A letter about a play called The Pillowman

6/15/06 | The Louiswu

[The Louiswu]

There was a show presented here in Indianapolis called The Pillowman and if you read the letter presented below you will understand what is was about. I saw this letter and was just so stunned by it's content that I did not know how to respond, so I thought I should post it here at the FR and get some feedback. There is a lot to this story, I may not have all the information I should, but this letter says a lot. BTW - "NUVO" is local liberal "arts" newspaper that caters to the "in" crowd around Indianapolis. ************

To: indycallboard@yahoogroups.com Subject: [indycallboard] Digest Number 1065

Indy Call Board Messages In This Digest (11 Messages)

----- Original Message ----- From: Julie Powers To: INDYCALLBOARD Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2006 10:18 PM Subject: [indycallboard] Nuvo this week

The beginnings of an intelligent theatre discussion are planted in this week's Nuvo Letters page. Nick Crews responds to an article by David Hoppe re: The Pillowman at the Phoenix.

3c. Re: Nuvo this week Posted by: "gerald davis" theatreactorthespia@yahoo.com   theatreactorthespia Wed Jun 14, 2006 7:29 pm (PST) Here's the letter:

Hard to watch by Letter to the Editor | Jun 14th, 2006

In "Where's the Art Audience?" David Hoppe laments the decline of attendance at Indianapolis arts events and appears to suggest that people avoid productions such as the Phoenix Theatre's The Pillowman because they are not sufficiently hip or daring (Hoppe, "Change in the Weather," June 7-14).

Hoppe reminds us that the play was the "toast of London" and "won a boatload of drama critics' prizes" in New York. He goes on to wonder why local theater-goers failed to turn out for a production so lavishly praised by New York critics and other arbiters of theatrical taste — if for no other reason than "to see what all the hooplah's (sic) about?"

Hoppe's view appears to be that we local patrons of the performing arts deserve chiding for failing to respond to critical raves and support this "piece of cutting-edge theater fresh from the Big Apple."

New York theatrical critical opinion, of course, serves an important educational and interpretive function. (Although it never fails to surprise me when "with-it" folks who would disdain buying a car or handbag, say, based on the latest promotional buzz blithely make theatrical choices based on pronouncements from "the critics," who, as anyone knows who's been one — or tried to influence one — play a key role in the marketing of theatrical productions.)

For the local theater patron The Pillowman presented a unique set of challenges. The play contains graphic depictions of repugnant acts, many of them directed against children — a boy's toes are cut off, a 12-year-old girl is crucified, there's torture and so on. Whatever redeeming artistic merits the play might have, the number of awards it's earned or how highly the play comes recommended, the fact remains for many violence against children is (ready for this?) hard to watch. This is especially true for an audience perhaps uncomfortable with the disquieting knowledge that we reside in the state that leads the nation in abuse-related child deaths (a fact, of course, of which New York critics are probably unaware.)

This is not to say the Phoenix should not have presented The Pillowman. Hoppe's correct that there is a need for challenging productions in any city that has cultural aspirations. We in Indianapolis ought to have access to new and challenging works, and the Phoenix Theatre, among others, should be commended for making these available to the community, especially since selling these productions is such a thankless task.

But the implication that theater-goers lack sophistication or commitment to the performing arts because they pass on a production that depicts child victimization shows, it seems to me, a lack of insight and a poor grasp of local theater-related sales and market realities.

****

Thanks for reading

[ovrtaxt]

As a former theatrical/concert production guy, I'm not surprised. Most stage people are sick, degenerate, and hold the lowest of ethical and moral standards- yet they feel the need to preach to everyone else about whatever issue they've glommed on to lately.

I'm glad this stupid production got their a$$ handed to them by the general public.

[Publius6961]

Contrary to many self-promoting famous lines, art is not a life's necessity, and way too many insane are drawn to it.

[bvw]

The paper's editors added the "(sic)" after "hooplahs"? If so, they are sick. Jeeks, it's an okay variant of a slang word, after all.

When they like someone's letter editors usually clean up minor spelling and grammar problems. When they dislike the letter, they'll fill it full of dagger-like sic's, gleefully showing off how ignorant the writer is.

In this case, it was not even a minor error. It is an acceeptable variant. What doofusii!

[Quix]

Aren't the puppet masters and their death grip on the 'cutting edge' of and all the rest of "the arts" a real hellish trip!

And then they have the audacity to get indignant when significant numbers of "the folks" see through their hideousness sufficiently to avoid it!

I ask again . . . do any history buffs know of any culture in all of recorded history--maybe even including Soddom & Gomorrah??

[Quix]

I ask again . . . do any history buffs know of any culture in all of recorded history--maybe even including Soddom & Gomorrah

THAT WAS SO CHRONICALLY SUICIDAL??

[IndyInVa]

The general public seems to be finally catching on. How many sick movies, art exhibits, plays, etc., do you think the average person needs to attend before they realize that they are not enjoying it? I'm much more careful with my "arts and entertainment" dollar than I used to be. I only go to about 2 movies a year because most of what's out there is not worth my money, much less my time, which I value even more.