ghost Goes West” into the public’s imagination and favor, allegedly was written in a week.

But Coward’s velocity doesn’t show through.

His wit does.

Adding to the onstage fun are old-fashioned projections of scene names and action, accompanied by screechy sounds from vintage recordings.

As well as ectoplasmic special effects that peak just before the final curtain.

On a personal note, repeated use of Irving Berlin’s “Always,” ancient enough to have been my parent’s favorite song, hit me right in the labonza.

Angela Lansbury’s 70-year career includes harvesting five Tonys, six Golden Globes and an honorary Oscar for lifetime achievement. She starred on Broadway in “Mame,” “Gypsy” and “Sweeney Todd.”

She’s best known, of course, for playing Jessica Fletcher in “Murder, She Wrote.”

Which I never saw.

In spite of the original series being on TV for 12 years (and the cable re-runs still going strong).

She first awed me, rather, in a 1962 Cold War film thriller, “The Manchurian Candidate,” while playing the conniving mother of a potential political assassin.

Her “Blithe Spirit” characterization couldn’t be more dissimilar.

She portrayed Madame Arcati as a bent, cantankerous, peculiar old lady with a distinctive shuffle. But when it came time to take her bows, the nearly nonagenarian’s body was suddenly erect, and she was smiling and sprightly.

Why’d I like her and this play so much?

Maybe because too many shows nowadays are heavy, heavy, heavy.

In contrast, “Blithe Spirit,” which Coward appropriately subtitled “An Improbable Farce,” didn’t require` me to think about it, chew on it, discuss it, worry about it or dissect it.

All I needed to do was sit back and enjoy it.

It and Lansbury, that is.

Last year, the living legend made headlines when Queen Elizabeth aptly made her a dame.

She’d earned the honor.

And clearly, to steal a line from a hit Broadway show she didn’t star in, she’s still up there in the footlights proving “there is nothing like a dame.”

Especially a spry old one.

“Blithe Spirit” will play at the SHN Golden Gate Theatre, 1 Taylor St., San Francisco, through Feb. 1. Night performances Tuesdays through Saturdays, 8 p.m. Matinees, Wednesdays, Saturdays and Sundays, 2 p.m. Tickets: $45 to $175 (subject to change). Information: (888) 746-1799 or shnsf.com.

Contact Woody Weingarten at voodee@sbcglobal.net or check out his blog at www.vitalitypress.com/

A powerful Xs and Os at Berkeley Rep

By Kedar K. Adour

 

(l to r) Marilee Talkington, Anthony Holiday, Eddie Ray Jackson, Dwight Hicks, Bill Geisslinger, and Jenny Mercein make up the ensemble cast in the world premiere of X’s and O’s (A Football Love Story), a hard-hitting docudrama at Berkeley Rep that examines our country’s passion for a game that is life-giving yet lethal.

X’s and O’s (A Football Love Story): Docudrama by KJ Sanchez, along with Jenny Mercein. Directed by Tony Taccone.  Berkeley. Repertory Theatre: Thrust Stage, 2025 Addison Street @ Shattuck, Berkeley, CA.  (510) 647-2949. www.berkeleyrep.org.     January 23- March 1, 2015

A powerful Xs and Os at Berkeley Rep [rating:5]

To add a bit of authenticity to the football play that opened last night on Berkeley Rep’s Thrust Stage, the ushers were dressed in black and white vertically stripped referees’ shirts and the University of California marching band played snippets of rousing classic stadium music for 15 minutes before curtain time. It was a nice touch but unnecessary since the powerful staging and acting of this 85 minute docudrama creates its own authenticity in words, action and spectacular visual/sound projections. It received a well-earned standing ovation.

Football injuries, especially brain injuries associated with the violence of the sport has been examined through the actual words of those who were involved. It is appropriate that the creators of the show were intimately attached to the sport. Writer KJ Sanchez is a die-hard fan and Jenny Mercein is the daughter of former pro player Chuck Mercein.  After interviewing former National Football players, their families and fans their loyalty to the sport has been thoroughly shaken but remains partially/ (mostly?) intact.

Originally co-commissioned by Berkeley Rep and Center Stage in Baltimore, the play was developed in The Ground Floor: Berkeley Rep’s Center for the Creation and Development of New Work. Sanchez is known for ReEntry a docudrama based on interviews with Marines returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.  Like that show most (95%) of the words used in Xs and Os come from their interviews that included sports medicine experts needed to clarify the term Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE) that results from hard to detect repetitive small injuries to the brain by concussions. The phenomenon is explicitly demonstrated by word and x-rays by Marilee Talkington playing a neurologist.

The entire cast is well suited to playing their multiple roles and becoming members of the chorus without missing a beat. An authentic touch includes Dwight Hicks, a former NFL player with the 49ers, in the cast. Bill Geisslinger a 25 year member at the Oregon Shakespeare represents the ‘white’ player faction of NFL football that has become a minority as most teams are now composed of mostly black players. Hicks, Anthony Holiday and Eddie Ray Jackson fill out the multiple roles of black players and fans with each turning in superlative performances. Mecein and Talkington are never overshadowed by the male contingent and share a touching scene as the wives of brain damaged players.  

It is Eddie Ray Jackson who played Mohammed Ali in Marin Theater Company’s production of Fetch Clay, Make Man who almost steals the show as a young player performing physical exercises to build up his body to become even better on the football field. His versatility is demonstrated in the fore mention scene with Mecein and Talkington playing a young boy bemoaning, and not understanding the physical and mental change of his father wrought by CTE.

And then there are the spectacular visual/sound appearing on the multiple screens situated above the stage in a half circle where the historical and pertinent vignettes are projected often to the musical interlude of Monday Night Football ending with “Are you ready for some football?” Berkeley Rep under the brilliant direction of Tony Taccone certainly is. Running time about 85 minutes without an intermission. Advise: A must see production.

CAST: Bill Geisslinger, Frank, Rocky, Tough Guy & Chorus; Dwight Hicks (George Coleman, Ramon & Chorus); Anthony Holiday (Addicott, Ben & Chorus); Eddie Ray Jackson (Eric, BJ, Anthony & Chorus); Jenny Mercein (Kelli, Martha, Roberta & Chorus); Marilee Talkington (Caroline, Team Physician, Laura & Chorus).

CREATIVE TEAM: Todd Rosenthal (scenic designer);, Meg Neville (costume designer); Alexander V. Nichols (lighting and projection designer); Jake Rodriguez (sound designer); Kimberly Mark Webb (stage manager).

Kedar K. Adour, MD

Courtesy of www.theatreworldinternetmagazine.com

Photo by Kevin Berne