Copyright 2004-2008

  • David Gottlieb. All rights reserved.
Blog powered by TypePad

Buddhism, Judaism, and Theatre: my own holy trinity

In Judaism, the present moment is a very narrow bridge.

In Buddhism, the moment is all there is.

In theatre, the moment is part of an arc.

*

In Judaism, one must strive in each moment to serve God.

In Buddhism, one must be in each moment. No striving.

In theatre, one must be the character in each moment. No "indicating."

*

In Judaism, we are chosen.

In Buddhism, we are enlightened.

In theatre, we are cast.

*

In Judaism, we are commanded.

In Buddhism, we are taught.

In theatre, we are directed.

*

In Judaism, we study Torah.

In Buddhism, we study the Dharma.

In theatre, we study the script.

*

In Judaism, we pray.

In Buddhism, we meditate.

In theatre, we rehearse.

*

In Judaism, we do.

In Buddhism, we refrain from doing.

In theatre, we perform.

*

In Judaism, it's your mother.

In Buddhism, it's your roshi.

In theatre, it's your ego.

Feel free to add to the list. You don't have to be Jewish, Buddhist, or an actor.

--T.A.

A dear friend from a previous life

That's how I think of my friend Kathryn.

We acted in a play together in college. Five years later, we rediscovered each other in the same graduate acting program. She's two decades into a very respectable career mostly in theatre, but also in film and television. We both married and divorced actors; I left the business more than a decade ago.

She is lively and funny and bright, and a little sad -- still pained by the divorce from the man who was her best friend. And she is still very beautiful, with clear blue eyes, a tiny, slightly upturned nose and high, feline cheekbones.

We hadn't really visited in several years. She's one of only a few friends of mine who are still in the biz. She has to turn down leading roles at regional theatres, because it leads (as I discovered) only to more regional work, which leads to poverty. One must get film or TV work to make a living, and in order to get that work, one must be in NY or LA, not Hartford for six weeks or Minneapolis for a couple of months.

She said it's hard to go out for a drink with friends anymore, because the actors have gone into diaspora: no one can afford to live anywhere closer than Inwood (near the northern tip of Manhattan) or Park Slope (in Brooklyn) or Astoria (in Queens). Off-Broadway theatres pay a pittance, but the roles there are prized, because, after all, one can be seen by casting agents and directors.

She has a boyfriend, also an actor, in LA. She has family mostly in and around Philadelphia. She has other dear friends, too. Like me. I loved her from a distance in college, this perfect shiksa goddess, but now I see her and am reminded of all the years and all the plays we did together, and all the stupid relationships and marriages we consoled each other over, and all the delight of catching up.

And when I say she's a dear friend from a previous life, I don't just mean the previous chapter of this one. I have a feeling she and I go way, way back.

--T.A.

Bus Stop

Saw a sweet little production of this landmark play at the Writers Theatre of Glencoe last night. They've taken over the Women's Library Club building, and on its tiny stage they faithfully and beautifully reproduced a 50s diner in rural Kansas.

The cast was uneven but the cumulative effect must have been just what Inge had been hoping for, and just what I love in plays of this era: throw together wildly improbably characters in an isolated setting (in this case, they're marooned in the diner-cum-bus stop by a howling snowstorm); let them be inhabited by Method actors who literally get into the characters' skin; and let them pour out their longing and their pain.

I'm a sucker for the theatre again. A good two decades removed from my acting career, at last, I no longer watch critically. Every time I see a show, it's my favorite show, or my favorite production, or my favorite genre; maybe it just has one performance I admire: bingo. Money's worth. All my knowledge has evaporated, and left in its place just a soppy appreciation for how hard everybody works to create this burning slice of time and space at the edge of a dark room. What better way to make sense of it all than to watch people living out the lives of others groping toward understanding?

The rest of this weekend, I've been immersed in preparing for upcoming talks and teaching engagements. Will I ever be rid of the feeling of fraudulence? Will I ever know enough to believe the words coming out of my own mouth?

I spoke at a Reform synagogue on Friday night: another intimate gathering in another massive sanctuary. There is something forlorn about a Friday night service where the rabbi's amplified voice echoes off the stone walls, and the people feel far removed from each other and from the incendiary awareness Judaism -- and all of religion -- is supposed to nurture. Sometimes it seems that people just want to belong.

My nephew Matt left an interesting comment to the previous post: "our journeys are both reflections of who we are, and attempts to escape from who we are." He's got something there.

Have a good week.

--T.A.

Sky Masterson's subdivision

This brief interlude in Guys and Dolls is unforgettable: the most lyrical moment in the greatest American musical ever produced. Sky Masterson is in his element, on a rain-oiled Manhattan street, and the song is born right then, right for that moment, so you never even think to ask yourself, "Why the hell is this guy singing?" It's him, expressing himself, no filter, no censor -- just him and an orchestra:

My time of day is the dark time
A couple of deals before dawn
When the street belongs to the cop
And the janitor with the mop
And the grocery clerks are all gone.

