Download File - Chalkdust Theatre Company

Presents
Angels in America
Part 1 Millenium Approaches
A play by
Tony Kushner
Directed by Annette Rowlison
TEACHING NOTES
Produced by
Chalkdust Theatre Inc.
Monkey Baa Theatre
Darling Harbour Precinct, June 2015
Compiled by
Henrietta Stathopoulos & the Cast
© These notes are for educational, RESEARCH purposes only, and may not be copied.
How to use these teaching notes
These notes are a collection of various sources, that we have used to help us
create this production and you will find a large number of websites that are
included for you to access, rather than just cutting and pasting in material.
In researching the play, to help the actors and director, a variety of sources
were found to be useful and these have been included, or
sourced/referenced for you to explore with your students.
The areas that are beneficial to Drama HSC students are the notes from the
director and the actors where they discuss their own exploration of the
play, as well as some of the activities and essays. A number of photographs
are available on the Chalkdust Theatre Facebook page. These photos are an
excellent source of discussion for students to explore staging and character
relationships.
Please feel free to contact me if you require any additional information at
[email protected]
Henrietta Stathopoulos
MA BA Dip Ed
Grad Cert Arts (Directing/Dramaturgy)
Drama / VET Entertainment Teacher
St Andrews College, Marayong
May 2015
2
Who are Chalkdust Theatre?
In 1993 drama teachers Peter Hazell and Matthew Barry decided to start
Chalkdust Theatre as an opportunity to perform and give other drama
teachers an avenue to refine their own performance and production skills.
From humble beginnings the company has grown and developed into a semi
professional company that has firmly established itself in the Western
Suburbs. The last 21 years have seen the company perform at the old Q
theatre in Penrith, JSPAC and Riverside Theatre, Parramatta. In the last 21
years the company has continued to refine its artistic choice, deciding to
bring to life HSC texts, Contemporary Australian texts, Feminist texts, Irish
texts, English drawing rooms comedy/farce and a musical to the theatre
stages. The current Executive continue to refine the mission in light of
economic and artistic changes. Part of their mission is to use social media to
help provide teaching notes to help drama educators. It also engages
prominent and promising directors, actors and designers to present an
annual artistic program that is razor-sharp, popular and stimulating.
Actors and production crew are involved voluntarily, with all monies
collected and banked to pay for each production. Their services to the
community were recognised with the awarding of a Volunteers Award from
Penrith City Council in the Year of the Volunteer.
They have managed to stay afloat where other companies have struggled or
gone under, but only through the generosity of its members and the
Executive - with the giving of time, services – either performance or
technical based. Educational experiences are vital for all students not just
from the viewpoint of seeing a production of a performance they are
studying, but also in extending their cultural experiences. The theatrical
experiences we give our students are important to the overall life education
of students.
The current Executive is a mix of primary and secondary teachers, and
industry professionals. All have professional acting training, experience or
technical credentials (Cert III in Live theatre and Technical Operations,
3
Marketing, Dramaturgy and Directing). Chalkdust Theatre endeavours to
mount productions that are of a high standard, and give students a
theatrical experience, which they can refer to in performance essays, along
with broadening their cultural experiences.
Chalkdust Theatre Inc. is one of the few local community theatre companies
in NSW that specialises in bringing to the stage at least one HSC drama text
per year - enabling students the chance to see a play they are studying in
performance, as well as the opportunity to discuss with actors and the
director the performance, focusing on the Rubric written by the BOSTES
NSW. Under the current leadership of the core Executive, the company
performs in local venues in the western suburbs to give the students of the
west the opportunity to see theatre at a reasonable cost. It continues to
expand with performances at Monkey Baa Theatre Darling Harbour.
Sell-out productions including The Laramie Project, Ruby Moon, Summer
of the Seventeenth Doll, and NUNSENSE have consolidated Chalkdust
Theatre’s position as one of Sydney’s acclaimed community theatre
companies.
Executive 2015
President:
Secretary:
Treasurer:
Executive
Members:
Catherine Simpson
Nicole Bonfield
Marnie O’Mara
John Baltaks
Sara de Vries
Trent Gardiner
Jonathan Llewellyn
4
First cover of the first edition of the play
New York City. 1986.Two couples wrestle relationships, religion and figuring out their p
in the world. Valium, politics and sex help to escape reality and sometimes make it clear
And then there’s the invincible and egotistical, Roy. A corrupt lawyer whose ability to
spin words makes the truth sometimes seem highly unlikely.
Set in a world of fast paced change, medical epidemic, and the excitement of city living,
Angels In America is a phenomenal piece of theatre having won the Pulitzer Prize for
Drama in 1993.
This new production by Chalkdust Theatre promises to really explore the themes of
Community, Identity and Status versus Change, as it is created with secondary students
studying the HSC Drama topic, Tragedy in mind.
Angels in America was described by the New York Observer as ‘one of the
greatest plays of the twentieth century’. It is 1985, Prior Walter is HIV
positive, his Jewish boyfriend leaves him for a straight Mormon and then
he gets a hospital visit from an angel who says it is up to him to save
humanity.
Throw in his drag queen best friend a closeted Republican lawyer the
Mormon’s pill-popping wife and a Rabbi and things are about to get mighty
interesting.
5
Angels in America is an epic double-comedy of love and hate, heaven and
earth, past and future. It’s magnificent in both scope and detail, with
luminous writing.
Both Millennium Approaches and Perestroika won the Tony Award and the
Drama Desk Award for Best Play. Playwright Tony Kushner is also a duel
Academy Award nominee for the screenplays Lincoln and Munich.
The Board of Studies BOSTES 2 UNIT DRAMA
Rubric for this Topic in 2015 is:
Topic 3: Tragedy
This topic explores, theoretically and experientially, plays which give
expression to a tragic vision of human experience. By comparing an ancient
Greek tragedy to a modern tragic play, students will consider the essence of
tragedy and the controlling nature of the protagonist’s plight. In particular,
the role of fate, suffering, hubris and moral responsibility in the experience
of individual tragic heroines and heroes should be considered in light of the
political, social and cultural aspects of that experience. Students will
explore the dramatic forms, performance styles, techniques and
conventions in the plays and consider the implications of staging these
plays for a contemporary Australian audience.
TWO plays must be chosen, ONE from each list.
List 1
EITHER
Sophocles 2003, Oedipus Tyrannus, Cambridge University Press, Port
Melbourne, Victoria.1
OR
Sophocles 2003, Antigone, Cambridge University Press, Port Melbourne,
Victoria.
AND
List 2
EITHER
Miller, Arthur 1998, Death of a Salesman, Penguin Classics, London.
1
Please note: Oedipus Tyrannus is also known as Oedipus Rex or Oedipus the King.
6
OR
Kushner, Tony 1993, Angels in America (Part 1), Theatre Communications
Group, New York.
So what does this actually mean???
Below is a scaffold for you all to work from. Some of you are drama
teachers and have an understanding of what is required from students to
help them prepare for their written responses, but many of you are theatre
practitioners and hence will look at the text and the actual performance
from a very different view. Students are required to look at their texts as
more of a case study in discussing aspects on a theatre style, or movement
in the development of theatrical history.
Students should look at their plays from the point of view of The Director,
The Actor, The Designer and The Audience. (D.A.D.A is the acronym I get
my students to work under.)
1.
Students are required to work with their texts both theoretically and
experientially, through their exploration of plays which give expression to
a tragic vision of human experience.
They will do this by comparing an Ancient Greek tragedy either:
Sophocles 2003, Oedipus Tyrannus, Cambridge University Press, Port
Melbourne, Victoria.2
OR
2
Please note: Oedipus Tyrannus is also known as Oedipus Rex or Oedipus the King.
7
Sophocles 2003, Antigone, Cambridge University Press, Port Melbourne,
Victoria.
to a modern tragic play, and in their case: Kushner, Tony 1993, Angels in
America (Part 1), Theatre Communications Group, New York.
The following were focus questions asked of the cast and their
responses provide valuable insight into the actors perception of playing
roles and the play as a whole.
QUESTIONS TO ACTORS AND THE DIRECTOR
1. How as a Director would you try and create a world onstage that
highlights a tragic vision of human experience?
2. What aspects/issues pertinent to 2015 are integrated into your own
preparation and subsequent production?
3. How influential do you think this play was when it was first
produced, and is it still so powerful? If so what do you think makes it
so relevant in 2015?
