Tag Archives: Rasheeda Moore

Ludlam’s “Reverse Psychology” Proves Devilishly Ridiculous

Review: Reverse Psychology at VisArt Video

By Perry Tannenbaum

Best known for his international comedy hit, The Mystery of Irma Vep, Charles Ludlam and his Ridiculous Theatre Company struggled for 17 years before his 1984 breakthrough brought him financial security. But AIDS took him down, so he couldn’t enjoy his celebrity and notoriety for long. Ludlam was gone less than two months after my first reviews and features appeared on the Charlotte theatre scene in 1987.

Vep wasn’t too long in finding me. Following up on previous drag triumphs in Psycho Beach Party and Vampire Lesbians of Sodom at the storied Pterodactyl Club, Alan Poindexter and innovative Theatre Company introduced the crowning Ridiculous Theatre glory to the Queen City in 1993. Poindexter was only partially mincing in Ludlam’s flamboyant footsteps, for the Long Island native not only wrote a large chunk of his Ridiculous rep but also starred and frequently directed.

In all, Ludlam’s Complete Plays runs to over 900 pages, including such promising titles as Turds in Hell, Eunuchs of the Forbidden City, Isle of the Hermaphrodites, Secret Lives of the Sexists, and Der Ring Gott Farblongett. Despite these temptations, we’ve waited over 30 years to dip further into the Ridiculous oeuvre.

But it’s not surprising that PaperHouse Theatre is the perpetrator. After all, they exhumed Irma Vep two summers ago at VisArt Video’s clubby setting at the rear of their alley. It’s also rather discerning of them to ignore Ludlam’s more sensational titles in favor of Reverse Psychology.

The original 1980 production drew one of the strangest reproaches ever seen in a review. Writing for the New York Times, Frank Rich declared that Ludlam’s new farce did not live up to the playwright’s Ridiculous brand: “Silly? Perhaps. Clever? Certainly. Funny? Absolutely,” he conceded. “But ridiculous? When a play is as well-crafted and sharply written as Mr. Ludlam’s, honest-to-God respect must be paid.”

Rich wasn’t done, citing Ludlam’s production for selling his own play short.

PaperHouse doesn’t make the same mistake – or any others, for that matter. Shrewdly in charge, PaperHouse founder and artistic director Nicia Carla gives her players free rein to go with the freaky flow of the action and to underscore their quirks and hypocrisies, even if they trespass the borderlines of caricature. But they keep their mischief within the two psychiatrists and their two patients, never breaking character or milking an easy laugh.

That approach enriches the ironies Ludlam explores and sharpens the satirical points he scores with his four intertwined adulterers.

Leonard Silver and his wife, Karen Gold, are the psychiatrists who begin secret affairs at the beginning of Act 1, neither of them aware that their new paramours, Silver’s Eleanor and Gold’s Freddie, are also patients of their spouses. Ludlam is showing us all this gradually in a series of two-handed scenes between Silver and Eleanor, Silver and Freddie, Freddie and Eleanor – yes, they’re married – and Silver and Gold.

So the accumulation of deliciously absurd discovery adds fuel to the comedy as we piece together the big secret that this unfaithful quartet doesn’t, that they’re all being cheated on. Yet the business end of this farce, juxtaposed with the couples’ home lives, compounds the comedy long before their intertwined deceits unravel.

For the most absurd thing you’ll notice is that the psychiatrists’ marital relationship is far more hostile and acrimonious than their patients’! They’re the ones who need therapy!

Nevertheless, Gold is making Freddie, a struggling artist, feel guilty because she can lavish all the money she receives from Eleanor and her other clientele on a new gallery where Freddie can paint and exhibit. Silver, meanwhile, is wowing Eleanor on her own dime, if we presume that Freddie can’t really afford his therapy on his own.

Ludlam will keep leaning into this point even after the farcical climax in Act 2, where all four of his sex-driven cheaters are found out in a frantic scene at a beachside resort. The upshot of all these blasted deceptions is a double fake-out epilogue that serves to magnify Ludlum’s exploitation theme to the magnitude of horror.

And yes, Rich may have missed what Ludlam saw as the most ridiculous aspect of his satirical tale. A specter of promiscuity hovers over it all. All the wicked stealth and hurried cover-ups are driven by axiomatic beliefs in the sanctity of marriage, fidelity, and monogamy. Each of these pieties may have seemed supremely ridiculous to Ludlam – inside the box – before he was diagnosed with AIDS a mere two months before his death.

Carla and her cast make it clear that the psychiatrists are definitely among the loonies that we see. The most promiscuous of these is Ashby Blakely as the ravenously omnivorous Dr. Leonard Silver, madly attracted to all the other people onstage except his wife. Brilliantly layered on in the epilogue is an eerie touch that would have been unavailable to Ludlam when he originated this role: a spot-on evocation of Anthony Hopkins as Hannibal Lecter.

