 This city as we always say, but we also need a very good audience. So first of all again, thank you Richard for taking the time to come and visit us in the middle of the preparation for your new work that is going to open up. I would like to start with a quote and then I have prepared some questions, but we'll hope it will be a fluid conversation and you will also be a part of it. In your quite interesting, as someone said, Sly in very smart book, Theater for Beginners, where he pretends to explain people what is theater all about and if you want to create your own theater company and your own theater work, he talks about that. Instructional, almost like master Sly Armies and no instructions for the theater. So it's an interesting, clever book and also very profound introduction, I think, to his work you are right at the very end. For at our essence, at our core, we are not professionals, we are amateurs, we are myth, history and advertising, but still we exist. We are real and we are simply beginners, it's how we thrive, we begin and therefore perpetually remain connected to the spark. We ask questions, we thirst and we learn and the disenters complete us, causing us to be better. So the question is what are we now as theater makers in the world we do live in? I don't know what we are as theater makers, I know what I want to do in theater. I'm interested in working with, well why do you, I make theater because I'm interested in working with people. You know, you can make stuff and not work with people, but that's something that interests me, it's something that I feel like I need. And so writing a play on its own and just handing that off is not something that I'm so interested in. I like to complete the process by inviting people to work with me in the room on the play that I've written. So I'm not very good at talking about what theater means or what's going on. Currently I can really only tell you what matters to me. So maybe tell us a bit about the very beginning of your theater work. Maybe also tell us a bit about your family, do you have some theatrical roots or connections? Sure, my father was, he was an actor I guess, an amateur actor. He was actually a judge and he was a district judge and then a federal judge. But when we were in Fargo, North Dakota, which is where I'm born, he was active in the community theater there. And so he not only acted, but he wrote a couple plays that were done. So some of my earliest memories are inside a theater watching my... I was just remembering recently that I saw my dad in the play Equus when I was about seven years old. And if you know that play, it's like really... There's psychological trauma in this thing and sexual psychological things going on there and tormenting this character. And my dad played the psychiatrist in that play. I was just wondering if that has had a lasting impression on me. But also my sister, Janice, also known as Jan, she's an actor. She lives in the city. I would go see her in plays. She was acting when she was in college, I would go see those plays. It was this event that people would go to and I would go along. I think that had a lot to do with forming my ideas about theater in the beginning, but also getting me interested in pursuing it as a career. I think I remember that you sent out the recent Trump developments an email with your photo of Jimmy Carter, I think, with your father. Obama? So they were community activists? Active politically, yeah. Good Democrats, I'd say, in Fargo and active in the scene there. And my dad was a World War II veteran. And so that's how they wound up at this event where Barack Obama was speaking and they got their picture taken. And it wound up in this 30-minute commercial that he made in 2008 for the election. So we were all a little proud about that. And yeah, I think that's... Anyway, there was... In my family, you're either a lawyer or an actor, or in theater. And I actually was trained as an actor. So we moved to Chicago and my dad became a federal judge and worked for OSHA. And I was in plays in high school and musicals and I wanted to be an actor. And I went to Illinois State University to study acting. And they had a really good program there. I was... I felt very lucky to be in that program. A lot of the Steppenwolf Theater Company matriculated through Illinois State. So I moved there as I got this fellowship at Steppenwolf at the end of my schooling. And that's where I met some other actors who... Yeah, we would form this theater company, Cook County Theater Department together. And that's where I got... I guess I got put on this trajectory of directing and then writing plays. I found myself being useful on the other side of the footlights. So you studied acting, but you became... You're known as a writer-director, a model that is in Japan, or also in Germany, not unusual, like Toshiki Okada or any Polish, or so many auteur de teatres, as the French would say. How did that journey start? What was the very beginning, the nucleus? Why did you decide not just to direct other people's plays or not just to write plays? And how do you navigate those landscapes? That's a good question. I was interested in music and I was a musician and I was in bands also and I was writing songs for that band. And so I think the writing came before the directing. But in any case, I found that I was not patient enough to be like the traditional actor where you wait for the audition or you wait for the job to come along. And I was with some other actors who had similar impatience and so we started reading plays together and this is how Cook County Theatre Department formed. It was out of this restlessness. And I proposed that we do... We were reading plays like Harry Ape, I remember we read that, and maybe some Breck plays. And then I brought in Oklahoma, the musical and I had been in it in high school and it's such a classic American story and musical that I thought it made sense that we try to do a version of that. And I found not only in the show but then I was directing the show because I proposed it but that's where I got interested in directing. So I guess I synthesized over the course of maybe three or four shows in Chicago this interest that I had in writing from the songwriting with the directing and then I guess I felt like I had something to say. And I never thought back then that it would turn into a career of writing plays and directing them. But I was definitely moving away from acting and getting interested in directing and then I'm going fast here. But I went to... Then I moved to New York and interned at the Worcester Group. I wanted to watch Lis Le Comte work. I became interested in their work. Fascinated by how... Just like how they really were thinking outside the box when it came to making theater and attacking these classical texts like O'Neill and Chuck Off. But yeah, I guess I still was not... This impatience thing continued this restlessness where I didn't want to direct other people's plays. I wanted to write these... I wanted to write something. And so... And I feel like in New York, or at least I should say in show business it makes sense to be a director of your own plays because otherwise you're just waiting around so much and so I think you have to find a way to... And I encourage any theater makers here to do that to find a way to somehow make theater that way because otherwise it's just waiting or a lot of waiting. Well along the way, I mean many do that. Many do have companies do write, work and direct but you develop something as it's now known as the Richard Maxwell piece. One of the great marks of an artist is you look at the painting of the film and you say, oh, that's a film by Kubrick. That's a painting by... by Ayesha Galdor. This is a Maxwell or Robert Wilson piece. The idea of realness that comes up in your work and also the amateurish, you know, the non-professional acting. Actually some people, you know, say all your work is against everything that's being taught at every American acting university acting school. So tell us a little bit, what is your idea about acting? What do you want from an actor? What do you want? Well, I really like actors and I like talking to actors probably because I was an actor. I feel like I can... How were you trained? What was your training? Probably, you know, like Stanislavski, you know, that Bolaslavski book, you know, Bobby Lewis came to our school. Oh, but also, you know, Alvin Goldfarb, who is an alumnus here, he was the dean of the department there and he's a New Yorker originally and he brought, like, Lee Brewer out for like a master class workshop and I was introduced to... I think I was introduced to the Worcester Group and Richard Foreman, Stuart Sherman, you know, these kinds of artists who were trying to make their own way and I became interested in coming and following through on that. But my acting was really, you know, I don't know, Meisner or... It was... The curriculum was based in this kind of Stanislavski notion of emotional memory and that's something that I feel is a place in my work or in theater but I don't adhere to it very rigidly. I think that if I had to say what the work is about, it might be along the lines of you are never prohibiting emotion from inhabiting you on stage and not obliged to show us emotion and I think that that's an important distinction. And this is... These came out of ideas that we were doing, like making plays in Chicago. Like a lot of time arguing about, like, well, what is the point of this? What are we doing right now? Why are we on stage? What are we going for? What's important to us? These big questions came across the rehearsals. They infused the rehearsals and for the first play, for example, Oklahoma, like nine months, just banging our heads against the wall, trying to figure out what's important and not satisfied with the pat answers or the rote information that was before us, really having to identify. And maybe you come around to the same conclusion in some cases, but you don't want to assume that. At least I don't want to assume that. And so we came... There's this classic thing in educating, in theater, I think, which is that in order for something to be interesting, there has to be conflict. We just go up on stage and be on stage and there wouldn't be any conflict. There would be me and Frank on stage in front of you all. And we would, you know, not say anything. So it's like, it's okay. And time becomes very important. Silence became important. Distance became important. Spatial relationships became important. Yeah, and what we see and awareness comes into play. And that's, you know, I don't know that there's anything necessarily special about that or new in terms of acting discipline. But certainly it becomes, it's emphasized and explored more actively. At least it was, and that's something that I continue to explore in my work. And yeah, I don't... You know, to look at how I was trained in college, I would say that the thing that I valued most was that it wasn't just this one way of acting. There were people that were advocating for different ways, like outside of my own curriculum and my training as an actor. There were directors there, for example, or playwrights, there were grad students, undergrad, there were just, there were designers, and it was felt like an active conversation. And yeah, that's all I'll say. Yeah, I like the one moment you described in your book. He says he is an actress. He works with some actress. And after the first rehearsal day, she says, is there anything beyond zero doing zero? Does it ever get beyond zero? No. Well, in this case, I said no. And she left, right? She left, yeah. In case of also of misunderstanding, but it's an important point to make in your theatre. So what is beyond zero? Because there is something obviously there. Well, you know that going back to the conflict thing, like let's say you say no and you continue to say no, or let's say you have silence for an extended period of time. I mean, the conflict is going to be a conflict because you all are going to be like, what am I doing here? You know, do something. And I'm going to say, I'm not going to do anything. So you have to make a choice then. You can stay or you can leave. And that's conflict. But we never expected that the conflict would emerge not just the conflict, but the conversation would become between the audience and the stage in addition to this conversation that we're having as actors. So, yeah. Did I answer your question? Yeah, I mean, no, no, no. For sure. I think one of the exercises in the book of what you talk about is to do an everyday movement, like you stand up, fold a piece of paper you throw. Take a drink of water. Take a drink and put it back in kind of a non-attached way without any meaning. Well, I can't take credit for that. That's Jacques LeCocque. I know, but LeCocque, you talked about this. And then also to say, how about speaking a text the same way of an everyday motion without any, you know, as you say, adjective. You said it in the book, but without any notation, without any intention to be very... But I leave that space open. I like that idea of the exercise. He says, I have a seven-minute scene and he tells those actors, okay, do it in three and a half minutes. So all this time and space, they have to condense it. And then he says, okay, now do that, please, in 14 minutes. Yeah. Then you expand. So tell us a little bit. I think it says something about your work, but what are you trying to find out when you rework a scene as a director in that way? Well, there's a practical side of that. When you're getting off book for, you know, your rehearsal and just the lines are not coming. You can, you know, I think that's where that came out. I was like, let's do this. It's taking too long. It's taking seven minutes to do this scene. Let's do it in half the time. And you do it and it takes a lot of tries to get that done. It's like twice as fast. And meanwhile, you're getting off book. You're learning your lines, right? And you're also, in the fast version, you're eliminating, you're not necessarily eliminating, but you're discovering like what's important and the extraneous stuff. Like, because you can't just like blow through the scene and not do the movements of the blocking. You have to do all that stuff that we've staged. But you do get a sense of like what's extraneous. I get a sense of like, well, we can cut that. We can get rid of that. What's important comes to the fore. Flipping it around, it's not a challenge anymore to do this scene in 14 minutes. We know the lines hopefully by now. It becomes a different exploration where you're able to allow it to be... Well, first of all, it's not going to end. Like, let's say you do this scene. This happens almost every time, because you've just been used to going so fast, so fast, so fast. Let's say you do it and you get to, you finish the scene, and you think you're taking all the time in the world and whatever, and you get there and there's still like five minutes left. But the scene is over, right? The lines in the movement. But I'm not going to stop. Like, you're still... I'm not going to stop the clock. It will be 14 minutes. And so now it's a different exploration. And now the actor is learning about time management, right? How to... I don't want all that time at the end. Like, I can pause here in this line, or I can find... I can explore this time with you. And it encourages this idea that I believe in, which is time is never your own as an actor. It's never your own. You're always sharing time. And whether you're in a large group of actors on stage or if you're all by yourself, you're never truly by yourself. You're not at home. And so time is something that you need to be aware of. And I think that that can be cultivated, that awareness. And I try to cultivate that with the actors that I work with. And myself too. I'm not like... I talk about time a lot, I think because of my musical background. I'm really interested in that, but I don't feel like I can't claim to know time either. So I'm cultivating it too. I'm interested in it too. And you say that the time that allows the audience actually to explore or to interpret or to imagine what might be going on between the actors because you say that they should imagine it or not. Well, they're going to do that anyway, right? So you, as you say, we ask questions. But tell a little bit. Your idea is basically the show really happens in the mind of the spectator. It doesn't really have an on-show on the stage. Well, I think... I've thought about character a lot. And when I write a play, usually it's character-based drama. So we're talking about story, we're talking about fiction, we're talking about narrative and these kinds of things. But I really think that character has been miscategorized. Over the years. I think it actually is the audience who defines what character is. As the writer, I'm certainly... I'm making indications. The director is making indications. And the actor is making indications. Intended and unintended. But I really feel like it's finally the audience who decides who this person is that they're watching. And I like that idea a lot. And I like plays that let me in that way. And I try to... Yeah, I want to make a situation where... And I don't know if I'm successful or not. I just know what I like to see when I go see theater. And that's where I have room to decide what this character is. And I'm not told so much what the character is. I think there's this one quote. I think it was in The New Yorker that Maxwell's work is about distillation. And they quote you, I never tell people to avoid realism or naturalism or what feels natural. It's just that what I'm saying, you're not obliged to pretend that that is what you have to feel something or that's what you feel. And I think it is a significant distinction. Of course, as you say, it's a story, a connection to the New York avant-garde of a Wilson, of a Foreman, of a Lebrou or John Jasrow or others. But still in that world which is so successful, we have an Indonesian visiting scholar here. And two days or two weeks ago, we had one of our seminars and we talked to him about what do you think about New York theater. He said, yes, good, but I don't know. It's all like television. It looks like they're on television. Oh, so Regina's dad... Regina's from Greece. This is my producer, by the way, a New York City player's producer right here. And Regina's dad came from Greece and I felt, I was happy that he saw his old and it's a similar thing. He was like, what do you think of the play? And he's like, well, I liked it because it wasn't all this American silliness. Yeah. It's something you do explore. But also let's talk about this kind of realness. I mean this idea of hyperrealism in a way of what you have or surrealism in a way of the French about it, but it's not really sur la réalité, but the idea of what you feel in New York subways and Grand Central, many of your characters are security guards, policemen have uniforms, chains with keys, flashlights, and people from jobs we would categorize that you know what, blue collar job. So you try to capture something and on the same time it's so highly constructed. In the Good Samaritans, and the actress Rosemary, who is actually, was a nurse, a registered nurse, you picked her out to play and you insisted, which she didn't really want to do, to really write things down on track and everything so you really have a detailed attention to do something real within that role. So what is your idea about that? Do you insist on that kind of realness in situation that are so highly constructed? I don't insist on it. I work with actors who are trained and I work with people who have never been on stage before. So I'm really concerned with the person and what they emit, the choices they make, how they think. And in that case, I don't know who would play that part of Rosemary. No actor could play that part? I don't think so. I certainly don't know. I mean they could, but I don't know that they would bring into it that I'm really interested in her and I'm really interested in the choices that she makes. It wasn't required that she was a nurse practitioner during her day job, but it's just like I knew her and I wanted to work with her. I like working with people who are genuinely curious. I think I'm a curious person. I'm interested in what things will yield, where they'll go. And I want to work with people who are also curious. And in that case, Rosemary, she was reluctant, but I felt like she could do it and I felt like she... Well, she brought something to it that no one else could. I feel very lucky that she did that. But it's not about whether she's an actor or wasn't she an actor. Well, it's also that distinction doesn't really exist in that way because she's a performer. I really try to keep it one-to-one, my relationship to people. I address the situations that come up with the individuals that I work with and I can't just have a blanket conversation. I can't even go to that book and say, this will solve the problem. It's really like there's something interesting going on. I can't really identify what it is, but I want to take some steps here to figure this out with you. I like the idea that you said to go back to that clipboard to please write everything out. Your people go and check the heat regulations or whatever. They really went to go to the temperature regulator for that. So you insert something of realism in something where a lot of people who sometimes have a hard time with your work say, it's so flat, I don't feel any emotion. I can't... Some people who we, of course, think there's something so highly interesting, so highly unique and something so real about it. But if someone did say also, that's in the Good Samaritan, there's an orgasm on stage, but she could also be reading a shopping list and from that tone of voice, there is no difference in it. I don't know about that. A shopping list. Yeah, or one of her dialogues. I mean, of course it was different, but still there is that beauty in that stylized neutrality which you are looking for. And you also talk about in it. And I find it quite a unique force in theater, in New York. You're one of the few New York artists who tour. There's the Woostergroove or there is Neutral Theater of Oklahoma. Very few companies do that in New York City because it is a unique handwriting. So this idea of... Do you really go say, are these flat lines? Do you just deliver the speech? What is your ideal delivery of a text of a line? I don't have an ideal. There really isn't. How do you create it then with the actor on stage? You want to do it right now? Sure. Okay. Take this speech here. You want to read this? Start there. So this is from a play called House... Frank Henscher, ladies and gentlemen. We'll be playing the part of Father. Father, yes. Cities. There are a lot of cities and a lot more towns and villages. I've been to a lot of towns and cities. They are all the same. They want the same thing. They all have streets. They all have governments. They all have civics. They all have people who want to see better things for the community, nice things. And they have problems too. We all have our problems and disagreements. People might disagree, but that's okay. But you can't always agree. You don't have to believe everything. You don't have to belong to every club. There are some things that you don't agree with, and that's okay. But there are things that keep the city together to make it working, to make it logical. I think about logical things. Nature. Look like at your house. You know all the rooms. You know all the different rooms. You know all the outside. You can look at the outside of this house. You can look at the yard and over the fence. You can look at that view. That's something you do not see every day. I think that is beautiful nature. You and I, maybe we don't think like we do. Like they do. If I, we see them, or if they see us, maybe they wouldn't look at this. I would count this as important, but I'm not them. See, they and I, we couldn't think that. But with that much pride, we would never get away with this life without hurting someone or not even noticing. So we can think and not be pushed to think a certain way. You, anyone, I think you should think about these things. You and I, I think you should take pride in some of these things. Okay, nice. Now, when you read that, were you consciously trying to do it in what you think my style is? I would try to get through the lines. No, I would not. But I would certainly not over act it and put any psychological things in it. But I tried to read the text, yes, and a bit more. So what would you want to do with that text? If it would be me? Yeah. It was you. Yeah. Okay, well, I would say I would like to, by the way, I deliver the text. So I'm not still in front of it. So, you know, that it shines through and that it's not about me. Bring the text out. But how are you going to do that? Well, I would listen to your advice in the book, say, you know, learn the lines, you repeat your own it. And I would, you know, try to, you know, be able to deliver it, that it's a fluid way. Well, you would, yeah, I mean, that's a very willing actor in my company. But what, but I want to know what you want to do. Like, that's, that's, that's, I think that's important. And that's something that, whether I've written the material or not, or I'm directing the show or not, I want to know what you want to do with it. And I'm not saying you have to answer that right now, but that's where the conversation begins. And usually it's started by the actor doing that, by saying, well, this, because that's what training acting is, in most cases, about. It's like, make a decision, decide who this character is, decide what they want, and go in and do that. So I'm just not, I want to examine that. I mean, I'm not, I think it's great that you have the capability of making choices. But I, but we have to, but it's not off the table in terms of discussing it or examining it. And, you know, nor should it be. It's not, that happens in probably most productions where you have a conversation about, but I'm, I really want to identify what brought people here, what keeps them here, why they come back. And, you know, because I feel like I know why I'm doing what I'm doing. I just want to make sure that you're doing, for the reasons you want to do it, and that they can live happily together, those reasons. And, you know, you, but at the same time you did it. You also got through it. And I can't, I can't, no one can take that away from you. I learned that. And, and performed it well. You know, you communicated what was on the page, and you inhabited the character, such that you all, who are watching it, got a character, a sense of character. And, you know, am I wrong? Did you see, you guys can tell me if I'm wrong, but I think that it's so, yeah. Oh, I just said, oh, this is fun. I just said that maybe it's a question of semantics, but I didn't see Frank inhabiting. I saw him, you know, Frank sitting there and reading a text at arm's length. I think it is semantics. You know, he didn't, he wasn't, he wasn't memorized. He wasn't, I don't know, I pictured him standing up. We, we, we have, we bring a lot of expectations, don't we, when we sit down and watch something. And that's one of the things I find, I think that I'm battling, is our people's history of viewing theater. And that keeps, that keeps, that limits the options, actually, for what a character could be. But, let's say he was off book. Let's say he memorized it. Let's say he was in costume. Let's say he had a Miami Hurricanes starter jacket on, you know, and, and stonewashed jeans, and some complicated sneakers, sneakers, and gel in his hair, and a mustache, you know. Now, now we're talking, you know, now it's, but really what did, what he, I'm just, my point is the synthesis that his character happens with you guys. You may, you may not meet your standards, but it's still, it's still there. And, and I, I, I like that baseline. I like starting from that baseline, and establishing the conversation arc there. Yeah, and I think you also, in the very beginning of your book, say, you know, what do you enjoy most in theaters talking with the actors about the text. So you really, to answer the question, you do really create it in a dialogue, and the actors are as much the creator as you are. But coming to your writing, how, how do you write? How do you write the text before the show starts? Do you write on a typewriter, on a computer? Is it a year ahead done? Then how do you distribute the text? How does that mechanical, how's your writing process? It, it really varies. It really, sometimes I usually write on a computer. I like Google Docs, to be honest. I really, I used to be a work guy, but then I moved to Google Docs. But sometimes, you know, you just got to shut the computer and pick up a pencil and write on paper. A lot of writing happens in rehearsal. Like, you know, if you were, if you were cast as father in, in house, I would, I would probably, I don't know that I would change an existing play, but if it's a new play, I'm going to, I'm going to tailor the language to some degree on how you're performing and who you are and what's coming off. And then also, after an audience comes in, the writing will continue and change and I even write on my phone. After opening. You know, I write on my phone, you know, sometimes. But yeah, after, after it's, we've started performances, for sure. And do actors have something to say? Can they choose lines, suggest lines? How does, no, I mean they can, but I think I'm, that's probably where I'm pretty, I'm kind of old fashioned in that way. I feel like I've, I've spent a lot of time thinking about these lines and, you know, like a year maybe and then for an actor to come and propose something is, it, it, that's kind of weird. It's a little weird to me. I don't, you know, like I'm not, but by the same token, I'm not giving the actor how, I'm not telling them how to say it. I would never say like, well, Frank, why'd you say it like that? Say it like this, you know, you know what I mean? Cities, I've been to a lot of cities. You know, I wouldn't, like, there are directors who do that, they want it to sound a certain way. I guess what I'm saying is I believe in a certain, like, division of labor. And that's, maybe that's old fashioned, but it's, that's the way it is. So who do you, who influence you, but also who do you look up to when it comes to directors or writers? What are your stars on the furniture? What is, what is your, what are your main influences? I mean, you mentioned some, but still. A lot of music. Do you also go to music? A lot of music, yeah. Visual arts or architecture? I'm really excited by music that came, like, that came out of punk rock music. Like, when I was like 13, 14, 15, like it was the, it was the 80s, early 80s. And bands that came up there were like really important to me. And that, I think, I like that there, this is, what's great about punk rock isn't always the music so much, but if the idea that anybody has access, anyone has access to get up on stage and say something, it doesn't matter if you can play or not. And I think that's, that's, that's really important to me. And I think that's probably why I'm casting people with no experience a lot of the time, yeah. So kind of a democratization of the arts that really everybody can be an actor or director if they choose to practice. So would you see yourself almost like a punk band compared to a classical orchestra? Compared to a classical orchestra, yeah. So you are, that's, that would be your tradition. But also do you, what colleagues in theater or performance world do you follow? Well, I mentioned the Worcester group. I'm a fan. I still think they're the best. I love Liz and I love her work and the company too. I mean, the actors, the designers. I'm fond of Romeo Castellucci's work and I like Sara Benson who's directing this play Samara at Soho Rep. I like Annie Baker. I like her work. Geez, I always feel like I draw a big blank because there's so many, there's so many people that I admire. Yeah, it's forced entertainment. I'm going, I'm just trying to thinking like globally now. But also like in dance, you know, like Sara Mitchelson has been a real influence for me and I really admire her work and I've worked with her, I've worked with her too. It's like, I feel like if I'm, if I like somebody, you know, I want to work with them. Like we've started producing playwrights and playwright directors now. So I'm thinking like Julia Jarco and Jackie Sibley's Drury, Tina Satter, Christina Masiotti. These are really important writers to me and I, we want to, yeah, with this, with this American playwrights division, we want to give them a platform. I think all of them who have been also here at Prelude, speaking of Jackie Sibley's Drury, that Kamaroksura work you did, was that influenced by visual arts. I know that MoMA were many, some of the exhibitions of contemporary artists who also use it. Are you in a dialogue with what you're seeing galleries, what you're seeing museums, or how did that collaboration happen? How did you choose that Kamaroksura, that box people all went into a big... Yeah, it's a play. Jackie's play is really about photography and the audience is invited to sit in a box, which turns out to be a camera. We are inside a camera obscura and one of the final images of the play is an actor standing outside the box and lit in such a way that their image is coming through a hole in the box and projected on... not projected, but appears on the wall upside down. It's like being inside an eyeball. We were very lucky that it actually worked. But why are we talking about that? Oh, because of the art world and stuff? Yeah. I don't really know too much about that. I think I have an affinity for how artists think about composition and color and tone and atmosphere and time, but I didn't come up in that world, so I'm trying to bone up on that and learn more about it. I think it could be a symbol for you. It's such a beautiful Kamaroksura, even so it doesn't completely stand on its head, but what you capture, the mood, the atmosphere of a reality, which you create on stage is truly so very unique and so highly complicated to achieve. It's so easier, I guess, to put on a comedy, a well-written play, and everybody's entertained, but to achieve this highly choreographed dance in the tradition of Japanese theater in Ovisahirata and his everyday theater movement of his people from Seoul or the Tokyo Notes or even Okada, where so few things happen on stage, but you say the mystery of life are in the everyday movements. Taking the glass and what you say is important, but also not important. It is truly unique. Before we open up to questions, what really would you do, let's say if you, someone would give you resources, like we had Hoda LaPage here and some Japanese donors said, I like your work, you have $50 million, and you got $50 million from the city of Quebec, and then Canada gave him $20 million. He's creating now the diamond, it's called an art center, and you could create what you want for your own work, what would you do, what is your vision, what is something you couldn't do so far, but you would dream about. That's funny, I guess I have a kind of poverty mentality or something, because when I think about those numbers, I think, well, jeez, I could put my kids through college for that. I haven't figured that one out. But that's interesting too, because when I was doing these early plays, back in the day when it was first starting out, it was really about renting a rehearsal space for three hours. Actually, it hasn't really changed much, but it's like, you rent a rehearsal space for three hours, and then you, people are working three and four jobs, and they make time for this production, and everybody's busy, but you come together, and you have this really small amount of time to put a story up, and I really believe that my approach or aesthetic or however you want to say it, grew out of that economy of, we don't have a lot of time, so if you could just stand still there and stay in that spot and not move around, and figure out if that's working. I was a little taxed from a management point of view, and not able to really dream up concepts in my off time, a grand directing scheme where we can make a shape of an umbrella. I don't know, I'm just thinking, it didn't have time for that. I have to finish this play, and so I'm sure it informed it, and I guess what I'm saying is I don't, I don't know, you know, that's a lot of money. 15 million, 15 million? Robert LaPage got 15 million. 100,000, 100,000. That's like normal. That's how much it costs to put on a play these days if you want to pay people. You said earlier you're now looking ahead for two or three years of work, what are the waves that are coming in? What are you doing? What are you planning? Well, we talked about Samaro, which I hope you can come see. It's at Soho Rep, and we start previews tomorrow. It's got music by Steve Earl. Speaking of music and influence, it's one of my first, I count him among first heroes growing up. Great songwriter, singer songwriter. He's in the play, he wrote the music and he's in the play. So that's happening, but it's on this, it's an Art New York theater on 10th Avenue and 53rd, and you can go on the New York City Players website, which is my company, or Soho Rep's website to get tickets for that. And then, I don't know, it's kind of, things are, it's too early to talk about yet. I don't know, they're not having landed yet, in Limbo right now, but I'm thinking about a part two to the evening, which is a show that I did at the kitchen. So I think I'm going to start working on that this spring. And you did a Shakespeare, Henry IV, which was a legendary production or evening, but also the... Legendary for its success. Yes. Well, there were two worlds colliding in, you know, small spaces. As you said, all of a sudden, it was in a space where, which is huge, which is big, where people expect Peter Brooks or Peter Hall Big Show, but you did not compromise, you did what you always did, just in a different environment. A lot of people walked out or were upset about it, and of course we saw that you were doing what you would always do, it was just moved into a different space, a different gallery, and then big space. Except it was Shakespeare. That's a big difference. Tell what? The difference Shakespeare is... Oh, I got hate mail from that show. And most of it was based in you can do what you want with your work, but don't just leave Shakespeare alone. Even so, you reference Shakespeare in your theatre for beginners, take any random Shakespeare text, and speak it in a neutral way. Speak it out loud. Say it out loud. Say it out loud so that you can hear it come back to you, train your mouth to get around this language that we're not used to. I think that's great practice for an actor. It's great practice if you want to be a person. We haven't really talked about that, but I don't think, when I wrote this book, I was thinking about actors for sure and I like to think that it's open enough that you can appropriate it to whatever you want to do, or whoever you are. I'm heartened to hear from people that they're actually introducing it to visual art, visual art teachers incorporating into their syllabus. It's a universal adaptation. It's open that way. Shakespeare is really, it's a great, just try it. Pick up a