Poetry & Blindfolds

When I finally sat down to write “The Observatory”, I decided to continue my trend of writing myself a small role in order to add some laughs and punch to the play.  If nothing else, I know how to twist scripts and get laughs.  So I wrote the part of Victor, the charming and sadistic government agent (not from the FBI, as one reviewer suggested, and not in the future, as claimed by another – I’m all for reviewers projecting their feelings, but when they project my plot points, they’re piss poor at their job).

Having myself in mind for the role of Victor allowed me to have quite a lot of fun at the expense of one of the main roles, that of David Lockwood.  Even with Victor offstage, I still relished in Victor-izing David throughout the show, tormenting him with his own weaknesses, foibles and vulnerabilities until he is crushed under the weight of them.

In early 2011, I had a breakfast meeting with a couple of fellow creative types and we ruminated on the idea of combining our powers under one umbrella.  This unnamed entity was to be used to promote each other’s works and be on hand for each other to work with.  It was decided that, to launch this none-too-ambitious idea, we would remount “The Observatory” to capitalize on the very positive reactions we received from the December 2010 run (and – this should be underscored – we all liked the play anyway). 

Like most garage band philosophies, the idea of the creative umbrella didn’t survive long after our french toast, pancakes and omelettes made their way back into the public water supply.  However, by this time, I was financially committed to remounting “The Observatory”, so that was that.  From the first run came Angela Jo Strohm and Kasey O’Brien, both of which have outstanding talent, infinite charm and magnificent noses.  In line with creative evolution, we all took on more ambitious roles this time around: Angela, who had understudies the role of Marissa, took on the principal role of Sally Lockwood, as well as became the main director.  Kasey, who had understudied Sally in the first show, moved up to take on the principal role of Marissa, as well as assistant director. 

Right around this time, I heard an interview with Ken Finkleman, a particular hero of mine, in which he was asked why he chose to produce, direct, write and star in his various TV shows.  He responded, “would you ask a painter why he decided to paint the entire canvas?”

With that, I decided to take on the lead role of David Lockwood.

Now, as I mentioned above, I did delight in torturing our poor David when I wrote the script, but what I didn’t realize is that the tools I used to create a mental Guantanamo Bay in David’s mind – the insecurity, the vulnerability, the loss of worth, the fear of being mediocre – are exactly my fears.  And David and I get to share them with everyone for an hour and fifteen minutes.  Oops.

Over the last six weeks, it’s been a circle of hell that Dante didn’t even think of.

There were two saving graces to being so emotionally naked in front of the rest of the cast: (1) no one was aware I was really terrified and vulnerable and (2) Angela and Kasey were always there.  I have grown very reliant on their opinions and have come to trust them implicitly.  This is not a common thing in theater, no matter what anyone says.  I cannot hug them enough. 

Love is the cast member with the longest resume.  And she’s not even Equity.

It goes without saying that, although actor Morgan Freeman does not fare so well as a leading man, he is the very best supporting actor in the world.  From “Shawshank Redemption” to “Batman Begins”, Mr. Freeman brings gravitas and class to every project he touches.  Even those movies that tank, like “Evan Almighty”, are at least partially rescued by this fine thespian’s gifts.

So it occurred to me: why can’t Morgan Freeman be inserted into today’s volitile and scary real life?   Would even the worst world tragedies garner a lift from Mr. Freeman’s presence?  Could life be a bit more livable and lovable if Mr. Freeman made a (non lead-role) appearance?

The answer is yes.

 OK, just to get it out of the way.  With a title like that and me being an atheist, you probably can foresee the punch line of this piece.  However, this case is unusual for these reasons.  (1) The Christian and I are not strangers, we are real-life acquaintances, for years.  (2)  While we are diametrically opposed on the Spiritual Scale, we have enough passion in common – women’s rights, especially – that our friendship has been built on a solid respect of those things we both deem important and a mutual respect for those things we may disagree with.

Until last night.

It began when, on Facebook, I posted a video of Christopher Hitchens, the Vanity Fair editor and author, criticizing some of the tenets of Christianity.   This is a common enough thing – people post videos and links all the time about things they like and support.  Indeed, The Christian is known for posting from a ‘God Wants You To Know’ application.  That’s all well and good.  …or is it?  On came the comments.  It is important to stress that I have not edited any of the language chosen by The Christian or me in the exchange below.

The Christian: “This man is a raging narcissist. I think he doesn’t like the concept of God because he thinks HE is God. I agree evolution is not a theory, it is a working model and I am a devout Christian. If I want to read about theology, I read the Bible or Church teachings if I want to read about science I read a science book or website. He reduces religious people and theology to essentialist terms ( of his own making) and doesn’t account for the extreme variance in theologies across faiths and denominations. YAWN.”

Vincent Truman: “Predictably enough, I don’t see the narcissism so much as an objective discounting of certain theological ideas (admittedly, not theories, as they cannot be tested). I find no missteps in his presentation, which dotes, we may both agree, on a rejection of faith and/or wish fulfillment.”

The Christian: “Well, I agree he rejects faith but I don’t agree with him that faith is wish fulfillment. I repeat: He is a self-involved YAWN.”

Vincent Truman: “Now, be fair, Missy. I don’t piss in your pool with your daily ‘god wants you to know’ app, so don’t feel obliged to denigrate my corner of the philosophical market.”

The Christian: “You regularly denigrate my Christian viewpoints through your posts, that is fine you are entitled to your opinions and you have to realize on some level you do open yourself up criticism it by posting it on Facebook. I am being fair, I frankly do not mind you commenting on my faith-based posts. I don’t like Christopher Hitchens and stand by all my prior comments. He is a man after all, not a deity.”

Vincent Truman: OK, then I’ll consider myself invited to slap down your posts on your own page. I thought we were being mutual respectful, but I can suspend that, too.

The Christian: “This is a laughable waste of time. Time to prune my friend list.”

At which time I was immediatley deleted from her friends’ list. 

Another commercial for ‘love thy neighbor – unless you don’t wanna’ theology.