TWO LETTERS
Sandra McGregor
November 14, 2006
A man named Tony Nardi stands in a University of Toronto lecture
hall with his lap top, and proceeds to read a letter. The backdrop
is some math equations on the blackboard. The lights are full
on. I am sitting at a desk about three feet from him. He stands
alone on stage and proceeds to read the first of two letters.
The following evening he performs letter two in a different
lecture hall.
Many characters and perspectives come through in these incredible
readings, and this work is a cleverly crafted criticism of the
state of the theatre in Ontario and Quebec. His letters are
a response to two events. One has to do with being offered a
role in a lousy television script, with characters that “smell
like cardboard”. The other more significant event is the
story of a critic who is responsible for triggering the collapse
of an artist’s esteem and her subsequent suicide.
This production confronts the dramaturgical critics in the writer’s
own head and the in the theatre community at large. In both
letters he portrays various “dramaturgical ghosts”
and their points of view and then he takes the opportunity to
respond and voice the limitations of these points of view. In
letter two we meet the “Clever stuck in the neck ghost”,
“the ‘PhD. Ghost”, (a dramaturgical queen),
the “Goateed Ghost”, (a 3000 year old anti Semitic),
the Inquisitor ghost, “The PR ghost”, and the list
goes on. Tony captures the spirit and nuance of various personalities
and attitudes and confronts with passion and authenticity the
ignorance and blindness imbedded in these perspectives.
This production is far from being your typical theatre experience.
It is a traveling act reminiscent of the wandering players depicted
in the production’s beautifully designed program. The
lecture hall becomes the set and in this show, the actors, the
director, and the critics are all embodied in one man. The format
is ‘un-dramatic’ and does not meet our traditional
ideas of what theatre ‘should’ be. This form is
intended to reflect one of the central ideas communicated in
these letters: We need to transcend the boundaries of our own
expectations of how theatre should be and aspire, with beginner
mind, to create art that enlightens humanity. Tony feels that
the “bar is set in hell’s basement” and that
mediocrity has consumed us on all levels. Repeatedly he challenges
us to “re-think our thinking” and “break the
pattern of sameness”.
He uses the image of a box to illustrate how artists, critics,
and perhaps all of humanity are trapped in their own mediocrity.
If you are trapped in a box, and never see outside, you might
believe you are free. If you poke a hole and look outside the
box, you will discover, you’re not free at all, and all
you know is just a small part of all there is.
The difficulty with not looking outside the box is that you
live and create in this ignorance.
According to this playwright, our incapacity to speak and give
voice to our opinions and our ideas is what keeps us in “the
box”. Mediocrity thrives in a society that teaches its
children to be seen and not heard, and since “children
are our future actors” , there is an entire body of the
theatre community who feel “choked”, “blocked”
“sick, and “most likely to take things in with no
resistance”. The “silent cancer” and the “no
comment hell” are plaguing the theatre family and humanity
at large. It is clear, however, that this actor does not suffer
from any of these afflictions. These letters reveal a man who
believes in the transformative power of words and values our
capacity to communicate our ideas and opinions. He states, “Those
who speak create their own Destiny.”
Tony speaks on many topics. He wants to eliminate Clichés
and Types because they are “masks that conceal, not reveal”.
He is particularly sensitive to the Italian gangster, ball rubbing,
pasta loving, pussy smelling, and Italian stereotype. I particularly
enjoyed his suggestion of what the character of Johnny might
have really have said to the ‘Pussy man” in the
unconscious television script that aired anyway. He comments
on and depicts a range of stereotypes through the various ghosts,
and appeals to writers and actors to “pierce the fifth
wall” and aspire towards producing ‘truthful’
scripts with real characters that have “lines rooted in
reality”.
Tony wants writers to ask more often, “Why am I writing
this story?” He says many Canadians have “no physical
relationship with what it means to survive” and so they
cannot fully empathize with the human suffering around them.
Their comfort has desensitized them and this alienation from
the depths of human feeling and experience affects the quality
of Art that they create.
At one point the actor answers his cell phone and takes a call.
At first I wonder if someone really has called and I expect
him to integrate this spontaneous improvisation into his reading.
But the phone call is staged; it is an act and it feels like
it. I am suddenly aware that Tony is an actor performing a phone
call. This was ineffective, inauthentic and I would question
the motivation behind such a choice.
How did this performance impact the rest of the audience? I
gleaned from here and there that people were interested, confused,
lost, or found. At the end of the show the lights and attention
are temporarily on us. Our responses in those post show moments
mirror our range of ‘boxdom’ (my word inspired by
Tony). One woman sincerely wants to know what the solution is.
She missed those lines. “What’s the solution? That’s
the problem. Your question.” Another actor from Quebec
declares how he had said “no” to bad scripts, bad
directors, but what was he to do? Saying “no” means
unemployment. Tony listens and tells him. “Do your own
thing”. Another wise audience member advises us to, “Write
letters”. He achieved results when he wrote to the Globe
and Mail. Most memorable was the thirty year veteran actor who
wanted to know how many times the door clicked during the performance.
He seemed satisfied when I gave him the number seven, but I
was annoyed at his own self indulgence and resentful for squandering
precious opportunity. Overall, I think the audience was speechless
(of course). They were whelmed to say the least. “Think.
Think. Think”. After seeing this show, thinking is inevitable.
What have I been thinking? I’ve been thinking about the
importance of letting go of knowing so that I might listen more
freshly to people. I have been thinking about how difficult
it is for me to voice my opinions and my criticism. I’ve
been thinking about the epiphany I had when I figured out that
I don’t want to act in unconscious scripts. I’ve
been thinking about how fucked up the world is and remembering
how my heart collapsed again and again with each “Even
then…” horror listed in Tony’s first letter.
Yes. “Cause and Effect cannot be ignored in Drama or Comedy”.
If only Cause and Effect were not ignored in real life.
There is rich content in these two letters and Tony Nardi’s
performance is powerfully provocative. I did not absorb all
of what was shared in these readings, but many of his thoughts
permeated my bubble of mediocrity. My box has been rattled.
I feel encouraged to listen more closely and speak out more
often.
