AN ARTIST'S NIGHTMARE:
A professional theatre artist returns to the small town
A new playlet by Mark Ruhala
Setting:
A trendy upper-middle class kitchen in a small town, circa 2010
Characters:
Janet (1) & Marybeth (2), sisters, 30-somethings, small town residents
[As the curtain rises it should feel like we catch the middle of conversation between two women gossiping. Janet (1) throughout the scene makes coffee and prepares some nuts & raisins, and some apples & cheese. Both sisters enjoy the food and drink while they sit and discuss the protagonist who is never seen.]
1: Well why did he return here to this small town?
2: Like the prodigal son, it was time to return home.
1: But why, was he not happy in the big city?
2: I think he was ready to move on. His life was changing.
1: Or did he have something he was running from? Why would anyone return to our little town after having experienced the jet-setting life? Except maybe to escape something.
2: If he was escaping anything, it was the grandiosity of one of the wealthiest suburbs in the country.
1: But he was making good money, right?
2: A six figure salary, complete with benefits, a job in the company for his wife, and thirteen weeks paid vacation. The only thing he lacked was a 401k. Yet he owned his own performing arts center.
1: Again I ask you, why did he return?
2: Listen after more than a quarter century in the big pond, he was ready for a change. He had done what he wanted in show business…then he started a business…
1: He was on Broadway by twenty I heard.
2: Yes he had a very successful performing career, touring the world, working with stars, celebrities, Tony -award winning actors, directors and choreographers, and able to move through TV, film, Broadway, cabaret, ballet, video…
1: So why did he return?
2: He grew tired of the “business” of show long before he returned. He exited a very successful career which was short lived, especially when you consider he was out for two years with a knee injury.
1: Yes he even came back here to have one of his four surgeries. We were scoped by the same legendary knee doctor here in town. He was the one who finally fixed his knee I think.
2: Yes it was his last hope to dance again and his knee doctors in the big city sent him here because they knew how legendary our good doctor was. But even though he got his knee fixed he bad mouths western medicine, only seeing the side effects and not the cures.
1: That’s what I don’t understand. He seems to lose touch with the great things our society offers, while he stubbornly remains countercultural. Although I too have had enough of doctors sometimes.
2: After four surgeries and two years to think about it he realized that he had had many unnecessary procedures, performed by expert doctors who only could relate to his knee. As he discovered alternative ways to heal and repair he simply chose less intrusive and more holistic ways to deal with his health. He…
1: What, does he think eating organic foods is going to help his knee? I hear he even teaches about organics.
2: He reads voraciously and he is an autodidact. He has his life experience behind him and he realized that every choice he makes effects the entirety of his being.
1: Did tofu make his knees better?
2: Actually he stays away from most soy.
1: And why is that?
2: Soy can cause over production of estrogen and can cause cancer.
1: Give me a break. How does he know? Does he think he knows better than experts?
2: He reads a lot. He always has. And he finds the most obscure books and researches his doubts.
1: But he never even went to college! He barely got through high school for God’s sake! Right? You told me that.
2: Einstein struggled in school too.
1: Oh now he’s an Einstein.
2: No, far from it. But he is well read and he does know that history is written by the victors of the latest war, and education itself is manipulated to serve the elite. Truth is hard to come by. He thinks for himself.
1: He sounds very eccentric.
2: He is as far out there as anyone I know.
1: And you want to go into business with him?
2: And why not?
1: Okay. So why did he leave performing in the first place?
2: When he realized he didn’t fit into the politics of show business he left.
1: What did he do?
2: He worked in a four star French restaurant.
1: Really. Why? Did he like it?
2: He likes almost everything he does, as long as it’s his choice. Which it has been since he left here at eighteen. He lives on his own terms.
1: So what did he like about a French restaurant?
2: He met more worldly people, he experienced gourmet French cuisine and he made good money. But mostly he liked being out of show business.
