Wednesday, March 30, 2016

Review - The Royale, and some other thoughts

I keep telling myself I need to stop buying theater tickets if I think I'm going to be able to afford to go to Italy for Thanksgiving this year, but I just can't seem to stop myself.  I'm going to try MUCH harder to resist (though I must see The Humans; it is not negotiable, gosh darn it).  But after hearing wonderful things about Marco Ramirez's new play, The Royale, I succumbed to the siren song of TDF and picked up a ticket for last night.

I just love seeing plays at the Mitzi Newhouse at Lincoln Center; the space is fairly intimate, even with its sharp sight lines and sort-of-steep rake, and I always feel like a part of the action.  Last night, being a part of the action of The Royale, was quite an overwhelming experience.  I found the play to be enormously powerful, with much to say about how far we've come and how far we still have to go.

The play is loosely inspired by the life of African American boxer Jack Johnson and an episode in his life where he greatly desired to fight a retired, white, heavyweight champion.  It takes place in the early 20th century and opens with a fight where no punches are thrown - it's mesmerizing the way the action has been directed; you feel the blows that aren't really there because of the percussive quality of the writing and the acting.  Each punch is signified by a foot stomp or a block throw, and many of the lines are highlighted with claps and/or grunts.  We're hearing the thoughts going through the boxers' minds as they fight, and many of the thoughts are amusing and many are quite sad.  It's a visceral scene, and I really did feel exhilarated and breathless, as if I'd seen a real boxing match.  Jay Jackson remains champion, but has been impressed by his young foe and hires him as a sparring partner. 

photo credit: T Charles Erickson
Jay is a charismatic athlete, full of bravado and machismo, yet still charming, gentle and sincere. He wants stories about his fights to be on the front page of the papers instead of the fifth page, and knows that the only way to accomplish this is to take on a white fighter.  He also believes that if he can win a fight against a white champion, that will do his people more good than being a winner without that fight.  He has a manager who understands him, and the fight game, all too well; a promoter who, although racist, still seems to have Jay's fighting interests at heart.  The other characters in the play are Jay's young sparring partner, Fish, and Jay's sister, Nina, who appears at the end of the play.

There are so many facets to the story Ramirez is telling in The Royale, it's kind of hard to get them all straight in my head.  I felt for the plight of Jay, who just wanted to be known as a great boxer instead of a great black boxer.  He wanted to avenge the wrongs he feels have been done to his family (especially his sister) and to lift the plight of his people.  But he wants to do all this through his tunnel-vision idea that fighting, and beating, a white man will change everything.  He sees this through his own lens without seeing it through everyone else's.  Once other characters start showing him what is happening in the world outside of Jay's head and the gym where he prepares for his fight, he suddenly becomes less sure and more afraid, and the tunnel-vision isn't quite so clear.

photo credit: Sara Krulwich
The acting is spectacular in The Royale - every single cast member was powerful and moving and they all played off each other beautifully.  I was especially taken with Khris Davis as Jay - he is a big, strong, handsome actor who could have just come across as someone who could play an athlete because he looks like one, but he had so many more layers and emotions than that.  His performance throughout, but especially in the final fight scene, was truly momentous.  But, again, I liked all the actors.  I also liked the physical production very much, especially the lighting.  There was one scene where Jay sparred with a punching bag, where suddenly the lighting changes and we see the shadow behind getting larger and larger.  It was quite a stunning visual.  And I thought the direction was first-rate, as well.  Finding an alternate language to the fighting/boxing was ingenious and the play flowed beautifully throughout.

There were many twists and turns to the story that I didn't expect; by the end of the play, I was gasping with sobs at the powerful way Ramirez combines the emotional, the physical and the universal in one story.  I couldn't help thinking of angry mobs today that I read about on the news, and how people of color still struggle to rise to the top of their professions.  The 90 minutes of the play flew by and I was on a roller coaster of emotion throughout.  I highly recommend The Royale and think you should run out and get yourself a ticket immediately. Of course, not everyone felt that way.  Seat neighbor report:  the couple of in front of me were more interested in PDAs than in the play; the gent beside me was more interested in his bag of pretzels than in the play; behind me, a nice couple snored throughout; and at the bus stop after the play, as I was trying to compose myself and stop sobbing long enough to get home, the man behind me was telling someone on his cell phone that the play was "lousy.  too much talking."  O.M.G.  But there you have it.

