A Discourse with Dan Pappas

1. Tell us about yourself:
I have spent over 37 years in the field of education. I have been everything from a teacher to principal to superintendent of schools. For the past 4+ years I have been working as an association executive for two groups. My role is to provide professional development to administrators across Michigan. This includes planning conferences, workshops, and online experiences. My wife Lisa and I have a blended family which includes four adult boys. None are married at this time and we don’t have grandchildren yet. Each have a strong interest in the arts. All are musicians. Three are percussionist and one was a saxophone/piano player. In fact, when he went to MSU, he was a keyboard player in their jazz program. Even though none are ‘professional’ with the arts, they still stay involved.

I discovered theater as an adult and was in my first show when I was 30, God’s Favorite. I did the same show two years ago, but played the father part this time. Since that first show I have been involved on or off stage in over 40 productions. It is a part of me that keeps me energized and youthful in thought.

2. Why did you pick "Fiddler" to direct?
Fiddler is one of my all time favorite shows. I was also in a production in Hartland, Michigan long ago playing Motel. LCP, as part of their 80th season asked me if I would direct this show. I believe this will be the third time it has been done by this group.

3. What is the biggest challenge and the biggest joy for you about directing.
The biggest challenge is making sure that people who commit to doing both on and off stage work on a show really understand, can and do what they have said they are going to do. The biggest joy is working together to create not only a quality theater experience, but also a positive sense of community.

4. You've been on stage as well - has your acting experienced influenced your directing methods at all?
It truly has. I have worked with many fine directors. Doing that has helped me both with my acting as well as my directing. I’m a student of both theater and movies and am always looking for tips, ideas, and ways to be as good as possible with this passion hobby of mine.

5. What do you look for when you cast a show in people? How do you know someone is "right" for a particular part?
I look for not only an individual fit for a part but also a fit with the direction and vision I have for a show and with the rest of the cast.

You take as good a guess with the selection and then work with each person to take on the role and enhance what they bring to the project. I look for a person who has stage presence, who is willing to work, doesn’t bring too big an ego to the audition and rehearsals. I do review what experience they have either from what they share on the audition sheet and from what I know about ones work in the past.

6. Tell us what people have to look forward to with "Fiddler on the Roof."
People are in for a real treat! Even as this show is so familiar, there is a freshness that we will deliver. The set is unique in that it will be storybook in look. The actors understand who they are and are working very well together. The music is rich in sound from both the pit and actors. I am sure that people will not only walk away with the tunes in their heads, but a real like for the people and the show itself.

Quick Questions:

1. What is your favorite scene from "Fiddler"?
There are many, but the one I relate to the most is the Little Bird scene where Tevye reflects on the decision of Cheva to marry outside her faith.

The fun scene is the Dream sequence.

2. What was the first show you ever directed?
My first show directing was with LCP. It was Cheaper By The Dozen.

3. Favorite line from any show?
From Camelot, "I do enjoy being King!"

4. Dream show to act in or direct?
Les Miz

5. Why is theatre meaningful to you, and what role do you think it plays in the community?
Theatre is essential to the healthy life of a community. It is a way for all of us to either pitch in on or off stage, even as audience, to share a slice of life in a creative way. It is a great way to teach and learn. I love shows that have many people of all ages. We share back and forth. We understand each other and the world better. We see that sometimes, even when things don’t go right, we learn more about who we are and more about those around us. It gives me energy to do the things in life that are not always very pleasant. It connects me with an amazing group of people, of whom many are my best friends. Most of all, I can work hard on a project of love as I play and have fun!

Manic with Macbeth

Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
--Macbeth, Act V, scene v

Perhaps one of the most oft’ spoken soliloquy’s of Shakespeare, this short bit of prose provides profound insight into the inner workings of Macbeth. Though outwardly he maintains a fervor for power and plentitude, he ultimately understands the irony of the pointlessness of possessing it – for it was never truly his in the first place.

In Riverwalk’s “Macbeth” there were, unfortunately, many production values that signified nothing; or, worse, foretold of a tale told in less regality than Shakespeare wrote, without the intensity and emotion that makes this “ghost story” of intrigue, murder and chaos compelling. I was able to catch glimpse of director Eric Dawe’s vision – ‘twas a pity he couldn’t carry it out.

Mr. Dawe had some superb ideas; I loved the Weird Sisters without faces…however, I bored of their jellyfish antics after the first two scenes. For some reason it is common among directors to believe that flowing or spider-like movements make for a scarier character or presence on stage. These Weird Sisters are not out to scare Macbeth – they simply are what they are. They are supernatural – and being thus did not need affectation to create fear mixed with curiosity in Macbeth and Banquo; sometimes no movement at all is a more powerful means to invoke terror and awe. Their canned voices were impossible to understand; perhaps voice recorder boxes to obscure the tenor of their words would have worked if Mr. Dawe wanted a mysterious effect, however Shakespeare is difficult enough to understand without the distortion. The witches whispering their incantations and laughing quietly I believe would have been a great deal more powerful – their seeming insight into the future being much more believable by Macbeth and the audience, as if they know of a cosmic joke but won’t reveal the punchline. They are mere spectators in the form of specters, ghoulish in their predictions.

The costumes for the cast seemed to range from 18th century dresses to medieval wear; I wasn’t quite sure what the costumer was going for. It was a mish-mash of styles and trends and really didn’t work. Danny Bethea in pumpkin pants for example, and being a bit bigger than the woman who played his mother, suffered through one of the more unfortunate scenes of the show. Lady Macbeth’s crimson gown was beautiful but inappropriate – her head ornament was also anachronistic. I was hoping to see glitz and glamour on the stage for this man and woman who lusted after the royal robes – but the robes Macbeth ended up wearing were bland and practically pajama like. Not a good look for a king. I really had no place in time to put myself, and it was disorienting.

Brad Rutledge tried to play the role of Macbeth with zeal and energy, however it’s just not believable that he would ever respect Duncan the King, portrayed by Randy Matthews, or that he would heartfeltly regret killing him. Mr. Matthews demeanor was not particularly kingly nor did he develop a relationship with Macbeth that would evoke the guilt Macbeth suffers from later on. Mr. Rutledge exerted a great deal of pathos – but it was so method that it distracted from being real in any sense of the word. It was clear he was “acting,” and I don’t know if Mr. Rutledge is a method actor, but that’s what I appeared to be watching on stage. He had no chemistry with Kelly Gmazel, who played Lady Macbeth. I wanted to believe that he would kill for this woman, and to see a smoldering passion between them – instead of flames I saw forced readings and over-acted sentiments that glossed over the depths of the lines they were speaking. Ms. Gmazel also seemed to have a “method” feel about her and though there is nothing wrong with that style of acting, if it seems apparent on stage then it becomes transparent and does affect the performance.

Ms. Gmazel was bland at best. She did not have the natural knack for speaking the language, and so her emotions didn’t make sense and neither did her motive for wanting her husband to kill the king. She doesn’t come across as greedy and seductive – I’m not sure how I would describe her performance other than disappointing. I wanted to see a scheming enchantress, a woman who knew what she wanted and for the audience to see if she had been a man, she would have killed the king herself. As it was she had to take over for Macbeth as he falters and finish what he starts, and she should do so with venom instead of exaggerated irritation that Ms. Gmazel emoted instead. This is supposed to be a woman who has no heart – and she steals away what is left of her husband’s. There was a great deal more depth that Ms. Gmazel could have plunged into with this character.

Mr. Dawe had a unique supporting cast; of them, Adam Carlson as MacDuff and Erik Grill as a host of characters, are the strongest actors of the entire show. Erik Grill in particular played his parts with the understanding and full commitment to the language and intent of the language. He understood where to stress the words and how to make them clear. He assigned the right emotion and facial gestures with his speeches, and I was thoroughly impressed with his performance. Great job, Mr. Grill. I would love to see you do more Shakespeare – Iago, perhaps?