1: Why? Wouldn’t he rather be on Broadway than serving
2: He felt that he had to sell out, kiss ass and be what Broadway wanted him to be. After years of feeling like a whore he decided to put his money where his mouth was and get out.
1: Unbelievable! What does the guy believe in?
2: Well he went on to create a school, as I was about to tell you earlier.
1: I thought he didn’t do well in school. Actually, you said he hated it.
2: He did hate it. But he’s always believed, to answer your question, that the only way to help people change is to educate them.
1: Yet he criticizes schools and the way they educate.
2: Schools are conformist factories to him. He sees his students rarely working to their potential.
1: Well I always felt too that my kids weren’t learning at their potential.
2: Un-huh…
1: So he decided to make his own school within his performing arts center?
2: Yes now he’s on his second one. And he teaches independent thinking skills.
1: So he must really like it. What happened to the first one?
2: It’s still going strong. They’re celebrating their twentieth anniversary this year.
1: So why did he leave, if it was so successful?
2: When he left he had been directing it for thirteen years. It was time for something new.
1: Oh c’mon, you don’t leave a company you start, making good money with all those benefits just to do something new?
2: Well by that time the school was a not-for-profit organization and he had to work with his board of directors. And let’s just say they didn’t meet eye to eye.
1: I can imagine! Who does see eye to eye with him? I heard he took advantage of the girls he taught. Maybe the board found out.
2: Hardly…actually it goes back to your second question. He was disgusted at the inexplicable sense of entitlement his wealthy students and families demanded.
1: Like what?
2: Well when you teach the children of celebrities, high powered Wall Street executives and other wealthy VIP’s you are working with people who are used to having things their way.
1: So how did he get to teach those people in the first place?
2: Because he’s good.
1: But aren’t there lots of good teachers like that in the big city?
2: Yes but not like him.
1: What do you mean? What makes him different, Besides being critical of main stream thinking?
2: He was trained as a triple threat. He is equally adept at teaching singing, acting and dance. He also teaches like an old school mentor - he demands excellence from his students and holds them accountable.
1: Sounds like a good fit for the wealthy elite.
2: Until they had to deal with race and class.
1: How so?
2: He was inclusive in the school; the board was only paying lip service. Once they had to actually show their inclusiveness they acted with prejudice.
1: So he left because of that?
2: That was heart breaking for him. And when they pushed their agenda of artistic choices on him he resisted.
1: Why? Couldn’t he work with them? Maybe educate them if that’s what he believes in?
2: Patience is not his strong suit. He has little tolerance for ignorance. And when they asked him to add lines to a play to keep a student happy he could not stay. He knew the chasm was too wide to bridge. He gave them his school.
1: After thirteen years he just gave it to them.
2: Yup.
1: He just resigned.
2: Yup.
1: He let them do it their way.
2: Yup.
1: And it’s still going strong after twenty years.
2: Yup.
(PAUSE)
1: So why did he return here?
2: He and his wife talked it over and they decided to start a new center in big city again.
1: So why did he return here?
2: Two days after resigning from the center there he got a call from his father.
1: His father wanted him to come home?
2: No his father informed him he had stage four lung cancer.
1: So that’s what brought him back here.
2: Yes and when he told his dad he was moving back home, his dad tried to persuade him not to.
1: I guess he should’ve listened to his dad.
2: He always had to learn things for himself.
1: Hard headed?
2: You bet.
1: Sounds like he was a loyal son.
2: He loved his dad.
1: But to move back across country and uproot his family.
2: He was ready for a change.
1: Did his dad live long?
2: Six more months.
1: Not much time.
2: Time enough for him to move back and help nurse him for three months.
1: Nurse him? Why?
2: Well his dad was somewhat radical himself.
1: How so?
2. He too sought out alternative medicine for his cancer treatments and wouldn’t take chemo.
1. I heard he was also an Aids counselor.
2: He was a highly regarded professor of social work at the university, and a principled man who spent years in service to the community. Although he took unpopular positions as well.
