Sunday Books & Culture
This week’s reviews include UMW Theatre’s production of “John Proctor is the Villain,” and early air innovation and exploration in David K. Randall’s “Into Unknown Skies.”
Books & Culture is edited by Vanessa Sekinger
JOHN PROCTOR IS THE VILLAIN
by Kimberly Belflower
Directed by Gregg Stull
Presented by UMW Theatre Tickets $30.00
Reviewed by Dennis Wemm
The history of the Salem Witch Trials and their subsequent reporting by Arthur Miller’s The Crucible provide the texts for Belflower’s deconstruction of the myth of male heroism in John Proctor is the Villain. It’s successful in its polemic thanks to a thoughtful, energetic, and committed cast who aren’t afraid to dance (for the most part).
Before doing a deep dive into that concept, a few notes about this production and why it’s a good example of production management. John Proctor is the Villain is a very recent play — written through university workshops, with a production at the Studio Theatre in Washington D.C., and a 2022 production in Boston. Doing this play is smart right now, since the play will open on Broadway this March.
Curtain — a loud sting of rock from the late twenty-teens, dim to blue, door opens, high school juniors assemble into class and open books. Every kid has a place, a self-defined personality, and a character type defined by their clothing. The first line is the teacher (Mr. Carter Smith-played by Jonah Hilbert) saying “Sex” and the class reading the definition out of their approved textbooks.
Wait, isn’t this English Lit? Nope, it’s an approved and sanitized text, and it clearly shows that abstinence is the only way to happiness. But these are the smart, motivated students who WANT to read, have heard about sex before, and are raring to have a go on the text of The Crucible. Sex education stops until they are satisfied that English Lit will continue. The teacher does a masterful job of negotiation. He has to teach sex education, until the approved course plan is done and then they get the juicy prize of reading the whole play. The class complies, and the scene ends with an approved definition of abstinence. Teacher (mildly sarcastic): “Awesome.” And — Scene!
The characters are easy to read in American high school drama. Beth (Rachel Piotrowski) is the teacher’s pet, highly competitive and intellectual, Mr. Smith is her friend. Nell (Araiana Adamek) is newly arrived from the big city, which our school’s location is not. It’s called “a one-stoplight town.” Raelyn — the Preacher’s Kid (Emma Magner) is intense but conflicted about the person she’s trying to become. Ivy (Nikki Rizzo) is analytical and funny, freely offers that she’s been in “horse therapy.”
On the male side, Mason (Peyton Vecera) plays basketball, is sensitive and smart but unmotivated; he doesn’t communicate well. Lee (Henry Zeigler) doesn’t seem to fit with the look or behavior the others show, but he spends a lot of the early moments with his eyes fixed on Raelynn, while she doesn’t really look at him. Two classmates, Gianni Marshall and Isabel Sowry, only speak with the rest of the class (listed as “Ensemble” in the program).
One character (Shelby) seems to be missing and missed. Obviously, we’ll be meeting her later. Shelby (Rob Wilcox), has not been in school or in town for months, was friends with Raelynn until she seduced Lee. (Raelynn and Lee have a tense breakup early in the play in which he appears aggrieved, angry, and controlling). Soon we will meet the other adult influence, Bailey Gallagher (Cora Denny), the school’s Guidance Counselor.
The girls in class have formed a Feminism Club to support each other, Mr. Smith is the advisor who offers Mason as a member, since he’s no longer playing basketball because of grades and needs an extra credit. Mason: “I’m just here.”
Okay, so, the production. The scenes flow from one to another with little change, even most of the costumes and hair remain the same through most of the performance. This helps because the pace of the performance never stops through the hour and 45 minutes of stage time, with no intermission. It also helps you to keep track of who’s doing what to whom.
The actors are well-cast and believable. They do a wonderful job of playing three-dimensional people, rather than the types we’re used to from “High School Confidential” shows. A part of this comes from the minimalist dialogue that Belflower has composed. If you think that you’ve got them figured out you are surprised soon enough.