It’s pretty obvious that Carla and Lisa Schacher, in her yummiest role yet, see Eleanor as the polar opposite of Silver, the least guilt-ridden by promiscuity and the most horribly victimized. Partly due to her sunny histrionics and partly due to Ludlam’s portraiture, we find Eleanor the most artless and appealing of these risk-takers. Her most extreme travails begin midway through Act 2 when she is visited by a quasi-nightmare.

This is when Rasheeda Moore comes to the fore as Dr. Karen Gold and begins to seize her rightful place as the cunning and evil of the bunch. Blakely as Silver offers keen competition, shamelessly wooing Freddie during multiple therapy sessions and shredding his Hippocratic oath when his dear patient forsakes him. Moore is merely cruel and unscrupulous with Eleanor, taking multiple phone calls in the middle of their session and then brusquely shutting her down mid-question when time is up.

How does Chaz Pofahl as Freddie manage to keep paying Silver if the starving artist cannot sell even one of his paintings? Supreme poseur and part-time sponge, the stylish and cavalier Pofahl charmingly shows us that our Freddie cares nothing for such mundane matters, slickly picking up Gold at a museum when only one of them can pay the cab fare to his humble abode.

On your ride home, with your impressions of Reverse Psychology still fresh, you may consider the notion that Eleanor and Freddie have somehow cured their therapists.

That may be the last of multiple meanings that you’ll find in Ludlam’s title. It’s the last of his ironies, for sure, and devilishly ridiculous.

Or it was the last irony in this farce. Grimmer ironies surfaced when Ludlam’s death was front page news in the New York Times. Public Theatre’s legendary Joseph Papp, with whom Ludlam was engaging in contract talks, put it bluntly, as he always did: “We lost an extraordinary artist who was just on his way to a tremendous breakthrough in the theater and opera.”

“I and You” Sings Songs of Myselves

Review: I and You at Theatre Charlotte

By Perry Tannenbaum

Stevie Wonder made the point so memorably over 50 years ago when he dropped his Talking Book album: “You and I” sounds so much more melodious and natural than if you reverse those pronouns. As Laura Gunderson’s unique 2014 dramedy reminds us, now wrapping up Theatre Charlotte’s 95th season, I AND YOU sounds and feels rather awkward – even if it’s grammatically correct.

Predictably, the play is written for two high-school-aged people going through an awkward meeting, and director Rasheeda Moore makes the two-hander a little more fit for community theatre programming by rotating two different casts during the production’s two-weekend run. Pronouns figure prominently in the plot from the beginning, for when Anthony enters Caroline’s bedroom and meets her – without prior notice – for the first time, he’s carrying a really lame handmade poster and a fairly shabby old book, overflowing with scraps of sticky notes and bookmarks.

He’s a young man on an urgent mission, so desperate in his pleading that he almost sounds commanding. You and I, he is telling her, need to collaborate on a project for our American Lit class where we show how the meaning of I and You keeps changing during the course of Walt Whitman’s “Song of Myself.” That’s a rather big ask of Caroline, a rather ornery young woman suffering from a liver disease that keeps her out of school most of the time. She actually hates poetry, let alone Walt Whitman.

Caroline’s objections to poetry and how it’s taught in school are rather intelligent, and Anthony’s advocacy of Whitman is passionate and rather erudite for a teen. If they can get together, the outcome could be provocative. We know that Caroline isn’t really going to throw Anthony out, and we know that Anthony isn’t going to storm off, never to be seen again, so it’s gratifying that Gunderson only briefly feints in those directions. Once these formalities are dispensed with, our main interest jibes with that of the people before us onstage: getting acquainted and finding out why they’re worth our time.

Gunderson keeps it personal and unpredictable, with mercifully few ensuing chances that Anthony and Caroline will break apart before they get to know each other. They do get to know each other over two acts, with multiple scenes before and after intermission. Through various disagreements, crises, musical jams, and accords – and of course, through the lyricism and the merging, pantheistic spirit of Whitman.

Along the way, Anthony’s classroom assignment becomes a subtle template. For while he and Caroline are wrestling with the multitudes that Whitman packs into his pronouns, we find ourselves on the lookout for how the I and You speaking to each other onstage are changing before our eyes – in their views of themselves, each other, and what they can do and be together. Even so, the outcome was beyond my wildest imagination, though Gunderson had skillfully dropped a hint or two.

Moore is similarly thoughtful in how she handles her two casts, the Walt Cast and the Whitman Cast. They are listed in that order on our playbills, but it was the Whitman Cast, Njoki Tiagha and John Emilio Felipe, who actually premiered this production last Friday at the Queens Road barn. That’s the cast I saw at the Sunday matinee, so the Walt Cast (Dorian Herring and Isabella Frommelt) will be performing more times during the second week of the run as they continue to alternate, evening the score for the last time at this coming Sunday’s matinee.

