Blog Exclusive Interview: Nathan Robbel of the Right Brain Project

The much discussed problem with the new play process in America is one of lots of development that rarely leads to actual production. Plays get workshopped to death. Well, this isn't happening at the Right Brain Project. Not only has artistic director Nathan Robbel programmed a three-play season of world premieres, they are all by the same playwright: Randall Colburn. The season started with Pretty Penny, which I really enjoyed. It now continues with Hesperia, the surprisingly tender story of a former porn star who seeks a redemptive future in the midwestern town where she was born. I talked to Robbel about why Right Brain chose to devote their season to Colburn's work and the process they've been using to bring his plays to life. I'll be seeing the show Friday, so I'll report back.


How did you first encounter Randall's work?
I was first introduced to Randall through a mutual friend of ours who felt I would take to his scripts and his style. She had been familiar with his work for some time, and I had directed her in a number of projects in the past few years. The first time I saw his work, however, was at a short play festival with Dream Theatre Company. The piece was short, obscure and non-traditional. But I remember being impressed at how quickly and efficiently he was able to create deep characters with so little.

What made you decide that he fit with Right Brain's mission and aesthetic, and how would you describe them?
The primary tenet of our mission statement has always been to find unique and unexpected ways to connect the audience to the actor. Whether that has been through breaking the fourth wall, physically touching the audience, or simply delivering something non-traditional, we've always felt that theatre should be a communal experience beyond simply sitting in the dark and watching a story unfold. It excites us when we can find ways to get the audience closer to the story, characters, and the overall "theatrical experience" than might be expected.

As far as our aesthetic is concerned... The short answer is that our aesthetic is highly influenced and dictated by our resources. We're constantly asking ourselves how can we best serve the story and deliver a satisfying, sometimes larger-than-life theatrical experience within our limitations - and how do we turn our limitations into an advantage? We've often labeled our shows (rather tongue-in-cheek) as "epic minimalism." Instead of apologizing and finding ways to hide our limitations, we choose to embrace them and find ways to weave them into the fabric of the production as a positive means to an end - which is telling a story as strongly and as emotionally truthful and resonant as possible. I would like to think that if our productions were mounted in a larger space or with significantly larger resources, that they wouldn't be nearly as effective. We strive to make choices that embrace what we have to their fullest potential.

Randall's work fits this mission and aesthetic particularly well. Take Pretty Penny, for example. While I'm always hesitant to apply labels to scripts, one could call the script grounded in realism. It could easily be done on a huge budget with multiple sets and loads of props to accurately depict the "real" world, and that may be the obvious choice. And we could have exhausted ourselves attempting to make that happen. But due to our limited budget, we chose to forgo all of those things. By committing to miming everything in the show, hopefully the audience accepted the convention from the very first scene and instead concentrated fully on these characters and their inner struggles. Suddenly Randall's characters, which are full of nuance, complex motivations, and deep-rooted issues, were a force to be reckoned with. There is literally nothing in between the audience and the psyche of these people. We watch their faces and their eyes, as there is nothing else on stage to see. Suddenly quiet moments between characters become extremely important. In fact, a scene can become ABOUT those quiet moments. And when we're forced to slow down and give over our full attention, a great actor can take us with them on their emotional journey. Randall's work is full of these tender, quiet moments, and given what we have to work with, they become the centerpiece of the production.

And from there, why a full season of his shows? It's a pretty big risk to take on someone who isn't well known to the general public.
Truth be told, it just felt right. When I saw a staged reading of Hesperia, it knocked my socks off. There was so much nuance happening just in between the lines of the script - it didn't need any bells and whistles. In fact, I can only imagine that layering in elements of that sort could only detract from what I was witnessing. I felt close to these actors, and their struggles resonated. It was powerful stuff. In an intimate space like ours and with committed, excited actors, I knew we could fully harness what I felt Randal was trying to achieve with his scripts. It just seemed right.

And as far as risk is concerned... I fully believe that if one does work they're passionate about, and does it well, the audience will eventually come. I strive to never compromise what feels right artistically for the RBP. Sure, when one considers we could be doing more established work that may draw in larger audiences, there's a risk to devoting an entire season to one local playwright. But I believe in Randall's work, and I believe that we're a worthy vehicle for his scripts. We can only hope that people catch on, and will appreciate what we're doing. I've been completely satisfied thus far, and I believe our actors and our crew feel the same.

Had you done any readings or workshops of his stuff, or did you just jump in to produce?
We held a reading of Pretty Penny for our own sake very early in the process. It was kind of an opportunity to hear it out loud, chat about it, and give Randall a chance to approach the script again with fresh eyes. But really, most of the work on the script came from Randall, our wonderful dramaturg Jamie Bragg, and me chatting about the script and what we wanted to accomplish, and what was within our means to bring to life given our resources. Because this was a new work, our rehearsal time was extended by about a week and a half or so, in case we encountered the need for re-writes. But really, that was about it. I went with my gut. I loved the script, and I loved his style, and I had to trust that our audience would as well. And I felt we could successfully work together as an ensemble to make this work efficiently. In the end, we were extremely lucky to find the cast we did, as they were highly professional, willing to play, and they jumped right in. And we've been just as lucky with the cast and crew of Hesperia. I couldn't be happier with the enthusiastic people I'm working with. It's a joy to produce with people so excited about a project.