Mr. Carlson as MacDuff was also quite good; I would have liked to have seen more angst in his “Horror, horror!” line – after all, the king’s just been killed – but I also know that is a pretty difficult line to deliver. I think he portrayed the character of MacDuff with an amiability to begin with and so when we see him betrayed by Macbeth, Mr. Carlson opens himself up to rage and for the audience to feel his sorrow. He could have been a bit louder, even – his family has just been killed after all – but overall he emotes grief and the urge for revenge very well. He never went over the top with his character, and his lines were very well delivered.

I wish I could say the same for the characters of Malcolm, Banquo, and other members of the cast. Many were difficult to understand, and many characters were directed to face upstage as they spoke so their lines just couldn’t be heard, though Scott Larson was another stand-out who played multiple characters (including one of the Weird Sisters) and made his presence known on stage.

There were many production choices that were poor – the recording of the Weird Sisters, the prolific and pointless scene changes without music to mask the stomping on the set, and even the random use of the set itself. The design by Craig Smith was interesting – though it wasn’t really used to its full potential. There were three steps downstage for use – I think it would have been wise to use that for a sitting area instead of bringing the lights up and down to move a bench, and then a stump, and a bench – over and again. Or else perhaps a bench could have been made into the set to be used? The stairs in the middle of the set which led to an upper level – which my inclination is to think was a construction issue rather than a design issue – were built with the steps too far apart. More than once an actor teetered on them, and without railings they were downright dangerous. Ms. Gmazel did stumble at the top as she tripped the night I saw the show – I’m glad she made it safe through the end of the run.

I know I sound very critical of the show, but that is because my expectations were set very high. Mr. Dawe has a tremendous reputation in theatre and I’m surprised at the production choices he made; little or no music for scene changes, allowing costumes that were of different time periods, some corny prop items (the twigs for the forest, for example), unsatisfying choreography for the fighting – a desperate death cry of rage and rebellion from Macbeth, even at the point of defeat off stage, would have been appropriate and yet was missing. The end of the show lacked luster and was unsatisfying. I never believed Macbeth was all that strong or determined or even afraid for his soul – mostly he was pathetic. There is no nobility in pathos.

Shakespeare, if not cast with the right actors who know how to deliver the lines, understand the language and can use their facial expressions and body movements to help translate the story for the audience, falls flat and is a sad sight to see. The minimalist set – while not great – did give Mr. Dawe all the components he needed in and of itself. Lady Macbeth did not require water to wash her hands – the magical effect of the blood appearing out of thin air would have been much more potent without actual water present, for example.

I know Mr. Dawe carries a great deal of passion for Shakespeare – it’s unfortunate that his passion didn’t translate to the stage and into the roles of Macbeth and Lady Macbeth, specifically. These are characters are akin to Othello – whose blood runs hot and are made of the stuff action springs from – and once they take the fiery plunge into red depths, they sink deeper and deeper until they know they’ve damned themselves into a place from whence there is no return.

I’m sorry Mr. Dawe; I was looking for regality, rebellion, lust and revenge – I wish I’d seen it.

Signs of Intelligent Life with Kellie Stonebrook

So what made you decide to become a Boarshead Intern? I decided to become a BoarsHead intern because I wanted to learn about the daily business of working in professional theatre. I also wanted to earn Equity points to join the Professional Actor's Union.

2. What has the experience been like? My experience has been awesome so far! I had NEVER done anything to do with tech theatre before coming to BoarsHead and I've learned a lot! The interns, or Second Company Members, build the sets for every mainstage show, hang and focus all the lights, operate the lighting and sound boards, assistant stage manage, for at least one production, participate in educational programs for kids of all ages, and plan, produce, act, and direct dark night shows. I learn something new every day!

3. What made you choose Lily Tomlin’s show to perform for your dark night? I decided to do Lily Tomlin's show for my Dark Night because I have always wanted to do a one-woman show and Lily's is probably the best one out there. It's fun, thought-provoking, and extremely witty. Not only is it a challenge to perform, but the material itself challenges the audience. I love having the opportunity to make people laugh and think at the same time!

4. What is your favorite line from the show? My favorite line from the show is "reality is nothing more than a collective hunch." So true!

5. What do you enjoy most about theatre? The aspect of theater I enjoy the most is performing, although working at the theater has introduced me to other aspects I would also like to pursue. Writing, dramaturgy, and stage managing are three areas of theater I would like to learn more about.

6. What do you dislike about theatre? I'm not sure what I dislike most about theater. There isn't any aspect of it that I absolutely loathe, but there are areas I find particulalry challenging. Light hang, for example, scares the crap out of me. I'm always afraid I'm going to drop a heavy instrument and end up injuring myself or someone else. The same goes for handling certain power tools in the shop like the dreaded router, for example. Everytime I use that thing I either get sparks flying at me or the bit breaks off. And to be frank, me with power tools in general is a dangerous thing

7. What comes easy to you about working in theatre? Good question. I'm still learning, but at this point I would say that performing comes the most easily to me. I feel more confident onstage than I do working backstage, although I'm getting better.

8. What is more difficult for you? Anything to do with lighting is the most difficult aspect of theater I have dabbled in thus far. Scary, scary, scary...

9. Any plans after Boarshead? I don't have any concrete plans for after BoarsHead, but I do know that I plan on finishing my degree and moving out of Michigan to hopefully purse theater elsewhere in a climate more conducive to my health.

10. Dream role for you? My dream role has always been Scarlett in Gone With the Wind. Sadly that will never happen...I'm blonde and have no boobs.

11. What have you learned about people from your experiences in theatre? I have observed vast differences in personalities between actors and technicians during my time at BoarsHead. My experience here (in general) is that actors tend to be more needy and less independent than tech people. They also of course love to be the center of attention. Techies tend to be more independent, have better problem solving skills, and are content to fade into the background. Two very different types of people - both essential to the theater process.

12. Why is theatre important to the community? Theater is important to the community because it teaches people more about themselves and the human condition. It challenges us to think critically about ourselves and the world around us.

13. Why is theatre important to you? Theater is important to me because I feel like it is my bridge to the outside world. I can make a difference in people's lives by bringing theater to life.

15. Why should people come see “Signs of Intelligent Life in the Universe” at the Boarshead? People should come see "The Search for Signs of Intelligent Life in the Universe" because I said so. And because Bruce said so too. No, actually, I think people should come to hear Jane Wagner's incredible insights about the world as we know it. She explores many of the questions we all have about life, reality, and humanity. There's a little bit of something for everyone!

Don't Eat the Chili in "Daddy's Dyin'"...!

It doesn’t take much imagination to figure out that Mark Boyd knows what it’s like to be high, and when watching him on stage with Sandy VanLacker in a pig-out scene during “Daddy’s Dyin’ Who’s Got the Will?” it’s fun to observe them both let go and actually enjoy themselves. Ms. VanLacker as Marlene Turnover – married to Orville Turnover – starts a bit hyper and seems to get more and more energetic as the show goes on. She may have started out a little more beaten down in order to build herself up to a final confrontation with her very loud husband, however her perkiness and impertinence are fun to watch.

The stand-out member in the cast, with unfortunately the smallest role, is Mr. Boyd. He waltzes in with Evalita Turnover (played to the hilt of the 80s fashion sense and white trash sentiments by Jill Maddix) barefoot, sporting tattoos with a bandana covering long hair and torn jeans. In the stiff, redneck household of the Turnover residence he seems both out of place and very at home, and eventually interjects himself into the insanity of this family’s crisis – which is really about the missing will of Daddy – and leaves with a different Turnover than he comes with. He’s a hippy with a Zen sense of humor – he is happy to live and let live – to a point.

Kerry Waters plays Lurlene – the sister who leaves the family to “answer the call of God” with her husband, thus abandoning her father. Her father, played to sweet and sad success by Steve Shelton, cut her out of his will, but the family knows he’s recently changed it. There are hopes for Lurlene that he forgave her and put her back in the will – although the money in the end never really matters to Lurlene. She plays the role of a dutiful daughter – which is far different than the role of Sara Lee, played by Marni Holmes, who takes it to a higher level and becomes the loving daughter who doesn’t want to see her father die.