When the smell of the rainwashed pavement
Comes up clean, and fresh, and cold
And the streetlamp light
Fills the gutter with gold

That's my time of day
My time of day

And you're the only doll I've ever wanted to share it with me.

That's it. That's the whole song. It's perfect.

I got up well before dawn this morning. Made my coffee. Got the paper. Thought: Hey. I'm the Sky Masterson of the 'burbs. Here in my terry-cloth robe, reading about Paul Konerko and our ham-handed foreign policy, listening to the trucks on the tollway and the furnace firing up for the day, checking in on blog-world and waiting for the skim-milk sun to pour through the continent of clouds that hovers over the Midwest at this time of year.

Yeah, I'm the Sky of my subdivision.

And you're the only one I've ever wanted to share it with me.

--T.A.

Arms and the Truth

Last night's very satisfying production of Shaw's Arms and the Man, at the tiny but determined Writers Theatre in Glencoe, provided a few good laughs, along with a sobering realization: in the 110 years since the play was written, we're still being sold the same bill of goods about war, patriotism, bravery -- and love.

Arms and the Man is mostly about the follies of war -- or really, the follies of the way war gets sold to the citizens of warring nations. Written more than a century ago, Shaw's play is still fresh in many respects, but none more so than this: what is sold as bravery is often mere foolhardiness, and what is sold as necessary and patriotic is often calculated and cowardly.

Self-deception is a human characteristic that replicates itself in nations and in individuals. We tell ourselves stories about love that are concocted of the same ingredients as our war stories: bravery and devotion, passion and purpose -- and just a pinch of the truth.

One of the astonishing contradictions in our current public priorities is the effort expended on legislating life's sanctity on the one hand, and fertilizing the ground for mass slaughter on the other. This contradiction mutates and appears in our personal lives, where, we are told, love is sacred -- as long as it is strictly limited to existing between man and woman, or, more impossibly, husband and wife, the single relationship most likely to deprive love of its oxygen.

(Equally misguided are the efforts to make unconstitutional the burning of the flag. Meanwhile, across the globe, flag makers can't keep up with demand for American flags, so eager are angry nations to light them on fire and stomp on them.)

Some wars might be necessary, their prosecution clever and heroic. It may even be that there have been wars, or battles, that saved lives, channeling fury into combat that otherwise might have mushroomed into genocide on an even more ghastly scale than the battle achieved.

But as Arms and the Man reminds, what we are told and what the soldier knows from experience have nothing in common, save the source of disinformation and decision.

I predict that we will someday look back on the War in Iraq as a success, but it won't be our soldiers who are painting it that way, and historians will make careers on debating the veracity of that claim.

On that selfsame day that success is proclaimed (not counting our president's battleship proclamation), we will be commanded to love and forgive our enemy, as the Bible requires. On that day, we will admire love as the pinnacle of God's creation -- much the way we might admire a butterfly, pinned in a glass case.

--T.A.

"I can't look at everything hard enough!"

I've been haunted by that line lately, for some reason. It's said by Emily, the young heroine of Thornton Wilder's Our Town, as she is "allowed," after having died in childbirth, to relive one idyllic morning of her childhood before she takes up her eternal place in the graveyard on the hill above the town. Totally awash in memory, at once living it and beyond it, she enters her childhood home and experiences the miraculous impossibility of going back in time.

She sits at breakfast, just past dawn on a school day, tears streaming down her face, as her mother serves her breakfast and her brother pesters her. The day has begun, as days will. To her mother and brother, Emily is simply there, as she is every other morning. Emily knows the terrible truth: she is already gone, and she is alone with that knowledge.

*                                                                   *                                          

I watch my girls living the tortured magic of high school. They love this time in their lives, but cannot stand outside of it and peer in. I thought high school was OK, but I wonder why I can't remember much about my own experience. Perhaps, like them, I was too sunk in it, too self-absorbed, and/or simply too young to have cultivated that skill. I have images, not memories. Sensations. Even smells. But no narratives.

Last night, for the first time in weeks, the whole family -- all five of us -- sat down to dinner together. (Psychologists and family therapists say there is a direct correlation between how often a family eats together,the cohesiveness of the family unit, and the mental health of the individuals that comprise it.) We laughed uproariously. We talked about our respective days, we made fun of each other. Gabe entertained us by imitating his mom and the hysterical noises she makes when she hurts herself (a kind of strangled "Doh!" with an absurdly elongated vowel). We ate vast quantities of bread, trying to rid the house of all chametz as Passover nears.