QUESTIONS TO THE SET, and LIGHTING DESIGNERS AND COMPOSER
(Soundscape)
1. How is the human experience explored through the use of the
soundscape and the set design?
2. What elements or moments have been focused on for this production
and why?
3. How much research was done on previous productions? What
specifically was explored –Reviews? Set photos? Posters??
4. What came out of discussions with the Director on their Directorial
vision of this specific production?
8
5. What constraints did you have (if any) and how did you overcome
them?
6. Was your Designer vision realised?
7. What issues were there with the set?
8. Can you please provide us with set design sketches and notes and
stage plans?
9. Who was responsible for the Poster design? What were they trying to
achieve through the design? Why did they pic this image?
2.
Students will consider the essence of tragedy and the controlling nature
of the protagonist’s plight.
In particular, the role of fate, suffering, hubris and moral responsibility
in the experience of individual tragic heroines and heroes should be
considered. These should also be looked at in light of the political, social
and cultural aspects of that experience.
Students will explore the dramatic forms, performance styles, techniques
and conventions in the plays and consider the implications of staging these
plays for a contemporary Australian audience.
QUESTIONS FOR THE DIRECTOR AND ACTORS
1. What do you think is the essence of tragedy?
2. Is your character an embodiment of tragedy, or a victim of tragedy?
3. Who controls your character’s destiny?
4. What moral responsibility does your character have towards society?
5. Do you like your character as a person?
6. Is your character a victim of fate, or do they create their own?
7. What kind of moral responsibility does your character have? Who
defines that responsibility, and should they take it up? If they choose
to be morally irresponsible, what are their reasons for being so?
8. What understanding do you have of the Political climate the play was
originally written in, and does this climate still exist?
9. How do you think an Australian audience will respond to this
essentially American play, and it’s American culture?
10.
What is the Directorial Vision of the play? Where do you want it
to go each performance?
11. Have you read other reviews of the play?
9
12. Has the play’s meaning changed over time?
13. Has the play’s intention changed over time?
14.Is the play still relevant?
15. What modifications had to be made and why?
16.What challenges did the actors face and how did you help them
overcome them?
17. Do you like this play?
18.
As an actor what preparations did you feel were necessary to
help you create your character?
Publicity
Sample of handout and Poster
10
11
12
Set Building
13
14
HSC 2014 Question
Question 2 — Tragedy (20 marks)
‘Tragic characters are responsible for creating their own fate.’
Discuss this statement with reference to your study and experience of
TWO plays in this topic.
Texts set for study:
List 1
Sophocles, Oedipus Tyrannus
or
Sophocles, Antigone AND
List 2
Arthur Miller, Death of a Salesman
or
Tony Kushner, Angels in America (Part 1)
When exploring HSC style questions it is always good to look at the Markers
comments on BOSTES website
http://www.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au/hsc_exams/2014/notes/drama.html
Marking Centre comments
Question 2 – Tragedy
Candidates showed strength in these areas:
 addressing the question explicitly
 providing discussion of both plays as theatre
 demonstrating insightful ideas about how the plays might be staged
 supporting their arguments with relevant examples from their own
workshop experiences or imagined directorial choices.
Candidates need to improve in these areas:
 addressing all components of the question
 linking ideas such as catharsis and hubris to the notion of the
characters creating their own fate
 not just outlining the stories of the plays
 exploring the theatricality of the plays.
15
DRAMATURGICAL REFERENCES
These are used to help actors, the director, production crew research and
gain further insight into the play in amongst the rehearsal period. Many
questions are raised during the period before the play even commences
rehearsals, and then once in rehearsal more and more questions arise.
Angels in America-the play
20 Years on Oskar Eustis
▶ 2:08
www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRp9AED4gGc
Oct 20, 2010 - Uploaded by SignatureTheatreNY
The Play
NY Times Review
Frank Rich sings the praises of Angels in America's Broadway
debut.
https://myaccount.nytimes.com/auth/login
Signature Theater Company
Check out the website of the recent Off-Broadway revival of
Angels.
http://www.signaturetheatre.org/Past-Shows.aspx
16
NY Times on Off-Broadway Angels
See what the NY Times has had to say about the new production.
http://query.nytimes.com/search/sitesearch/#/%22angels+in+a
merica%22/
Book Cover
Here's the cover to one of the first editions of the play.
On Tragedy
http://abhinemani.com/essays/angels-in-america-the-americantragedy/
Angels in America: The American Tragedy
17
Contextual notes
https://www.scribd.com/doc/21554140/Angels-in-AmericaAudience-Guide
Glossary
http://alacarte.pugetsound.edu/subject-guide/141-Angels-inAmerica-Production-Guide?tab=1461
Genesis - Land Of Confusion [Official Music Video]
- YouTube
▶ 5:32▶ 5:32
www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pkVLqSaahk
Not the Nine O'Clock News - Reagan - YouTube
▶ 3:13
▶ 3:13
www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2n87YKSjrA
18
Not the Nine O'Clock News - I Believe... - YouTube
▶ 2:29
▶ 2:29
www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmWLJmbytkk
Not Necessarily the News; Reagan Press
Conference.flv ...
▶ 2:43
www.youtube.com/watch?v=fosIMbY1-PE
Not The Nine O'Clock News - American Election
Candidate ...
▶ 3:19
▶ 3:19
www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfuN9HRDVZY
19
The Playwright
Tony Kushner was born in Manhattan on July sixteen, 1956. His parents,
both classical musicians, moved a year later to Lake Charles, Louisiana, and
Kushner spent his childhood there. Growing up as a gay Jew in the Deep
South, he has later said, made him more conscious of his distinctive identity
as he might not have in heavily Jewish New York City. Kushner returned to
the city for college, receiving a degree in medieval literature from Columbia
University. After graduating, he taught in Louisiana for three years, then
returned to New York for good, studying for an M.F.A. at New York
University and writing and producing plays. His early works included an
adaptation of Pierre Corneille's The Illusion in 1988 and A Bright Room
Called Day in 1990.
Nothing in Kushner's early career, however, predicted the overnight success
he attained when Part One of Angels in America, Millennium Approaches,
opened in Los Angeles in 1992. Critical reaction to the play was immediately
and overwhelmingly positive: the influential New York Times theater critic
Frank Rich, for instance, called it "a searching and radical rethinking" of
American political drama and "the most extravagant and moving
demonstration imaginable" of the artistic response to AIDS. The play's Part
Two, Perestroika, was greeted with similar adulation the following year.
Kushner received bushels of awards for Angels in America, not least of
which were Tony Awards for Best Play in 1993 and 1994 and 1993's Pulitzer
Prize for Drama. Outside liberal literary and theatrical circles, however, the
play sometimes sparked controversy. A 1996 production of Angels in
Charlotte, North Carolina, for instance, took place only under protection of
a court order after local officials threatened to prosecute actors for
violating indecent- exposure laws, and productions in other cities were
picketed.
It is impossible to appreciate the play without understanding something
about the history of the AIDS crisis as well as the broader story of gays and
lesbians in America. Although men and women have engaged in homosexual
behavior in all times and cultures, it was only in the twentieth century that
homosexuality came to be seen as a fundamental orientation rather than a
20
specific act. In the United States, the modern gay rights movement began
after World War Two, which brought millions of unmarried adults into close
contact in large cities far from their families. Gay bars and political
organizations existed mostly in secret in the 1950s and `60s, but New York
City's Stonewall riot in 1969 helped usher in a period of growing openness
among gays and greater public acceptance.
Although gay life flourished in the 1970s, many gays saw the '80s as a
period of retrenchment and tragedy. The first cases of AIDS were diagnosed
among gay men in 1981; within ten years more than 100,000 people died of
the disease in the U.S. alone. In the early years of the epidemic, ignorance
and fear resulted in widespread discrimination against AIDS patients, and
the national media reported the story in a sensationalistic manner, if at all.
Gays' anger about the mainstream reaction to AIDS became interlinked with
political frustration, as a conservative backlash that began in the late '70s
hindered the cause of gay rights. For many gay activists, Presidents Reagan
and Bush symbolized the opposition: both men's administrations were at
best uneasy with and often hostile to the gay cause, and Reagan remained
silent on the subject of AIDS until 1987, when more than 20,000 people had
died. Angels in America opened in Los Angeles in the same week that Bill
Clinton, the first presidential candidate to openly reach out to lesbian and
gay voters, defeated George Bush; among gays the play inevitably became
associated with a sense of euphoria and political optimism.
