My Younger Brother Responds to INVINCIBLE SUMMER
My quasi-Orthodox younger brother who is a library science masters student at Simmons in Boston went to go see Invincible Summer. I asked him to write a response to the show so I could post it on the blog. So... here you go... from Lee The Brother:
I’ll be honest: I would never have heard of, much less gone to see, INVINCIBLE SUMMER had it not been for The Incident. Shabbas had gone out, our guests had gone home, and I fled back to my computer, as I do most Saturday nights. I checked Parabasis to see what Isaac had been up to, I followed one “must read” link, and, for once, I did read. And then I followed another link, and another, and another. Mike Daisey was so articulate about his feelings with regard to what had happened, but not, in this context, with what had been said, with what his piece was. Other people wrote about this breach of the audience/performer social contract, how upset they were, and how the legitimacy of that upset was most likely ignored, and I still wondered: what was there in the piece that upset these people so much? Maybe it’s my oppositional nature, or my tendency to try to understand the rational motivation of people and actions that seem totally out of whack. I suppose, even as someone who deplored the actions of these people, this man, I still bought into the idea that the performance had “thrown the first punch”, as one of the many blog posts I read put it. I couldn’t figure it out watching the video, or the trailer, or reading about the show; I couldn’t find the motivating statement, or conceit, or anti-religious trope that pushed these people. So I decided to go and see for myself. I was surprised to see that this show was going up in Cambridge, two miles from my house. I’ve come to think of Boston/Cambridge as a wasteland for theatre. Everything I’ve encountered is expensive, sub-par, and boring; coming from DC, I expect more. But this was a New York import that wasn’t a Broadway spectacle, a well-respected artist, a short bike ride away, a storytelling event, had an air of controversy, and was $15 for a student. I overcame my Sunday inertia and blew off my homework. INVINCIBLE SUMMER is a profoundly sparse piece of theatre from a design standpoint: Mike Daisey sits behind a table with a glass of water and a stack of notes on a black stage. There are maybe ten light cues, the only sound cues are the house music, and Daisey never gets up from behind the table. There are no distractions, no detractions, from the profound force of his storytelling presence. His voice moves all over the spectrum, from manic squeaks to bombastic shouts to lulling whispers to conversational confiding. And this is the variety of delivery demanded by his disparate subject matter. INVINCIBLE SUMMER touches on the nature of marriage, the history of the New York Subway, what it means to move to New York City, parental divorce, book deals, September 11 and its aftermath, theatrical community, and other incidental topics. It moves between uproariously funny, historically informative, and revealingly confessional, with the full force of Daisey’s presence and voice behind all these moods. And the movements are smooth. Daisey’s taken a chunk of his life and done what we all do: make all the events into plot elements of a larger narrative, given them meaning through their placement in a structure that we all recognize. And then he’s externalized it, creating the meandering story we’d tell if only our friends would listen for long enough, without interrupting to tell a portion of their own experience narrative. It’s a beautiful storytelling event, and a fine piece of theatre. And it’s totally inoffensive. Daisey doesn’t lambaste religion, ridicule believers, take pot shots at those who have a different worldview than he does. He talks about his disillusionment with the government, about his need to believe, his desire to reach through the television screen and touch the president in order to understand, to see if he can be trusted. He describes, relates, and relives the typical liberal experience over the last few years. And all of this happens long after the walkout. The moment when one group decided to get up and leave the theatre comes so early in the show; Daisey had told the story of his wedding, a bit about the history of the subway, and was getting started on the nature of New York City when that moment came and went. I can’t understand how an accurate comparison of New York City to fucking Paris Hilton could have provoked so much anger. And I understand why Daisey was totally unprepared for it: the walkout and the destruction of his work were so out of proportion it was absurd. After the show, I went up to Daisey to let him know that I knew, that I was there to support him and his work, to ask how the recovery was going. I went up to him to show that a visibly religious person (I wear a yarmulke and tzitzit) supported him, saw nothing wrong and a great deal right with his work. That the conflict isn’t between atheists and the religious. I’ve since read his follow-up essay, about the impotent rage of this one man, and about the framing of the argument in terms of security for children. I’m in graduate school to go into education; over the summer my goal is to learn to not swear. This is a legitimate professional development activity, the excision of “fuck” and “shit” from my vocabulary. Because children have to be protected. And it makes me a little sick and a lot sad.