(Reading the script: it’s like reading a musical score for performance, everything is prescribed down to timing of breaths. It is like reading free-form poetry in its style and intensity and the performances reflect all of the moments, hesitations, interruptions, and over-talking that happens in real life between people who know each other well. They finish each other's sentences.)
Scene changes are sudden, jarring, kind of loud, swift, and efficient. They help to place a period at the end of a scene. The music is ironic and frequently is referenced in the script.
All the while, the play is moving, funny, easily grasped and understandable, and an impressive work of stagecraft from all concerned. It shows that UMW Theatre has an impressive amount of flexibility in choice of material as well as how the material is handled. As serious as the subject matter is, the play itself shows what theatre can do when it shows us human characters in important situations.
The negative side of this debate is one of fairness: is Shelby/Abigail any more of a hero than Smith/Proctor? What does a hero do, and how far are they justified in doing it? If control and personal need are not enough to justify a seduction, is a thwarted need for justice enough to justify an act of personal revenge? Should a victim of sexual control be required to follow some due process?
You can argue with it, but first you should see it. You really should go.
TL;DR:
For those interested in a critical analysis (known in mathematics as “showing your work”):
What was attempted? The play reflects modern concerns of the classroom from all angles. It doesn’t stop with this. It deconstructs and adds to our understanding of the Salem Witch trials, their relation to the realism of The Crucible, and the relationship of both to modern feminism and sexual politics.
It provides a counterpoint to the traditional classroom approaches to the original play by turning the point of view from a play about John and Elizabeth Proctor as heroic victims to a play about Abigail Williams. By having Shelby speak through Abigail’s (and Raelynn from Elizabeth’s) point of view it effectively questions whether Proctor deserves the title of “tragically heroic victim” that he’s traditionally been placed in.
The play succeeded in its attempt to refocus our attention from Proctor’s persecution onto how his actions affected the women who are central to his life, and who were most damaged by his seduction of Abigail. It did so in an effective and highly theatrical way by showing us the Junior Lit Interpretive Project. It shows that Abigail’s actions were motivated by her rage at having her abuse swept under the rug by Puritan culture — as the school’s administration grants Smith a slap on the wrist as punishment.
It also refocused the accusation onto Puritan culture by identifying the correlations between Smith’s seduction of her and Proctor’s of Abigail. It never tries to excuse Abigail’s use of Puritan prejudices to bring down the lives of those she accuses, taking innocent lives down with them. The religious patriarchy in 2018 still stands strong in the world after this play, but then so did the Un-American Activities movement after The Crucible was first produced.
Was it worth doing? The goal is to raise consciousness and to interrogate the issues raised by the automatic acceptance of Proctor as a hero. It also identifies and supports the activities of the “Me, too” movement in outing abusers, denying them support, and removing them from positions of trust.
To that extent it’s worth doing, worth seeing, and worth using as a springboard for further discussion of accepted notions of teaching for the text of The Crucible. It implies that we not only need to question who our heroes actually are, it asks us to question the need for heroics in the face of people’s personal needs.
The play itself is a deliberate challenge to established values: the title lets you know that. John Proctor has been held up as a stalwart tragic hero since The Crucible was first performed. It’s been taught as a protest against political oppression of the individual (full disclosure — I’ve taught it this way). But Proctor is problematic as well. The standard interpretation of the play — taught by teacher Carter Smith — has Proctor as a stand-in for Miller and all the others accused and blacklisted by the House Subcommittee on Un-American Activities. He is a lonely and stalwart tragic figure who has brought about his own demise.
In his choice of death, though, he shows the inhumanity of the Puritan culture and the hysteria of the times. He chooses to tell the truth and shame the Puritans — and in part his death helps to end the witch hysteria in Salem.
With me so far, still? Okay, so Proctor’s tragic flaw is the same as his reason for his stand. He upholds Puritan ideals while challenging those who are using them as a tool of oppression.
Playwright Belflower has done her homework, and she understands just what is intended by the standard teaching. But she asks us to reconsider whether Proctor deserves to be thought heroic, and asks whether his flaw is worth the grief that it causes.
Whew. End of dramaturgical analysis.