1: Like what?
2: Well he too almost didn’t graduate from college because he refused to sign McCarthy’s US Loyalty Oath which he considered un-American and had to instead spend two years in the army to get his degree.
1: I guess he is a lot like his father was.
2: In those ways yes.
1: It must’ve been hard to lose his father.
2: Yes, but his participation in his father’s Hospice care helped him have closure and finality.
1: Was his father’s Hospice care in the hospital?
2: No his father wanted to die at home.
1: How did he help his dad?
2: He and his wife and son moved in with his folks and he helped to the very end.
1: His father died at home?
2: Yes, he found his father dead early one November morning.
1: Meanwhile he was starting his school?
2: Yes it was a very intense time. On top of this his wife was surprised to discover she was pregnant the first week of their return.
1: A new child coming while his father was passing.
2: His wife impulsively named their son after his father.
1: Why impulsively, didn’t they talk about it?
2: The birth was three weeks early and they had a natural home birth so they didn’t know the sex of the child. When the baby boy appeared, in their hot tub, she named him right there.
1: Sounds like they had a full plate.
2: And yet one of the patriarchs of theater in this town criticized him that first year for not being at other local theaters!
1: Did he set him straight?
2: No, he’s still gay!... but he did explain his extenuating circumstances.
1: How did he manage to do all of this? I mean he relocated, created a performing arts center, nursed his dad while dying and took care of his pregnant wife and his three year old son.
2: He comes from a large family and they are all close and they all help each other.
1: They helped him with the center too?
2: He could never have done it without them.
1: So why didn’t he expand the center and create the dream he wanted of a large consortium of the healing and performing arts in a bigger complex? Isn’t that what he wanted?
2: Well you know this town as well as I do.
1: So why did he return?
2: Naiveté.
1: He really thought he could build it here?
2: Naiveté.
1: Didn’t he know he’d face small town mentality?
2: Naiveté.
1: Did he really try? I mean did he reach out and try to connect with the community? Seems like had he really tried, that the theatre community would love to have a person with his success and experience here to work with and learn from.
2: Perhaps they were intimidated.
1: Did he offer to work with them and collaborate?
2: He offered a lot. He wrote to every school in the area and offered to work with them.
1: What happened?
2: Not one responded.
1: Did he try the local theatres?
2: He spoke with all the local theater directors.
1: What happened?
2: Only the university director, himself from the big city, collaborated with him.
1: What did the others say?
2: One now defunct professional theater said they would collaborate, but then didn’t return his calls afterwards.
1. I know that one – seems all too common today.
2. The other professional theater directors blew him off. And then both of those theatres copied his programs and began to offer the same kind of summer camps and theater classes with their own people, actually creating competition.
1: No kidding.
2: No kidding. He thought they would be a perfect match to partner because they dealt mostly with older people and he dealt mostly with younger people.
1: Makes sense. Pool the resources and both organizations benefit - fewer expenses, expanded audiences. Then farm the younger performers into the established theatres.
2: Makes sense. Actually they are starting to do this now, just not with him.
1: Nice. What about the community theaters?
2: One community theater director started to become friends with him. He does edgy plays and musicals, often with homosexual themes, pushing the envelope himself.
1: What happened? Sounds like a good fit?
2: Well when he had the director over to his house for coffee one afternoon he expressed his idea to merge organizations and partner up with space and resources yet leaving each organization as a separate entity. They both loved the idea. The director said he would talk to his executive director and board and get back to him.
1: I don’t imagine it ever happened. I don’t recall this partnership.
2: He never heard back from the director again.
1: You mean the director just dropped it?
2: Yup.
1: He just left him hanging?
2: Yup.
1: Not very nice.
2: Nope.
1: Small town mentality.
2: From the moment he began, he faced it.
1: I’m not surprised, only surprised he didn’t anticipate it.