In other news, last weekend, I had yet another birthday.  It was a grand day, filled with sunshine and fun.  I saw a matinee performance of Charles Busch's new show, Cleopatra, then I had dinner with some dear ones.  I'm seeing Charles' show again in a couple of weeks, so I think I'll put off writing about it more thoroughly until then.  I saw the third performance, and even though they billed it as the "opening," there were still some kinks that will be ironed out as the run continues.  Even with the tiny rough spots, though, I had a grand time.  Charles is a riot, his costumes are spectacular, his supporting cast is terrific, and I laughed A LOT. Cleopatra was fun fun fun, and the perfect choice as a birthday treat. And my dinner at La Palapa afterwards was tasty tasty tasty. It was a terrific birthday all around.  I'll put some photos below of my recent adventures. Enjoy!  May this year be our best year yet!

















Thursday, March 24, 2016

Reviews - Boy and Disaster!

As you may or may not remember, I am a fan of playwright Anna Ziegler.  I know her a bit and I enjoy her writing.  I saw her play A Delicate Ship last year (review HERE) and really liked it.  When I saw that her new play, Boy, would be playing at the Clurman Theatre, I knew I wanted to pick up a ticket.  When I saw that Bobby Steggart would be starring in it, I really knew I wanted to pick up a ticket!  I'll get more into my fangirlthing for Bobby Steggart in a bit...

Boy is based on a true story about an infant boy whose circumcision was botched so a gender identity specialist convinced his parents to raise the boy as a girl, that nurture would conquer nature, and that this was the only course for the child to have a normal life.  The play itself begins in 1989, when we see an attractive young couple leave a loud Halloween party for a quieter spot to talk.  The young man begins by asking the young woman if he looks familiar to her (although he's wearing a mask) and so their flirtation begins.  The young man, Adam, seems eager to flirt with the young woman, but when she begins to respond and reciprocate, Adam ever-so-quietly backs off.  The next scene is in a doctor's office in the 1970s - the doctor is having a tape-recorded conversation with Samantha, a precocious six-year-old.  We then realize that Samantha is Adam, as a child, because Bobby Steggart plays both characters.

Scenes alternate throughout the play between Adam's youth as Samantha, and as an adult, struggling to have a relationship with a woman.  The scenes from the past are truly heartbreaking - the doctor is conversing with the child he considers to be a girl, yet the girl is having questions and problems she can barely articulate.  The doctor, who is more concerned with confirming his medical ideas than the good of his patient, seems to be as clueless as everyone else in the play about who they are and where they fit into the world.  In each scene, more and more is revealed, which means more and more is hidden, and the the two co-exist beautifully.  There are layers on top of layers, clues on top of clues and I loved it all.

I cried quite a lot throughout Boy.  The struggles of Adam were so real and, having the real-life case in the back of my head only heightened my sadness at what his life must have been like.  I have to admit that I did a little more research about the real-life subject and cried even more while reading about him.  But even during the play, I was so moved by the situations and characterizations and I think the playwright has beautifully articulated the divide between nature vs nurture.

photo credit: Carol Rosegg
All of the acting is strong, but really, Boy is Bobby Steggart's play.  He finds the balance between hope and despair, between male and female, between truth and fantasy, between understanding and ignorance.  It is truly a masterful performance - his body language is so telling and his shifts from the adult Adam to the child Samantha are breathtakingly smooth.  He creates a truly three-dimensional character who we care about, cry over and cheer when he finally confronts his past in a hopeful way.  But I guess I would've been predisposed to enjoy his performance - I'm a HUGE fan of his work.  I am truly starting to believe there's nothing he can't do.  Even in shows where he doesn't seem to be optimally cast (in my opinion), he is still strikingly original and honest in his portrayals.  

I highly recommend Boy - I think it tells a story that needs to be told, I think it's a story that's beautifully told, and I think that Bobby Steggart is giving a performance that must be seen and remembered.  The show is open at least a couple more weeks, so please go check it out.

Yesterday afternoon, my Tony-voter boss asked if I'd like to accompany him to the matinee of the new Broadway musical Disaster!  I thought, oh, why not?  I love everyone in the cast, I'm always up for a new musical, and one of my life guilty pleasures is to watch the disaster movies of the 1970s.  The Poseidon Adventure?  Airport?  The Towering Inferno?  LOVE THEM.  Oh, and I also love those craptastic pop songs of the 1970s.  So this show seemed to be in my wheelhouse, even though parody can quickly wear a little thin for me.

I had heard from a few people that the show was too long and a little too schticky, but I think I went in with an open mind.  I'm happy (and surprised) to report that my Tony-voter boss and I had a good time at the show.  Yes, it IS too long and it IS too schticky, but it also has really good performers having a really good time onstage, so that was pretty infectious.  And, come on, it had a disco ball and closed with a Barry Manilow song!  I mean, hello!