Kushner has continued to write plays—such as Slavs! (Thinking about the
Longstanding Problems of Virtue and Happiness), Hydriotaphia or The Death
of Doctor Browne, and most recently Homebody/Kabul—though none have
attracted the praise accorded to Angels. In addition, he has authored a
number of essays and op-ed pieces and has delivered addresses at
universities and political demonstrations. Robert Vorlicky, a critic and
friend, says Kushner occupies "a kind of 'poet laureate' position for many of
the disenfranchised an extraordinary, public intellectual." Although Angels
so far remains the highlight of his career, it is a career—in drama, letters
and political activism—that is far from over.
The Playwright -Tony Kushner
http://s3.broadway.com/article-photos/large/1.134240.jpg
Talk of the Nation
21
http://www.npr.org/tags/126948781/angels-in-america
NPR does a piece on a recent documentary about the life of Tony
Kushner.
Tony Kushner Interview
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgORSgnOYUc
Kushner talks about his path to becoming a playwright, his
father, and his take on directing.
Kushner on Obama
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ty9CloMJn4Y&feature=relat
ed
The playwright talks about Obama's policies on gay rights.
Kushner Smiles
Ever wonder what Kushner looks like? Well, here you go.
22
ANGELS IN AMERICA, PART ONE:
MILLENNIUM APPROACHES SUMMARY
Ref: angels-in-america-part-1/versions-of-realityquotes.html
Copyright (c) 2000-2015 ZEDO Inc. All Rights Reserved.
How It All Goes Down
Act 1: Bad News
The first act of Millennium Approaches sets up all the major
storylines of this overlapping plot. Roy Cohn, a lawyer and
powerbroker, offers his young protégé, Joe Pitt, a chance to work
for the Justice department in Washington, DC. Joe is excited to go
join the conservative Reagan revolution. But first he's got to
convince his wife, Harper, who we soon learn spends most of her
time hallucinating on the prescription drug valium. As the two
argue over going to Washington, Harper's suspicions that Joe is
secretly gay come to light, though he denies it.
Meanwhile, we also meet Louis Ironson and Prior Walter, the
other main couple in the play. When Prior reveals to Louis the
23
first of many lesions to come, the reality of AIDS crashes down
on the two men. Prior seems worried that Louis will desert him,
and so does Louis. Prior gets sicker and begins to hear a mystical
voice. Joe and Louis have a run-in in a bathroom. Louis assumes
Joe is gay, but Joe again denies it.
The first act ends with Roy Cohn in his doctor's office. Is comes
out that Roy is gay and that he has AIDS.
Act 2: In Vitro
The second act begins with an incredibly sick Prior crumpled and
bleeding on the floor. Both he and Louis freak out, and Prior is
rushed to the hospital. At the same time, tensions continue to
mount between Joe and Harper about the possible move to
Washington and whether or not Joe is gay. Joe goes to Roy Cohn
for advice, and Roy pressures him to take the job no matter what
the personal cost might be.
Meanwhile, Louis drifts further and further from Prior, having
sex with an anonymous man in the park and moving out of his
and Prior's apartment while Prior is still in the hospital. Having
not seen Louis for several days, Prior takes comfort in a visit
from his best friend and ex-lover, Belize. Prior continues to hear
the mysterious voice and worries that he's going insane.
Joe has another meeting with Roy, and it comes out that the real
reason Roy wants Joe to come to the Justice Department is to
help keep Roy from getting disbarred: his life of corruption is
finally catching up to him. Joe is deeply conflicted about this, and
he seems to take comfort in a conversation with Louis about the
nature of justice. The bond between the two men is growing.
Joe finally takes the plunge, calling his conservative Mormon
mother, Hannah, and admitting to her that he's gay. She can't
deal with it and tells him to go home to his wife. The second act
comes to a head with Joe admitting to Harper that he's gay and
24
Louis telling Prior that he's moved out. Needless to say, neither
Harper nor Prior is pleased, and explosively emotional scenes
ensue. Harper runs out on Joe, and Louis leaves Prior alone in his
hospital room. The act closes in Salt Lake City, where Hannah
prepares to sell her house so she can move to New York City.]
Act 3: Not-Yet-Conscious, Forward
Dawning
The final act begins with Prior talking to the ghosts of two of his
ancestors, who tell him that a great messenger is coming to him.
Meanwhile, Louis has coffee and talks politics with Belize, and
we see just how guilt-ridden Louis is for abandoning Prior. As
he's being released from the hospital, Prior has an intense vision
of a flaming book.
The last we see of Harper in this part of the play. She is hanging
out in her own hallucinated version of Antarctica. Hannah has
made it to NYC, though she's lost somewhere in the Bronx. Joe
goes to Roy and finally refuses to take the job in Washington,
saying that Harper is missing and that he just can't do the
unethical things Roy wants him to do. The two men almost get in
a fight, and when Joe leaves, the very sick Roy collapses to the
ground. The ghost of Ethel Rosenberg appears. She's a famous
alleged Soviet spy whom Roy broke the law to see executed. She
dials 911 for Roy.
In the play's final scenes, the ghosts of Prior's ancestors appear
again, announcing that the moment has arrived; the messenger
will make her appearance. Before this happens, Louis
materializes in Prior's dream and the two share a dance. Louis
disappears, and Prior is left dancing alone. Meanwhile, back in
reality, Louis and Joe meet in the park. Joe comes on to Louis and
the two go back to Louis' place together. In Prior's bedroom
things are going crazy. There's an insane noise, wild lights, and
25
the walls start to shake. In the climactic moment of Millennium
Approaches, an angel crashes through Prior's ceiling, announcing
that Prior is a prophet and that the "Great Work begins" (3.7.47).
ANGELS IN AMERICA, PART ONE:
MILLENNIUM APPROACHES QUOTES
Key quotations from Angels in America,
Part One: Millennium Approaches.
Visions of America: The Reagan Era Quotes
Prior: K.S., baby. Lesion number one. Lookit. The wine-dark kiss of the
angel of death. (1.4.31)
Politics Quotes
26
Roy: I've had many fathers, I owe my life to them, powerful, powerful men.
Walter Winchell, Edgar Hoover, Joe McCarthy most of all. (2.4.56)
Justice and Judgment Quotes
Joe: The truth restored. Law restored. That's what President Reagan's done,
Harper. He says "Truth exists and can be spoken proudly." (1.5.63)
Sexuality and Sexual Identity Quotes
Louis: Sorry I didn't introduce you to... I always get so closety at these
family things. (1.4.8)
Isolation Quotes
Harper: People who are lonely, people left alone, sit talking nonsense to the
air, imagining... beautiful systems dying, old orders spiraling
apart... (1.3.62)
Spirituality Quotes
Stage Directions: Rabbi Isidor Chemelwitz alone onstage with a small
coffin. [...] A prayer shawl embroidered with a Star of David is draped over
the lid, and by the head a yarzheit candle is burni...
Betrayal Quotes
Prior: I was scared, Lou. [...] That you'll leave me (1.4.51).
Versions of Reality Quotes
Harper: What are you doing in my hallucination?Prior: I'm not in your
hallucination. You're in my dream. (1.7.5-6) 1
Quote #1
Prior: K.S., baby. Lesion number one. Lookit. The wine-dark kiss of the
angel of death. (1.4.31)
Thousands upon thousands of Americans became infected with HIV in the
1980s. The lesion Prior reveals to Louis here was by this point a known sign
of full-blown AIDS. One of the major criticisms of Reagan's presidency was
his silence on the AIDS issue. Some say his long silence on the epidemic
significantly increased the death toll. Reagan's harshest critics claim that
the disease was not a priority because, at the time, it largely affected the
gay community and drug addicts, whom Reagan thought were in some way
being deservedly punished. Fans of Reagan say this idea is totally unfair
27
liberal propaganda. Do your own research. Where do you weigh in on this
debate?
Visions of America: The Reagan Era
Quote #2
Joe: America has re-discovered itself. Its sacred position among nations.
And people aren't ashamed of that like they used to be. (1.5.63)
In some quarters, Reagan's presidency was greeted with an overwhelming
sense of optimism. Reagan saw America as a force of good in the world and
any country who opposed it as evil. He famously called the Soviet Union and
its brand of communism the "Evil Empire." To Reagan, America's "sacred
position" was to be the democratic leader of the word, vanquishing the
communists. The US was Luke Skywalker, and the USSR was Darth Vader.
