The cast of Guantanamo

Guantanamo really needs to be judged on two levels. Playwrights Victoria Brittain and Gillian Slovo make an overt political comment on the United States’ detention of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. And, of course, it’s a piece of theatre, and should be evaluated as such.

Politically, Guantanamo falls into the same trap Fahrenheit 911 does. It applies itself against its opponent’s weakest argument. I completely agree with Brittain and Slovo’s opinion that Guantanamo Bay is reprehensible, indefensible and will be looked back on as a shameful moment in American history. However, I would hope that, at some point, someone in the American government has made a more cogent and reasoned defense than the one we see on stage from Donald Rumsfeld (played with moral certainty by Don Blair). It doesn’t take much to make Rumsfield look like a wriggling ferret, and the playwright’s succeed in this, but their argument would be all the stronger if they took the administration’s best justification and refuted it.

Similarly, Guantanamo seems to suggest, based on its sampling of prisoners, that all the detainees were simply Muslims who were in the wrong place at the wrong time. The American government would have us believe that the prisoners in Guantanamo are all bad people who would threaten the innocent if released. The truth most likely lies somewhere between these extremes; some of the prisoners are probably innocent, some are probably guilty of something and some probably fall into a gray area between. The terrible fact of Guantanamo is not that innocents are imprisoned there—this happens every day in prisons through the U.S. and U.K. It’s that none of those prisoners has access to any sort of due process. The playwrights, writing from a British perspective, understandably restricted themselves to detained British citizens, and this certainly limited their pool of subjects, but by portraying only innocents, the injustice they discuss is clouded.

As a piece of theatre, Guantanamo also has problems that can’t be alleviated by TimeLine’s generally solid production. It makes its point early and often, and by the time the second act rolls around, it has nothing new to say. The piece exists entirely as a series of monologues, since all the text comes from interviews, so no characters interact. Director Nick Bowling offers a pretty static staging as well, despite some well done video from Mike Tutaj, which does its best to help the piece’s lack of flow.

Guantanamo will likely find a sympathetic ear given the usual political leanings of a theatre-going audience, and it will probably anger and shame those audience members who already are feeling angry and ashamed about the actions of their government.

But this piece doesn’t stand on its own theatrically and doesn’t make the kind of strong political statement that could sway those who might disagree with its core message.

Guantanamo: Honor Bound to Defend Freedom—
TimeLine Theatre Company

Chris Jones, Tribune—“It’s not a flawless play. But it’s holding up to history well. [Director Nick] Bowling uses some skillfully produced video segments to deftly link the actors to their real-life counterparts and the staged events to historical truth. That major enhancement wasn’t on stage in London. All of the actors are competent. Many—Clayton Smerican (full of vulnerability and uncertainty), Christian Castro, Hunter Stiebel, Robert Allan Smith and Don Blair (who does both Donald Rumsfeld and a British Lord with notable aplomb) go well beyond that. They make this a powerful chance to ponder problems of the moment—and moments well into the future.”

Hedy Weiss, Sun-Times—“On a purely formal basis, TimeLine Theatre’s production is up to the company’s well-established impeccable standard—with director Nick Bowling’s admirably muted approach, with expert casting all around and with first-rate set design by Brian Sidney Bembridge. And the production will no doubt generate some lively post-show discussions. But one of the crucial questions that might be asked at those discussions is this: Wouldn’t Guantanamo have been a far stronger work of theatre (and political advocacy) had the authors taken a more even-handed view of the overall situation?”

Barbara Vitello, Daily Herald—“TimeLine’s production achieves the company’s usual high standards thanks to an exceptional ensemble subtly directed by Nick Bowling. The first-rate production also benefits from Mike Tutaj’s revealing video and Brian Sidney Bembridge’s shrewdly designed set, which places detainees in a well, flanked by the family members, advocates and politicians who help them tell their stories. The subject will surely generate discussion. Unfortunately, the narrative device where characters speak directly to the audience doesn’t always generate great theatre. Guantanamo fails to fully exploit those conventions.”

Justin Hayford, Reader—“Two years later the hasty creation of Guantanamo: Honor Bound to Defend Freedom compromises its value as theatre, even in this handsome production by TimeLine. Lacking compelling human sagas or a provocative political point, it’s painted mostly in black and white, empathizing with the innocent and wagging fingers at the unjust.”