Disaster! is really ridiculously stupid, but rather smartly directed and cast.  The plot is of little to no importance, it's just a mashup and send-up of most of the disaster movies I've enjoyed in the past, this show taking place on a floating casino.  I laughed with a lot of "oh no they didn't!" subtext when they inserted a particular song into the proceedings ("Ben," in particular, cracked me up, as did "Three Times a Lady"), but a lot of the show is pretty clever. Plus, and here's some more fangirling, Adam Pascal is DREAMY. That dreaminess and his amazing singing carried me a long way.  I won't soon forget his "Without You" or "I'd Really Love to See You Tonight."  I mean, seeing him at the opening of the show in one of those disco polyester shirts, bell-bottomed jeans and hearing him sing "Hot Stuff"?  Grabbed my attention.  

The real MVP of the show, though, is Jennifer Simard as Sister Mary Downy, a nun with a guitar and a gambling addiction.  The sight of her pas de deux with a slot machine, while singing "Never Can Say Goodbye" was truly a riot.  As was her "Torn Between Two Lovers" (the lovers being Jesus and the slot machine, naturally).  She was sublime and I missed her in the second act (we see her less, unfortunately).  Oh, and Faith Prince?  Genius.  She was playing a Shelley-Winters-in-Poseidon-Adventure kind of character and she went for it. Watching her tap dance in morse code to save people who are trapped below? Hysterical.

photo credit: Jeremy Daniel
I think the show could be even better if it cut about twenty minutes - ten from each act. I did start to feel as if I had had enough, well before the first act and final curtain, because, sometimes more isn't always better, it's just more (to quote another guilty pleasure movie).  On the whole, I had a good time and smiled a lot through Disaster!.  The audience seemed to really enjoy it, too.  My seat neighbors on the right were particularly enjoying themselves, laughing heartily and repeating joke lines back to each other.  I'd say check it out if you share my enthusiasm for disaster movies, terrible ballads from the 70s, and Adam Pascal in bell-bottom jeans (and can get a discount)...

Friday, March 18, 2016

Coincidental Flashback

After waxing rhapsodic about Kia Corthron's new novel last week, I thought it was a cool coincidence that six years ago today, I saw one of her plays!  Here is a reprint of that review, just for a little flashback fun.  With all the news about Nestle, the water situation in Flint, and other tragedies, her play seems prescient now.  And some of the things I quibble about in this review with regards to the play, I embraced thoroughly in Kia's novel, which you should have bought last week after I talked about it...

3/18/10:  I lucked into a free ticket for a preview of Kia Corthron’s new play, A Cool Dip in the Barren Saharan Crick, at Playwrights Horizons last night.  I've read some of Kia's plays before, but I've never seen one.  This is a play jam-packed with ideas and plots and sub-plots—my head was spinning by the end.  I enjoyed myself, but I think maybe it’s a little too jam-packed for one play.  I actually ran into Kia in the ladies room before the show started and she said they put a lot of changes in last night. After seeing the performance, I think I want to go back and see those changes after they've settled in more.

We first meet our lead gent, a smiling young man named Abebe, wandering into a bathroom and continually flushing a toilet.  It’s an odd beginning, but I was completely charmed by his joy and rapture at the sound of running water.  Once the other characters began yelling at him for wasting water, the central debate was underway.

The main plot of the play deals with this young African student who has come to America to learn about water conservation so he can return to his village in Nairobi and save it from drought.  He is also very interested in becoming a preacher, so he frequently gives sermons to the ladies he is living with in America.  Right off the bat, we’re given several storylines to follow:  the young African gentleman struggling with his desire to be a preacher vs. his (imagined) responsibility of saving his village, a young girl struggling to be understood by her mother, and a mother struggling to deal with her grief over a loss that is revealed throughout the course of the first act.  We also have a sub-plot about a young white boy who recently lost his entire family in a horrific event and has since become mute, and is befriended by Abebe.  Whew!  That’s in the first fifteen minutes or so! Several other stories make their way into the evening, and for me, it started to become a tad overwhelming.

photo credit: Sara Krulwich
I greatly enjoyed most of the performances--I thought the young man playing Abebe (William Jackson Harper) did a fine job with a very difficult role.  His smiling, optimistic exterior hides a guilt-ridden, unhappy man.  Once those two forces start to collide, it’s quite interesting to watch him struggle.  The dream sequence he has with his adopted brother was very moving.  I also liked Myra Lucretia Taylor, who played Pickle, the woman who takes Abebe into her home, treating him like a son, while he lives in America.  I think she’s saddled with some very difficult business, especially at the end of the first act, but she pulls it off very well.  She was also quite charming in the second act with a character trait that was hinted at in the first act coming to the fore.  I wasn’t as enamored of the girl playing the daughter or the boy playing her boyfriend, but I think it’s because they were more devices than characters.  The boyfriend, especially, only seemed to be there to make a very specific political point late in the play.  Since I couldn’t really make an emotional investment in him, I didn’t find him as interesting.  But you know me, I can always find things to quibble about, especially in plays that intrigue me.

