Joking Apart by Alan Ayckbourn (1978)

TW:

 

SYNOPSIS

            Vicar Hugh and his wife Louise have just moved into the house behind successful couple Richard and Anthea and have been invited to their Guy Fawke’s party. Hugh enjoys the evening, but Louise is terrified by the loud fireworks. The properties aren’t evenly divided and Anthea and Richard get the idea to not only invite the new couple to use their backyard, but to tear down the dividing fence entirely with Hugh’s permission. Louise is horrified and feels as if she no longer has a yard at all. Brian spends the party arguing with his girlfriend and confesses to still being in love with Anthea. Sven and Olive arrive late and warn the new couple to be wary of Anthea and Richard. We skip ahead four years to a summer party and Sven complains that Richard is making too many big decisions about their shared business without Sven’s input, made all the worse by the decisions bringing them nothing but success. Brian’s new girlfriend hardly interacts with the group and instead draws alone. Hugh has become chummier with the group and always eats big portions of Anthea’s cooking while eating very little of his wife’s at home. Anthea and Richard spend the evening prepping food and entertaining the children while their friends complain out of earshot that they coddle their kids too much. Four years later things come to a head at Anthea and Richard’s Boxing Day party. Sven, still upset with his business relationship challenges Richard to a tennis match despite being a decade out of shape and clearly intoxicated. During the match Hugh and Louise stop by on their way to take a walk. Despite being invited to join the party, Louise insists on leaving and Hugh not only stays but confesses his growing adulterous love for Anthea. Brian’s newest girlfriend ruins Richard’s plan to appease Sven by revealing that Sven only won because Richard played left-handed. Four more years pass and the group gathers once more for Anthea and Richard’s daughter Debbie’s 18^th birthday. Brian is alone for the first time in the play and Louise is now under the influence of new medication that is much too strong causing her to laugh and sing unprompted. Sven is imbittered but admits that Richard is simply better than him. Unfortunately, he admits this as a very somber and downtrodden toast to Debbie causing him to bury his head and his wife to burst into tears.

 

CHARACTERS

Richard – Adult, British Accent

Anthea – Adult, British Accent

Hugh – Adult, British Accent

Louise – Adult, British Accent

Sven – Adult, British Accent

Olive – Adult, British Accent

Brian – Adult, British Accent

Melody/Mandy/Mo/Debbie – Adult/Adult/20s/18, British Accent

 

POTENTIAL MONOLOGUES

            Sven has the first potential monologue when his jealousy towards Richard first starts to surface. It’s the monologue where he tries to tell Anthea that Richard is going to get them into trouble making so many business decisions on his own. It comes out rather comedic because it starts as if Richard has done something terrible and lost the company money when by the end of it Sven has to admit that Richard is actually doing a great job and earning them lots of money. Then in the last scene he has his somber toast.

            Brian has a monologue to Mo, girlfriend #3, explaining how Anthea left her husband and ended up staying with him for three months with her two very young kids before meeting Richard. He fell in love with her and her family but invited her with no strings attached, so he felt like he couldn’t confess his love for her without seeming like he was backsliding on his word.

            Hugh has his love confession to Anthea which are actually small paragraphs broken up by interjections, but they could easily be strung together for a nice long monologue.

 

PERSONAL THOUGHTS

            The concept is how the perfect couple affects the people around them that continuously compare themselves to them. Their friends both want them and want to be them, yet they aren’t. Things just naturally come easily to Anthea and Richard. I find it interesting though that the friends pick at the way the couple raises their children, but no one ever attempts any condescension about Anthea’s failed marriage. There isn’t a reason given as to why Anthea left her husband so it’s totally possible that the nature of the separation is completely justifiable and in no way a fault of Anthea’s.

            This was an interesting read getting to know the characters and their relationships. Of course, it would be better seeing it played out on stage and the most fun being a part of bringing the characters to life. There’s even a running joke about all Brian’s girlfriends all looking alike which they absolutely do because they’re all played by the same actress. There isn’t much that dates the play aside from the more conservative views on divorce and that barely counts. Despite this the playwright very specifically believes the play should take place using the late 70s as the setting of the final scene.