Shakespeare play and just start saying it out loud. It's not easy. We're not used to talking that way. We're not used to listening that way. I encourage people sure to, and not just Shakespeare, but Ben Johnson or, I don't know, Ibsen or Chekhov, which is probably better in English. Go to an O'Neill play. Even that feels like something. How does that experience for you to do a classical text or work with it? With O'Neill? Well, I like O'Neill because he's American. That's important to me. He's like the birth of American theater in terms of, it was like a lot of imports up till then. We were relying on melodrama and stuff that his dad was doing, right? And he's also cool because he was in New York. He was experimental. He was trying to find different forms and look at what theater can yield. I like how he goes to the Greeks and really pulls on the myth element and finds that in an American milieu. Wasn't this company also called for a while New York City players or wasn't this company or what he worked? New York City players? No. No, I would be shocked. So you're not planning other adaptations or you will be writing your own work for the next foreseeable future and keep on doing that. Last thing you said, you know, you hope that becoming a actor also makes you a better person. That's something that we should all do. We can all be better at. I think that's the most important thing as an actor is listening. It so happens that it's handy if you're a person. I think it's important. So thank you so much and let's put out some lights up for the audience and let's take some questions again. We are recording the evening so we will bring you a mic. So maybe say who you are and if you have any session. Peter. Thanks Richard. My name is Peter. There's a a book written about you by Sarah Gorman, I believe which is a very lengthy introduction to your work where she introduces us to some kind of key thematic ideas like amateurism and she also puts your work in a context of American frontier kind of context and I just wonder if you it's a kind of dangerous question for an academic to ask an artist whether you engage with that kind of dialogue with her to write that book or did you respond to that do you relate to the kind of readings in that book do they make sense to you of an observation of your work could you talk a little bit about that. I'm happy that the book exists with Sarah quite a bit. We met periodically as she was writing it I like Sarah Gorman. I have to admit that I can't I it's an uncomfortable situation to read what things I don't know it's not the most it's not something that I seek I don't seek out what the work means I don't but in most critical writing about my work I kind of feel like you work your side of the street I'll work mine that's that's my approach and I but yeah I think it's I seems like a helpful thing to have out there I have read it but it's you know it was it was as I was thinking about this book and so I think I was like trying to I was trying to carve out these distinctions for myself as Sarah was working on that. The comments or Oh you need a mic. Can you just tell me how you came to work with Steve Orill and just talk a little bit about the mechanics of the collaboration. Yeah Sarah said she wanted to do what I wrote knowing that I wouldn't direct it and Sarah had the idea to put music in it and I thought well who I would like to propose music you know especially if I'm not writing it because you know my shows I normally write the music board and I saw that he played a benefit for Soho Rep so I knew there was a connection and I asked Sarah about it and she's like yeah you know somebody on our board this and that and so I wrote a letter a very fawning letter telling him how much I admire his work and this and that and then got him the play and the letter somehow he read the play to my surprise he liked the play and it turns out he's a big he's a big theater buff and I remember I told Sarah and I at an early meeting like he moved to New York to breathe the same air as Tony Kushner and we were kind of we weren't expecting that you know and if you know Steve's work you never would really know that but he was like he's kind of a theater nerd in high school in Tennessee so and he goes to theater a lot he really he's like Mark Rylance and and he's really he's really out there and he was doing the he was doing the music and then slowly he got into being in the show so he's actually performing in the play as well now well yeah to answer the second part of your question was like we had workshops and and some of them were with the whole company one was just with Steve and the music so he was he was around I was I was impressed with how he like he didn't really come to the early rehearsals with any music but he would hang out and he would he would be there and he'd be interested in watching and didn't feel like he had to I don't know I was just surprised at how and then so he started reading the direction and in this play one of the conceits is that the stage directions take over so it's like little descriptive headers at the top of each scene become longer and longer until it's like that's all it turns into prose basically and and so he's that's his function in this play and that grew through these just evolved gradually through these three workshops and then he was also of course writing writing music and I think it's really impressed with what he's what's happening musically in the play I want to ask you about your participation in the Whitney Biennial in 2012 because there's increasing amounts of the performing arts being migrated into gallery spaces but what you did with that opportunity was quite distinct in terms of having continuous rehearsals in the space rather than using it as a place to perform at a set time in a ticketed event like Sarah Mitchell's did during that period so how did you arrive at that format and and how did it go for you is that something you would ever do again well I would do it again, yeah I like getting out of the framework of a theater and the way that came about was meeting with Jay Sanders and Elizabeth Sussman and we we had meetings about what it could be and we knew that we'd have this option of doing plays but somehow having an assigned time didn't satisfy me so we were thinking about like what's a temporal equivalent in terms of like you look at museum hours and you look at what happens in rehearsal and they match they match up pretty much you have a rehearsal day if you're lucky you can work all day and so it came out of trying to identify like what's the scene what's the Whitney scene what are the mechanics of the day and trying to match up something in theater with that and that's how we came upon the rehearsal idea we wrote a play that was special for the and yeah it was open to the public people came in they trafficked through sometimes there was no one there sometimes it was very crowded but meanwhile we're still rehearsing and yeah I learned a lot was the play different to you said you wrote a play especially for it is that because an existing play wouldn't have worked for you to write something that would sustain the noise and the contingency somehow to do a play that exists felt kind of contrived to me to bring that in here's a play that I already directed I'm doing you the favor of directing it again to show you what it's like it had to be we were actually putting together a play and I felt that was important you answered the questions about collaborating with the directors or the playwright and the actors and the musicians but I wondered if you had a methodology of working with designers and what that would be that's a great question in the book I added a chapter the chapters are learn your lines learn your blocking warm up things that are really pragmatic for the actors build a set this is sounds like a red herring but I enjoy thinking about the correlatives between set building