CUT PIECE
By Sylvan Oswald
BECAUSE, REALLY, WHAT ARE PLAYS?
AND WHY SHOULD WE READ THEM?
CUT. This is the complete text of Yoko Ono's most famous performance. "Cut." That is all. In her book Grapefruit, Ono notes she usually performs the piece herself, sitting on a stage with scissors, inviting an audience to "cut a portion of her clothing (anywhere they like) and take it." Many have ascribed feminist and anti-war meanings to this canonical work of 1960s performance art. Few would call it a play.
Theater people certainly would not claim it. Where are the rest of the words? As playwrights we are trained towards specificity. In the traditional model of theater, the script is a contract with our collaborators. Designers, directors, actors, and producers all rely on our careful notation of speech, motion, light, sound, and space to do their jobs - to illuminate our structures with their own vitality so that a shared project may be offered to and completed by an audience. Once after I expanded on a few lines from one of my plays, a collaborator told me that my interpretation wasn't supported by the text. "But I am the text," I insisted, immediately embarrassed. I knew that I was wrong. In traditional theater the text is the only text.
Much of the time I've spent trying to be a playwright in the American Theater, I have also spent loving Yoko Ono (and John Cage and Gertrude Stein). Their incompatibility, my resistance, is the defining tension in my work. Am I a playwright? It's not always enough. In recent years I have watched the art world's interest in performance explode. Occasionally a few poets and even fewer theater artists have been granted places in that new cosmos. Documentation of performance, artists' writing and performance scores (even plays!) receive much attention. Yet plays called-as-such by actual playwrights are never on offer. For the most part, these two spheres - art and theater - are almost magnetically opposed. We circle each other then repel, a kind of force field between us.
Because, really, what are plays? And why should we read them? Here are some of the ways I've come to think about those questions, offered as a somewhat personal and rather feminist context for independent publishing in theater.
*
"Cut," is a polygon, a many-sided shape in one's choice of dimensions: two, three, or time. To a writer like myself who has long been obsessed with how the materiality of words collides with the unwriteable "text" of performance, a one-word script is an exhilaratingly simple act of rebellion.
From 2003-2011 I published a journal of plays co-edited with playwright and screenwriter Jordan Harrison.
PLAY A JOURNAL OF PLAYS WAS DEVOTED TO "RETHINKING THE LIFE OF PLAYS ON THE PAGE," BY WHICH WE ASPIRED TO A LITERARY AND ART-PUBLISHING TRADITION THAT OWED MORE TO THE ITALIAN FUTURISTS, GERTRUDE STEIN, GROVE'S EVERGREEN IMPRINT, AND MCSWEENEY'S THAN TO, SAY, SAMUEL FRENCH.
Our four issues were lovingly unbranded, unplanned, and pretty much unmarketed. You could maybe sometimes buy them at the St. Mark's Bookshop (R.I.P.) or at the Drama Bookshop in Midtown when I had time to drop them off. Our greatest folly was a one-night stand with a major distributor which started off well, we thought, when our books landed in at least one confirmed Barnes and Noble. It ended abruptly when we learned that the distributor had pulped half of the already-modest print run of our most decadent issue (#2) because we made the rookie mistake of assigning it a magazine identification number, an ISSN, without also adding a book's ISBN. Magazines perish; books get a shelf life. Issue 2 quickly went out of print - only a few copies are still available.
We published genre-agnostic writers of fiction and poetry, makers of puppet theater, ensembles for whom authorship was fluid and text was procedure, though mostly the project was plays. We hoped to foster in the wider world something like what we'd seen at graduate school where visionary poets and fiction writers wrote not just poems or stories but lists, graphics, dialogues, games, and one memorable bestiary. We took each other’s seminars; attended each others' readings, and some of us shared apartments. We had our eyes opened to the world of independent publishing and L=A=N=G=U=A=G=E poetry. Keith Waldrop showed us his copy of Scenarios edited by Richard Kostelanetz, a mind-bending anthology of scripts, scores, and performance texts by artists as varied as Jack Kerouac and Philip Glass.
Our mentor Paula Vogel was preaching a gospel of "impossibility." This ethos fit in perfectly with the downtown theater I was introduced to in college. Yes we would write impossible plays! Plays that no one could produce!
Meanwhile, we playwrights were also getting schooled on how to enter the business of theater circa 2003.
Step 1, Write a play (in the proper format!).
Step 2, pack it in a manila envelope and mail it to a theater.
Step 3, Wait. Where "wait," strictly meant, "don't call us, we'll call you."
As someone who had long occupied a then-nameless space between the gender the world said I possessed versus the one that felt true, I knew I would never win at the mail-order-bride game. If I hadn't made the life-changing realization in high school that I'd only ever be cast as a fat girl dancing in the back row of The Pajama Game, I wouldn't be here today. So why don't I just start directing plays in that other theater that no one is using, I thought to myself. And I did.
Vogel's "impossible" assignment was a playful way to break us out of what we thought a play was supposed to be. She had a rigorous agenda of defiance towards white male gatekeepers, or towards conservatives and self-righteous liberals of any gender. Her plays of the 1990s saw both sides of pornography, abortion, and molestation, sometimes to feminist dismay. Her radical politics were bent on raising up an army of pleasant, door-knocking proselytizers (her word) who would get invited into the plastic-wrapped living rooms of American Theaters and proceed to fuck their shit up. But she wanted us to do it more diplomatically than she had. Vogel's playwrights must master a craft - building Trojan Horses.
It seemed impossible as Vogel came of age that a lesbian (or three) might hold the empathetic center of a Tony-winning Broadway musical (Fun Home). Or that an electro-pop opera based on War and Peace would be staged environmentally in a Russian supper club with free-flowing vodka and pierogies (Dave Malloy's Great Comet, which capped its long trek to Broadway with star Josh Groban, visionary design by our generation's finest, Mimi Lien, and the expert chaos of director Rachel Chavkin).
Like the master teachers of any age, and in ours she has few peers, Vogel's methods are so effective because she fused her own grief and rebellion with a body of knowledge that bears its own history of resistance. The Impossible Play was founded on her notion of Plasticity, a concept she translated from Meyerhold, the Russian Theater director, and filtered through Viktor Shklovsky, the Russian Formalist she first studied as a graduate student at Cornell.
Plasticity for Meyerhold meant rethinking the entire theatrical event. Instead of attempting, like his mentor Stanislavsky, to represent reality through meticulous reproduction of birdsong, samovars, and psychologically-based acting, Meyerhold's theater drew its charge from the energy of the actor's performance. Like the built environment of the stage, which he similarly liberated from the mundane task of playing a drawing room or some other bourgeois environment, Meyerhold wrote that he was interested in a physicality "which does not correspond to the words." This meant that an actor's physical actions need not illustrate what they are saying – and can even contradict the language – in service of revealing a deeper truth. He pursued a physically precise outside-in approach to acting that would radiate the essence of a role. Inspired by sculpture, Commedia dell'arte, and with some appropriation of eastern performance styles, Meyerhold went after a kind of shamanic presence.
VOGEL: PLASTICITY IS THE PLAYWRIGHT'S VOICE ON THE PAGE.