Chay Yew is the director and he’s done some really interesting visual things with the production—the end of each act become these amazing flights of fancy that come from nowhere but just kinda knock you back with their power.  The playwright has written about very interesting and necessary topics—water conservation and how water has become a commodity instead of a right.  There are some compelling ideas in it and stuff that I had no idea about beforehand.  I enjoyed the intellectual debates and am actually really interested in learning more.  I also basically liked the characters and how they were constructed; their dialogue felt authentic to me.  But the sheer number of storylines made it hard for me to really latch on, ultimately.  I think I understand what she was trying to do—make these characters real people by giving them all something to overcome, then we’ll become invested in them and then invested in the major issue at hand, but there were SO many things to overcome and dissect that it became a little unwieldy by the end.  I guess I feel if she just cut out at least one of the subplots, things would move a little more easily.  But then that would make it my play instead of hers, I guess.  There’s a lot of speechifying going on (the characters have a habit of speaking in monologue-form rather than in dialogue), underlining the political points, that I could do without, though, to be honest, they do make the fantastical bits at the end of each act stand out even more. So maybe I should just shut up.

Of course, now this review is rather like the play.  Maybe a little too much.  Oop.  But I do give the play a thumbs up.  It’s about ideas and you know how I like a play about ideas. I’ll just give the caveat that there is maybe such a thing as ‘too many ideas.’   But I'll be first in line to see what Kia brings us next...




Thursday, March 17, 2016

Review - Red Speedo

I have a friend who teases me because he thinks I only enjoy Lucas Hnath's plays because Lucas Hnath is handsome.  Well, yes, he IS handsome (as is my teasing friend), but I like Hnath's plays because I like the way he writes.  I like the way his brain works.  I like that he writes smart dialogue that sounds like the character and not just like the playwright.  I like how he lets me decide for myself how to feel about his characters and his situations, without taking sides. I like the wide range of subjects he writes about.  I just like the way he tells a story. Since I've already enjoyed seeing three of his plays, I guess I was predisposed to enjoy Red Speedo last night.  Hurray for predisposition!

I'm so grateful that another handsome friend let me be his plus-one when he used his New York Theatre Workshop subscription ticket for Red Speedo.  I'd been looking forward to it for quite a while and I was not disappointed.  Plus, after the show, there was a talkback with the actors!  I do so enjoy a talkback!

Red Speedo tells the story of Ray, an Olympic-caliber swimmer, who is preparing for the Olympic trials.  The play opens with Ray's brother, a fast-talking lawyer now representing his brother's interests, delivering a diatribe to Ray's swimming coach, while Ray listens, seemingly disinterested in the conversation.  The scene is filled with lots of quick speech, repetition, stammering and first-rate characterization moments. You get a real sense of the dynamics between these three men right off the bat. The way things twist and turn from there is terrific.  We hear in that first scene that Ray's participation in the Olympic trials could be in doubt - that situation leads to many more developments, some foreseeable and some not.  The play touches on performance enhancing drugs, endorsements, class issues, morality and the idea of the American dream.  Just to name a few ideas.

photo credit: Joan Marcus
There is a fourth character, Ray's ex-girlfriend, who is a former sports therapist, now extremely down-on-her-luck, mainly due to her own actions, but also due to something Ray's brother did. So everyone in this play is desperate for something - for a spot on the Olympic team, for fame, for money, for success, for self-worth.  These are four people willing to do anything to alleviate their desperation, and what they all do, or don't do, is what makes up the 90-minute running time of Red Speedo.