Visions of America: The Reagan Era
Quote #3
Joe: The truth restored. Law restored. That's what President Reagan's done,
Harper. He says "Truth exists and can be spoken proudly." (1.5.63)
Joe is a proud Reaganite. If he could, he'd like to have Reagan's babies.
Reagan was famous for stating simple "truths" that the general public could
easily understand. Coming from Joe, this quote is a pretty ironic – he's got a
big secret that he definitely isn't speaking proudly.
Visions of America: The Reagan Era1How we cite our quotes:
Quote #1
Harper: What are you doing in my hallucination?
Prior: I'm not in your hallucination. You're in my dream. (1.7.5-6)
In a play full of fantastical sequences, this scene between Harper and Prior
really takes the cake. Kushner even admits in his stage directions that the
scene is "bewildering" (1.7.1). So what level of reality does this exist on? It
seems like somehow we are in both Harper's hallucination and Prior's
dream. Somehow these two characters, who have never even met, have
stepped out of themselves and crossed paths in the world of imagination
Versions of Reality
28
Quote #2
Harper: Imagination can't create anything new, can it? It only recycles bits
and pieces for the world and reassembles them into visions. [...] Nothing
unknown is knowable. (1.7.29-31)
Harper is trying to figure out how someone she's never met, Prior, could
possibly be in her hallucination. What do you think of her theory here? Are
we unable to think of anything that is totally new?
Versions of Reality
Quote #3
Harper: In the whole entire world, you are the only person, the only person
I love or have ever loved. And I love you terribly. Terribly. That's what's so
awfully, irreducibly real. I can make up anything but I can't dream that
away. (2.2.12)
Harper is incredibly skilled at hiding from reality in her dream worlds.
Here she admits that the one thing she can't hide from is her love for Joe.
Unable to face the fact that Joe can't love her the same way she loves him,
she escapes into a Valium-induced wonderland.
Versions of Reality
How we cite our quotes:
Quote #4
Prior: I hear things. Voices. [...]
Belize: Don't go crazy on me, girlfriend, I already got enough crazy queens
running around for one lifetime. For two. I can't be bothering with
dementia. (2.5.27-54)
What do you think; is the voice that Prior hears real, or is it all just in his
head? What level of reality does the angel who bursts through his ceiling
exist on? Is she a figment of Prior's imagination, or, in the world of the play
at least, an actual heavenly being?
Versions of Reality
Quote #5
Joe: As long as I've known you Harper you've been afraid of... of men hiding
under the bed, men hiding under the sofa, men with knives. [...] I'm the
29
man with the knives. (2.9.34-62)
Here Joe claims that all of Harper's paranoia about evil, knife-wielding men
has been caused by him. He seems to think that Harper has always known
that he was gay and that, unable to deal with that directly, she is plagued by
these faceless, malicious men. Of course, earlier in the play, Joe also hints
that Harper may have been physically abused as girl. Might that also
contribute to her nightmares?
Versions of Reality
Quote #6
Emily: There's really nothing to worry about. I think that shochen
bamromim hamtzeh menucho nechono al kanfey haschino. (3.2.105)
Prior's nurse in the outpatient clinic, Emily, suddenly starts speaking
Hebrew. This is kind of crazy, since neither she nor Prior presumably even
know Hebrew. Is Prior somehow connecting to a deeper spiritual reality?
30
Angels in America explores many ideas.
 AIDS disease
 AIDS Disease Patients United States Biography
 Gay Liberation Movement
 Gay Men in Literature
 Homosexuality
 Homophobia
 Homosexuality Religious aspects Judaism
 Jewish Identity




Mormon Church
Millennialism
Apocalypse
Angels





Reagan, Ronald
Cohn, Roy
McCarthy, Joseph
United States Politics and Government 1981 1989
Cold War
 Suffering
31
The Play and its relevance in 2015
The issue often raised with this play and current productions of
Angels in America is that of it not being relevant anymore. 9
Relevance in terms of what-you may need to ask first!)
DISCUSS IN CLASS IF THE FOLLOWING ISSUES ARE STILL
RELEVANT:
a) AIDS
b) gay rights
c) the politics of the Reagan era
OR DO THEY DATE THE PLAY?
Once students have discuss and presented their cases perhaps for
those who feel it is dated the following could be discussed:
 While AIDS is no longer an immediate death sentence in the
West, the epidemic is virtually crippling some countries in
Africa. The infrastructures of entire nations are falling
apart as a result of the disease.
 The issue of gay marriage is constantly debated on the
national political scene, and the recent spate of suicides by
gay teenagers has once more brought intolerance against
the gay community to national attention.
 Reagan basically re-shaped the whole Republican Party in
his image. Some say that he even re-shaped the Democratic
Party in his image, bringing the entire country over to a
more conservative mindset. Many say we've never left the
Reagan era. (Head over to our US history guide on The
Reagan-Era for more on that.)
32
Actors speak …
Name: Rowan Davie
Role: Prior Walter
1 Angels was very, very relevant when it premiered as a play in 1991. It was
exactly ten years since the first cases of AIDS had been detected in 5 young
men in Los Angeles. Of course it wasn’t called AIDS in ’81 - often it was “gay
cancer.” By ’91 the US had gone through two terms with Reagan as
president who didn’t speak about AIDS publicly until as late as 1985. George
H. W. Bush was about to be voted out for Bill Clinton, who had gained the
support of the gay and lesbian community for promising to champion gay
rights. After a decade, so many had lost their lives and lost loved ones. The
drugs administered to treat HIV infection today were not even approved or
fully developed in ‘91. Saquinavir and other protease inhibitors got approval
in ’95. So it was a very long road and the play reflects the time in all of its
dark confusion, fighting against the pull of the maelstrom.
33
And now? Any great play transcends its own time. And Angels to me is
absolutely a great play. The rhythm, and the vastness of Tony Kushner’s
humour, imagination and research is engaging. The way he incorporates the
cultural history of the Mormons from the 1820s and the drag queens of the
1980s, the plagues of the past, the Justice department, communists and
intimate contemporary relationships all flowing in the yoke of some
fictional bureaucratic heaven - a mirror of our own nations.. It becomes
hard to hold everything from the play in your brain, but in the viewing it
seems to wash over us because it’s larger than us, and gives us one big giant
embrace. Millennium Approaches - the inhale, Perestroika - the exhale. And
AIDS is still here. There are estimates of over 1 million cases of HIV
currently in the US and 25,000 in Australia. But the play is about more than
the syndrome. It’s about our humanity, how we are to live and live together,
the human project facing the unknown and adapting. When I got the part of
Prior I had to research AIDS and the times. I had to read and watch films. I
was born during the plays setting, and isn’t it shocking how quickly history
slips away from the young. Perhaps as we go forward the play will serve as
a beautiful and sad and hilarious and maddeningly insightful time capsule
of a time that is past, but of things present.
2 Tragedy.. We live, we die.. there’s a cycle and a finiteness to human form.
Acting that reality out, dramatizing it and witnessing it, and everything
about it that is funny and sad. There’s a great film Of Gods and Men where
these Algerian monks get overtaken by rebels in their monastery, and the
night before, they all know they’re going to die and they just laugh and
drink together. Those faces.. the shot goes for what seems like 10 minutes.
In their wrinkled skin.. That’s tragedy.
3. Prior defies tragedy. He’s not at all a victim, even with AIDS. He wrestles
the angel like Joseph in the bible story. Joe says “how can any human win?
What kind of fight is that?” But Prior does. With imagination, humour and
self belief. He controls his own destiny, as a symbol of humanity having to
control its own, without God.
4. Morality and love wise, Prior is heartbroken that Louis leaves him. In the
end (part 2) his responsibility is toward humanity. As he chooses to live,
and fight and struggle. He backs us. It’s the playwright backing us.
5. America and Australia..
Personally I don’t go to the theatre or cinema to see myself, with my
specific set of identities, reflected. That’s narcissism. I mean if I went to see
a white male actor in Sydney in this specific year etc.. Art, theatre etc is at
its best always going to be about you/me/us and the place and setting, sure
it might be America, but hopefully it transcends that. Last night I watched
Fanny and Alexander, a great Swedish film set in the 1900s. Was I bored?
No. Because it was amazing. It was inspiring. When we go to the theatre we
need to stop identifying ourselves as citizens of somewhere and go to learn
and laugh and cry. I have no idea how our specific production will succeed
34
or fail, but Angels at Belvoir last year touched me so deeply and I think that
was reflected across the board.