2: Yup.
1: Didn’t his dance teacher also face the same mentality when he returned here in the seventies and eighties after a thirty year career to take care of his mother?
2: Yup.
1: So why didn’t he anticipate this?
2: Naiveté. Hard headed… Stubborn.
1: Yup.
2: His first Open House at the center should have been a warning.
1: Why?
2: There was a local woman in the audience who went off on a rant about how he was beginning a cult here. She took a quote from his spiritual teacher’s website and completely took it out of context and used it to make her point and then spread poison.
1: I see, ok, I think I’m getting it…I remember when he first came to town…
2: Un-huh…
1: A prominent dance teacher’s family here in town bad mouthed his reputation remember, because he didn’t have a teaching degree in dance. Telling his students they shouldn’t study with him.
2: Uh-huh…
1: And a local voice teacher who told his students that they shouldn’t study with him because he had no certification in vocal training.
2: Yup.
1: Completely ignoring his real world experience and success.
2: Yup.
1: Only giving credit to academic experience.
2: Completely ignoring that he was taught by some of the best world class teachers here and abroad.
1: Yup. Well if it’s any consolation, this is going on everywhere. The universities are an elite club with ties to every industry. And their endowments are littered with the money elite’s agendas as well as their donations.
2: Isn’t it a way to dominate and control society from behind the scenes?
1: Yup.
2: Isn’t it further conformist structure and pressure?
1: Yup.
2: And isn’t it anti-art in its squelching the independent thought and action of the individual?
1: Yup. It creates a cookie cutter approach so that each performer now must pass through the state controlled and constructed curriculum to be an “accredited” artist.
2: But do these folks understand that art is self-expression and the more unique our “selves” are, the richer our expression and art is?
1: Nope.
(PAUSE)
1: So why did he return here?
2: Why did he?
1: But wouldn’t it be the same anywhere?
2: To a degree yes.
1: But I suppose the big cities are a bit more open minded and sophisticated.
2: It does seem easier to pave your own way there.
1: But globalization is homogenizing everything.
2: Yup
(PAUSE)
1: So how has he managed to stay here and work?
2. His work is good, and he knows that art is transformational. And I know I can help him transform his business.
1. Okay. But how does he survive in this economy?
2: Well the first few years he was a novelty – “the guy from the big city”.
1. And everyone came out to try it right?
2. Right. But most didn’t understand the “seriousness” and the work ethic he demanded.
1. Does he still demand it?
2. No, eventually he caved in to survive. Right from the beginning actually, people didn’t get his demand for attendance.
1. What!? How can you not understand attendance is a must for good work.
2. Small town mentality. They wanted to be able to do their high school musical.
1. He wouldn’t let them?
2. He was totally fine about it. The problem was the students had already committed and registered for his program long before they brought this up.
1. And now he accepts poor attendance?
2. What else can he do?
1. Doesn’t that create mediocrity?
2. Uh-huh…
1. So how does he survive?
2. His frustration, or his work?...He’s good, he’s adapted.
1. So there must be people who believe in his work.
2. Many – and many of them have found ways to get his work known. He does work out in the community thanks to them.
1. Like who?
2. Ironically the Catholic schools love his work.
1. Good Lord in Heaven!
2. He’s also got a great musical director and tech director he’s created long lasting relationships with.
1. And you said he worked for the university?
2. He’s had fruitful collaborations, again with the big city artists who teach in the theater and vocal departments.
1. Not dance?
2. Not dance.
1. As experienced as he is…
2. As experienced as he is…
1. Art councils?
2. Only in the big cities, where they used him often to be a guest artist in residency and to adjudicate grants, even for the federal government.
1. Ironic…he can work for the federal government but his work isn’t accepted here.
2. Ironic…the chairman of the National Endowment for the Arts collaborates with him.
(Pause)
1: What about the media?
2: Nowhere to be found.
1: C’mon. They must give him press.
2: Nope.