Pretty cool, eh?
"I’ve come to think of Boston/Cambridge as a wasteland for theatre. Everything I’ve encountered is expensive, sub-par, and boring; coming from DC, I expect more."
Although we have our problems in Boston Theatre, and I am the first one to turn the lens on our ourselves, I don't exactly think we are a "wasteland."
But, I always give the benefit of the doubt to the person making the statement. It sounds as if he has seen things here, and not liked what he has seen.
Just as a rebuttal though, I would suggest possibly looking at this listing of new and newer plays opening in Boston over the next few weeks, some of them playing now.
Whistler in the The Dark - The Flu Season by Will Eno (Eno wrote Thom Pain, a Pulitzer Finalist.)
Theatre Offensive - Surviving the Nian by Melissa Lee and Abe Rybeck (This play is a World Premiere, that just won the Jonathan Larson Award before it even opened.)
Huntington Theatre Company - Persephone by Noah Haidle. (Haidle is a red hot playwright right now, receiving premieres all over the country. As a side note: local playwright Melinda Lopez is in the cast.)
Devanaughn Theatre - (sic) by Melissa James Gibson. This play was received very well in New York back in 2000 or so, but the playwright, I don't think, has received a production here in Boston yet.
Up You Mighty Race Theatre Company - 402 Edgecombe Avenue; The House on Sugar Hill by Katherine Butler Jones. (World Premiere.)
Zeitgeist Theatre Company -Valhalla by Paul Rudnick.
By the way, I was at the same Sunday night performance. The show was great.
Posted by: mirroruptonature | April 25, 2007 at 12:41 PM
I'm grateful for Lee's report, and to Isaac for posting it. I appreciate that Lee seeks to move the debate away from Atheists vs. Christians.
The Boston Globe interview with the principal (boston.com/ae/theater_arts/exhibitionist/2007/04/norcos_explanat.html ) offers some insight into why the group left so early, and at that particular moment. I wish they hadn't; it sounds like they missed something valuable.
Posted by: Mac | April 25, 2007 at 01:16 PM
This was lovely. Good writing must run in the family.
Posted by: Johnna | April 25, 2007 at 01:43 PM
I'm glad I overreacted. Yes, I know I'm part of the unwashed, hippie, non-journalist blogger problem, but that's what bloggers do -- we highlight issues, don't let them die, until traditional media either investigates or yet again disappoints us with its myopia. I'm glad the Globe got down to business, and with Mr. Daisey got to the heart of what happened.
As for future controversies, I predict that five years from now, Young Jean Lee and Neil LaBute will team up for a six-hour trilogy called JINGO!, which will have to be staged on decommissioned weapons testing sites, to limit the spread of any terrorist WMDs to local populaces.
'Cause if some folks are dared, really dared to be controversial, when it comes to playwrights who know how to piss people off, we ain't seen nothing yet....
Posted by: cgeye | April 27, 2007 at 02:14 AM
I,am a Father,of one of the kids, my son was there .
One thing most people are missing. It seems to me, Mr Mike Daisey, knew before he posted on youtube, who this group were and came from. In the info area of the clip It states 87 members of a Christian group. why?
I talk to him about this in messages ,he said he had posted before he knew who they were. It does not look that way to me . The one that puts the clips on youtube, are able to pull their clips, and repost, They can remove comments and block veiws from making a comment. Which he did to me.
Day of walk out 4-19-07
Talked with Cindy L. from the school and the man the poured water David 4-20-07 acording to news papers and his site.
Youtube shows posted 4-21-07.
Why? After reading much about Mr. Daisey and hid followers. I think I have the answer.
Seems as he forgave 1 and punished 86 others lets not count the other 11 adults just the 75 kids that were 14-17 years of age.
He heard there cries with their comments . Thank you for your time Jim
Posted by: Jim | May 03, 2007 at 10:32 AM