John Beer, New City—“TimeLine’s production of the exceptional British docudrama Guantanamo, composed entirely from actual documentation and interviews, provides a timely reminder of the lives put on indefinite hold despite growing evidence that they pose little if any threat, sacrifices to America’s increasingly hard to justify post-9/11 hysteria. TimeLine’s ensemble delivers engrossing performances, investing Gillian Slovo and Victoria Brittain’s script with a compelling humanity. Slovo and Brittain pepper their text with fascinating, and frequently surprising, details.”

Lawrence Bommer, Free Press—“Their English accents unassailable, Nick Bowling’s seamlessly superb 12-member cast present the loved ones of the innocent prisoner, their counsel, and indignant judicial reactions to America’s perverse fusion of the Louis XIV’s “lettre de cachet” and Henry VIII’s Star Chamber proceedings… It’s a shame that so persuasive a piece will neither be seen by the torturers who set our foreign policy nor the Muslims who think we’re all the same infidels. But for the rest of us Guantanamo is a wake-up call to secure the freedom of America’s victims before we’re next.”

Jonathan Abarbanel, Windy City—“The play’s intentional dryness is emphasized by director Nick Bowling’s rather inert staging. The 12 actors rarely move from their fixed positions on the massive, multi-layered but inelegant set devised by Brian Sidney Bembridge, as those who are free—family, officials, audience—look down on the prisoners confined in a deep, rectangular well. It’s a voice play, really, a radio play and not an active drama. Too long for the material it covers, and imbalanced—Act I is nearly 90 minutes and Act II under 30—Guantanamo lacks a passionate story-telling center to match its passionate politics. The play’s message, then, is more powerful—and certainly more important—than the play itself.”

A Child’s History of Bombing—The Neo-Futurists

Chris Jones, Tribune—“Politics aside, the show has problems of aesthetic unification. There are two main sources. One is A History of Bombing by Sven Lindqvist. The other is personal issues engendered by Allen’s being the nephew of a guy who worked on the Manhattan Project. Uncle George appears on tape, largely dodging the moral issues behind his work. Allen ponders them for him, but his show wants to be both an impersonal history with Brechtian detachment and a personal meditation. It didn’t figure out how to be both at once. An outside eye probably would have helped.”

Hedy Weiss, Sun-Times—“But despite the obvious fervor of writer-performers Greg Allen and Donovan Sherman, and despite some neatly done Neo-Futurist-style high jinks (from a whimsical meditation on why man likes to make things explode, to antics with toy soldiers, paper airplanes and matches, to an effective audience participation sequence), nostalgia soon began to give way to irritation. For the two men ended up trading in a whole lot of revisionist history and using the wrong war for their anti-war premise.”

Justin Hayford, Reader—“The Neo-Futurists’ lecture-demonstration on American militaristic zeal is mistitled. Thankfully its droll ironies are decidedly unchildlike, and its many stylistically diverse segments form less a history than an idiosyncratic inquiry into select wartime atrocities. Writer-performers Greg Allen and Donovan Sherman struggle to find a coherent thread through their onslaught of props, and often their politics—particularly their racial politics—are too broad to be meaningful. But at times their tiny gestures artfully convey the enormity of mass destruction.”

John Beer, New City—“Let me begin by saying that Greg Allen and Donovan Sherman’s artfully skewed look at a century’s worth of blowing up civilians attacks its subject with passion and theatrical wit. Several moments in this Neo-Futurists production linger in the memory: the video interviews with Allen’s uncle, a participant in the Manhattan Project; the burning paper house that represents the incineration of Tokyo during World War II; the empty chair reserved for Henry Kissinger. A Child’s History is an intelligent treatment of a topic that could not be more timely, and you should go see it.”

Louis Weisberg, Free Press—“In A Child’s History of Bombing, a front-row seat is conspicuously reserved for Henry Kissinger. Audience members are called on stage to answer questions about how many and which members of their families they’d sacrifice in exchange for killing Adolph Hitler before he took power. If you think these devices sound clever or intriguing, then you’d enjoy this production. If you’d dismiss them as sophomoric—as I did—then you probably won’t.”

Venus Zarris, Gay Chicago—“Allen and Sherman are likable guys talking about a deadly important and compelling topic, but they are creating nothing that even resembles good theatre or even a cognitive history lesson. The stories are cloudy. They are thrown together like a procrastinated assignment for a history class written the night before the due date, and the message is murky. I mean, war is bad, but that’s not enough to call yourself a play.”