6 Politically.. It’s documented in plays like The Normal Heart how groups
like ACT UP were fighting to cut the red tape at places like the Food and
Drug Administration (FDA) and the National Health Institute (NIH) on new
experimental preventative drugs and put more funding into research and
testing and expand the definition of AIDS so that people had greater access
to disability benefits. They helped move legislation. There was so much
work done by groups like ACT UP to fight for the rights of people with
HIV/AIDS and the stigma associated with the LGBTI community. As an
example of how far things have moved, in ’09 Obama announced the
removal of the ban on people who tested positive to HIV to enter the
country. And it’s not just the democrats - the removal of the ban was put in
motion during the end of the Bush administration. That ban had meant
International AIDS conferences couldn’t be held in the US and it only
increased fear and ignorance when it came to AIDS.. RIght now there is still
no vaccine. RV 144 was trialled in ’09 and does reduce the rate of infection
by 30% so there is progress medically and socially. And now it is rarer for
HIV to develop into AIDS with HAART - a combination of drugs used to
primarily boost T Cells. But it’s a worldwide pandemic. And a lot of the
politics now seem to be about getting HAART to developing nations where it
is too expensive and far reaching to do so. I read somewhere (don’t quote
my stats) about 40 million had died from AIDS and 32 million were living
with HIV and only about 13 million had access to HAART.
35
Cheyne Fynn
Role: Belize/Mr Lies
What do you think is the essence of tragedy?
Tragedy is by definition an event causing great suffering , destruction or
distress…I feel in the drama when performing a ‘tragedy‘ it if the job of the
performer to hold up a mirror to human pain for an audience to experience
it in the most natural and realistic sense whilst being cushioned by the
protection that it the theatre.
36
Is your character an embodiment of tragedy, or a victim of tragedy?
As an actor you can never view your character as tragic by the same sense
you can never view your character as simply good or bad it is in doing so
that a character become two dimensional and shallow and therefore fails to
serve the overall story.
Who controls your characters’ destiny?
Mr. Lies is a conduit for Harpers conscience as such he is a figure that only
manifests when desired by Harper – He is no way controls his ‘destiny’.
Belize however is a confident character of strong ethics and integrity he is a
character which is forceful if needed, and pliable when required he however
does not allow any external forces to dictate his trajectory.
What moral responsibility does your character have towards society?
Mr Lies – N/A his moral responsibility is to Harper and Harper alone, it is
Harper Moral responsibility which dictates that of Mr Lies. Belize on the
most fundamental level is a Health care worker who is there to ‘serve and
protect’ irrespective of his own personal ethos.
Do you like your character as a person?
Yes! Regardless of the character you play as an actor it is your job to find
the positive to find the light to find something to like about the character
even if the character is archetypally the ‘villain’ the actor can never
perceive them as such.
What understanding do you have of the Political climate the play was
originally written in, and does this climate still exist?
The political presence in this production is a major factor and do in a very
real way define the entire era. The names of individuals, the political
movements and events are ones which for the most part we are aware of or
have heard mentioned, who hasn’t heard of Ronald Regan or Jesse Jackson?
However, that is where my knowledge ended. In researching the
movements of the time the entities they provided clarity and understanding
to the text and certainly clear parallels can be drawn to the political entities
of today especially within Australia.
How do you think an Australian audience will respond to this
essentially American play, and it’s American culture?
Australia is saturated with American content and culture you only need to
turn on the TV or listen to the radio to see the impact that America has had
on the Australian ‘culture’ we have in many ways infused our own culture
with theirs which in neither a positive or negative thing however in this
context only serves to benefit the audience.
Have you read other reviews of the play?
Of course! This is not by any means an out-dated or obscure text, its
relevance today is as significant as it was the day that it was written and as
37
such it is a production which is often produced and therefore reviews for
these productions are available and as an audience member if I go to see a
show I often read the reviews related to the show… in short yes however
not in preparation for this show, if you did there is the chance that you will
enter a scene with preconceptions as to how the character or scene should
be played.
Has the plays’ meaning changed over time? Is the play still relevant? Has
the play’s intention changed over time?
As stated above time has not lessened the significance or the importance of
the themes. The language of the play is so beautiful and dense and touches
on so many aspects of our society from love to bigotry, religion and politics
to isolation and identity. Whilst the direct references [i.e political] may
have altered the climate is definitely still prevalent and has broadened. In
the 80’s and the world of the play we speak of AIDS today we speak of
cancer and Ebola, we speak of racism towards blacks and oppression of the
Mormon institution today we speak of the racism towards those of middle
eastern appearance and the oppression of the Muslim institution. The arts
are able to hold a mirror to society so we always remember the past or as
the saying goes we will inevitably repeat it.
What modifications had to be made and why? We have stuck very much to
the script, there were very minor amendments made to things such as
character allocations however these were a directorial decision.
What challenges did the actors face and how did you help them
overcome them?
The challenge when trying to inhabit the skin of another person (character)
is always the same understanding what makes them different to yourself
physically, emotionally, sexually, ethnically, ethically etc. and the
circumstances that surround them including the time and place. For ‘Angels’
it is complex because the 80s were a time of massive change and upheaval
and as a result the characters were a byproduct of this…how to overcome it
is research research research!
SARAH CARROLL
Role: Hannah/Rabbi/Ethel
QUESTIONS FOR THE DIRECTOR AND ACTORS
38
What do you think is the essence of tragedy?
Human suffering
Is your character an embodiment of tragedy, or a victim of tragedy?
Rabbi – the Rabbi represents Judaism and the ritual and attachment in
religion. The Rabbi gives Louis the opportunity to speak his truth and
express his tragedy. The Rabbi has transgressed tragedy through faith and
belief in the family and community, and the power of good.
Hannah – Hannah’s tragedy is that she is bound by the rules of her religion.
Her desire to help and comfort her son is in conflict with the constraints
placed on her as a Mormon. Hannah is not a tragic figure herself, but her
inability to love and nurture openly creates pain for Joe. Hannah actually
grows as a person through AIA.
Ethel Rosenberg – Ethel has returned to witness the downfall of Roy Cohn.
She was a victim of true and horrific tragedy, and her spirit lives on to
manifest the destruction of evil. She has no hand in Roy’s downfall but she
allows the audience to witness his true nature. In doing this she
transgresses tragedy.
Who controls your character’s destiny?
Literally or figuratively??
God, in all cases. The Rabbi’s destiny is his faith, Hannah’s is her religion
and Ethel as been to hell, heaven and back again.
What moral responsibility does your character have towards society?
Rabbi – to express faith and guide community. To teach and enlighten.
Hannah – to do what is right.
Ethel – to embody Karma.
Do you like your character as a person?
Of course!
The Rabbi is a teacher and historian and he allows Louis to find his own
truth. He has faith and a deep sense that while life is complex and difficult,
it is certainly hopeful and purposeful.
Hannah is difficult because on the surface she is reactionary and pious, but
she has a deep love for Joe and literally abandons her former life to help
him. She is a victim of her religious upbringing, but she transgresses that.
39
Ethel – she comes back to sit and watch her nemesis die.... gotta love that!
And yet she is still deeply kind. She experienced great cruelty and her spirit
is strong.
Is your character a victim of fate or do they create their own?
That’s difficult to answer because fate plays a part in each of their lives, but
they all had choice.
Rabbi – bound by his race, ethnicity and religion, yet he lives a full and rich
life by choice.
Hannah – Bound by her religion, which is cult-like. It’s easy for others to
judge, but in the end she does move away for the sake of her son.
Ethel – the fate of ending up in the hands of Roy Cohn. The fate of having a
husband and brother involved in espionage activity. The fate of being a
woman in the 40/50’s. But she comes back by choice to seek her revenge.
What kind of moral responsibility does your character have? Who
defines that responsibility, and should they take it up? If they choose to
be morally irresponsible, what are their reasons for being so?
Same as before. All my characters are bound by their religion and/or
circumstances and their responsibilities to family and community. They all
believe themselves to be morally responsible, because they believe in their
actions and their value systems. For example, Ethel gains pleasure in Roys
demise, however she still calls the ambulance because at her core she is a
good person. Hannah believes Joe is wrong for being homosexual, but she
still goes to help him and support him because she loves him. The Rabbi
gives Louis the space to find his own truth rather than giving him a sermon.
What understanding do you have of the Political climate the play was
originally written in, and does this climate still exist?