1: One of the most experienced professionals in town and they just ignore him.
2: Yup.
1: C’mon. I see stuff all the time about theater in the papers. Especially that weekly paper.
2: Yes but do you see the center mentioned?
1: Now that I think about it - almost never.
2: Do they preview his shows?
1: Nope.
2: Do they review his shows?
1: Nope
2: And does the weekly paper include his center in their local theatre awards?
1: Nope. Well actually yes he did win an award for best choreography a couple of years ago didn’t he?
2: Yup it was the one time he was asked to choreograph for another local show.
1: But not for his own shows?
2: Nope.
1: How ridiculous. What is their reasoning?
2: Which day?
1: What do you mean?
2: Well there is no consistency to what they say.
1: Really?
2: One day it’s because he has a school with paying students.
1: Aren’t the colleges schools with paying students also?
2: Yup. But they’re included. Another day it’s because the performers are too young.
1: But kids get reviews in other community theatre shows.
2: Yup and sometimes the same kids.
1: And doesn’t he work with adults also?
2: In almost every production, and his actors have actually won awards, but when they performed for other theater groups.
1: How come they don’t know he has adults in his productions?
2: They don’t come see his shows.
1: Never?
2: The weekly paper has not been in many years. Ironically the A&E director did come to two shows in the early years and gave them rave reviews.
1: What the hell? Has he talked to the publisher?
2: Many times to no avail. He even sent a letter signed by fifty local families asking the paper to include the center in its coverage just like the other community theatres get.
1: And?
2: The publisher refused to publish it, threatening to bring up the demand for coverage through advertising in the publisher’s paper
1: You mean he advertised his center in that paper only to be covered?
2: So the publisher says. But it doesn’t hold water.
1: But doesn’t that paper have all kinds of partnerships with other local businesses and theatre folks already, anyway?
2: Yup.
1: I suppose no one cares.
2: Fits right in with the mentality doesn’t it?
1: Has he asked for support?
2: Just recently he asked all the local theater directors for support. A local director had emailed him about marketing the center at the theater awards, even though his work is excluded.
1: How absurd is that?
2: So he asked the theater folks in the email to support the center and ask the paper to include them or to share their thoughts about how they felt about the center being discriminated against.
1: Nothing. Right?
2: Nothing.
1: Not one reply?
2: Not one reply.
1. Well small town politics.
2. And an incestuous club.
1. Really.
2. Judges, actors, reviewers, all intertwined in a network like a good ‘ol boys club.
1: But you told me earlier that a local author wrote to the paper in support of his center?
2: Yup. Didn’t get published.
1: No?
2: The publisher’s reasoning was that she was a nobody, and has no relevance to this town.
1: Isn’t she also a nationally renowned author of books, and writes for a major metropolitan newspaper in the capitol of this country?
2: Yup. But the publisher of our little weekly had no respect for her employer saying it was a joke – owned by a high profile reverend who buys journalists paid for by his groupies!
1. Ouch!
2. That’s exactly what she said.
1: What about the other paper?
2. Oh, our “big city” paper? They ignore him too.
1. I guess there’s some kind of cohesion to his exclusion. No wonder he is so critical. They deserve it don’t they?
2. Yes, it’s just absurd. And maybe its happening everywhere and not just in our small town.
1. And from what I understand the judges of these paper’s theater awards have mostly little if any real professional theater or dance experience.
2. Yet they have the responsibility of critiquing the professionals.
1. Kinda like the high school coach judging the professionals.
2. Worse even. One of his students became a judge and was in charge of critiquing local shows. Imagine if he was included.
1. The student judging the professional…what are we coming to? They do the same thing in colleges now – the student’s evaluations of their professors now affect the professors employment.
2. Absurd isn’t it?
1. Mediocrity abounds.
2. When he first met the journalist of the big paper, he did his homework…
1. Sounds like he always does.
2. And he knew the journalist had no experience in his field. So he asked her what made her think she had enough knowledge to critique his work.