I tried to remember family dinners from my childhood. I can't. It was a great childhood. But there were so many of us, and as the youngest, for many years I couldn't tell how many there were, or what was being discussed, or who was in charge. It was like living among mastodons. Perhaps this helped cast the vague contours of my memory: I could grasp the scene, sense the energy, but not share in the story. I had to just avoid wrath, or being accidentally stepped on.

There is one event I clearly recall: the famous "Prune Whip Episode." This was an evening when my mother, fed up with the finicky and impossibly varied tastes of her six children (and husband, and two dogs and at least as many cats), made "prune whip" (swear to God), slammed it down on the table (for dessert, I think), and told us we were damn well going to eat it. All of it.

And even this I don't recall as a narrative. What I mostly remember is our startled, dutiful silence, punctuated only by the soft, gagging sounds of somewhere between four and six children, choking down one of the most awful creations ever spawned in the Devil's kitchen.

It is an evening that lives in family lore, and yet I'm sure my brother or one of my sisters -- or even my father, who will use his advanced age to feign forgetfulness -- will recall more than just that audiovisual, which is all that's surfaced from my softened memory. They'll have the story. I have only the gagging sounds.

For almost the last decade of his life, my grandfather was sunk in the inescapable reverie of what must have been Alzheimer's, although it wasn't yet identified and named as such. It is impossible to know what he may have known or remembered, because he lost the ability to communicate. I remember, though, that he seemed supremely untroubled. He would cry silently when he saw us enter his room at the nursing home. He would devour, with evident delight, an ice cream cone, which we often brought him just to see him emerge from the wax mold of his illness. Then he would sink back into it and resume his reverie.

Sometimes, that's how I feel. I see memory enter the room of my consciousness. I feel the richness of a long-gone moment, I feel the lachrymose joy of bittersweet remembering, and the feeling that I can't look at it hard enough.

Then I vanish again into the contemplation of nothing in particular.

--T.A.

Miller and Measure

The Chicago Shakespeare Theatre mounted a solid production of Shakespeare's Measure for Measure last night. I found myself sitting there thinking about Arthur Miller.

The play is one of Shakespeare's more convaluted and improbable. While considered a comedy (at least, it's grouped among the comedies in my Riverside Shakespeare), it is dark, quite insightful and cynical about the relationship between power and lust, and way ahead of its time in many respects -- not least, its powerful portrayal of sexual harassment in action.

But its really a play about principle, one of Arthur Miller's great concerns.

I used to be a stage actor. It was one of my first careers. I wasn't sure then that theatre mattered in any lasting way, although we actors were constantly reinforcing each others' sense that we belonged to an itinerant priesthood that secretly kept the world spinning on its proper axis.

When you see an Arthur Miller play, you're reminded about the ways in which theatre can matter. You're seeing the work of a human being who lived through the Depression, the World Wars, and marriage to Marilyn Monroe -- there's enough drama right there, enough principle and passion, to infuse the theatre with life well into the next eon.

The disguised Duke's speech to the condemned Claudio, on the way to prepare oneself to death, though not as famous as Jacques' Seven Ages of Man speech in As You Like It, is ever bit as moving:

Be absolute for death: either death or life

Shall thereby be the sweeter. Reson thus with life:

If I do lis thee, I do lose a thing

That none but fools would keep. A breath thou ar,

Servile to all the skyey influences,

That dost this habitation where thou keepst

Hourly afflict. Merely, thou art death's fool,

For him thou labor'st by thy flight to shun,

And yet run'st toward him still. Thou art not noble,

For all th' accommodations that thour bear'st

Are nurs'd by baseness. Thou'rt by no means valiant,

For thou dost fear the soft and tender fork

Of a poor worm. Thy best of rest is sleep,

And that thou oft provok'st, yet grossly fear'st

Thy death, which is no more. Thou art not thyself,

For thou exists on many a thousand grains

That issue out of dust. Happy thou art not,

For what thou hast not, still thou striv'st to get,

And what thou hast, forget'st. Thou art not certain,

For thy complexion shifts to strange effects,

After the moon. If thou art rich, thou'rt poor,

For like an ass, whose back with ingots bows,

Thou bear'st thy heavy riches but a journey,

And death uunloads thee..."

... What's yet in this

That bears the name of life? Yet in this life

Lie hid moe thousand deaths; yet death we fear

That makes these odds all even."

Neither death nor politics have changed much since Shakespeare wrought his wonders. He's changed the way we see them, though, and Arthur Miller did no less.

--T.A.

Most Recent Photos

  • Damaschke Field
  • All Star Village
  • Cooperstown
  • Chevy-Volt-Concept-07
  • DSCN3957
  • Hillary
  • Aaron-burr-350
  • Farm
  • Gabe and Calusa 2002
  • 200pxabraham_abulafia
  • Black_rhino
  • Moshijog