I was a teenager during the AIDS crisis. I remember the Reagan years. I
lived in America in 1988/89 and was frequently called a “commi” because
Bob Hawke was our Prime Minister and people perceived him to be a
socialist (or a ‘goddam red’, as they liked to call him). As a teenager I
experienced the AIDS crisis through mass hysteria, advertising campaigns
and music. There was an awful anti-gay sentiment and homophobia was
rife. It was a dangerous and frightening time for young gay men. I also
remember the famine in Ethiopia and Live Aid. A time of great change.
Happy I was a lefty creative type!!!
40
We are experiencing a crisis in Australia right now, with violence against
women. We are experiencing ridiculous political exposure and upheaval in
government and with our embracing a multinational, capitalistic, right wing
society (Reagan would be proud!). We are witnessing fear campaigns
around terrorism and horrific treatment of refugees.
Politics doesn’t change much – that’s why this play can be compared to a
Greek tragedy I guess. It’s all the same stuff – human suffering, religious
intolerance, political warfare.
How do you think an Australian audience will respond to this
essentially American play, and its American culture?
I think the themes are pretty universal, as I said in the previous response.
Hopefully the audience is intelligent enough to appreciate the play for what
it is. I would hate to think that an Australian audience could only appreciate
Australian plays....we will be doomed to watching Dimboola for the rest of
our lives. We manage Classical Greek theatre and Shakespeare, and I guess I
put this play in that category. It is timeless and somewhat placeless.
Have you read other reviews of the play?
My greatest concern for this production is that it will be compared to a) the
Belvoir production and b) the HBO movie. I also have some issues with the
play being produced in isolation, without part 2, but I accept that this is
because of the school curriculum. The Belvoir production was very well
received and much loved by Sydney audiences and critics....there is a lot to
live up to. People generally think this is an important piece however.
Has the play’s meaning changed over time? Not really
Has the play’s intention changed over time? Not really
Is the play still relevant? Most definitely
41
Mitch Feltscheer
Role: Joseph / Prior 1/ Eskimo
What do you think is the essence of tragedy?
At the core of tragedy is the truth of humanity, I believe. Not everything has
a happy ending, sometimes things in life don't work out. We try our hardest
and sometimes we succeed and sometimes we fail and tragedy presents that
without a filter.
Is your character an embodiment of tragedy, or a victim of tragedy?
Joe is more a victim of tragedy. He's a victim of an overbearing religious
upbringing which ingrained certain restrictions and didn't allow him to
truly be himself.
Who controls your character’s destiny?
Throughout the play Joe transitions from being controlled by external
forces; his religion, his sense of patriotism and duty to country, to finally
taking steps towards making his own path from his own inclinations
towards the end of the play.
What moral responsibility does your character have towards society?
Joe believes himself to be a very moral person and sees his role in the world
as someone to contribute to society in powerful, positive ways. He learns
through his dealings with Roy that the world he believes in so much is much
more grey than black and white and begins to question the importance of
42
being a moral person in an immoral world.
Do you like your character as a person?
Yes.
Is your character a victim of fate or do they create their own?
What kind of moral responsibility does your character have? Who
defines that responsibility, and should they take it up? If they choose to
be morally irresponsible, what are their reasons for being so?
What understanding do you have of the Political climate the play was
originally written in, and does this climate still exist?
I researched the climate thoroughly for the play and can relate to the
hyperbolic truth-clouding of a conservative government which I feel we
have today.
How do you think an Australian audience will respond to this
essentially American play, and it’s American culture?
Whilst some of the specific references to 1985 American culture may not hit
the exact mark with Australian audiences, the major themes of human
relationships pushed to their extremes is obviously universal.
What is the Directorial Vision of the play? Where do you want it to go
each performance?
Have you read other reviews of the play?
No, I avoid other interpretations whilst rehearsing ours.
Has the play’s meaning changed over time?
Has the play’s intention changed over time?
Is the play still relevant?
What modifications had to be made and why?
We modified very, very little to keep the sentiments of the play largely
intact. It has such a strong socio-cultural presence, any alterations to the
script would be damaging overall.
One change was the swapping of the Prior ancestral roles between myself
and the actor playing Roy. We felt the grizzled, farmer Prior better suited
that actor and the pompous 17th century Prior was a opportunity to contrast
the much less confident Joe.
What challenges did the actors face and how did you help them
overcome them?
The challenge of inserting myself, a 25-year-old Anglo-Australian into a
foreign culture from 30 years ago was a challenge. I read a lot about the
43
time at the beginning of rehearsals to familiarise myself.
Elias Brown
Role: Louis
How influential do you think this play was when it was first produced,
and is it still so powerful? If so what do you think makes it so relevant
in 2015?
Angels in America was hugely influential. It re-introduced the AIDs
epidemic and the role of the Reagan administration to public discourse.
AIDs had been written, discussed and explored in the art world and in
political spheres - but Kushner’s Angels was one of the first leading
accounts from the perspective of homosexual and marginalised people - and
it was certainly the first theatrical response to the political/social/cultural
response to AIDs in the 1980's. It's arguable but I would suggest that Angels
in America was considered then and still now, the greatest study of the
American condition in the 1980's for it's ability to encapsulate issues
pertinent to the political climate (not just Reagan's administration but
leadership which grew in the face of it - the Rainbow Coalition etc.), sexual
and racial suppression, the rise of evangelicals in the south, Jewish identity
in modern America and the general shifting of the American identity.
What makes it relevant now?
It would be unfair to compare the Abbott government to Ronald Reagan. But
certainly, politically speaking Australia is going through a change not
44
unparalleled to 1980's America. We are seeing a rise in conservative
leadership which is affecting a growing disparity between socio-economic
groups and there's is of course a widening divide between White Australia
(read: "White Straight Male America" to quote Angles) and minority groups
including but not limited too homosexuals and our first nations people. The
Abbott government have also put 'God' back on the map, following a change
in leadership from Gillard, a self-confessed agnostic. Due to our countries
position on refugee issues we are also seeing a shift or at least a
questioning of the Australian identity.
What do you think is the essence of tragedy?
As a dramatic concept in theatre - the genre of tragedy focuses on extreme
suffering and catastrophic activity. As a phenomena in life tragedy is
difficulty to judge because what is tragic is a matter of perception and
perspective. Especially when tragic circumstance is occurring on a personal
level - as it occurs too one person as opposed to a larger collective. I think
the essence of tragedy is the crumbling or inversion of ones world - when
the laws we live by are suddenly inverted by harmful forces.
Is your character an embodiment of tragedy, or a victim of tragedy?
I don't think any character written for the stage can be an embodiment of
tragedy - not unless we're dealing with representation as we might expect
in Brechtian or other heavily stylised forms of theatre. Kushner doesn't
work of representation - he writes his characters so that they are
completely dimensional, complex and able to turned into something we
consider to be realistic and recognisable. Louis is a victim of tragedy - he
was not born a tragic, although his religious conditioning and world view
have evolved in a way that perhaps makes him more susceptible to "glass
half empty" perspective on all things. Like any of the others characters in
Angels, Louis is affected by tragedy and at times this pushed him to make
decisions that in turn negatively impact the people around him,
perpetuating tragic circumstance.
Louis is often read as an negative archetype. It's important to understand
that Kushner doesn't write archetypes because he writes for the real world archetypes exist in literature as an extension upon themes, the
representation of ideas, or as a literary tool to provide conflict etc. - Louis,
like an other character in Angels is written with the integrity of any reallife person. Kushner himself has confessed Louis is the closest character too
himself that he has ever written. Being an entirely life-like character,
Louise is able to be interpreted in a great many ways - I personally have
empathy for Louis and understand that under any normal circumstance
Louise would come across as an entirely well-rounded individual with a
moral high ground similar to any respectable and social conscious human
being - but given the situation he is in, under stress and facing
unpredictable outcomes (remember tragedy in the inversion of ones
45
personal law's) he acts in a way which is uncharacteristic of his rational
self. No one in life is evil or innately antagonistic - but we are all flawed and under extenuating conditions we may be pushed to serve our own
survival over the survival of other around us, and in moments of conflict
the actions we adopt (due to irrational thinking) will not always do justice
to our usual sense of moral.
Who controls your character’s destiny?
Louis controls his own destiny. Because he comes from a religious
upbringing, perhaps he cannot help but feel that life’s events are guided by
higher forces (God..?) - however throughout the play it becomes apparent
that while Louis' first instinct is to turn to religion for guidance, deep down
he embraces a the attitude of an humanist. Louis chooses to challenge all
that society considers right and bible truth in the true pursuit of personal
freedom and survival. Instead of accepting the grand design of destiny or
fate he becomes flippant towards the religious/moral/social law's we live
by because he recognises social expectation to be a construct - essentially
he realise that there is no right or wrong way to behave when tragedy hits,
and he chooses to a path where he can be more in control of his freedom.