I really loved the play, as you might have guessed.  One, I love Hnath's work.  Moving on. I also enjoy a sports story, especially a sports story that uses sports to tell a totally different universal story. As someone who follows Olympic and other athletes, these characterizations seemed true to me.  I thought the writing was spot-on for each character; each character sounded like themselves, if that makes sense.  Ray is uneducated, hides behind his lack of education, yet might have the most common sense of anyone on the stage.  So his slacker-affect is just right.  Peter, Ray's brother, just keeps talking, over everybody else, over himself, until he just can't talk anymore.  So what do his words mean?  His fear of failure is palpable, and so is the dual nature of the relationship between the brothers.  There's love, certainly, but there's also distrust, fear, disappointment, manipulation.  So many different facets tied up in this relationship. Then, by adding on the relationships/dynamics of the coach and the ex-girlfriend, we see how these people change their behavior to get what they want from everybody else.  Ray, in particular, is not what he seems from scene to scene.  There is so much going on, above and below the surface; I loved that.  Ooooo, I think I just made a swimming metaphor.  :)
photo credit: Sara Krulwich

I was completely caught up in the story, going back and forth about how I thought things would play out, and I was frequently surprised, but not in a 'oh, they wouldn't do that' kind of way.  I loved how Hnath didn't judge or take sides.  Each bad act or questionable decision was presented fairly and honestly and it was up to us to make up our minds how we felt about them.  And, I have to say, the building up to the stage violence that occurred at the end was masterful.  It was expected and unexpected at the same time.  And that was some of the most emotionally and physically horrible stuff I've seen in awhile.  I kept having to hide my eyes and I kept verbalizing my discomfort - a guy sitting in front of me kept looking at me, I don't know, to make sure I was ok.  Or to wish I would shut up.  One or the other.  But I was genuinely scared and disturbed and saddened that things had to come to this.  Yet the ending was still ambiguous - there are many ways things could go on after the final blackout.  And that's another thing I loved about the storytelling.


photo credit: Joan Marcus
The set was fantastic - the front was an actual pool; well, part of a pool that had wonderful lighting effects to make it look like things were happening on the other side of the pool that we weren't seeing. The chlorine smell immediately gave a sense of place and detail right when you walked into the theater - in fact, my eye started to swell and itch a little bit since I'm rather sensitive to chlorine.  So things felt authentic to me right off the bat.  It was very interesting, after the show and before the talkback, to hear about the pool, how's it's heated, filtered and maintained through the run of the show, then it was interesting during the talkback when the actor who played Ray described how they came up with what stroke he would do in the pool at the opening of the show.  The acting was fantastic, from top to bottom, and then hearing from the actors during the talkback about how much respect they had for the writing and for the characters was very heartening.  I'm really glad we stayed for the talkback because it's always interesting to me to differentiate the actor from the character.  And these actors, and characters, were very compelling, coupled with a terrific script, which made the experience of seeing Red Speedo a fantastic one indeed.  The house was full last night, but I believe there are discounts to be had, if you keep your eyes open.  Who knows, you might even see me there again!

Saturday, March 12, 2016

Review - Nice Fish

 As a huge fan of actor Mark Rylance, when it was announced he would come to Brooklyn with his new play, Nice Fish, I knew I would be buying a ticket.  I adore him, frankly, and consider watching him onstage one of my greatest pleasures.  Since he won his Oscar a few weeks ago, I think even non-theater people are jumping onto the Rylance bandwagon.  My seat neighbors behind me had never heard of him but took their tickets off their friends' hands (and they didn't like him in Bridge of Spies, which rendered their opinion moot, in my opinion).  The couple on one side of me had heard of Boeing Boeing but didn't enjoy it and the couple on the other side of me was too busy drinking wine and falling asleep to be much of a barometer, but...oh well.  I had a grand time and it was maybe the perfect show to see on a tired Friday night.

Nice Fish consists of a series of vignettes, using the words of poet Louis Jenkins - if you don't know Jenkins' work, you have heard some if you've heard any of Rylance's Tony acceptance speeches.  Jenkins' prose poems are seemingly ordinary and banal, but as you keep listening, there are such interesting non-sequitors and complete changes of pace, that you never get into a 'poetry rut' when you're listening to them.  There's a distinct style to the phraseology, but it doesn't become rote.

Rylance, who worked on the script with Jenkins, says in the program that they've 'stitched together' passages from many poems to tell the story of two friends who are sitting on the ice for the last day of ice-fishing season.  Rylance plays Ron, an ice-fishing novice, who quickly begins losing things down the hole he's drilled (the opening scenes, where Ron is drilling by hand and his friend Erik drills with a power saw are funny sight gags, the first of many).  Erik is a more experienced fisherman who is looking for one big catch.  Both gents tell whimsical stories, of fishing, of life and death, of man and beast, of many things.  Their stories can be funny, either purposefully (Ron is quite a cut up) or inadvertently (Erik is a bit of an existential sad sack).  Most of the scenes, separated by blackouts, are between Ron and Erik, who seem to take on a bit of a Waiting for Godot vibe, but we do meet other characters who are just as quirky: an officer who comes out onto the ice to explain the intricacies of ice-fishing licenses (it's funny, trust me), a spear-fisherman who is longing for the good old days, and his granddaughter, a flaky philosopher.