Ms. Holmes is convincing as the daughter who not only stays behind to care for her father and the farm, but the sister who is constantly being connived by her youngest sibling, Evalita. Pushed past her breaking point several times, Ms. Holmes reveals a poignancy with a simple phone call, and a rush to her father for comfort – he sings to her, lost in the past and believing he’s putting his baby girl to sleep, and she listens to his voice while crying on his chest as the lights go out at the end of a scene.

Her other confrontation is a bit more dramatic; she scares the hell out of Evalita and pushes her around the living room, tired of her crap, tired of her getting the way, and tired of Evalita taking away the things that she loves…Ms. Maddix goes from confident to being a bit scared from being shoved around, to bouncing back into the bitchy sister role at the end of the scene before running away from the wrath of Sara Lee. Well done, ladies.

Rick Wendorf – if you know him – is costumed in overalls and looks the part of a wife beater despite his well-known and oft’ loved diva ways. He was loud and crude, unafraid to get downright nasty with his wife, Marlene. Towards the end of the show, however, Mr. Wendorf displayed a surprisingly soft side when he asks Marlene to “just leave.” It’s a broken voice and I was touched by it. His presence tends to egg the women of the family on, and he plays dumb quite well (that is, I’m assuming he’s playing at it)…

Steve Shelton as Buford – or Daddy – was quite good with playing befuddled and living in the past, while upset about not understanding his present. While the others in the cast mostly ignore his rantings, Sara Lee takes him seriously and it’s obvious she loves him while her siblings are there for other intentions (to assuage guilt or go after his money). Mr. Shelton portrays a victim with a temper, retreating back into confusion timidly.

There are usually hiccups in a show, and in this one the real disappointment comes in the form of Marie Papciak as Mama Wheelis. She had a few moments when she remembered her lines, and they were funny when she could recall them and deliver them with a bit more speed than a turtle’s pace, however she couldn’t keep up with the rest of the cast and there were very long stretches of the show in which she elongated her speech, for some strange reason. I’m not quite sure if this was because it was her idea of how to act older than her actual age, or if it was because she was searching for her lines and thought the slower she spoke the longer it gave her to remember them. She was painful, unfortunately, to watch at times and even brought the alacrity of conversation between the rest of the cast to a dead stop as she struggled and fumbled over her words. What a shame. What should have been a show that rested just under two hours stumbled it’s way to closer to two and fifteen, and it was because the pacing was off for key scenes that should have clipped along. Except Harmony who has an even temper, everyone else has a sharp tongue and it should have showed. The speed of the dialogue should have been quick and snappy - and it was with the other characters, but when she took the stage and mixed up character names and re-started her sentences, it upset the timing and pace and frankly, was a bit irritating to watch. She should have known her lines. Period.

Tony Sump should be proud of his functional and appropriate set design, tech work and backstage crew. They all moved quickly and the sound/lights were impeccable. The costumes were likely appropriate for the kind of people we were watching; tacky, ill-fitting at times and even outrageous. I’m not typically a fan of this genre, however the night I saw the show the ponderously obvious flaw was the pacing. Some of it may have been inherent in the script, but much of it was most certainly due to actors fumbling for lines. Ms. Papciak wasn’t the only actor to grasp for words, however she was the most obvious and the most rampantly irresponsible about it. I hope for next weekend Mr. Sump can grill into his actors that they’ve got a good show – but it could be so much better by shaving off about 20 minutes and forcing it to clip along at a pace that leaves the audience forcing itself to have to keep up with the story on stage instead of wanting to shout out words to help the actors keep moving.

What's Happening with Marni Holmes

1. What made you decide to audition for "Daddy's Dyin'"? I have wanted to work with Tony again since 1999, (we did Fools at RW), and the awesome script didn't hurt.

2. How would you describe your character? And how would you describe the Turnover family? Sara Lee is the glue that holds the family together. Without her they would probably never see each other, until, maybe, her funeral. Of course, she has also felt obligated to take on this role, and resents it, but will slip right back into it because she finds it necessary. It is really the only life she has ever had. This, sadly, makes her a waste of humor and wit, because she has both, not to mention intelligence. Motivation is what she is lacking, but I feel that that will change with the death of Mama Wheelis. The Turnover family is just like any other, but a bit more sheltered in the small town scene. (Small? I meant teeny-tiny, population 40). They all express love in the way they know how, which a lot of times screws up everything. However, their hearts remain pure, and when it comes right down to it, there isn't anything they wouldn't do for one another and people they consider friends.

3. How long have you been doing theatre? Technically since the 9th grade, (my first play), but I have on stage since I was 4 years old, (dance and many character parts).

4. How do you prepare to play a character? I believe that every person has a bit of the character in themselves already, and you just need to find it, draw it out, and nurture it. I was one of those kids that wanted to be everything when they grew up, and finally decided that as an actress, I could do that. Once you find that character in you, you can start the process of bonding with your co-stars' characters, and the background research of the environment you all inhabit. Research is ALWAYS a part of the process.

5. Tell us a little more about yourself! Lansing born, raised and educated since 1966, until 1984 when I left for college in WI and MN, where I studied Theater and English. Returned to Lansing, (ahem), due to life, and pretty much the rest is just a garble. I was destined to be a part of the Lansing community's theater scene because I was following in my father's footsteps most of my life. He was a part of the Community Circle Players since at least 1961, (earliest program of a show that I have), and when he died in 1965, 2 months before my birth, I was predestined to pick up where he left off, so to speak. Although I waited until the late '90's to make an appearance, I have not regretted one minute.

Quick questions:

1. Favorite line from this show: "Daddy, I don't want yew ta die. Yew're the only man who ever really loved me." Close second: "Shut up, Orville!"

2. Favorite moment from the rehearsal process: Many moments: the literally uncontrollable laughter as the characters became more and more real, and the letting loose on an awesome catfight scene.

3. Why is theatre important to you? It keeps me sane, believe it or not.

4. What was the first role you've played and where? I played a diva in a minidress, with high heels and a cigarette in my living room in 1968.

5. What is your dream role? They all hold a special place in my heart, but it has to be the next one where I get paid...

Listening to Logophile Eric Dawe

1. Is this the first time you’ve directed at Riverwalk? If so – why did you choose this show to be your first, and if not, what was your first, when, and why did you decide to come back now?
Yes, this is the first time I've directed at Riverwalk. I had directed some Shakespeare in Grand Rapids, and have wanted to direct this show for awhile. When I heard Riverwalk was celebrating its 20th anniversary, I submitted 'Macbeth' because I felt that Riverwalk, as a legitimate theatre, really needed to do some Shakespeare for this important anniversary season.

2. What is the most alluring feature to you about MacBeth?
The characters and the story. Part of Shakespeare's genius is that even with his most heinous characters, their humanity is always palpable. Macbeth betrays his conscience - and then is torn apart by his guilt. The harder he tries to excise his moral compass, the more he finds himself in its unrelenting grip. Lady Macbeth, likewise, seems so strong and Machiavellian; but when she loses control of Macbeth, we see how truly dependent she was on him. When he casts her adrift, she loses her soul. All the characters in this play are fully realized and impeccably drawn - they all have their strengths and their weaknesses. And we recognize ourselves in all of them.

3. Why is theatre relevant to the community?
For that answer, I'll turn to Shakespeare again. Hamlet tells the players that their charge is to hold up a mirror to nature - "to show virtue her features, scorn her own image, and the very age and body of the time his form and pressure." In other words, theatre is that lens through which we see the nobility and ignobility of the human condition; theatre exposes society's decencies and flaws with unflinching honesty. But it also helps us accept ourselves, with all our virtues and failings. It challenges us often to reach beyond our grasp, to strive for to be better than we are.

4. I know that you act as well as direct – do you like one better than the other? What are the challenges and rewards you enjoy/encounter in both endeavors?
I've often said that as an actor, you are one of the colors on the artist's palette. You bring as much richness and depth to that color as you can, using your imagination, intellect, and emotions. As a director, you determine how all the colors are composed on the canvass, to what degree and intensity. It's a much bigger task, but it is also much more rewarding in many ways. As an actor, you get to focus your energies on your character; you can dig deep and concentrate on the inner life and conflicts of the role. As a director, you get to manage all of the relationships on the stage. It's like mixing a sound track: you can bring the 'volume' up in some moments, or dial them down in others. It's like conducting an orchestra: the script is the score; the characters are the various instruments. Tempo, dynamics, they're all up to the director.