Rick Reed, Windy City—“Yet, A Child’s History of Bombing never really (you’ll pardon the expression) catches fire. Unlike other outings by the Neo-Futurists, this show lacks a lot of things: continuity, balance and, most of all, drama. For all its insight and historical background, it’s a colossal bore. Boring is not a word I’ve associated in the past with the talented and edgy folks at the Neo-Futurarium. They’ve practically created their own brand of theatre which, with varying degrees of success, never fails to engage and provoke us. But this historical look into the development of instruments of war seems to have been created to enlighten, with absolutely no thought given to entertainment.”

Johnny Tremain—Lifeline Theatre

Chris Jones, Tribune—“It’s perfectly content to show up, provide some light adventure at reasonable cost, celebrate courage and fortitude in the era of the Revolutionary War, tell its apocryphal story without theatrical grandiosity and leave things at that. Some theatres in town—the types with loftier reputations to polish than Lifeline—would have over-produced or complicated this thing to death. To their great credit, adapter John Hildreth and director Katie McLean keep things simple, straightforward and honest.”

Hedy Weiss, Sun-Times—“The gifted adapter John Hildreth has turned to Esther Forbes’ 1944 Newbery Medal-winning book—for decades a young adult classic, and a story written just a couple of years after Forbes’ adult work of history about Paul Revere won her a 1942 Pulitzer Prize. And in conjunction with the hugely resourceful director Katie McLean and an ingenious team of designers, he has devised a show with surefire appeal for audiences of all ages. That label may make some wary, but be advised, this is a great yarn, steeped in delicious language and humor, and brought to life by a group of hugely engaging, high-energy actors.”

Somebody Foreign—City Lit Theatre Company

Chris Jones, Tribune—“[Playwright Douglas] Post also spends too much time on the wrong part of the story—he tells us not much at all about Liz’s [now-fictional] background but spends ages on repetitive scenes in which she’s trying to fight off the FBI and insist that her own life had nothing to do with the killings. As a result, the piece flattens out. This is far from a dull night. Post writes clever crime thrillers. [Director Terry] McCabe’s production takes place on a set dominated by bottles of booze—a metaphor that escaped me. But the show is directed with some snap. And while some supporting performances look uncertain, [Bethanny] Alexander is terrific in the lead. She drives the show along.”

Hedy Weiss, Sun-Times—“Post’s revised drama, directed by Terry McCabe, apparently has been in the works for a number of years, but no one could claim it was not timely—and trendy—as a cautionary tale about what might happen in a society where the fear of terrorism could lead to an intrusion on individual rights. But whether intentionally or inadvertently, Somebody Foreign now turns out to be a play that Hamas would be more than happy to stage as a celebratory event when its representatives take office later this week in the Palestinian territories. The group could not hope for a more fervent trumpeting of the Palestinian cause, the evils of the Israelis, the abusiveness of the FBI and the ignorance and paranoia of the average American.”

Jennifer Vanasco, Reader—“Though the subject of American hysteria about the Middle East is timely, this clunky play doesn’t make any comprehensible points. The story—which was hastily rewritten in response to legal troubles, as the Reader reported—revolves around Liz Fletcher, a feisty Middle Eastern studies professor who’s sure her brother’s murder is not connected to her human rights work in Palestine. Playwright Douglas Post mines all the clichés—the media distorts stories! national security agencies lie!—without going deeper than television drama. Though director Terry McCabe aims for briskness, the play remains bogged down by a meandering story. It’s not helped by blank-faced John Tomlinson as the narrator and Liz’s lawyer. Only Bethanny Alexander as Liz gives this production a sense of reality; she’s worth seeing even if the play isn’t.”

Lawrence Bommer, Free Press—“Terry McCabe’s taut staging turns Post’s already-crisp 100-minute script into a scary exercise in prosecutorial abuse. Moving believably from flippancy to anguish, Bethanny Alexander’s Liz is just the kind of unbending idealist who brings out the worst in authority figures. John Tomlinson acquits himself in the dubious double role of narrator (too easy a short cut in presenting the plot) and love interest from Liz’ past. No question, the crackerjack nine-member cast keeps the energy flowing. Still, in our post-9/11 world Somebody Foreign seems too mild an example of institutional stupidity to be the anomaly of arrogance that it was 14 years ago. We’ve seen worse and learned little.”

Quote of the Fortnight:

“Gertrude Stein once said, ‘A masterpiece may be unwelcome… but it is never dull.’”—Rick Reed reviewing About Face’s Loving Repeating in Windy City.