photo credit: Teddy Wolff
All of the actors seem to be having the time of their lives with this eccentric piece - there is whimsy and light-heartedness, but there is also serious rumination on the meaning of life. Often in the same vignette.  I was completely entranced by everything happening, from the wonderful acting, to the interesting poetry/dialogue, to the beautiful sets and lights, and the well-done direction.  I had a smile on my face and uttered admiring 'hmmmmms' throughout the 95-minute running time.  Rylance, of course, is a first among equals.  I tell you, he creates characters down to the smallest, most minute, detail.  Everything could seem calculated or planned, but it's not.  It's completely spontaneous and in the moment.  But, as I said before, I already love him, so... But even his curtain call was enchanting!   The other actors totally match Rylance's excellence, though, and they are a wonderful ensemble, working off each other beautifully.

This was my first trip out to St. Ann's Warehouse - I got a little turned around when I got off the subway and my phone's GPS was no help, but I did eventually find my way there.  Finding my way back was much easier because I finally figured out where I was.  Now that I have my internal GPS turned on, I'll be able to go back and enjoy myself.  The lights of the bridge were lovely, so I took some photos around the theater.  I'll put them at the bottom.  The theater had some empty seats last night, so I'd say you should all go see Nice Fish.  You won't see anything like it again any time soon, plus, hello, Mark Rylance!  :)






Friday, March 11, 2016

Preview Thoughts on Southern Comfort and some other thoughts, too

May I first say that my brain is shutting down and I still have one more show to see this week?  Yikes!  My spending spurt of January is catching up with me, but things will be slowing down moving forward.  I am really looking forward to tonight's event, though, and hope I have the brain power to report on it over the weekend...

Last night, I saw Southern Comfort, a new musical at the Public Theater.  I think they're close to opening, so I doubt there will be changes, but just in case, I'll only offer a few thoughts.  I've seen a couple of previous incarnations of this piece and I do know the authors and one of the musicians, so I suppose I was predisposed to enjoy it.  Oh well. Enjoy it, I did.


Southern Comfort is based on the 2001 documentary about a community of transgender people in the deep south.  These are people who have been rejected by their families and everyone who used to know them - therefore, they made a family of their own, their 'chosen family.'  The musical is rather a snapshot of this community rather than a linear story, though it does chronologically tell a story.  The subject of the documentary, and the heart of the musical, is Robert Eads, who has hand-selected his family and acts as a father figure to some of his younger friends.


photo credit: Matthew Murphy
Robert is played MAGNIFICENTLY by Annette O'Toole, who has been with this show for a very long time.  The work she has done is nothing short of extraordinary - she inhabits Robert and all of his joy and sorrow.  The detail and the commitment is mind-boggling. This is one of most moving and spectacular performances I've ever seen. I really mean that. She effortlessly moves from dialogue to song and back again, and just shines from within. I can't say enough about how fantastic her performance is.  I also greatly enjoyed Jeff McCarthy as Robert's love interest, Lola, who is less far along in her transition, but is still a fully-realized character/person.  And McCarthy's huge, sonorous voice in his solo numbers was quite powerful.

Everyone in the cast was good - much was made when the show was announced that the production team would be auditioning and casting from the transgender community.  Two of the actors in this production are transgender and their presence adds a level of authenticity and humanity to the musical that can't be denied.  I will admit to wishing another of the characters had been played by someone from the transgender community, but...that is probably just me.  

The music is a wonderful mix of bluegrass and musical theater sounds.  I will admit here that I love bluegrass music, I grew up with it and it generally makes my heart swell.  I have read online that some people think the music sounds 'all the same,' but I don't agree. Or at least, to me, the songs/score sounded like a whole instead of parts.  It helped to create a feeling, a community, that just built on what the story, book and lyrics were doing.  I don't think you can parse that stuff out - in this musical, it all came together in a wonderful whole.  The lyrics were quite heartfelt and moving and they sat on the music very well.  I especially liked how the expert musicians were also used as singers and characters in Southern Comfort - again, it made the whole thing a communal experience and everyone was a part of it. 


the view from my seat
I do have one tiny complaint - I was supposed to see the show last week, but the performance got canceled because of a sick performer.  OK, not a problem, the Public made it very easy to reschedule.  My original ticket, which I bought the day tickets went on sale (in December, maybe) was in the center section towards the back.  When I rescheduled for last night, my seat was in the front row, on the far left side.  The front row of seats for Southern Comfort is a row of lawn chairs; a clever conceit, making the front row REALLY feel like a part of things, but that kind of seating isn't good for my back at all.  Plus, being on the extreme far left side put me behind the musicians.  No matter how wonderful I thought they were (and I did think they were amazing!), being so close to them made them the only people I could hear in the group numbers.  I couldn't hear the lead actors at all, especially when they were facing the other side of the stage.  And I really wanted to hear those lyrics.  Thankfully, I noticed an empty seat in the center section as the lights came up for intermission and a very kind usher let me move into that seat once it was obvious no one else was coming for it.  I guess I just wish the box office gal who had exchanged my ticket had pointed out the difference in the seating location; I might have tried to go another night for a more central seat.