5. You saw Teller’s version of MacBeth – how did it inspire you to re-create this show with your own stamp? What did you like and not like about Teller’s version?
I always intended to do this show with some magical effects. This is a good old-fashioned 'Ghost Story,' with witches and specters and supernatural events. I wanted to see Teller's version to be sure that they could be integrated into the play in a way that supported the action, rather than detracting from it. Teller did that, to a great extent. I also knew it would require my actors to learn some things they don't usually have to do when acting; but then, several of them have had to learn how to fight with swords for the first time, too. Acting sometimes includes challenges; but they can enhance the experience of the play for the audience.

I enjoyed the pace and tempo of Teller's production of "Macbeth." Unlike audiences in Shakespeare's time - who only had the theatre for diversion. Shakespeare could indulge in plays that ran for three hours or more. Today's audiences are conditioned much differently. Movies are two hours long; we have DVDs and Wiis and Play Stations and IMAX. I've pared the script down so that it emphasizes the action while still retaining the genius and integrity of the story.

6. Tell us more about yourself:
I've been doing theatre for too many years to count. Lately, I've been drawn much more to writing. I've won a few awards regionally and nationally for both stage plays and screenplays, and that's encouragement enough to keep me going. I've also just completed my first novel and would like to get that published (www.lastkingoftroy.com). Hopefully, soon. Next year, Riverwalk will produce one of my plays, 'The Watch List,' as part of its 2009-2010 season. It won the 2005 C.T.A.M. Regional Playwriting Competition, and was awarded 'Honorable Mention' in the Writer's Digest 76th Annual Writing Competition - which received over 19,000 submissions.

7. Why is theatre important to you?
When I was younger, it was an outlet, a form of self-expression. As I get older, I find it more of an inroad into understanding the human condition, the conflicts and aspirations we all share. Having lived several decades now, and experienced the joys and heartaches of raising a family, the challenges of finding a path through life, the death of loved ones, I find theatre as a way of connecting with others, sharing their triumphs and sorrows, and discovering those common threads that unite - and sometimes divide - us.

8. What is MacBeth’s weakness, and is he truly redeemed at the end of this play? In what way?
Well now, that's a question that could be debated endlessly - and by better minds than mine. For me, Macbeth is a man who has been schooled all his life to follow the rules, but has a driving ambition that, goaded by temptation, overmasters his virtue in a moment - a moment that propels him down a path of slaughter and self-destruction. As I said earlier, even after he murders Duncan, Macbeth cannot cast away his moral compass. The more he tries, the more tormented he becomes.

Is Macbeth redeemed at the end of the play? By no means. He is bitter and morally desolate, his soul as barren as the blasted heath on which he first meets the Weird Sisters. He is remorseless, determined to fight on against the powers of right, even when he knows that the fates have betrayed him and that the fight is futile. In the end, he is bitter and defiant, so I think it's hard to say he's truly redeemed in any sense of the word. He stands in marked contrast to the first Thane of Cawdor, who acknowledges his sins, asks for forgiveness, and faces death with nobility.

9. Should we pity Lady MacBeth, or does she deserve her fate?
The genius of Shakespeare is that we do pity Lady Macbeth, even while we feel that she deserves her fate. She's a woman in a man's world. She's been married before, probably lost her husband and her children to death, knows what it's like to be powerless, and hated it. She knows Macbeth is an ambitious man, and knew it when she married him - seeing in him the avenue to gaining control of her life and the power that will keep her from ever falling victim to the helplessness of being a woman again. Her moral choices are wrong; but we can identify with her conflicts, even while decrying her actions.

10. Any comment on the role of the witches in the play? And one cast one male?
The Weird Sisters, as they are more aptly called, are the catalyst for the entire action of the play. What's open to debate is whether they KNEW Macbeth would murder Duncan (predestination), or whether they simply goad him to the task by inflaming his vaulting ambition (self-determination). Certainly, they are master psychologists. They know Macbeth's psyche better than he knows it himself. Is this some kind of supernatural knowledge? Perhaps - or perhaps not. Lady Macbeth knows her husband's ambition and his dark impulses - but she also knows he is conflicted by a set of high moral values, as well. If Macbeth's qualities are so obvious to Lady Macbeth, why wouldn't the Weird Sisters also recognize these vices and virtues, as well?
Quick Questions:

1. Favorite play:
Hamlet

2. Favorite line from a play:
Way too many to list. Among the favorites are:
'O, for a muse of fire that would ascend the brightest heaven of invention.'
'All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players.'
'We are such stuff as dreams are made on.'

3. Favorite character you’d played:
Atticus Finch, 'To Kill a Mockingbird'; Claudius, in 'Hamlet'

4. Dream role for you to play?
Iago ('Othello'); Sir Thomas More ('A Man for All Seasons'); Don Quixote ('Man of La Mancha')

5. Dream show for you to direct?
Wow, right now, 'Macbeth' is my dream show. I'll have to let the dust settle when this is over and see what pops up. When I get a little more seasoned, I'd like to do 'Hamlet,' of course; and 'Othello.'

Living Amongst "The Dead"

Though a little late, I did want to give my take on the musical adaptation of James Joyce’s “The Dead,” as directed by Mary Job. The production had a stellar cast, a gorgeous set, beautiful costumes, and fine actors. There were all the ingredients to make a sophisticated romp, and yet – something was still missing, though it was mostly apparent at the end of the show.

That isn’t to say that the actors didn’t do their part to help tell the story or that the musicians were terrible. The music was enchanting and most of it even rousing – it enlivened the environment of the party and made the stage feel as if you were one of the guests. It was inviting, and though a bit too loud at times for the actors’ voices, very well-played.

The caliber cast that Ms. Job put together included Doak Bloss, Gini Larson, Bill Henson, Rick & LeAnn Dethlefsen, Eve Davidson, Laura Stebbins, Shelly Garyet, Mara Schaberg, Alec Nagy, Emily Aslakson Himebaugh and Casey Shipman.

The story itself, though changed somewhat from Joyce’s original work, centers around a holiday party with Gabriel’s aunts. They seem to be the central focus for most of the show, actually, and the play takes a startling and totally superfluous turn by ending the life of Aunt Julia, played by Eve Davidson. To her credit, Ms. Davidson’s performance was lovely – tender in the right moments, cranky in others, and she could be downright rabble-rousing too. She was fun to watch, as was her sister Aunt Kate, played by Laura Stebbins, and her niece, Mary Jane, portrayed by LeAnn Dethlefsen. Mrs. Dethlefsen’s singing voice is matched only by Shelly Garyet, who plays Molly Ivers – a feisty Irish lass who dishes out her opinions without blinking an eyelash. She goes after Gabriel (Doak Bloss) at one point and we see the beginnings of his personality begin to reveal itself; he backs down at conflict and wants everyone to be happy. Mrs. Dethlefsen and Mrs. Garyet genuinely seem to have fun on stage, and shine as they dance and make merry. What a treat to watch them.

Bill Henson sang a solo, and the harmonics of his voice were quite beautiful to listen to – the words didn’t seem to matter. And then at the somewhat opposite end of the spectrum of sophistication were Freddy Malins and Mr. Browne, played by Mr. Nagy and Mr. Dethlefsen respectively – and they were boisterous and boyish and full of vim and vigor and charm. They were fantastically fun to watch and I genuinely believed they were having a grand time at the party.

Mr. Bloss’ character took several asides during the show to reveal what he was thinking; after all, the original short story centered about Gabriel. The play however, twisted from the story and attempted to incorporate Gabriel’s thoughts into the fabric of the party, which seemed to focus more on his two aunts. Why the author did this I’m not sure; we are not allowed as much access to Gabriel since the story seems to focus mostly on the party.