Pretty Penny is about a young woman who starts a job at a no-limit phone sex line. It looks at desire and identity, without being exploitative. Do Hesperia and the third play of the season explore similar themes? What can we expect?
Hesperia most certainly follows a similar theme, but down a slightly different path. While it's a very different show, both in terms of story and presentation, its themes are connected, and these characters definitely feel like they exist in the same world - just very different corners of it. Pretty Penny's characters are in various stages of attempting to redefine and reinvent themselves on their own terms, to varying degrees of success - and sex and sexuality is the catalyst. Hesperia explores a woman's attempt to do the same, but more specifically she is trying to find a purity and an innocence that she feels she has strayed from. She is seeking redemption, and in many ways, a return to childhood. She latches onto the small town of Hesperia and the Evangelical Christian environment that permeates the town to do so. But like Pretty Penny, Hesperia delves into some uncomfortable places - specifically in its raw depiction of sexual desire that is refreshing and almost disturbingly innocent in a way I've never before encountered in a script.

Our third show of the season, entitled Halfshut, will hopefully go to some similar places as well. I can't outright say what to expect, except that we're striving to blur the line between actor and character more than ever before, and we hope to continue to dwell on similar themes of identity and the role that sexuality plays in that.


So give your final pitch: why is it important for you to produce a full season of Randall Colburn's plays, and why should audiences come see it?
When so many new scripts attempt to tackle big ideas, political or social trends and upsets, Randall's plays are simple and there is a familiarity to his characters that he achieves through small moments. And it's these small moments that we can all relate to. A song that was playing at our prom when we knew we were in love, or the awkward anticipation of holding someone's hand, or the remembrance of an event that touched our heart. These are good people, with their own private struggles, and our vulnerability can be seen in those small moments. While we're surrounded by large political and social issues, at the end of the day, when we look in the mirror, we're there with ourselves and those private struggles. And really, when we connect to other people, it's these small, personal struggles that we all have in common. We hope audiences will see a show, relate to the character, and by proxy, relate to the actor willing to be vulnerable in such an intimate space. All we have are each other, and if art can take us on a personal journey with another person, that's a beautiful thing.

Hesperia opens July 15th and plays through August 15th, running Thursday, Friday, and Saturday nights at 8 PM. All shows play at the Right Brain Project, 4001 N Ravenswood, which is accessible by the Irving Park Brown Line stop, the Irving Park, Damen, and Lincoln buses, and the Ravenswood Metra, as well as boasting ample street parking. Tickets are $15, $12 in a group. Tickets at 773-750-2033 or tickets@therbp.org

Sean Graney On...

Just read this entertaining interview with Sean Graney, currently in Milwaukee directing Steven Dietz's play Yankee Tavern, about conspiracy theorists in the wake of 9/11. It's an entertaining look at the world of conspiracy theorists, the evolution of his aesthetic, and the joys of masturbation. It made me smile. Check it out.

Exclusive Interview! Molly Brennan!

Okay, enough of the Broadway news from my two previous posts. Time for something unmistakably Chicago.

As has been well established, I'm a fan of the work of the troupe 500 Clown and particularly Molly Brennan, who created the character of Madam Barker for 500 Clown and the Elephant Deal and inhabited Harpo Marx in the Goodman's Animal Crackers. Well Madam Barker is back in The Madam Barker Holiday Variety Show, which has two more performances, this Friday, December 4th (which I'll be attending, with review to follow), and next Friday, December 11th, at Prop Thtr, 3502 N. Elston. Showtime is 11 PM. Among the many special guests will be Top Chef Rick Bayless, making guacamole with the group. You can get tickets here. But do it fast--they are flying off the metaphorical shelves.

I recently exchanged some emails with Brennan, and here's the interview that resulted. You can only see this here, folks; tell your friends!

First off, for those not familiar with her, can you explain who Madam Barker is?

Madam Barker is an aging singer who was never a star, with a love for a live paying audience, a passion for dirty glamor, and a thirst for the apocalypse. She was originally based on the Widow Begbick from Brecht's Mann ist Mann. When 500 Clown was developing 500 Clown and the Elephant Deal, John Fournier, the songwriter and co creator for the project, came up with the name "Madam Barker". She moved from being a secondary character in the piece to the mc of the piece, and enjoyed toying with the clowns in the Chicago premier of 500 Clown and the Elephant Deal at Steppenwolf in the Summer of 2009.

Has she ever appeared without the rest of 500 Clown? Why is she on her own this time?