You’ll also notice – and perhaps appreciate – that the players in each cast are listed in the order of Whitman pronouns they will explore. Chris Timmons’ set design is richly hued, a nicely coordinated mix of turquoise, blue, and purple, always in tune with Timmons’ lighting. The décor is more dreamy than girly, particularly when Caroline turns on the little light show she has installed. Bedridden though she often is, she is outfitted with a laptop, a cellphone that serves as a gateway to her someday becoming a photographer, a smoke detector with a dead battery, and a turtle pillow that she hugs fiercely and talks to.

Anthony, we learn, is a varsity basketball player fresh from a game where he had a traumatic experience. Not a total loser with women, he comes bearing waffle fries.

Although Gunderson specifies the race of each character, Moore demonstrates that she finds such prescriptions disposable. Her results with the Whitman Cast are quite admirable, though she needs to tell both players to turn up the volume if they’re to conquer the acoustic problems of the renovated Old Barn. Even the most veteran actors who have appeared there since the grand reopening have sometimes struggled to be heard.

Tiagha is near-perfect as Caroline, particularly in mixing the teen’s intelligence with her eccentricities. She only needs to let us know a wee bit more clearly that Anthony is getting over on her and that she is falling for him (and Walt’s poetry). The opposite problem afflicts Felipe, who is perennially a couple of notches too shy and worshipful toward Caroline – he’s a popular jock at school! – without gaining sufficient confidence as he begins to make headway. While I question those choices, I must applaud how intensely Felipe inhabits every moment. Furthermore, the rapport that Tiagha and Felipe have sown is superb at every turn.

Gunderson strikes the right chord in developing her protagonists through the music they love. For a boomer like me – who owns Jerry Lee Lewis’s complete Sun Sessions as well as John Coltrane’s complete Atlantic, Impulse, and Prestige recordings – her choices couldn’t be more perfect. Or authentic. YMMV, y’all.

ShakesCar’s Dystopia Is as Serious as a Cartoon

Review: Shakespeare Carolina’s production of Mr. Burns at Spirit Square

By:  Perry Tannenbaum

2019~Mr Burns-12.jpg

If your Simpsons erudition doesn’t extend far beyond Bart, Homer, and “D-oh!” you likely haven’t the foggiest notion about who the evil owner of the Springfield Nuclear Power Plant might be. Good reason for boning up on the 30-year-old animated TV series before you go and see Shakespeare Carolina’s production of Mr. Burns, Anne Washburn’s strangely imagined “Post-Electric Play,” at Spirit Square.

The Simpsons is very much at the heart of Washburn’s myopic dystopia, beginning not too long from now, somewhere south of devastated Boston – at a safe distance from obliterated Pennsylvania. Not an ardent lobbyist on behalf of nuclear power, Washburn doesn’t trigger her nuclear winter with weapons unleashed after treaty breaches, miscalculated escalations, or some jerk’s pudgy finger on the nuclear hot button.

Instead, we seem to have been decimated by a chain reaction of nuclear reactors.

2019~Mr Burns-03

Certainly, the evil Mr. Burns has triumphed over humanity in Washburn’s scenario, but it’s unclear whether she views that as her ultimate horror. For as a few survivors sit around a campfire, we might gather that The Simpsons has outlived all other recognizable trappings of civilization. Matt, Jenny, Maria, and Sam aren’t preoccupied with reaching out to other clusters of survivors or isolated wanderers – or in re-establishing the nation’s electrical grid. Rather they’re engaged, sometimes excitedly, in piecing together an old episode of The Simpsons that they have all watched years ago.

Presumably a rerun, for the “Cape Feare” episode, the core of the reconstruction, first aired in 1993, twenty years before the off-Broadway premiere of Mr. Burns.

A newcomer named Gibson wanders into the campsite with the bad tidings from Boston. He is also familiar with this seminal episode of The Simpsons and contributes to the group reclamation. Aside from a ritual sharing of possible survivor info, that’s pretty much all of the Act 1 action.

Colleen 2.JPG

Not at all interested in adhering to established theatre traditions, Washburn gives us two intermissions instead of the usual one. And if you think the opening act was a bit impersonal, wait till you see the acts that follow. It’s seven years later and Colleen, recumbent and silent throughout Act 1, has become a post-electric TV director, and the company has grown to seven with the addition of Quincy.

We see the group rehearsing an odd amalgam of quick TV sitcom blackouts and commercial breaks, where “Cape Feare” has evolved and commercials are no less revered for their nostalgic content. Apparently, touring with such rudimentary fare has become a cutthroat industry. Lines, slogans, and episodes are licensed, and competition for rights to them is fierce – and perhaps more important than the quality factor.

Pret a Manger

Zoom ahead 75 years and, under Amanda Liles’ ritualistic direction, you’ll be able to visualize “Cape Feare” as either a solemn religious rite or as an eerie melodramatic opera, for most of the music written by Michael Friedman to Washburn’s lyrics resides here. Liles and the ShakesCar cast also leave the ending ambiguous. We’re either watching the near-revival of the electrical grid or a re-enactment of the original flameout.

Mr. B finally emerges emphatically during this savage spectacle, not as the evil and greedy capitalist of yore but as a demonic destroyer. Homer, Bart, and Marge are now as foundational as Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob – though their sacrificial fates bring in a New Testament flavor. Stray wisps of Washburn’s referential comedy still remain, though, as when the Simpsons make merry with new lyrics to The Flintstones’ theme song.

2019~Mr Burns-23.jpg

My suspicion is that enjoyment of Mr. Burns will be proportionate to how readily you can see yourself sharing in the opening bursts of enthusiasm that the nuclear holocaust survivors have in reconstructing “Cape Feare” on The Simpsons. Lacking more than rudimentary Simpsons erudition – Homer’s voice will send my hand flailing toward my remote a bit more quickly than Bart’s – I’ll have to admit that I struggled. My memories of Homer’s zenith had faded into forgetfulness long before 2013.

An apocalyptic landscape such as Washburn’s is obviously frill-averse, so if Jess Clapper’s costume designs look somewhat makeshift, no harm done. The cylindrical blue headdress that Jen Jamsky-Pollack wears as Marge works fine, recognizable in an instant for The Simpson faithful, while Rasheeda Moore’s get-up as Bart looks comparatively thrown together. Viking shoulder plates? Why not.

Nor does an outdoor campsite in the middle of the night – or the scenes to follow – require that Liles seek out a set designer, though the final flashes of zonked light presumably required some technical derring-do from James Cartee. The design and tech needs of Mr. Burns really do jibe well with ShakesCar and their fundamental Elizabethan fare.

Except that, in Mr. Burns, we never become more than superficially acquainted with anyone onstage. In Act 2, we can at least conclude that we’re watching a director with a company of actors, all of whom discuss the production they’re rehearsing and the biz. In the outer acts, Shakespearean ripeness is pretty much deep-sixed. The characters they’re portraying or debating are more important than who Matt, Jenny, Gibson, Colleen and the rest really are. By the time we’re 75+ years hence, when all these folks are sporting various configurations of face paint, they can’t really be the same people we were introduced to.

It’s not just a surrender to a debased pop culture that Washburn seems to be sketching – it’s a surrender of identity. Maybe that’s the point that the playwright wants to make, irrespective of nuclear threats, and maybe she was worried that we wouldn’t notice or be alarmed.

2019~Mr Burns-21.jpg

Most people who enter Duke Energy Theater for an evening with Mr. Burns – or the actor who plays the actor who eventually portrays Mr. Burns – will likely wish that Washburn were a little more worried about our perceptions of her script and a little more proactive. While I may need to evolve into a post-critic to properly evaluate Washburn’s post-characters, I’ll start with David Jamsky-Pollack as Matt, the geekiest Simpson preservationist in Act 1.

Although he lays relatively low in the middle act, Matt morphs into Mr. Burns, and more than anyone else, Jamsky-Pollack incorporates the pop-eyed essence of The Simpsons into his portrayal. That creates a credible bridge with Matt, whom Jamsky-Pollack makes the most hyper and paranoid of the people around the campfire. As Colleen, Corlis Hayes is another near-person we pay attention to, primarily in Act 2 while she is the company director and Matt is in eclipse. Hayes is moderately bossy, a bit yielding when her authority is challenged – everything her role demands.

Dervin Gilbert is arguably the nearest to a three-dimensional person as Gibson in the first two acts. With multiple guns pointed at him as he enters the campsite, we can empathize with his trepidations and attempts to ingratiate himself, and seven years later, Gibson is Colleen’s leading man, a temperamental artiste in an arts wasteland. Matt Kenyon as Sam/Homer, Melody McClellan as Maria/Lisa, and Jen Jamsky-Pollack as Jenny/Marge are most memorable during the sacred Simpsons rites, successfully achieving and slightly transcending cartoon reality.

2019~Mr Burns-17.jpg

Among the latter-day Simpsons, I was most taken with Moore, who doesn’t arrive until after the first intermission as Quincy, a singer with as much artistic pretension as Gibson. It does make sense that Quincy would get to chew nearly as much scenery as Matt when the Simpsons ritual becomes a life-or-death struggle between good and evil. Cartoon or not, Moore’s writhing, struggling, despairing, and rallying are key reasons why we see the horror in Mr. Burns, whatever it may mean.