But that's a quibble.  Even from my first-act seat, I could feel all of the love and commitment of these actors and these characters.  Their sadness and their triumph was beautiful to watch.  I was so moved, repeatedly, at what they had to endure and what they all overcame, with their heads held high and their dignity in tact.  I've put the Southern Comfort documentary on my list of must-sees, but I might have to wait a bit to let last night's emotion settle before starting again.  You should all go to the Public and check out the musical for yourselves!


The other thoughts I want to mention are about playwright Kia Corthron's new novel, The Castle Cross the Magnet Carter.  Again, I know Kia and love her, so I may have been prejudiced, but I thought this novel was an incredible experience.  It tells the story of two sets of brothers, one white, one black, over a period of many years (from the 40s to almost the present day).  These characters were so real, so compelling.  I would find myself wondering throughout the day, I wonder what Eliot is doing, or I wonder how this plot point is going to move forward.  To make my reading last as long as possible, I only read chapters while on the subway.  Since the book is around 800 pages, it took me quite a while to finish, but I treasure all of those minutes.  All of the twists and turns were so interesting and the intersecting of lives and stories was masterfully done.  There were so many details that made everyone so human, so real, I felt like I knew them.  Like I would look up and they would be sitting with me on the subway.  I giggled at some parts, I gasped more than once, I cried at other times (sometimes, my subway seat neighbors would look at me with a little side eye) - it was just so unique and so wonderful.  I have no business reviewing a book, but I just want to encourage people to go out there, get this book and read it.  Live inside it, like I did (in fact, I feel quite at loose ends now without being with these characters every day!).  You will not be sorry.

Wednesday, March 9, 2016

World Tennis Day 2016

When the lineup for this year's BNP Paribas Showdown at Madison Square Garden was announced, I thought, hey, I'd like to see them!  Then promptly forgot about it.  I'm gathering this particular group of athletes didn't set the box office on fire, so when a $20 discount offer came my way, I finally picked up a ticket.  Boy, am I glad I did!

My seat was a little further back than last year, but when I looked at what I paid for last year's ticket, I wasn't surprised.  For $20, sitting in the 200 section this year was not such a bad deal.  And at least this year, I was sitting in a location where I could see the whole court, instead of at one end, where I could mainly only see the backs of people.

Because last year's event was packed, I remembered the security lines being terrible and I missed quite a bit of the first match because I was stuck in line outside.  This year, I left work early-ish to head to Madison Square Garden.  Again, probably due to the athletes on the marquee, there wasn't much of a line this year, which was good on one hand and sad on the other.  There were quite a few empty seats in the house, but everyone who did come out had a good time, I think, and we saw some really fine tennis.  The lack of exciting signage outside was a bit of a drag, though.  Sorry to not have some good outdoor shots to share.  Actually, sorry to not have many good shots of anything to share.  Perhaps this year, the goal should be photography classes...

Since I got to my seat extra early, thanks to the lack of a security line mashup, I got to watch the pre-show match between two juniors, whose names escape me.  I'm very sorry, talented juniors.  I enjoyed watching you play, both of you.  One gal had a nice baseline game, though she had a hard time controlling her power, and the other gal had a nice all-around game with lots of approaches to the net.  I think they both have a good future and I hope I remember their names someday.  I'm only sorry there were so few people seated in the arena for their match.  The atmosphere still felt a little flat, though those of us who were there tried to give them lots of loud support.

Before the first big match, some adorable kids came out and danced a bit, then a small choir from, uh, Kips Bay? (my memory is shot), came out to do the national anthem.  They were very good, then they did another little song in tribute to Serena Williams, who would be playing a bit later.  It was very cute when Serena came out to sing with them - the kids were very excited to be standing next to her.  Very cute.