The script also simply failed to deliver the foreshadowing necessary for the audience to understand the end. As I mentioned, the play centers around the party, and so as Gretta (played by Gini Larson) and Gabriel retire to their hotel after the festivities, many people in the audience were left confused at the sudden switch in the storyline. The play seemed to be about the two aunts and the party and abruptly changed pace into a more intimate setting with Gabriel and his wife. I heard a lot of people say they didn’t “get” the end. Well of course not – the playwright failed to set it up properly, and it is through no fault of the director or the actors it wasn't understood by some patrons.

The party is a foil to Gabriel’s life and his perceptions of his life; there was no death in it, nothing for him to care about in the world – not until he heard of Michael Furey, and so as Gabriel revealed his aunt passing, it felt awkward and out of place, and rather premature. If it was meant as a foreshadow for a discussion of death, it was a poor one. However, Mr. Bloss rendered an amazing performance and I was riveted watching him; I noticed that as other actors were dancing or singing, he watched his wife, Gretta, instead. I don’t know if that was an actor choice or a director choice, but there were many small details that I noticed about his performance and appreciated. I noticed other characters were doing the same thing – Ms. Schaberg wringing her hands and looking worried, Mr. Nagy and Mr. Dethlefsen making jovial motions without disrupting the action on stage, Mrs. Dethlefsen covering her mouth with worry and anxiety – I appreciated the realism these actors brought to their performances.

Unfortunately, the only character that I truly felt lacked personality and development was Gretta, and she is so vital to the plot of the show and is the one of the key characters that you should feel something for. Although I watched Mr. Bloss attempt to connect with her, Ms. Larson did not give back the same energy and it affected their chemistry on stage. I just didn’t feel or see from her the angst and forlornness of losing a lover so young. As she sang the song from her childhood, I kept wishing to see wistfulness brush across her face – but I fear she was focusing too much on singing instead. I do not like to criticize harshly, and I know Ms. Larson is a fine actress given the right role – however this was not the right role for her and her performance at best was bland. In such a talented cast so full of facial expressions and empathy and feeling in a wide range of emotions, I was surprised that she came across so woodenly. Even when she tried to display feeling of some sort unfortunately it looked like she was “acting,” and was un-authentic to the point of being distracting.

My only other true concern, as a Joycean reader myself and being familiar with his short story of “The Dead,” is with the blocking of the end of the show. Perhaps some of what Ms. Job could do was limited by the actual script, however I would like to briefly explain the end of the short story and why the play as performed failed to deliver the final tenderness, isolation and despair, to a degree, that Joyce creates in his story.

Gretta makes it known to Gabriel that she once loved a boy when she was young, and he loved her. She was to be sent away to school and he came out to see her one last time in the rain, and he caught pneumonia and died, and Gretta believed all her life that he died for her. Gabriel understands as she is telling this story that it has been Michael who was her true love of her life all this time they’ve been married, and all this time he thought that it was he she loved instead. He realizes he didn't understand that kind of sacrifice, nor that depth of love...

Ms. Larson begins the final scene sobbing loudly with no real explanation yet, which of course leaves her no place to go as an actor. If you start a scene with a climax emotion then the rest of the scene can only falter downward. Her wailing was overly loud and cumbersome and as the most important speech in the show progresses by Mr. Bloss, it was very frustrating to try to listen to him as she sat at the desk and then laid on the bed sobbing. He sits on the edge of the bed at the end of his song/speech, the other cast members come out to join his singing in the dark, while Gretta remains on the bed crying. She sits up, and then embraces him from behind as the lights go out, and that is the end of the show. Unfortunately, in this final scene, Ms. Job made some poor directing choices.

Gretta should have been something of an outcast for most of the show, lost in her own world and coming into her own world at night – when she reunites, as it were, with Michael Furey. Gabriel is in his element at the party, which Mr. Bloss portrayed quite well. I wanted to see a meek and nearly broken portrayal by Ms. Larson, her thoughts obviously somewhere else, and perhaps even startled at times by her husband, as the singing commences. I wish I had heard her song played softer, and sung with vulnerability, so that when we see her and Gabriel back in the hotel room it isn’t a shock that she gives in to that vulnerability and the audience isn't taken so off guard by the drastic and sudden change in mood. Her sobs should have been girlish, child-like and soft, finally allowing sleep to overtake her.

Though I confess I didn’t read the adaptation and don't know what the blocking was meant to be, but I wish Ms. Job used the window. She had a perfect opportunity for Mr. Bloss step forward into the gelled window pane light, washed in a blue to reflect the coldness falling around him – outside and in – and make his final speech looking outside, with his back to his sleeping wife, and his life forever changed. The realization that he has been dead his entire life to see in front of the audience, center stage, with the framed spot on Mr. Bloss, could have been a powerful chance for Mr. Bloss to display the inner thoughts of his character more visually for the patrons. How perfect it would have been for him to have simply stepped into the light – which could be metaphorically meaningful in so many different ways – and to understand then, and only then, that he has never really lived – that he is one of the Dead.

Sorry to back-seat direct, but the loud tenor of the end of the show was awkward. The party itself was loud and festive and was the element Gabriel felt at home in, and Gretta not so much, which makes the quiet intimacy of the quiet hotel room much more powerful to utilize.

Aside from Gretta’s performance and the very end of the show, I was amazed by how powerful and raucous “The Dead” was and appreciated seeing it on stage. The accents weren’t too thick, and there was an air of genuine fun, and very few shows achieve that ability to pull the audience in and make them feel like a guest along with the characters on stage. Kudos to all the actors, and especially to Doak Bloss – his range of emotions throughout the performance were fascinating to watch, and he took an incredibly complex character and made him real.

For those who read the short story, one has to truly step back and try not to compare, but it’s difficult. The short story is intricately layered and quite complex, and I understand how the issues of Ireland and Gabriel’s disdain of his own country don’t really come out more in the show, because they would just get lost. It’s also confusing why the party seems to be the central focus, and we lose the inner thoughts of Gabriel and his pomposity and meekness all at once, to a degree. I wish more depth could have been pulled out, but what a difficult story to attempt to tell on stage even on a more simplistic level. I give great credit to Ms. Job for taking on an enormous feat!

GO SEE "Driving Miss Daisy"

I don't know what to say honestly, other than "Driving Miss Daisy" was one of the most thought-provoking and poignant theatre experiences I've been privy to. In fact, I wish I was older so that this wasn't merely the second time I've had the privilege to watch Carmen Decker master the stage.

Indeed; she knows how to work an audience - she was gauging the laughter and using the set, her voice, her body, the props, and the other actors to breathe life into her role. Ms. Decker is not only engaging and human - she's also just damned fun to watch. Unpredictable and cantankerous, she's everything I was hoping to see and more. I can't say enough good things about Ms. Decker - you just have to see her for yourself.

James Bowen as Hoke, the driver her son Boolie hires for her after she destroys her garage and wrecks her car, also believably built this friendship with Miss Daisy over the course of 25 years. I genuinely cared about both of these people - they both carried a bit of spirit and both sat firm in their own sort of code of ethics. Mr. Bowen assumed the rigors of age with an ability that gave me pause to watch as well - he became more bent with time, walking with a bit of a limp, and none of it seemed artificial at all. What a talented actor, and what a great performance.

The last member of the cast, playing Boolie, was Bruce Bennett. I had to laugh during the talk-back after the show when one patron said she'd never seen Mr. Bennett so calm on stage - she said when she saw him she expected bursts of energy, mime and other comedic antics that Mr. Bennett has been known for. To his credit, he acted as an anchor for the show; while the focus of the production did center around the relationship that built between Hoke and Miss Daisy, Mr. Bennett's respect and, I think genuine affection for Ms. Decker, was a beacon in the play as he played the straight man for her to shoot one-liners at and be cranky with...in one scene she seems to reach up (as tiny as she is) to kiss Mr. Bennett's cheek (who is rather tall, particularly in comparison to her) - but instead she knocks her head into his and departs. I loved it - he shook his head, and it seemed like a natural thing for a loving son to do - to accept his mother for who she is and all of her quirks. His character never tries to change her - he merely loves her, and Mr. Bennett's performance as Boolie genuinely portrays a son who does care for his mother and worries for her - it is just as authentic as the relationship that Ms. Decker and Mr. Bowen create.