and acting and I think if an actor I've never done this before so I was going out on a limb in this book here because I don't do this as a practice but I think it would be really helpful for the actor to build a set because you're talking about building fiction really and if an actor can build a set and decide for example here's where the line ends it's right here on this M we're going to end the fiction here this is where our set starts and here's where the rest of the theater is that's an important thing to establish and think about it's not here it's here what's the difference why can't it be here this seems like a fine, well maybe it can but usually it's like this is better because of certain sight lines or this is better because of the visual composition or what's revealed later or whatever most of the time the actor spends their time thinking about this in a very abstract place in their head like what is my what's my what's fictional about what I'm doing what's real about what I'm doing and I think if you can have an experience where you can answer those questions not just in a scenic way but also in a practical way I believe that if an actor knows where they are and how this building came to be that it has an impact on how they perform that will influence how they perform because what you're really talking about is awareness and grounding and knowing one of the first things we do if we're touring to a theater let's go the whole place let's know because that's a very practical thing how loudly shall I speak so that everyone can hear me does that sound and doesn't that sound fake that comes up too does it sound like I'm shouting like and usually the answer is no it sounds like I hear you so I'm listening to what you're saying you can't escape that in these especially in these places where you're talking to three or four hundred people whatever oh but in terms of talking to designers sorry that was a tangent in terms of talking about talking with designers that it goes the other way too we talk to actors about why why they're here or what's important what do we need what's necessary that's that's a theme that runs through rehearsal and it's also something that carries over for the designers as well I work with Sasha Van Real quite a bit she's been my designer on a number of shows and it's really it's helpful it's not it's something that I learned from her when she's like what does this mean when you wrote this thing and it's like I don't want to say what it means yeah but we still have to make a decision so it's like what's the decision going to be like what is what is this trying to say these are good questions it's a good conversation I think my name is Kathy and just now you mentioned the list of companies or writers such as Wooster Group or Annie Baker who admire or under influence may I add Samuel Beckett into the list and if it is to what extent or at what point do you admire him or influenced by him if not then what do you think of him and his place thank you I think he had a great haircut and I don't know I'm not like I'm not an expert on Beckett and I'm not really drawn to it I'm not I'm not going to lie I admire the work I respect the intellect that made the work but I don't I you know I feel like if I had to direct a Beckett play it would be very funny I would try to find the humor but that's not something that really gets brought out in a lot of you know did you ever see this if you like Beckett you should check this out he did this thing called film where he worked with Buster Keaton and you know I feel like that says a lot about what he's looking for what he was looking for in his in his work and I know he admired clowning and I just I think it takes a special sensibility to bring that out and I don't really see that much with Beckett but I the I find the writing hard for me to get into I'm like O'Neill where I feel like oh yeah I'm in there you know or even like Sam Shepard where I'm just like yeah yeah you know Irene Fornes like yeah I can go you know that stuff feels like right there for me Brian Freel you know Carol Churchill like these are people that I feel like I can access more maybe a question about songs like Brecht you put it sometimes songs in the house which we screened the afternoon but also in the Good Samaritans you I know you're a musician you once came here with a Taylor guitar but what role do you see for a song why do you put in songs why do they burst into singing like in the Abrams Art Center so is that something you want to you explore on and off or are you going to write a musical since you started with Oklahoma what is your relation to it well you could make an argument that I'm making musicals with these songs yeah I think that's where it comes from it comes from those very early those years where I was watching my sister and also performing in them in high school these classic American it's an American genre it's really I think that's great and I'm again the band thing was coming in I was trying to find a way to incorporate that when I was writing and yeah it's like I think what why Oklahoma was innovative and important was that it was the first example of a musical that was forwarding the story through the songs I think that's what these songs do in the plays is that if they're not if they're not pushing the action forward then they're certainly telling you more about the character that the text isn't yeah and I enjoy that it's also like it's one of the basic it's like one of the building blocks of theater you have you have bodies you have story and music you know I feel like that's it's very essential to me thank you so I think if I were to be blindfolded and driven to a theater and there's no billboards and no programs and I was sat down the blindfold was taken off and the show starts if it was one of your plays I think I would like to say it would take me about 15 seconds to identify that it was one of your plays but I know that it would be like a couple minutes at most your style your work is unmistakably your work you have like a remarkable signature to your aesthetic and yet this is my experience your work has never calcified into mannerism your style is so yours but it's always fresh at the same time I wonder is this something that you're conscious of do you consciously have to be in relation with the specter of mannerism when you're making work and when you've been making work for so long if you have been conscious of this like how have you it's kind of remarkable to me even you know some of my heroes they're later work they're middle to late work you know you see you know Cassavetes I'm thinking of Cassavetes you see a little bit of mannerism in late Cassavetes how have you related to that specter with making so much work that is so yours well a lot of people would disagree with you I think but I thank you for that that's very nice to hear this is not a friend of mine you know I said early on when I was trained as an actor that emotional memory had its place you know this kind of traditional Stanislavski based training for the actor has its place and I like I don't want people to behave like robots like that's not interesting to me or behave like to be deadpan I'm thinking of the adjectives that people use in writing about my work like that's not I think if I was going for that then the calcification would happen and so I keep that idea of what is available to the actor in terms of not just emotional memory but logic consequence that's got to be always at the disposal of the people making the thing and not that it gets used but it's there you know it's a very broad thing to say emotional memory and I don't know if everybody knows what that means but what you're really saying is that you're using parts of your life as an actor to justify situations that you find script so you remember how you felt and you apply that I don't even know if people do that anymore if actors do that if they