What moral responsibility does your character have towards society?
If we refer to the response above it's apparent that Louise feel no moral
responsibility toward society - not because he is immoral or heartless, but
because he understands that moral responsibility is not black and white, but
lies upon a spectrum that changes constantly under circumstance, and that
can only be measured by one's own sense of justice.
Do you like your character as a person?
I think as an actor you have to avoid making any judgment on your
character - whether it's positive or negative. It's not your job to tell the
audience that they ought to be a character well-liked or not liked at all. If
you develop an affection for your character or a grudge towards them you
affect the way in which they will be portrayed to an audience. My job is
simply to be Louise and respond to react appropriately to situations as they
are written in the script - and it's the audiences job to interpret the nature
of the character. I really haven't consider how I as Elias feel toward Louis, I
only consider the way I as Louis feel about the world and the people I
interact with in it.
Is your character a victim of fate or do they create their own?
Louise cannot help but to consider himself a victim in the face of all
misfortune. A collective Jewish consciousness backed by thousands of years
of history manifest in the way Louise identifies with himself and the world
around him. So yes he is a victim, but not of fate - I think he largely denies
the concept of fate - if he accepted fate he would bow to tragedy, accept his
boyfriends illness and suffer through it.
What understanding do you have of the Political climate the play was
46
originally written in, and does this climate still exist?
refer to my response for the first question regarding the relevance of Angels
to 2015.
Has the play’s meaning changed over time?
The perceived meaning behind Angels will always change over time - we
interpret all texts in response to our own context and so of course the
audience will derive a different meaning and intension behind the writing
in 2015 Australia than say the original American audiences of the 1990's for one, Angels would have been considered fairly literally by the first
audience who saw it - it was in direct response to trending discourse. Now
that we have some distance to 1980's America that play appeals because
there is something other then it's historical significance that makes it
relevant.
47
FOCUS QUESTIONS
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In your answer you will be assessed on how well you:



demonstrate knowledge and understanding of drama and
theatre relevant to the question
express your point of view using appropriate supporting
evidence
present a sustained, logical and cohesive response
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. “Audiences are drawn to tragedies because a tragedy
brings out the true character's spirit and creates vivid
emotions within these characters.”
48
Discuss this statement with reference to your study and
experience of TWO plays in this topic.
2.Aristotle once stated in his Poetics that a tragedy
should "arouse pity and fear in spectators.”
How do the texts you have studied and experienced
evoke such emotions from an audience?
3.Aristotle defined tragedy as the
"imitation of an action that is serious, complete, and has
sufficient size, in a language that is made
sweet...exciting pity and fear, bringing about a catharsis
of such emotions." .
Discuss this definition with reference to your study and
experience of TWO plays in this topic.
4.Tragedy has been variously described as a either a
moral, personal, psychological, emotional and even a
theological experience, or a combination of these same
experiences.
How has you study of texts explored theatrically these
experiences?
5.Tragic plays seek to give expressions to a tragic vision
of human experience.
Discuss this statement with reference to your study and
experience of TWO plays in this topic.
49
The following is from an essay on Tragedy using Topic 5
above. (Mike Shiraev 2006)
http://abhinemani.com/essays/angels-in-america-the-americantragedy/
50
With reference to Angels in America these comments are
a good way into discussion of the topic. The whole essay
is available on line
The nature of traditional tragedy is to portray a protagonist between two
conflicting principles, where the fatal flaw of the protagonist aided by the
fate of the Gods leads to their demise. But in the case of “Angels in
America”, the line between man’s miscalculation of reality and that of the
tragic society where an individual is responsible for their own wellbeing is
blurred. Prior’s tragedy as a fault of his own is an interpretation Tony
Kushner wished to explore as a means of conveying the “…Heartless,
macho, Reganite” perspective of the AIDS epidemic in 1980’s America –
AIDS was seen as homosexuals’ punishment by many conservatives for their
sin. The tragedy of “Angels” lies implicitly in its depiction of a ruthless and
confronting society. Although the individual tragedies of the characters are
the focus of the play, it is more the ills of society that Kushner wishes to
give expression to. It has been argued whether the play is indeed a tragedy
as it does not follow the strict conventions of Greek tragedy and the stylistic
features which go with it. Kushner has attempted to redefine tragedy
experimentally, questioning the notion of it being purely didactic. He
promotes a more pragmatic and humanist approach by seeing tragedy as
not necessarily caused by the fatal flaw of the individual in a fate
determined universe, but instead as the combination of humour and
suffering that makes up our everyday lives, socially, politically, emotionally
– that is, the tragic vision of human experience made by everyday existence.
By moulding characters that are flawed in one way or another, Kushner is
asking the audience to form their own opinion of what suffering, fate and
moral responsibility mean in our modern context.
“Angels” structured with a natural progression of events in the play’s 3
acts, however it is not seen to have a purely linear structure due to its
conciliation of realism and non-realism. This construction of intertwining
realistic and non-realistic scenes allows travel between other planes of
existence and allows for the audience to be told what is in the
imagination/subconscious of the characters. The play’s dream sequences
dramatise the sense that the simultaneously lived, collective life of society
overrides personal experience. In the ‘mutual dream scene’ between Harper
and Prior, for example, Harper approaches a “threshold of revelation” about
Joe’s homosexuality. The scene is suggesting the power of the unconscious
in shaping social consciousness, and the device of using this non-realistic
style arrives the audience at a more three dimensional understanding of the
51
characters and their relationships. These scenes contrast socially realistic
development of characters against their metaphysical, hallucinatory
experiences in the actions that take place such as dream sequences and in
the appearances of the angel. The message of the play is conveyed more
effectively to an audience through diverging into these modes rather than if
it stayed purely didactic like conventional Greek tragedy, as it is more
theatrically interesting and allows a greater scope for thought and analysis
of the tragedies of the characters and of society. A piece in theatre is true if
it forms a coherent whole. In the case of this ‘mutual dream scene’, the
clashing of dreams is coherent in that it makes sense in that non-realistic
world. Coherence is contextual and exists only on stage, not in an external
reality.
Kushner uses juxtaposing action, language and setting from scene to scene
and within scenes to focus the audience on the socio-economic forces at
play and uses a dialectical method to dramatise his thinking about
characters and issues. For example, in the split scene between Harper and
Joe and Louis and Prior, the stage directions specifically ask for the
overlapping of dialogue between the events to compare the two
disintegrating relationships: ‘This should be fast and obviously furious;
overlapping is fine; the proceedings may be a little confusing but not the final
results”. The juxtaposition of Harper asking Joe, “Are you a homo?’ with
Louis asking Prior, “What if I walked out on this?” suggests their social
interrelatedness and parallels the personal tragedies of the two couples,
giving a unique expression to their personal tragedies. The play has
minimal scenery and shifts are done rapidly to keep a flow of scenes.
Kushner notes that the “moments of magic – appearances of Mr Lies and the
ghosts, the Book hallucination, and the ending – are to be fully realised as
bits of wonderful theatrical illusion” as this staging targets the heart of
theatre’s ability to take us to another plane of existence, to educate its
audience and stimulate cogitation.
Kushner has created such an effective theatricality in “Angels” by
emphasising realistic settings, hyper accurate dialogue including dialect
and obscenities and contrasting them with the world of the non-realistic
through dream sequences and apparitions by the angel. Dialogue between
characters accentuates the intention to convey the social and political
themes to an audience through contravening theatrical techniques such as
the juxtaposition of naturalist speech against the stylised language of
‘camp’ when Belize visits Prior in the hospital. Their ‘camp’ speech moves
among various levels of playful theatricality from Belize treating Prior’s
illness as an insult to his appearance, “You look like shit, why yes indeed you
do, comme la merde!” to finally confronting the pain of Prior’s situation
52
with humour, “And eat more girlfriend, you really do look like shit”
reinforcing both Prior and Belize’s shared identity as gay men and
Kushner’s strong use of comedy to portray life as an unrelenting
amalgamation of suffering and humour.