Such delights abound in this play - little gestures, vocalizations, hesitations, and the attention to detail were minute; I can't say enough good things about these actors. They remained impeccably in character throughout the show.

The only thing that I seem to disagree with other people who have seen the show is that I really didn't care for the set. It seemed ponderous, with decoupage pictures attached to the floor that created a bit of a lip, and thus an uneven surface to walk on. I noticed parts of it were peeling up, and from where I was sitting I couldn't tell that it was in the form of a "friendship quilt star." I don't see how this concept fits into the show. I also didn't care for the ragged edges around the floating set pieces; if Miss Daisy was wealthy then I wish the set had been a bit more elegant to reflect her stingy yet refined tastes. There was also a gate in the background with the Star of David on both posts; no Jewish person at that time would have advertised their faith - particularly since one of the scenes in the show involves violence at a temple. It looked more like the gates to a cemetery, leading me to believe it was the foreshadowing of Ms. Daisy's death. But - she doesn't die at the end of the show - so again, I'm left wondering what the gate had to do with the story.

In my opinion, it seemed that the set designer tried to force a concept to work onto a show when it just didn't. The light designer, however, did a wonderful job lighting specific parts of the set for specific scenes without a lot of light overflow, and the actors always stayed in their light (some actors don't seem to sense the light and wander from it - and others just instinctually seem to know where that line is). The sound design was also lovely, and fit in well with the story - it was appropriate and at times, very moving.

The only other show I saw Ms. Decker in was "Unnecessary Farce," and I fell in love with her then - I'm glad she came back to Boarshead to perform in "Driving Miss Daisy" - what a treat for Lansing; go and make your reservations now. Seriously. This is a show that you just shouldn't miss.

Scattered Clouds with "The Sunshine Boys"

I think by and far my favorite line of the show comes from Willie, as played by Steve Shelton, and he delivered it perfectly: "I'm gonna drop dead from spite."

In fact, quite a few of Neil Simon's lines were delivered quite well - the pacing between Mike Stewart as Ben, Willie's nephew, clicked right along. The beginning of the show has a very long scene between just the two of them, but it was here that I saw Mr. Shelton deliver more of a variety of emotion/nuance in his voice as he speaks to his nephew - he seemed to lose the nuance as the show progresses, though still does a fine job as the cantankerous Willie. Mr. Stewart was able to maintain levels of variation in his performance throughout the show, and was fun to watch.

Once Charlie Ogar arrives as Al Lewis, however, the pace of the show comes to a near halt.

Although I thought Mr. Shelton did sound like he was from New York, and worked guilt and schtick as much as he could, I had a much harder time understanding Mr. Ogar and placing his accent. It was inconsistent, and his timing was very slow to pick up his cues from anyone on stage. While I realize this is his first performance, and he had a tremendously heavy line load, unfortunately he just didn't have the charisma that the role really needed. He and Shelton had, to say the least, an inconsistent chemistry. These were two vaudeville actors, and they should have slipped right back into their quick-tongued banter; unfortunately Mr. Shelton and Mr. Ogar just couldn't keep the tempo tight.

Director Kerry Waters put together a strong supporting cast - though they were in the show very little. Ron Lott as the Announcer used his voice quite well. Gary Mitchell as the TV Director was spot-on as a no-nonsense let's get this done kind of guy. Garrett Clinard and Faron Supanich were also adequate for what their roles needed.

The pace really picked up and some audible laughs were heard when Ms. Croff took the stage; she knows how to play the dumb blonde and she adds some much needed stimulation to the show, playing well off Mr. Shelton. She knows how to milk a scene - and the audience enjoyed it.

One of the better scenes in the show that could easily get overlooked fell between Marni Holmes and Steve Shelton; it was a great contrast from the over-the-top acting of Ms. Croff, who helped to propel the show along just after the act break. Ms. Holmes brought realism back into the story with the banter she had with Mr. Shelton. She was likeable and very laid back - and she helped to clip that scene along too.

One of the most disappointing thing about the show is the set. Willie is supposed to live in a dilapidated apartment and the set was painted in a mixture of pink and blue, so it honestly looked more like a nursery. More than likely the beige on the one wall where the bathroom was would have worked well for the entire apartment - a dull color, with dull furniture is what was needed. The construction of the set worked well, and the very few scene changes worked quite well too.

Overall I thought "Sunshine Boys" was a fair production; the biggest problem it faced was timing, and losing momentum in the scenes with just Willie and Al. However Ms. Croff, Mr. Stewart, Ms. Holmes and Mr. Mitchell help to jumpstart the show as it goes along and helps to propel the plot forward.

There are a lot of funny lines, and Mr. Shelton and Mr. Ogar get their laughs - but not nearly enough of them. For the most part their performances become predictable and dull when they are together. Perhaps it's just a matter of not having the right chemistry - I'm not sure.

I was also confused about the very end of the show; the director made a choice to make it look like Willie passes away on stage, perhaps hoping for a poignant wrap to the show; however this is a comedy, and the idea that these two old curmudgeons are going to be stuck in the same retirement home is part of the hilarity of the ending, and that just gets dropped. I'm not sure why that choice was made, but it really left me leaving the theatre confused and a little sad that these two never truly buried their demons - the final scene was confusing. Perhaps it was left open to interpretation, but it was too cloudy to really be able to make an assertion either way on the fate of these comedians. Well, except that they weren't quite as funny as I'd hoped.

Getting Perspective with Gary Mitchell

1. Tell us a little about yourself:

I was born in Detroit and served in Viet Nam shortly after graduating from high school. I was just a kid and very naïve while in the service, and it was a difficult time to be a teenager. I always tell people that I grew up hard and fast. I had no choice. Eventually, I moved to East Lansing and graduated from Michigan State University with a degree in Communications. Throughout my professional life, I’ve worked in various communication mediums.

2. People know what a director does, and a stage manager – but what does a producer do?

A good producer will do almost everything that is not directly related to what’s taking place on stage. A producer should be in charge of marketing and promotion, arranging publicity photos, media interviews, the programming of the production and just doing all that you can to make life easier for the director. Of course, it’s the producer’s responsibility to try and make sure the show is profitable (that’s means keeping a close eye on expenditures).

3. Do you enjoy producing? What makes a producer sweat bullets and conversely make a producer smile to see?

I enjoy producing, especially if you personally know the director and have confidence in the director’s ability to put together a good production. A good producer should be well organized, pay close attention to details and be very time consensus, and always know what your deadlines are. Having produced a number of shows, I almost immediately know whether or not the show is going to be well received

4. What are you currently working on?

I’m currently producing and appearing in The Sunshine Boys. In May, I’ll produce Fiddler On The Roof.

5. You do a little acting too – when did you first get the “acting bug?” What was your first show?

My very first acting experience was in high school (it was a show about the Salem witch hunts, called The Lottery). But it took a very long time for me to get back on stage.

6. How do you think shows could better market themselves to the community?

I think shows can be better marketed by working closely and cultivating relationships with reporters and writers who cover theatre in print, radio and websites. I’m also a big believer in getting writers theatre information well before the production dates. It’s important to always get a good photographer to take publicity photos, and get someone who can write a good press release. A poor photo and release makes the entire theatre group look bad. It’s also best not to be too cheap with the comp tickets to those who can help promote your show.

7. What do you prefer to produce – comedy, drama, musical and why? Same question, but to be a part of?

I’m a renaissance man in a rock-n-roll age. I absolutely love good drama and the classic scripts. If given my choice, those are my favorite shows (both producing and acting). The trouble is drama is a tough sell on stage. It does very well on film and television and in more intimate surroundings, but theater groups seem to be putting most of their resources into comedies.

8. What do you consider, from a producer’s perspective, a successful show?

There’s nothing more gratifying than having produced a show that makes a profit and receives favorable reviews. That’s a combination that tends to put a smile on the face of the producer, director and the entire cast.