 

Arsenic and Old Lace by Joseph Kesselring (1941)

TW: Asian Slurs

 

SYNOPSIS

            All is fine when Mortimer looks over his kindly and loving aunts’ paperwork to have Teddy, his brother that believes himself to be Teddy Roosevelt, committed after they pass until Mortimer finds a dead body and fears that his brother has become violent. It’s actually a victim of his aunts’ kindness. The sisters agree that if someone is old and lonely they’ll find happiness once they’ve passed on and consider it a charity to help them along. Mortimer is the only one that finds their ideology disturbing, but must leave to review the play despite desperately trying to get out of it to help hide his aunts’ crimes. While he’s away, Jonathan, the dangerous third brother returns after a 20-year absence with his friend, Dr. Einstein, that performs face changing surgeries for him. Jonathan weasels his aunts into letting him stay the night despite their fears and finds the “Panama Canal” that Teddy has been digging in the basement that’s perfectly for dumping the body of his murder victim. Hilarity and suspense ensue as Mortimer tries to protect his aunts and kick Jonathan out while Jonathan tries to hide his own victim and gain access to use his grandfather’s old lab as an illegal clinic, all the while neither party realizes that the other has committed murder. Eventually of course they discover what the other is trying to do, all while the aunts’ cop friend is trying desperately to tell Mortimer about the play he’s writing. More officers arrive from a noise complaint when Teddy blows his bugle at an ungodly hour and Jonathan attacks them after assuming they’ve come for him. The Lieutenant forces the family to have Teddy committed that day and the aunts happily join him leaving the house and all the buried bodies in Mortimer’s possession and ending the Brewster line.

 

CHARACTERS

No ethnicities are mentioned in the text though Teddy’s Asian’s slurs and the likeness to real people should be considered

Abby Brewster – Late 60s, Plump Little Darling

Rev. Dr. Harper – Middle Aged

Teddy - 40s

Officer Brody – Adult

Officer Klein – Adult

Martha Brewster – Elderly

Elaine Harper – 20s, Attractive, Looks Surprisingly Smart for Minister’s Daughter

Mortimer – Adult

Mr. Gibbs – Older Man

Jonathan – Adult, Sinister, Resemblance to Boris Karloff

Dr. Herman Einstein – Middle Aged, Ratty Appearance, Alcoholic Stupor, German with Accent

Officer O’Hara – Adult

Lt. Rooney – Adult, Tough, Driving, Dominating

Mr. Witherspoon – Elderly, Tight-lipped, Disciplinarian

 

POTENTIAL MONOLOGUES

            The explanation of the man that inspired the sisters’ killing spree is treated as dialogue, but could be a comedically morbid monologue if Abby and Martha’s lines are combined.

            Mortimer’s best potential monologue is when he goes on about how idiotic characters in plays are all the while he’s about to get caught the same way. It’s still a bit iffy since it involves sitting and the hilarity is improved with another actor getting the jump on him. The moment is definitely more compelling as scene work, but worth considering as a monologue.

 

PERSONAL THOUGHTS

            I have to admit that this play was hilarious despite touches of dated humor. I have no idea what the technical terms would be for Teddy’s delusions or the sisters’ dismissal of murder as a kindness, but Jonathan just comes across as a psychopath with anger issues and a touch of a God complex. Still he seems like a fun character to bring to life on stage.

            There’s a quote I’d like to share from Wikipedia’s article about the play and film from August 17, 2021 - “The play was written by Joseph Kesselring, son of German immigrants and a former professor at Bethel College, a pacifist Mennonite college. It was written in the antiwar atmosphere of the late 1930s. Capra scholar, Matthew C. Gunter, argues that the deep theme of both the play and film is America's difficulty in coming to grips with both the positive and negative consequences of the liberty it professes to uphold, and which the Brewsters demand. Although their house is the nicest in the street, there are 12 bodies in the basement. That inconsistency is a metaphor for America's struggle to reconcile the violence of much of its past with the pervasive myths about its role as a beacon of freedom.”

            I would love to see this play performed today, preferably with the few Asian slurs used edited out. There are some plot points that are well foreshadowed like how Mortimer mentions a third brother that he doesn’t like about 10 or 15 minutes in and lo and behold that very brother makes a dreadful appearance. At the same time the play makes fun out of subverting Chekov’s gun. We learn about the aunts’ poison as they’re about to have a new gentleman drink, but he’s stopped when Mortimer pours himself a glass and quickly rushed out of the house. Jonathan and Einstein also nearly drink the poison before being interrupted, twice I believe. Then finally the play ends with the aunts offering a poisoned drink to the director of the sanitorium they’re going to just as the curtain drops. It’s probably my favorite running gag in the show and makes me want to try a non-poisoned version of elderberry wine myself.