The Angel’s arrival through Prior’s ceiling in the final scene is the most
remarkable event in the play from a theatregoer’s perspective, a moment of
amazement and pure theatrical illusion. It is the moment of greatest chaos
and tragedy, the culmination of the emotional wreckage that the characters
have created. Yet, even at the climax of the drama, Kushner refuses to be
overwhelmed by sentimentality. “Very Steven Spielberg”, Prior whispers,
humorously undercutting the grandeur of the moment and ensuring it
remains tethered to the mundane, the tragicomic vision of human
experience that “Angels” has strived to express.
Prior’s suffering from AIDS accentuates the part of the convention of Greek
tragedy that does not exist in “Angels”. Prior’s suffering is felt, as an
audience, through the injustice done to him both by his disease and
ultimately his ‘loving’ boyfriend. Prior is a loveable character with no
obvious character flaws and yet is suddenly put in a life threatening
situation out of his control, contrary to the portrayal of a conventional
tragic hero. Prior is the play’s chief victim and at the mercy of everyone
around him: abandoned by Louis, infected with a disease that takes control
of his body and mind, and harassed by an unfathomable and seemingly
omnipotent angel. In a theatrical sense, it is most obvious to identify with
Prior as a sympathetic character as he is constantly physically disabled: his
inability to walk and live comfortably is as pathetic as his speech is
powerful, “We have reached a verdict you honour. This man’s heart is
deficient. He loves, but his love is worth nothing… I’m dying! You stupid
fuck! Do you know what that is! Love! Do you know what love means? We
lived together four and a half years you animal, you idiot.” Dialogue such as
this demonstrates Kushner’s intention to draw an audience into engaging
emotionally and sympathizing with the tragic characters.
My objective in performance of playing a collection of scenes from Priors
dialogue was to give the audience an insight into tragedy. The spiralling
down of a young, innocent man into the depths of despair starkly shows the
essence of human tragedy. He begins the monologue in his happy, ‘camp’
style making jokes “I did my best Shirley Booth this morning”, but it when
he shows Louis his first lesion his depth of character unfolds. The scenes
epitomises the tragic struggle of the protagonist in “Angels”. By displaying
his normal state at the beginning of the performance, I was able to contrast
this with his increasing sense of despair and hopelessness. This builds to a
53
climax in emotion and voice projection when he is in bed in the hospital
screaming at Louis, but resolves with his vision of the angel crashing
through his ceiling. I used minimal props (only 2 blocks) to keep focus on
Prior and show that what was occurring was uppermost in his mind a great
deal of the time. By contrasting his dream sequences and Angel visions with
the reality of his disease, a more visually appealing and dramatically
interesting piece is created. My costume was quite simple to display his
cosmopolitan character, but kept understated by due to his casual nature.
The white shirt is symbolic of the purity of his heart. Hopefully the
audience sympathises with Prior, as my aim was to show the audience both
Prior’s physical and psychological journeys and hopefully draw a strong
sense of catharsis from his undeserved suffering.
Roy is the only character in “Angels” who asserts themselves as the more
conventional tragic hero figure. His blatant hubris and contempt for
homosexuality constitute the fatal flaws of a tragic character, for example:
“Homosexuals are men who know nobody and who nobody knows. Who have
zero clout...Roy Cohn is not a homosexual. Roy Cohn is a heterosexual who
fucks around with guys”. It is said that “choice is that the heart of tragedy”,
and even when Roy is hallucinating from his ADIS he is too stubborn to talk
kindly to Ethel Rosenberg, a woman he had executed in the McCarthy
blacklist era,– “I’m scarier than you any day of the week! So beat it Ethel!
...you can all go fuck yourselves and then go jump in the lake because IM NOT
ARFAID OF YOU OR DEATH OR HELL OR ANYTHING!”. However, Roy’s
character like all characters in “Angels” are very three dimensional and
given a greater socio-political scope than characters in “Antigone”. He is
never depicted sentimentally or nostalgically to the audience, and at times
he stands out as the symbol of pure immorality in the play; however the
audience understands Roy’s terrible treatment of people as he too is a
victim of his sexual preference, his AIDS and his Jewish background. But
Roy does his best to deny membership of any of these groups, and he asserts
at more than one point that he loathes his history and cares only for power,
“What I am is defined entirely by who I am”. When describing how he
persuaded a judge to execute Ethel Rosenberg, the audience is shocked by
his arrogance as well as his brutal nature, “I pleaded till I wept to put her in
the chair. Me. I did that. I would have fucking pulled the switch if they’d have
let me. Why? Because I fucking hate traitors. Because I fucking hate
communists. Was it legal? Fuck legal. Am I a nice man? Fuck nice…you want
to be nice or you want to be effective? Make the law or be subject to it.” But
only moments later, he is writhing on the floor in agony from his disease –
a most pathetic transition. But this pathos is what leads an audience to
sympathise with him, the audience’s recognition of the tragic character’s
54
flaws. Roy’s dialogue is purely naturalist to emphasise his ruthlessness and
make a comment on the function of politics as a form of making and selling
the self. His language gives us the key to his personality and his strong New
York moxie and rough speech are conveyed and delivered rapidly, “What do
you mean do I know the judge Mrs Soffer? No, no I do not know the judge, I…
hold… (Under his breath) of course I fucking know the judge you dumb
bitch… (To Joe) oh live a little Joe, eat something for Christ sakes”. To
emphasise this, for example when Joe visits Roy in his office, Kushner uses
the specific technique in his dialogue whereby Roy and Joe speak over the
top of each other to create a realist effect, thus locating Roy and Joe in the
purely realist world of the play; and increasing dramatic tension :
ROY: (smashing buttons on his phone). Jesus
fuck this goddamn thing…
wouldn’t…
JOE: I really wish you
Baby doll, ring the post,
Get me Suzy, see if -
This type of realistic dialogue is one of Kushner’s vehicles for expressing his
view of the tragic human experience.
“Angels” is a tragedy in the social and political sense also, stemming from
society’s inability to live honestly and tolerantly. The tragedy of angels
ultimately culminates in man’s universal tragedy, dramatising the
connections between personal identity and political position, and
maintaining private one’s private in a world scourged by public greed,
disease and hatred. The main method Kushner uses to convey his
sociopolitical message to the audience is through Louis’ wordy political
rhetoric. Throughout the play Louis questions America's political situation,
his discourse questioning how to reconcile differences and establish justice
and how America can progress as a democratic nation, for example in the
conversation with Belize in the coffee shop at the hospital:
55
LOUIS: Why has democracy succeeded in America?...what AIDS shows us is
the limits of tolerance, that its not enough to be tolerated, because when the
shit hits the fan, you find out how much tolerance is worth.
Kushner has often been compared to Louis and shares similar political
views, i.e. he has been Kushner’s voice for his ideological views and a prime
means of representing them – through his dialogue and characterization
Louis has shown both sides to the brand of ‘democratic optimism’. Kushner
argues for a politics of solidarity, but he still believes in the imperfection
and complexity of all ideological movements. The moments in the play
where characters discuss their socio-political context show Kushner’s
intention to interweave the social, political and emotional tragedies of the
individual characters and of the society, giving each character a greater
intellectual dimension yet giving the playwright a license to spout as much
of his own ideological views as he wishes. Louis’ dialogue reveals to the
audience his extreme ambivalence, guilt and general neuroticism. This is
seen throughout the play but specifically in the lengthy conversation
between Belize and Louis at a coffee shop while Prior is in hospital:
LOUIS: “Power is the object [of governments], not being tolerated. Fuck
assimilation. But I think in spite of all this the thing about America, I think,
is that ultimately we’re different from every other nation on earth, in that,
with people here of every race, we cant… ultimately what defines us isn’t
race, but politics.”
Louis’ verbosity and quasi-intellectual rhetoric is the driving force behind
his speech and his fast and almost comic delivery is used to show the belief
that tragedy and comedy are inextricably linked – part of the tragic vision
of human experience. On the surface, Louis evokes an unsympathetic
response from the audience as his abandonment of Prior is selfish,
insensitive and weak. But because we can understand that caring for Prior
is complicated we do sympathize with him. His reason for abandoning Prior
is tragic, but due to his extreme guilt and perpetual “ambivalence”, the
audience accepts and absorbs it as part of the complexity of the
relationships in the play and part of the play’s overall tragic nature of
recognizing each character’s faults, to draw insight and wisdom from them.
Louis rationalizes his treatment of Prior by describing himself as a “neoHegelian positivist” whose “sense of constant historical progress toward
happiness or perfection or something ...can’t … incorporate sickness into
his sense of how things are supposed to go.”
56
57