actually take the time to do that but I think it could include being open to the logic or consequence of a situation where you tell me that my mother's passed away or that she's died suddenly or whatever I I don't want to be like I don't want to appear like anything I was going to say robotic but I really don't want it to be anything I don't want it to be anything and that's what's really cool about the neutrality exercises from Jacques Lacocque because what he was really trying to get was the actor to communicate something throw a piece of paper or whatever walk through the room or drink some water without any adjectives at all and I don't want to accept that that is futile and so it's I won't accept it I don't accept it that that's a futile thing and yet I've met and I keep getting met with that I keep getting met with the failure of that the failure of that is something that I keep encountering you actually mentioned that as an exercise he did work with mask, neutral mask and you say I'm actually doing the same just without the mask for your actors I wanted to appropriate it in that way because if you think it's hard to move without communicating adjectives try speaking text without communicating any adjectives and yet you can in terms of appropriating why not why not but I've moved away from that I don't think that that's something that I'm I think I've moved away from that I was talking about one to one I'm more one to one you and I let's solve this together and it's more of a dialogue based on the person rather than trying to find some kind of notion some standard of neutrality so I really appreciate the thoughtfulness and the time you're just working these answers out with us because it's a fascinating conversation when you're talking about the one to one and how this is it's a kind of a dominant thing you're doing right now are you still looking for something that's going to unify it as a whole with all these different or is that something that's sort of left to a Cajun chance well the story is what that's a great question the story is what connects for me in my work I'm story based all these plays are stories that I made up mostly one of them is based on a court deposition that actually happened but anyway that's what connects the one to ones for me and everything I'll tell you what I get excited in rehearsal when the story becomes a thing that everybody follows it's a relief you know I wrote the play and I'm glad it's not about me you know it's a relief that it's this thing that now has its own rules that everybody follows everyone is in service of this the writer, the director, the actors, the designers we now have this like it has a set of rules and that's super exciting to liberate something like that and that is probably why I come back each time like I don't know stop one of the things I really admire about your work and picking up from a lot of the things you're saying today is the idea of presence in your presence with the actors in that one to one relationship but also the actors presence with the audience the actors presence with each other the audience presence with the actors the way that that kind of neutrality you're talking about the experience already leaves us leaves everybody open to experience it in the present and so I'm interested in hearing about your work on film having watched some of the films earlier today how you feel what it is for you both making those films and also what it's like for you to see them and to see your work in a way that is actually perfectly repeatable the the thing about film it's like it's a frame and you unlike theater you can't see what's outside of it so you're really as a viewer you're really dealing with what's inside the frame and and it's well it's a contrivance that way and so it has its own rules I don't think that you can say that I'm an actor and I can this is going to sound obvious I guess but I don't if you're a theater actor you can't just go into a film and say I'm going to behave like I do when I'm on stage but what that means is that there is a a different set of I don't want to say rules but there's different parameters for behavior because you're really like talking about behavior how do you behave when the camera like when you have to say these lines that you didn't that are that you've memorized that are not you know or even if you're not it's like you say these lines and there's a camera pointed at you and it's just a different set of responsibilities it's a different approach and you know I couldn't call this acting for beginners this book it's theater for beginners because it's I really am interested in theater and I'm interested in what it yields I'm not a filmmaker but I am like like a lazy film buff you know I like I like I can't remember the names of any directors or movies but I do like I do like to watch movies and I am interested in that but in yeah but in terms of acting I I think it's just it's apples and oranges it's almost like doctors and lawyers it's like it's very I think it's like a very different pursuit oh but I want to say one thing about that one thing we did do with the darkness you're talking about the darkness of this writing one thing that I wanted to do kind of like the Whitney thing where it's like bring what can we bring from theater into this medium it's a one take movie it's a one take video so it's like everything we had like several like five six locations that the main character walked to but the camera never stopped rolling and I wanted to keep it as live as as possible but as you wrote this book Center for Beginners let me ask you question as a beginner I cannot understand I cannot comprehend popularity of Chekhov in America Americans are doers in many way from outside they look like very effective productive robots what they can find in Chekhov reflection in his character who doing nothing talking only reflection empty talk empty life what they see in Chekhov what is in Chekhov what do I see in Chekhov no in general you wrote the book not your personal opinion in general how society American society react to Chekhov where is roots of his popularity can Frank answer that question I think also it's a good question we can leave in the room it's a big question to reflect it's not the theme of our evening tonight but I think it is a good one and somehow related to it because one could look at your place as a Chekhovian version of an American realness but you try to find out that the stillness the openness the interpretation how you look at that scene that character what it produces your own memory because you do not interpret it you don't do preach it for the audience there's a lot of open space and that is why it's so fascinating and so complicated to do as also Tadashi Suzuki said no three sisters go in their backyards and burst into a song it looks like all real but of course they don't do that soup kitchen go on the table and sing a song so I think there are some connections to be found out in a way and updated a model that tries to explain the world and give the meaning and as you wrote in the book and we can also end on this that you said there's something that matters you want to lift something up and something does matter and it's not important how it looks but why that's what is important and I think we got a little insight tonight and why you do this, why you create the work and what that big question is why and where theater might be able to help us to connect to this world so I would like to thank you all very much for coming and for listening and we're going to have a little reception here if you have a little bit of time if there are additional things people would like to ask so thank you very much and I hope I read a little bit to your liking I'm putting you on a list Frank I am there so thank you very much and again really thank you for taking the time and for answering these questions and for being here thank you all