We Pride Ourselves on Consensus

I had the pleasure/semi-awkward experience last night of seeing ROLL, by Mac Rogers. It's the only new play I've directed that has had subsequent productions, and while there is a small, petty part of me that hopes these other productions will be awful or at least inferior, it's been much more exciting discovering that they are, in fact, excellent. I can only imagine how fulfilling it must be for Mac.

The first production of ROLL was part of a night of one-acts called STOP DROP & ROLL, produced back before terrorists changed the world. It was an innocent time of downtown, upstairs theater, and we did relatively excellent work in a relatively shitty space for our friends and some of their friends. The limited exposure was frustrating given the quality of the work going on there - and ultimately, I think that is what led to the dissolution of the "three-word-plays" partnership - we were doing too much work for the sole return of self-satisfaction.

ROLL is a tricky piece, mixing reality with flashback controlled by a trio of "mediators" whose characters Mac chose to leave mostly undefined (I say mostly because his script does give intriguing glimpses of personality). However, it's really these mediators who set the tone for any production of the play - so the decisions the director makes regarding these characters, why they're there, their intentions, etc. have a direct effect on every other choice in the show.

This is tricky because the show really belongs to Tim and Tasha, the husband and wife disputing ownership of their dog Josie. But since the mediators really give the audience access to Tim and Tasha, any directorial process of the play must be about "getting the walls right" before you can "furnish the room."

My production of ROLL was impacted by my desire to find common themes in the very different shows presented in the evening and to put at least a small focus on those themes. This probably altered the emphasis of my production to focus on the interactions between the mediator, A, and Tim more than was warranted. I don't feel this emphasis hurt the more important interactions between Tim and Tasha, but I may have been working to create moments at times that weren't necessarily there.

The only thing I really remember from the second production is the mediators themselves. I think the director was really interested in the artifice Mac had created more than the relationship he was exploring. (That being said, it was a really wonderful production.)

I found this third production to be Tasha's play (which is fascinating to me since the director, Jordana Davis, played Tasha in the original production - and even more fascinating (for different reasons) since the woman who played Tasha in this production clearly struggled at times with the English language). Both in the performances and in her staging, Jordana minimized the impact of the mediators and really let Tim and Tasha be front and center. The choices the actors made in portraying Tim and Tasha shifted the driving to Tasha, so Tim really did just "roll."

It was also an interesting balance using the mediators primarily for comic effect (in addition to their more pedestrian duties) while underplaying their roles. Tim and Tasha's more fully realized performances were set-off against this backdrop of utility. It was an effective choice, I think - and made me wonder if I spent too much time in the original production worried about integrating the mediators into the fabric of the play rather than simply leaving them in the periphery.

At any rate, Mac should be very proud. He's created an intricate, challenging, and very rewarding piece of theater. And if I ever direct another of his plays, I promise to deny I ever gave him that compliment so he'll stop arguing with me and do the rewrites I want him to do.