            The way that Teddy is incorporated into the world of the play also makes me happy. No one hides that his antics can be tedious, but nonetheless everyone respects that they’re part of who Teddy is and indulge the harmless beliefs that make him feel safe. Multiple times Mortimer considers and actually tries to pin the murders on Teddy after realizing his innocence, but in the end, Jonathan is arrested without any of the murders being discovers and Teddy goes to the sanitorium an innocent man.

 

Sister Mary Ignatius Explains It All for You by Christopher Durang (1979)

TW: Rape Mention, Homophobia, Abortion Mention, Child Abuse, Gory Descriptions

 

SYNOPSIS

            The play opens with Sister Mary Ignatius starting a lecture where she explains where people go in the afterlife. Whenever she needs something, she requests the help of Thomas who she tests with catechisms. Shortly after going through their list of people going to hell, Sister requests a break and has Thomas answer a few questions. Along with explaining morality, Sister also talks about her family before she joined the nunnery. That’s when former students arrive to do their rendition of an old pageant. Afterwards the students and the sister reunite only for her to discover the students returned to embarrass her and have not been living their lives according to her teachings. Diane has had two abortions, Gary is gay, Philomena has a child out of wedlock, and Aloysius is a wife beating drunkard. Diane reveals that she blames Sister for her unhappy life and pulls a gun on the nun, but sister is the first to pull the trigger and murders Diane without remorse. Gary gave confession before coming in so the sister then also kills him so that he might go to heaven before he “sins” again and condemns his soul. The sister insists that the janitor will take care of the bodies when Thomas offers to help her. She then takes a nap with Thomas on her knee having given him the gun to make sure that Aloysius doesn’t go the restroom until the sister gives him permission even though she fully intends to make him wet his pants like she did when he was a child in her class.

 

CHARACTERS

Sister Mary Ignatius – Middle Aged

Thomas – 7

Gary Sullivan – 30ish

Diane Symonds – 30ish

Philomena Rostovich – 30ish

Aloysius Busiccio/Benheim – 30ish

 

POTENTIAL MONOLOGUES

            Majority of the play is Sister Mary Ignatius giving a lesson on Catholic morality. Some parts of the monologue just explain the Catholic faith, at least the Sister’s interpretation of it. Of her ramblings I think some of the better to use as stand alone monologues would be her explaining the difference between the Immaculate Conception and the Virgin Birth through explaining the infallibility of the Pope in certain circumstances. It showcases how ornery she is and how even Catholicism isn’t set in stone. Sister’s monologue comparing the suffering of her students to Christ and her own struggles is a good monologue for a squeamish crowd as it gets very graphic about Jesus’s crucifixion. There’s also where she answers the question about if she’s sorry she became a nun. It stands up pretty well against the test of time because her first thought to why she doesn’t regret joining the nunnery is that they allow meat to be eaten on Fridays now. Am iffy one is where the sister explains Sodom and its modern day equivalents. It’s humorous, but I would suggest using it only if you know your audience/auditioners would appreciate it, otherwise you may risk appearing like a homophobe. The sister has yet another monologue about her family explaining that they all went to the cloister or were institutionalized and segues into how God answers all prayers, but sometimes the answer is no in a hilarious black comedy way. The truest monologue the Sister delivers is when she’s coming unraveled about her former students not following what she believes to be the clear teachings of the Catholic Church.

            Diane is the only character with a monologue long enough to rival one of Sister Mary Ignatius’s. In it she reveals her backstory of her mother’s cancer and how she was raped the very same day that her mother died only to be raped again years later by the therapist she sought out for her PTSD from the event.

 

PERSONAL THOUGHTS

            This play is meant to be comedic, but it’s not what I would describe as funny. Unfortunately, the events that unfold feel too close to home and too realistic for me to laugh along with some of the jokes and part of that may come from the nearly 50 years since the play was first performed and my own strained relationship with Christianity. Sister Mary Ignatius is a hellfire and brimstone type of religious that uses her position to assert authority over her students. The child, Thomas, is meant to absolutely adore the Sister and it makes my skin crawl seeing his religious studies appear identical to brainwashing and grooming. While a comedy, the play is also definitely meant to be dark. You don’t have a woman like Diane reveal the kind of trauma she went through for laughs and indeed the only kind of laughter that would be appropriate during her monologue would be nervous or hysterical, definitely not one of amusement. I don’t think I could sit through a showing of this play knowing the nun murders a man out of religious homophobia because for me it’s beating a dead horse and I’m personally tired of seeing gay people die to tell the story of how sick and twisted homophobes can be. Of course, these are only my personal thoughts on the show as a person in 2021 and doesn’t mean that it’s a bad play or that it would be better if it were lost to time. Reading this play made me appreciate the way we’ve grown.