9. Why is theatre important to you?

There really is no business like show business. There’s an incredibly bonding that takes place among theatre people when you work together on a project…it’s like family.

10. Why is theatre important to the community?

Theatre is important to me because it gives you a venue to express your artistic talents. It also exposes you to a group of talented and creative people

Quick Questions:

1. Favorite role you’ve played?

Chief Sitting Bull in Annie Get Your Gun.

2. Favorite line from any show?

“I think I know what to do. Now the question is, who to do it to” (from How To Succeed In Business Without Really Trying).

3. Favorite experience on stage with any actors/actresses?

Taking a curtain call with the cast of Annie Get Your Gun (it’s a special feeling when you see that audience on their feet. It doesn’t happen often and when it does, you cherish the moment).

4. What are you most proud of in your theatre experience?

I’m proud of my work ethic. I’m a quick study and always know my lines. I’m always ready and come prepared to work hard in every show.

5. If you could be in any a show, what would it be?

A powerful drama (maybe something like 12 Angry Men). As long as there’s a role for a middle age character actor in the show, I’m happy.

Jawing about Joyce with Mary Job

1. Tell us a little bit about yourself:

I was born in New Jersey, raised in Vermont, and have loved theater all of my life. I have a BA from University of Vermont in American Ethnic Studies, a law degree from Northwestern, and a MA in Theater from MSU. 10 years ago, after practicing labor, education and civil rights law for nearly 20 years, I decided to make my avocation my profession,got my MA in theatre and starting teaching at LCC and MSU. I love gardening, golfing (at which I am mediocre at best), skiing (at which I am very good), reading, knitting, Italy and cats.

2. What was the first show you directed?

Uncommon Women and others by Wendy Wasserstein in the early 80's-- on the principle that if you are going to direct a show, particularly as a new director, direct something you know something about. Since I am a feminist who graduated from a New England college in 1972, (albeit not a 7 sister), was fairly counterculture, it seemed like a good match. It was certainly a lot of fun. It was even more interesting teturn to the play a dozen years later, when I was the age of the characters as they appear in the beginning of the play -- professionals who are looking back on their younger years.

3. What attracts you to James Joyce - I understand you did your dissertation on his works (if that isn't correct please amend my misunderstanding)?

Actually, my undergrad honors dissertation was on the Irish in America, but I used Joyce as my staging area. (It seemed to me that to understand the Irish in America, you needed to understand the Irish in Ireland -- so I started with the Irish writers and thinkers. I first encountered Joyce in college when I took a course in Irish Lit., read his short stories, also Portrait of an Artist and Ulysses. I loved them all. I liked the lyricism of the language, the complexity of the characters, and the complexity and ambivalence of their relationships with their world. This of course mirrors Joyce's own ambivalence -- he first left Ireland in 1904, and permenantly in 1915, but never left off writing about it. (Although I freely admit I never got past the first couple of pages of Finnegans Wake!)

4. What is it about "The Dead" in particular that you are drawn to?

The split focus between the obvious convivality of the party -- in which friends and family argue and celebrate and the sense of aloneness that a person can feel in the midst of all this humanity -- it always seemed so true to me about the way we live our lives. I love the way the story shifts from person to person in terms of the viewpoints.I also loved the view of Gretta, Gabriel's wife. She is initially seen from his perspective and through his eyes, so the assumption is that he knows her -- that she is completely 'knowable". When he realizes that she has had an emotional life of which he is and never has been a part, he is profoundly shaken, and the essential aloneness of being human is so beautifully portrayed at the end of the story. There is also a sense that something has changed forever -- an old life permenantly left behind. When I was 22 and read the story, I saw the elegaic mood at the end of the story as evocative of how the Irish who came to America must have felt in leaving Ireland -- their pasts and their dead behind them but still following them westward. So I used the story at the first reading in a Seminar I taught on the Irish in America. Now when I read the story at 58, I see it more in an intimate vein, I too have my dead and their memory is both sweet and haunting. In the play I love the way the authors use a sense of ebb and flow to create moments on which one character stands out before merging in the general flow of the party. I love the understated quality of the play, the sense of intimacy -- as if the audience is a member of the party. Riverwalk's thrust stage is made for this kind of production! I also encourage the audience to sit on the sides of the auditorium -- they will get the sense of intimacy of the play far better than if they sit in the 7th row of the front!

5. How do you think the audience will relate to these characters?

What do you hope the audience will walk away after the show feeling? I hope that the audience will both like the people and identify with them -- to see their interactions on this evening of a family party as universal of the human experience. Life is joy, conflict, song & celebration and death. The snow of life -- real or metaphorical covers us all. The story is about an epiphany that we all experience, even if that moment of epiphany is frightenly solitary. I also hope that the audience goes away having both experienced and shared in moments of life at its most celebratory and social and at its most quietly introspective.

6. What do you find difficult or challenging about directing this particular show, verus something like Shakespeare or other classical pieces of drama?

Plays like this one are almost anti-classical in the sense that it is all subtext-- the text certainly gives you clues , but the details about the emotional arc of the characters are unspoken or suggested whereas in Shakespeare or other classical plays like the Greeks, the emotional life of the character, his or her motivations are the words -- in the sounds, shapes, poetic devices of the language. So here the actors and I have to infer-to fill the gaps and build the characters and the relationships with a different creative process. It gives a lot of scope for individual actors to create the characters and is also incredibly challenging. The characters are not handed to you. You really have to work at it and not take the play for granted. I use not only the original short story, but other characters in other Joyce stories or what I know about Joycean literature in general.

7. What do you think James Joyce's opinion would be of this adaptation of his short story (considered by some scholars to be the most insightful piece of short literature in all of Western history)?

I think he would love the musicality because his language is so musical. I also think that his sense of humor and irony is stronger in the story. The characters in the play are less trivial than in the story,and I think Joyce would have preferred more astringency! On the other hand, Joyce was a notoriously difficult person to be around and I suspect Lansing audiences will love the play the way it is. More compassionate and closer to our sense of family and memory.

8. How would you describe Gabriel, and Gretta?

Gabriel is a urbane, slightly stuffy, but a likable man. He is used to being the favorite nephew and the center of attention. He is an intellectual and a watcher; this sense of being a bystander is partly because he is an intellectual, but also because he is risk adversive. I think that explains his cynicism about the Irish Nationalist movement. Although he is not a supporter of British rule, he is unwilling to commit to the messy reality of revolution, so he sits on the fence. While he is a devoted husband, he also takes his wife for granted. He thinks he knows everything about her-and there is a touch of the Pygmalion about their relationship-he has had a hand in turning a country girl into this gracious and elegant woman. Gretta is warm-a natural care-giver, with a quiet strength, but there is a sense of reserve as well. Something hidden or sheltered. She has acquired a sense of polish in the years of her wife and motherhood, but there is also hints of the "country-cute"girl she was. She is accustomed to being a bit of an outsider in this family, of once being the country girl in a household of urban sophiscates. In the course of the play, we discover the depths of her emotional life, how she treasures the moment when someone found her special, in a way that for all his devotion, Gabriel never did.

Quick Questions:

1. What is your favorite line from any show?

WAKE THE DEAD!

2. How does theatre enrich your life?

It is all about the communication. As a director, I communicate with the author and the actors, who communicate with the audience. I get to tell my take on a story by collaborating with other talents who in turn shape my understanding.

3. Why is classical theatre still pertinent to audiences?

Because it is part of what shapes current theatre. Because so many of the plays are good! They are often universal in theme and in the human experience. Thus they are both familiar and new. They can be wonderfully escapist. Wouldn't you like to be in the Forest of Arden right now, teaching a lover how to be a lover with wit and humor as in As You Like It? Or outwitting both fraternal authority and a lover's less than faithful tendencies in The Rover with wit and verve? (Frank Rutledge & I always thought The Rovers was essentially Spring Break in 18th Century Naples!)

4. What is your favorite part of directing a show?

The whole rehearsal period -- communicating with actors and collaborating with them and the designers deepens my connection with both the play and my fellow collaborators.

Pass the 7% Solution, Sherlock...