1. Did she reply?
2. Only that she had her own opinions, that she had seen some theater and that she was interested in learning.
1. Not very convincing.
2. But like many of the others, they have become friendly even though he feels slighted by them.
1. I’m surprised he doesn’t scream at the top of his lungs to be heard.
2. He rises above. The other long standing theater guy at the paper wouldn’t even include the center in the season previews of local theater.
1. Do they not even consider the fact that he produces theater all year round.
2. They don’t really know how to label his work so it seems they simply leave it out.
1. What’s so hard about labeling his work?
2. He produces ensemble repertory work. No one else does in town. He also casts in colorblind, ageless, and gender bending ways. And most of his work is minimalistic.
1. What about the TV guy who now does radio?
2. Same ‘ol story.
1. Nothing?
2. He throws him a bone once in a while.
1. I see, they throw him a bone every once in a while to make him feel included. Yet no one really covers his work while he produces shows all year, brings in artists from Broadway and Europe, and all the while he’s excluded from the free publicity that all the other local theaters get.
2. And there’s no consistency to it. The big paper actually gave him an award for choreography a few years back but most of the judges didn’t even see his show.
1. Ok, let me get this straight. The judges voted on the award but did not see his show. Absurd…well at least he won.
2. He could care less.
1. You mean he didn’t jump for joy?
2. First of all he considers awards antithetical to the arts.
1. I always thought the same thing! How can you judge a work of art better than another one? Art is self-expression; to make it into a competition is hypocritical.
2. Rather than getting wrapped up in the competition thing, he just simply speaks and writes his truth.
1: It must be very frustrating.
2: Yup.
1: A bad review is better than no review.
2: Yup.
1: All theatres know this.
2: Yup.
1: So how do you grow your theatre if you can’t get covered by the local media?
2: Good question – how the hell do you?...But I have a plan and the media is not needed.
1: Can I see your plan?
2: When it’s ready.
1: So what is he doing in the meantime?
2: I think he is devising a scheme to get arrested so they will finally cover him!...Actually he’s very Zen about the whole thing.
1. Go with the flow…
2. He has always felt that life has its own purpose and he follows the winds when needed.
1. Even when the shit hits the fan uh?
2. What else can you do, fight it?
1. Fortunately he’s good, as you say, and he’s still surviving.
2. Amazing isn’t it, when he’s up against so much adversity?
1. It’s just ridiculous. This town could be so much better with a really great thriving arts scene.
2. But don’t we have that already? Send him back to the big city where he was so successful!
1. But if we exclude the professionals out of jealousy or fear or intimidation…what is it anyway? What does he think causes them to treat him so poorly?
2. He has no idea whatsoever because they won’t talk to him.
1. Well this town could be a much better place if they included everyone, most especially professionals who bring something worldly and sophisticated to the scene.
2. I can only imagine what a contribution he could make if the media covered him and he had the support of the theater community.
1. Oh well, if that were to happen we’d no longer have our safe little lives in the provinces.
2. That’s the crux isn’t it?
1. Well art is made in madness. Art is the deepest, rawest self-expression springing from the unconscious.
2. It has to be made from the guts – from the pure impulse.
1. But that just scares most people too much. We are scared of children for the same reason and we condition them out of their impulsiveness and teach them they must think before they act and not trust their impulses.
2. In acting it gets reversed, one must act before one thinks.
(Pause)
1. Well, he’s a song and dance man right?
2. One of the best.
1. He can just whistle a happy tune and kick-ball-change until something else happens.
2. Oh, he does. He gave up the frustration years ago and he loves the people he works with. Actually he is meditating and enjoying the UNITY consciousness of the Mayan calendar.
1. Uh –huh…
(PAUSE)
1: Well, maybe he should leave the provinces, and maybe you should go with him.
2: A true renegade doesn’t belong here.
{THE END}