Dennis Wemm is a retired professor of theatre and communication, having taught and led both departments at Glenville State College for 34 years. In his off time he was president and sometimes Executive Director of the West Virginia Theatre Conference, secretary and president of the Southeastern Theatre Conference, and generally enjoyed a life in theatre.
Coming Next from UMW Theatre:
INTO UNKNOWN SKIES
by David K. Randall
Published by Mariner Books (September 17, 2024)
Paperback $18.99
Audiobook $17.00
Reviewed by Penny A Parrish
If you think our test pilots and astronauts were made of “The Right Stuff,” wait until you read this wonderful book! It vividly describes the race to complete the first around-the-world flight 100 years ago, and the brave and creative men who accomplished this goal.
During WWI, General Billy Mitchell realized the importance of air power in future wars and in the future of nations. But his pleas for the American military to pour funds and manpower into that fell on deaf ears. Mitchell watched as 2,300 airplanes were torched, not because they were damaged but because no one thought they’d be needed after the Great War. Mitchell, temperamental and passionate, decided to work behind the scenes to get attention for a project: an around the world flight.
Most airplanes used in the war had been made overseas. Now it was time for Donald Douglas, working out of a former movie studio in Santa Monica, to build a machine that could handle heat, cold, wind, ice and fate — often with the help of good glue. Pilots tested his airplanes over and over, suggesting improvements and learning from failures.
Douglas’s planes had to fly faster, have larger gas tanks, and be able to fly at both high and low altitudes. They also needed the best pilots. Mitchell scoured the U.S. and found eight men who would fly a small squadron of four planes, with two men in each plane. No radios, no parachutes due to weight issues. They would fly based on their abilities and the resilience of their machines. Ships from the US Navy sat at various ports to help the airplanes with refueling or spare parts.
Other countries also vied for this honor. Pilots from England, France, Italy — even Argentina — joined in the race. They flew from east to west. The Americans flew from west to east and barely made it out of Alaska in the early days. They endured crashes on land and sea, weather emergencies and engine breakdowns. But somehow, they accomplished their mission.
“They flew a total of 26,345 miles over 363 hours and 7 minutes, averaging 72.5 miles per hour…over a period of 175 days.”
Charles Lindburgh is our most famous pilot, but to me his flight pales in comparison to what these men did in 1924.
When I chose this book, I had no idea it would be such a page turner. Readers will be absorbed in crisis after crisis, with ingenuity, fortitude and even luck helping the pilots and machines continue. The author ends with updates on each of the men, who 100 years ago were the most famous people on the globe, mobbed at every stop and on the front page of every newspaper. Certainly, they are American heroes who deserve to be well-known.
Penny A Parrish is a long-time book reviewer and artist. Learn more about her by visiting her page at Brush Strokes Gallery, which is in downtown Fredericksburg.
Local Obituaries
To view local obituaries or to send a note to family and loved ones, please visit the link that follows.
Support Award-winning, Locally Focused Journalism
The FXBG Advance cuts through the talking points to deliver both incisive and informative news about the issues, people, and organizations that daily affect your life. And we do it in a multi-partisan format that has no equal in this region. Over the past year, our reporting was:
First to break the story of Stafford Board of Supervisors dismissing a citizen library board member for “misconduct,” without informing the citizen or explaining what the person allegedly did wrong.
First to explain falling water levels in the Rappahannock Canal.
First to detail controversial traffic numbers submitted by Stafford staff on the Buc-ee’s project
Our media group also offers the most-extensive election coverage in the region and regular columnists like:
And our newsroom is led by the most-experienced and most-awarded journalists in the region — Adele Uphaus (Managing Editor and multiple VPA award-winner) and Martin Davis (Editor-in-Chief, 2022 Opinion Writer of the Year in Virginia and more than 25 years reporting from around the country and the world).
For just $8 a month, you can help support top-flight journalism that puts people over policies.
Your contributions 100% support our journalists.
Help us as we continue to grow!
This article is published under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND. It can be distributed for noncommercial purposes and must include the following: “Published with permission by FXBG Advance.”