 

The Boys Next Door by Tom Griffin (1986)

TW: Bulimia Mention, Autistic Slur, Fatphobia, Physical Abuse, Black Slur

 

SYNOPSIS

            We’re introduced to Arnold, a self-described nervous person, that has just done his grocery shopping and bought several unnecessary items after getting bad advice from clerks and other shoppers. When Jack arrives he and Lucien try to hid the extra groceries in the tub, but Lucien quickly spills the beans and Jack orders Arnold to return the items and get his money back. Norman returns from work attempting to hide free donuts from his job under his shirt but Jack sees and gives Norman the ultimatum of giving him the donuts or his precious keys since Norman is supposed to be on a diet. Jack introduces himself as the supervisor of group homes for the mentally disabled with Arnold, Lucien, Norman, and Barry being his charges. Arnold is being bullied at his movie theatre job, Lucien is up for a trial to determine whether or not he can be released into the mainstream public, Norman is dating Sheila from another group home and she wants his keys, and Barry’s golf lessons are interrupted when he gets word that his father is coming to visit. Barry is nervous but excited about his father coming, but it’s revealed that his mother was his true advocate and that after her death is when he became a ward of the state. His father arrives but Barry doesn’t know what to do and spends most of the visit sitting quietly, which upsets his father to the point of beating him over the head and quickly leaving when he realizes what he’s done. Afterwards Barry goes mute and gets sent to an institution where Jack visits and announces his decision to take another job with a travel agency. Back at the apartment, the men throw him a surprise party but only when Jack arrives does it set in that he won’t be their caretaker anymore. The men don’t take it well. Lucien runs to his room crying and Norman threatens to go on a hunger strike, but Arnold attempts to runaway and catch a train to Russia. Jack finds him waiting for a train and Arnold asks to be taken back home of his own volition. The leave just as the train to Russia arrives.

 

CHARACTERS

Arnold Wiggins – 40s, Very Nervous, Autistic

Lucien P Smith – 50s, Black, Large, Quite Slow, Autistic

Jack – Mid 30s, Wry, Allistic

Norman Bulansky – Maybe 30, Fat, Sloppy, Autistic

Barry Klemper – 28, Schizophrenic

Mr. Hedges/Mr. Corbin/Senator Clarke – Adult/Middle Aged, Mild Mannered/Middle Aged

Mrs. Fremus/Mrs. Warren/Clara – Deaf/30s, Cheerful/Very Clearly Autistic

Sheila – Late 20s Early 30s, Overweight

Mr. Klemper – Middle Aged, Coarse, One Armed

 

POSSIBLE MONOLOGUES

            The show opens with a monologue from Arnold detailing his experience as a nervous person trying to shop for groceries. It’s a monologue establishing him as having some mental difficulties that could be cut to a minute with the risk of losing some of the monologue’s nuances. He’s got a fun monologue about accidentally getting a few drops of pee on his pants and deciding it was better to splash water all over himself and blame it on an explosion.

            Some of Jack’s monologues serve to help the play along and don’t stand very well on their own, but his monologue about his ex-wife and Lucien’s impeding trial makes for a fairly somber piece. He has a slightly more humorous monologue about Lucien pulling the fire alarm in the apartment complex to get some aspirin.

            Jack has a series of lines that can come together with a short monologue of his to make a great dramatic one about his mixed feelings towards his father’s upcoming visit.

            Mr. Klemper has two monologues but none of them work well alone in my opinion.
            Lucien has what is probably the best-known monologue of the show. It’s about how uncomfortable allistic people feel around folks that are autistic. I do suggest replacing the R word, with “autistic” but that’s the choice of the performer.

            There are more long segments of spoken word by characters, but I don’t think they work very well outside the plays context. The monologues I chose to highlight are only possible ways to use the play’s text. They are not necessarily monologues that I think should be used in any general situation.

 

PERSONAL THOUGHTS

            I have mixed feelings about this play. On one hand, we have representation with one schizophrenic man, a one-armed man, a deaf woman, and five different autistic characters. On the other hand, is the representation good? This play premiered in 1986 and the language reflects it. The R word is used as the standard though I very much do believe the play is intended to raise awareness to the struggles of people with disabilities and their caretakers. What was daring and progressive in the 80s doesn’t always hold up and it’s been nearly 40 years. I think there would be a number of changes if the play were written or performed today.