Finally, our first main event.  The first match was between two of my favorites not named Federer:  Stan Wawrinka from Switzerland and Gael Monfils from France.  I enjoy both their games, and their personalities, very much.  They're rather polar opposites - Stan is more a traditional, serious grinder-type athlete and Monfils is a born entertainer.  It was a nice contrast in styles and personalities, though they both had a huge smile on their face the entire time.  There was lots of gorgeous tennis - Stan's one-handed backhand is a joy to behold in person, and Monfils' joie de vivre is beyond compare.  I wish I had gotten a better picture of them, but I did steal one incredible shot off the internet.  I'll put my version of that shot here, and the excellent professional photographer shot down below.  Back to tennis:  Stan built up a couple of leads in the first set but just couldn't capitalize on them, so Monfils took the first set in an exciting tiebreak.

photo credit: Anita Aguilar
Before the match, I had predicted (to myself) that Monfils would probably win, since he would be in his element performing for an enthusiastic crowd, and Stan might be a little tired - he just won a tournament in Dubai.  The second set did feel a bit more pre-ordained for Monfils, he had just a little more juice in his step and charm/excitement practically visibly pouring off him.  For a little fun, Serena and Caroline came out for a little mixed doubles action for a couple of games in the second set.  This was very light-hearted and enjoyable, with the players wearing mics so we could hear their conversations and reactions.  It was really funny when Serena told Stan that her sister Venus would've gotten to a shot that he missed.  Then, later, when Serena told Caroline to 'get him,' Stan reminded Serena that she was supposed to be HIS teammate!  Very fun stuff.  When Monfils served for the match, at match point, suddenly he went into the crowd and had a guy come out and play for him.  Then Stan did the same thing.  The chair umpire was very confused, but Monfils and Stan had fun with it.  Finally, Monfils closed the match out with a stylish ace and we were done.  Lots of hugging and high fives - you can tell these two enjoy each other and have a nice camaraderie.  The post-match interview was adorable and all-in-all, this was one of the most enjoyable matches I've seen at MSG.

After the gents finished, we met four little kids who were dressed as the four adults, and they were all ADORABLE.  The little Serena clone was especially delightful.  The kids played for a bit, demonstrating the new way kids are being taught tennis at many clubs around the country.  After they finished, the Serena clone and the Caroline clone stayed behind to sit with their doppelgangers.  It was very sweet.  Caroline even played with the little ones for a few minutes when Serena took a bathroom break.  During changeovers, you could see the ladies talking to the little girls - it was pretty charming, I must say.

The ladies' match was definitely less light-hearted than the men's. Even though it was played in good spirits, it was much more serious and competitive (not that the gents weren't competitive and trying to win, it just was more easygoing, on the whole).  Serena was trying to work on a few things in her game, it seemed, and Caroline doesn't really have the firepower to compete with that.  Caroline gets back a lot of balls, so there were lots of wonderful rallies with the full gamut of shotmaking, but ultimately this match, as usual, was on Serena's racquet.  And her superior skills helped her rise above.  Though, I should say that I only saw the first set.  I was getting pretty tired by this time and my seat neighbors had worked my last nerve, so I thought I'd better get out while I could.  Anything could've happened in the second set and I wouldn't know.  But at least I taped the broadcast - I'll be sure to watch it and see what I missed in the second set.  I do know Serena won in straight sets.  :)

Seat neighbor report:  when I arrived, there was no one in my section except for one woman in the row in front of me.  She had settled in to her seat and also the seats around her, with lots of bags and belongings.  Finally, a gent arrived to sit in her row.  Next to her.  She proceeded to yell at him for sitting next to her.  He kept saying 'it's my seat, deal with it.'  She said she was going to get someone in authority.  He said, 'fine, it's my seat, go right ahead and get someone.  They'll be on my side.'  Finally, that seemed to shut her up, so she moved to another seat.  When THAT seat owner arrived, I was afraid that someone was going to get a beatdown from this woman, but thankfully, it didn't happen.  She finally settled down and only took up her allotted personal space.  But I was worried for a bit.

In my row, there was a group of ten people, all of whom got up at least five times during the match.  And always one at a time.  So I was either getting up or swiveling around to let them out pretty much during the entire evening.  After a couple of the gents had a few beers, they started putting their hands on my shoulders to get by.  Oh no.  Don't be touching me, drunk guys.  I figured by the end of the match, it might've gotten ugly, after their having a minimum of five huge beers each in the span of around four hours.  So besides my being tired, I was trying to avoid the drunks.

I'm glad I went last night - it was high spirited and a lot of fun, with tons of good tennis.  I've been to a lot of these events and this may have been my favorite.  Well, my favorite that didn't include Roger, of course.  Let's put some healing thoughts out there that Roger's knee problems will be over soon and I'll be able to enjoy his beautiful tennis again soon...

I'll put some more photos below.  The ones on top are from my cell phone, then I'll put a few I got with my (still borrowed) camera, followed by a couple from the internet, which I will of course take down if so asked: