November 17, 2010
Dear Adrien--
When I was explaining my ideas about The Au Pair Man to the cast when we first began rehearsals, I emphasized the bourgeois nature of English society, and by bourgeois I don't mean how that term was used in the '60s but how it was used by Marx-Engels: the epitome of capitalism, owners of the means of production, owners of all they surveyed including large chunks of humanity itself. I thought and think that is even more important than the idea of royals. The real power lies with the aristocracy underneath the royals, and specifically I mean the lords, the barons, the earls of capitalism. That's what drove the empire, and it's the empire that's embodied in Mrs. Rogers as well as aristocracy, or the royals. That's the power that's personified in the play, I think.
Well, you say, the capitalists are still strong, in charge and you're right. (How about the great Celtic Tiger?) But this is something different. This is British imperialism. Mrs. Rogers is huddled inside her crumbling imperial fortress, fearing not only the masses out there, but the capitalists themselves. Her time has passed. But she can only still be powerful before the befuddled and confused. And she is still dangerous, she still has great reserves, like a poisonous snake who for all purposes has been killed but still possesses the ability in its death throes to strike and to kill. That’s what happening in this play. She’s going to take anyone she can along with her.
So saying that, I think there should be a portrait of one of the great capitalists, or maybe a prime minister who personified the capitalism-imperialism of England, someone recognizable. A map is too abstract I think, unless it's a map drawn by Captain Cook or someone like that, in which case it would also be a recognizable, rare work of art. Mrs. Rogers is not tacky. The woman has taste. That's the only vestige of power that she has left. And power it is. She knows this and uses it very deftly as you heard during the reading. That’s why she’s dangerous and is able to impose her will on all of the Eugenes that come into her life. And I don't think she'd be caught dead with a lion shaped map in her sitting room.
If Eugene falls for the cheap and the tacky or tasteless, that's demeaning to him. No, he isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer and he has his shortcomings, particularly his drive to improve himself by erroneously taking the wrong shortcuts--all put in there by the author--but he can't lose what he perceives is his dignity, and we as an audience must always see that conflict in him, his battle to keep his dignity, that struggle to keep for himself that one shred of decency and lust for a meritable life, his good instincts--even though he’s trying to be too clever by half, something which he is not--or else we don't feel bad for him when he loses everything at the end. I don’t mean that he must rage around the stage or anything like that, or try to be a stage Irishman, and in my production he will not. The strongest, most dramatic, most stage worthy conflicts are the conflicts within. And that’s why I’m careful to keep off of that stage any
convenient cliché of any kind. If people don’t “get it,” well, they can still come and have a rollicking good laugh. And maybe “get it” on the way home, or at breakfast the next day.
The reason I thought of a restoration king is because of the ease with which the monarchy came back, powered by the real power, the landed gentry, the lords and barons, the emerging and powerful mercantile and banking middle class of the day. But yeah, you're right about clutter, we have only three walls to work with and one of them will be dominated by the room divider
Anyway those are my thoughts. We all have to be on the same page, and that's the page we're going with. So anytime you are considering a hand prop or a set prop please ask yourself, "Is this Mrs. Rogers?" Not whether you or I like it or not or think it’s cool, but does it represent Eugene Hartigan or Mrs. Rogers.
I'm sorry to be so prickly and perfectionist--and I probably really am, Adrien--but first, that's how I am when I'm on a project, and that's why I get results; and second with such a small budget every detail--and with our budget all of our details will be small ones--has to be just right. It has to hit the spot so the audience forgives us right off for the spare set and settings, and appreciates--right there at the stage lights up cue--the clever and tasteful creativity we put into it. The actors will then take care of the rest. Aided by the sound and light crew as they hit the play spot on with their cues. Dick knows that too and will deliver the goods with his set. And Peter with his lights. And you and Doug and Larry, and Virginia with all of her producer duties, and everyone else who will be participating right down to the person who collects tickets or makes coffee or sweeps the stage before or after a show. We'll probably all be growly at one
time or another. Look at how growly we were last night and then look at what we accomplished and how happily and filled with resolution we left Virginia’s.
Don’t think I’m not scared, having the responsibility of getting this play on when we need so much for it to succeed. But if it’s going to go under (and it ain’t gonna!) I want it to be that it went under because of my poor efforts, not that I shoved everything off onto others and that’s not going to happen either. I need your help and support. And we all have to help and support one another. As long as we're all together, getting this very difficult play on the boards, we’ll be bringing one home for the Celtic Arts Center.
This note is for you, Adrien, but I’m sending a copy to Virginia. Away from the rehearsal space, from the green room and the stage, she is my boss and I always want her to know what I’m doing or thinking.
--Joe Praml
Dear Adrien--
When I was explaining my ideas about The Au Pair Man to the cast when we first began rehearsals, I emphasized the bourgeois nature of English society, and by bourgeois I don't mean how that term was used in the '60s but how it was used by Marx-Engels: the epitome of capitalism, owners of the means of production, owners of all they surveyed including large chunks of humanity itself. I thought and think that is even more important than the idea of royals. The real power lies with the aristocracy underneath the royals, and specifically I mean the lords, the barons, the earls of capitalism. That's what drove the empire, and it's the empire that's embodied in Mrs. Rogers as well as aristocracy, or the royals. That's the power that's personified in the play, I think.
Well, you say, the capitalists are still strong, in charge and you're right. (How about the great Celtic Tiger?) But this is something different. This is British imperialism. Mrs. Rogers is huddled inside her crumbling imperial fortress, fearing not only the masses out there, but the capitalists themselves. Her time has passed. But she can only still be powerful before the befuddled and confused. And she is still dangerous, she still has great reserves, like a poisonous snake who for all purposes has been killed but still possesses the ability in its death throes to strike and to kill. That’s what happening in this play. She’s going to take anyone she can along with her.
So saying that, I think there should be a portrait of one of the great capitalists, or maybe a prime minister who personified the capitalism-imperialism of England, someone recognizable. A map is too abstract I think, unless it's a map drawn by Captain Cook or someone like that, in which case it would also be a recognizable, rare work of art. Mrs. Rogers is not tacky. The woman has taste. That's the only vestige of power that she has left. And power it is. She knows this and uses it very deftly as you heard during the reading. That’s why she’s dangerous and is able to impose her will on all of the Eugenes that come into her life. And I don't think she'd be caught dead with a lion shaped map in her sitting room.
If Eugene falls for the cheap and the tacky or tasteless, that's demeaning to him. No, he isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer and he has his shortcomings, particularly his drive to improve himself by erroneously taking the wrong shortcuts--all put in there by the author--but he can't lose what he perceives is his dignity, and we as an audience must always see that conflict in him, his battle to keep his dignity, that struggle to keep for himself that one shred of decency and lust for a meritable life, his good instincts--even though he’s trying to be too clever by half, something which he is not--or else we don't feel bad for him when he loses everything at the end. I don’t mean that he must rage around the stage or anything like that, or try to be a stage Irishman, and in my production he will not. The strongest, most dramatic, most stage worthy conflicts are the conflicts within. And that’s why I’m careful to keep off of that stage any
convenient cliché of any kind. If people don’t “get it,” well, they can still come and have a rollicking good laugh. And maybe “get it” on the way home, or at breakfast the next day.
The reason I thought of a restoration king is because of the ease with which the monarchy came back, powered by the real power, the landed gentry, the lords and barons, the emerging and powerful mercantile and banking middle class of the day. But yeah, you're right about clutter, we have only three walls to work with and one of them will be dominated by the room divider
Anyway those are my thoughts. We all have to be on the same page, and that's the page we're going with. So anytime you are considering a hand prop or a set prop please ask yourself, "Is this Mrs. Rogers?" Not whether you or I like it or not or think it’s cool, but does it represent Eugene Hartigan or Mrs. Rogers.
I'm sorry to be so prickly and perfectionist--and I probably really am, Adrien--but first, that's how I am when I'm on a project, and that's why I get results; and second with such a small budget every detail--and with our budget all of our details will be small ones--has to be just right. It has to hit the spot so the audience forgives us right off for the spare set and settings, and appreciates--right there at the stage lights up cue--the clever and tasteful creativity we put into it. The actors will then take care of the rest. Aided by the sound and light crew as they hit the play spot on with their cues. Dick knows that too and will deliver the goods with his set. And Peter with his lights. And you and Doug and Larry, and Virginia with all of her producer duties, and everyone else who will be participating right down to the person who collects tickets or makes coffee or sweeps the stage before or after a show. We'll probably all be growly at one
time or another. Look at how growly we were last night and then look at what we accomplished and how happily and filled with resolution we left Virginia’s.
Don’t think I’m not scared, having the responsibility of getting this play on when we need so much for it to succeed. But if it’s going to go under (and it ain’t gonna!) I want it to be that it went under because of my poor efforts, not that I shoved everything off onto others and that’s not going to happen either. I need your help and support. And we all have to help and support one another. As long as we're all together, getting this very difficult play on the boards, we’ll be bringing one home for the Celtic Arts Center.
This note is for you, Adrien, but I’m sending a copy to Virginia. Away from the rehearsal space, from the green room and the stage, she is my boss and I always want her to know what I’m doing or thinking.
--Joe Praml