Madam Barker and John Fournier have hosted their own show twice before this little run: Madam Barker's Cabaret and Madam Barker's Cabaret II: Have a Drink on Me at Prop. These shows served the purpose of me figuring out how to be the authority in 500 Clown. I needed to learn about hosting a real variety show before I could host a show gone wrong. With 500 Clown Macbeth and 500 Clown Frankenstein, there is a text to which I can refer. I have to know the actual thing before any kind of useful deconstruction can happen. In knowing how a variety show can work, I can examine what the stakes are, and what is interesting when it DOESN'T work.

We had such a GREAT time doing those shows and the Elephant Deal, that John and I just wanted to keep working together. 500 Clown and the Elephant Deal is a big, expensive show, and hard to just put up for fun. But the Madam Barker Show can happen in a tiny space with just me in my hat and John with a piano and a bunch of my friends, including 500 Clown, performing awesome variety acts.

In developing The Elephant Deal, we discovered Madam Barker isn't a Clown. She's a character. She is smarter, driven by results, has more authority, and because of these things, has more limits than a clown. But she can exist outside a 500 Clown show in a way that "Kevin", my Clown, doesn't seem able. Kevin exists in connection to the other clowns onstage. She is defined by her relationship to them and the actions they are performing. Madam Barker sings her songs and makes her jokes and changes her outfits, and as shit falls apart, she is not as flexible or resilient as Kevin. Her sense of play is less chaotic. She's eccentric, she's certainly not human, but she's not Clown.

How much of what you’re singing has been in previous shows? How much is original?

In this version, the Madam Barker Holiday Variety Show, one song was written for 500 Clown Christmas, 3 were written for Elephant Deal, and one was written for the Madam Barker Show, and the other 3 are from John's catalogue, which, by the way, is massive. So half are from 500 Clown Shows.

And, by the way, "My Love Will Kick Your Ass" and the "Madam Barker Theme Song" will be available as singles before Christmas! Hooray!

Are there any special guests?


YOU KNOW IT! LOADS OF THEM:

Chef Rick Bayless and 500 Clown
Actor Noah Simon
The Galaxie Girls (dancing!)
The Barker Dames (my backup gals)
Jessica Hudson as Mr. Cellophane (burlesque)
Donnell Williams as Ventrilla Kiss (also burlesque)
Tim Simeone and Jeff Trainor (Physical Comics)

What can we expect from the evening?

Entertainment, not art.
Hot chicks, funny guys and gals, Bayless guacamole, free stuff and me singing some great songs by Mr. Fournier.


The last show you did was Animal Crackers, where most of the material was written in 1928. How was that experience different from your original pieces? Do you plan to get back to theatre scripted by other people any time soon?

I will be performing in TWO pieces scripted by other people: Oklahomo for the Holidays with About Face Dec 11-14 and Lookingglass Alice with Lookingglass Theatre on tour this winter and spring, and back in Chicago in the summer.

In terms of working with the Animal Crackers script, I had all actions, no lines, like we do with 500, so that wasn't so strange to me. But I was also playing a guy who actually existed, so finding a balance between me playing the character and me mimicking stuff the real Harpo did was a challenge. Paul Kalina, also of 500 Clown, was the Clown Director, and he helped Jonathan Brody (Chico) and me with a lot of our "dialogue" and bits. So, again, there was some familiarity there. Paul has been my performance partner for 10 years, and he's one of my greatest friends, so being able to work in that comfort zone was a blessing.

The crazy thing about working at the Goodman after all the clown and avant garde stuff I've done was how BIG everything is there. I felt I had a true Harpo experience...I was this clown in this super fancy place. And I couldn't quite figure out why I was there...but I had a fucking BLAST.

What would Madame Barker say if we asked why we should come?

Because I love you. You're my favorite. And I'm broke. I used to work at the Goodman. THE GOODMAN!

Dan Savage Interviews Frank Rich About Stephen Sondheim

This interview is three weeks old, and I somehow missed it when it came out, but it's entirely brilliant. One of my very favorite journalists interviews another about one of my favorite theatre artists. It's a beautiful thing, and you should read it right now.

Rocco Landesman is awesome

Just read this fantastic interview in the Times with Rocco Landesman, newly confirmed head of the National Endowment for the Arts. I'm really encouraged by the interview. Unlike some previous heads of the agency, he doesn't seem scared by the early 90's culture wars that eviscerated the agency. He's not interested in apologizing for the place of the arts in America, and hearteningly insists that artists have the same right to eat and send their kids to school as anyone else. It seems like he might really get places, and help the arts to have a more central place in American life. Anyone else pleased by this? Any dissenting views?

Read My Article From The Onion! (Their City Guide Section, that is.)

As you may know, I was taken on to write freelance theatre stories for Decider, which is the city guide section inside of the Onion, as well as its own website. And my first article, with the Neo-Futurist's Greg Allen, about his insane production of O'Neill's Strange Interlude, has been published online! You can read it here.

Unfortunately, while it was published in print, it was in last week's issue, which I didn't pick up. If anyone has a copy of it lying around, please save it so that I can pick it up.

Thanks, and happy reading!