There are several reasons I love watching James Houska on stage: he can do just about any accent you can think of believably, he’s not afraid to look quite silly, he throws himself into the characters he plays, and seems to effortlessly float from character to character within the same show and make them distinctive from one another. I found Mr. Houska to be the most interesting actor to watch on stage for Riverwalk’s “Sherlock Holmes: The Final Adventure” because he jumped into his roles with gusto in a show that lacked energy and, well, suspense, or for that matter even all that much of a plot.

Of course, the fault of the script shouldn’t reflect on the actors, and mostly what I saw on stage was a very flawed script which attempted to create mystery, intelligence and an ultimate rivalry between a brilliantly deductive Detective Holmes and a maniacally evil mastermind, Moriarty. The problem is, Holmes was not terribly charming nor Moriarty terribly evil, and there was no real explanation for their rivalry. That makes for a difficult relationship to create then, since it is established superficially.

Terry Jones picks up most of the jokes in the show, making a really likeable Watson, however. He carried a heavy-line load, and he did a great job of showing his loyalty to Holmes and making the audience believe it. He also narrates the show, and keeps the audience abreast through all of the scene changes.

Kevin Burnham as Sherlock Holmes seemed to run through his lines, in fact to the point of stumbling over the lines of other actors on stage, and wasn’t as dynamic, or as funny, as I hoped. There wasn’t any chemistry between he and Irene Adler, played by his wife Tanya Burnham, which rather surprised me. It was as if they were walking through the play and rushed the scenes they were in. Mrs. Burnham didn’t have chemistry with Joe Dickson either. Mr. Dickson did a fine job of playing a doting husband and then a sniveling bad guy – unlikable and better off dead. Quite suitably played indeed. Another praiseworthy mention in a small role is Amy Winchell; she went from nosy housemaid to bitter sister looking for revenge with passion and again, provided a bit of emotion in a show that lacked the intensity one would think you would find between arch-enemies.

Mrs. Burnham did do a great job in the scene she shared with Michael Hays. She felt authentic, and though that scene was short, it was very well done. Mr. Hays as the King of Bohemia held his own and offered a good emotional foil to Mr. Burnham’s intellectual Holmes. He held himself in a worried kingly sort of fashion (though I was a bit confused by his entrance), and he was able to salvage some humor as well. Good job, Mr. Hays.

And then we have Mark Zussman as Dr. Moriarty, the mastermind criminal to Sherlock Holmes. Through no fault of Mr. Zussman, he seemed more like Moe of the Three Stooges rather than some sort of supra-intelligent human and the only man with enough ambition to take on Holmes. His character bumbles in and out of the play and talks a great deal about how intelligent Holmes is and how to prepare for him; however, it just isn’t well fleshed-out nor particularly "evil." In fact, his character as written seemed rather dull, and it was good to see Mr. Zussman breathe some life into it. He was superbly costumed, as were all of the characters in the cast, but I didn’t catch fear and awe from his performance. He and Mr. Burnham seemed to play stereotypes, which may have been a directorial choice, instead of taking their lines and putting emotion, depth, intonation and other resonances within their vocalizations. They seemed to be directed to be caricatures, rather than characters, on stage.

The set was very well dressed and built, aptly thought out and designed for the show. The black stairs at the back seemed somewhat awkward, but then melded into the background since most of the action takes place downstage. Some of the tech sounds seemed out of place or a bit loud, but otherwise the technical aspects of the show went very well.

Overall I’m not impressed with Mr. Dietz’ script; if it had ended in the gas room I would have been happier, and it would have made more sense. It seemed to go on and on, without much purpose or drive. The actors did their best to breathe life into the show; I was left wanting Holmes to be more charming, more alluring to Ms. Adler, more of an adversary to Dr. Moriarty, and more of a mystery…

Rollin' on with Kelly Stuible

1. A lot of people have never even heard of "Urinetown," and the title is a little off-putting to some. What is the show about and why should people come see it?

It's funny you mention that, because the title is what I've been "fighting" since I first proposed to direct this. We're going to have to face the fact that if people don't know the show, the title might scare them away. Luckily, the national tour had a pretty well received run at Wharton a few years back, so it's better known here than in other places. The basic plot is: A terrible water shortage has led to a government-enforced ban on private toilets. The citizens must use public amenities, regulated by a single greedy company; amid the people, a hero decides he's had enough, and plans a revolution to lead them all to freedom. As for why people should come see it, first of all this is one of the most hilarious scripts I've ever read. Add to that a cast which I thank my lucky stars to have, and I think this is going to be quite an entertaining show. It's silly, it pokes fun of musicals... but at the same time, due to the status of the economy as well as the climate crisis, there is an actual message underneath all of the humor.

2. What are you strengths as a director?

Since this is my first time directing, and we're only a week into rehearsals, I can really only guess to what my strengths might be... for this production, so far I'd have to say it is the passion I have for this show -- I've been working for a year and a half to make Urinetown happen, and my directing debut just HAD to be this show.

3. What are your weaknesses?

So far, it's a mix between trying to wear too many hats and take on too may things (the things that directors don't typically handle), and just having too much fun with my cast. Already there have been a couple of nights where we all just wanted to laugh and have fun, and I know it will only get worse as we go along. I have to remember that it's my job to keep us all on task!!

4. What do you enjoy most about directing?

It's kind of a surreal to see these ideas I've been throwing around actually come to life in front of my eyes, but it's a very cool experience.

5. What do you find most challenging?

For me, it's knowing that in the end I have the final say. While I've been an assistant director and a vocal director before, I always had someone else to defer if needed. Now, I have to make the important decisions!

6. Pet peeves about theatre?

I guess it would be more like how people perceive theater, especially community theater. I got my degree in vocal performance, and trying to explain that to people not familiar with theater is pretty difficult. And when I try and invite people to shows or to get involved, they kind of brush it off as a silly little play or something. I think that the community theater scene here in Lansing is pretty remarkable, and I've been fortunate to be a part of some spectacular productions, so it's a pet peeve when people don't get that.

7. What you love about theatre?

Well like most of us involved on stage, I can be a bit of an attention hog, so that's a definite plus, and it's such a great experience to perform something that people respond to -- but most importantly it's the friendships I've made and the people I meet. I love how there can be people from so many different backgrounds, and with different day jobs, can come together for a common cause.

8. Why is theatre important to the community?

There's just something magic about live theater, or any of the performing arts for that matter, that just cannot be matched. I also sing with the Arts Chorale of Greater Lansing, and participating and attending live performances creates a shared experience for both the audience and the performers you can't get many other places.

9. Tell us about yourself!

Well, I grew up here and graduated from Holt in 2001. I went to CMU and graduated with a degree in vocal performance in 2006, and since then I've been living back here in Lansing. I work for Jackson National Life Insurance Co, and have been involved in 11 productions in a little over two years. I don't really know exactly what I want to do with my life :o) but for right now I'm really enjoying life here in Lansing!

Quick Questions:

1. What was the very first show you ever did?

Well I danced for 11 years growing up, but my first play was "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" in 11th grade. Believe it or not, I was an Oompa-Loompa!

2. Favorite role you've played?

For very different reasons, it's a tie between Lilli/Kate in "Kiss Me, Kate" and Georgie Bukatinsky in "The Full Monty"

3. If you could play any role, what would it be?

Since I prefer musicals, those are the roles I want, and I actually have a top 5: Baker's Wife in "Into the Woods" Cathy in "The Last Five Years" Florence in "Chess" Mrs Lovett in "Sweeny Todd" and of course Tracy Turnblad in "Hairspray"

4. If you could direct any show, what would it be?

That's a tough one -- right now there aren't really any other shows I'm just dying to direct. We'll see how I handle this one and then take it from there :o)

5. Favorite lyric from any musical?

Some people analyze every detail

Some people stall when they can't see the trail

Some people freeze out of fear that they'll fail

But I keep rollin' on.

Some people can't get success with their art

Some people never feel love in their heart

Some people can't tell the two things apart

But I keep rollin' on'

- From The Last Five Years

6. Favorite line from any show?

Pretty much anything from The Full Monty!!!!