(Sarah Terez Rosenblum)
December 15, 2010


Vincent Truman’s “The Observatory” centers on an off-kilter yet compelling idea. When teacher David Lockwood (Colin Fewell) and his wife, Sally (Kasey O'Brien) are offered the opportunity to triple their income by observing a suspected terrorist, they jump at the chance. The catch? The terrorist will be broadcast via hologram into their attic, and David alone must observe. He is forbidden to share details with Sally.

While the show is difficult to critique without resorting to spoilers, it’s safe to say that Truman smoothly navigates some almost unexpected twists, skillfully integrating necessary information without tipping his hand. I say ‘almost’ because the premise initially presented to both David and the audience strains credulity. It’s impossible not to suspect some sort of final reveal. Still, though the rising action takes a dubious turn, “The Observatory” is rescued by its last moment, which strikes just the right chord.

In addition to writing “The Observatory,” Truman is easily its most compelling actor. In a small role as Victor, the couple’s governmental point of contact, Truman is every inch the slick villain. Charismatic and droll, he owns his onstage moments without detracting from other performers. In addition to a satisfactory cast and a nicely stripped down production, perhaps the show’s key attribute is its tight focus on small moments and relationships. Vast sociological themes and lofty political perspectives may hang in the balance, but rather than pontificate, Truman directs our attention to what matters: people like us.


(Our Town Blog)
December 14, 2010

Our Town What inspired “The Observatory?”
Vincent Truman According to my diary, it was a “neat idea” I came up with [while] attending Columbia College in 1987. At the time, I was studying film, and thought the concept of someone watching a hologram would be challenging to shoot, as it turns out, a bit too challenging! There are multiple mature themes: dissolution of a marriage, a shifting of protagonist/antagonist statuses, bad decisions for good reasons, none of which a young film student knew anything about. The idea lay buried for twenty-two years. I discovered the notes during a move, and thought, maybe I’m old enough to write this now.

OT What’s your writing process like?
VT Terribly rudimentary. [My] sketch comedy pieces and plays are all rooted in things I find disturbing and/or irritating. In the case of “The Observatory,” it was [peoples’] creeping lack of privacy and rights and the false sense of security that results. At the draft stage, I host a workshop, for which I invite fellow writers, actors, directors and producers to critique and challenge the script’s arguments. From that, I either kill the project or shape the final. My ratio is three killed for every one finalized.

OT You act and write, which is a better fit?
VT Acting came first. However, I soon discovered I had, to lift a line from Dennis Miller’s assessment of Sylvester Stallone, “the range of a Daisy Air Rifle.” I retreated from the stage and focused on lighting and sound design. [Now], having produced or directed for so long, I see roles in my own shows to be less about acting and more about supporting proper actors.

OT Did you know you wanted to play Victor when you wrote the part?
VT Yes, even started his name with a “V” so I wouldn’t get lost! I meant to change it, but since his name describes his role a bit, I left it. I knew I’d most likely be working with younger performers, so I wanted to have my minimal role be a launching pad for them, like a football coach giving his team a rousing speech before the game. I had to give the character some purpose beyond that, of course, but that’s how he was originally conceived.

OT You directed the show as well. Ever worry about not having an objective eye on the piece?
VT I believe strongly in the team dynamic: the director is active but cedes great responsibility and authority to the team, mostly my assistant director, Angela Jo Strohm, a fierce writer/producer/director in her own rite. This [stabilizes] a potentially volatile or ego-driven atmosphere, and permits the actors to get the most from the experience. In addition to letting my peers critique the piece in development, I go to great lengths in my shows to [encourage] balance is maintained and collaboration.



(J. Scott Hill)
December 16, 2010


We live in a culture of surveillance beyond what George Orwell warned against. Orwell’s dystopia in Nineteen Eighty-Four was a Soviet-style nightmare, a nationwide near-gulag in which the people were desperately unhappy. Today, real people are happy to be surveilled by security cameras, red-light enforcement cameras, tollbooth transponders, GPS, Google, OnStar, cell phone apps, and airport scanners. All of this surveillance is supposed to make America freer, and many people believe it does.

The Viable Theater Company’s original play The Observatory, produced at the Charnel House Chicago, explores the effects of surveillance not only upon those being watched but also upon those doing the watching. The premise of The Observatory is simple enough: a government agency will contact a model citizen and offer them a large amount of money to observe, from the comfort of their own home, a hologram of a prisoner, day in and day out, for one year. The script is timely and timeless, and is careful to provide a reasonable explanation of the hologram technology. Like all good science fiction, however, The Observatory focuses on characters and relationships rather than science and conjecture. Writer/Director Vincent Truman creates a vision of the present (wonderful theater, disturbing future history) in the vein of Richard Matheson or Harlan Ellison.

Vincent Truman also plays Victor, the ranking government agent in The Observatory. As the G-Man in charge of the installation and use of the holographic observatory, Truman’s Victor is less like J. Edgar Hoover than he is like Ryan Seacrest or Greg Probst. As familiar and appropriate as this disingenuous portrayal of Victor is, it isn’t what makes the audience accept the complicated technology of the premise. The key to The Observatory’s believability is the tech guy Tony, played by Joseph Sultani. With Truman’s tight writing guiding the action, Sultani’s performance is very much like a teacher who knows how to distill complex subject matter down to the basic elements and serve that information up in pieces his students can easily consume and digest.

Once the device is installed, the transitions between when the device is turned on or off are handled cleverly in the script with a brownout, brilliantly simulated by “sound and vision” Drew Cohen. The music is uncredited, but has the feeling of Norwegian electronic downtempo – clean, but not sterile, and scintillating.

This show is not predominantly about the future technology. This show is about the relationship between the observer and the observed, the audience and the performer, the guard and the captive, particularly when the communication does not go both directions. As much as The Observatory is about how being a guard has much in common with being a prisoner, it is also about the false relationships we all conjure up in our minds between ourselves and our favorite celebrities or even fictional characters.

One of the high points of The Observatory is the performance of Colin Fewell as David, the observer. In many ways, the audience is asked by The Observatory to identify with David. Fewell navigates David’s rapidly shifting emotional states with a quiet strength. As he creates an imagined relationship with the hologram of the prisoner, Marissa, he is ever reasonable as he questions his own sanity. As he gets disillusioned and frustrated, he is like a man with his hands to his temples who one might assume is ripping his own hair out, but who is really trying to keep his head from exploding. There is nothing bombastic or blatant about Fewell’s performance; David is all tones and undertones against ever-failing attempts to maintain normality.

The subject of David’s observation, Marissa, is the primary focus of the show. Kate Lane, fresh off her acclaimed performance as the Bride in Oracle Theatre’s Blood Wedding, gives Marissa a vulnerable courage that very quickly enchants David and the audience. It is deliberately unclear at times whether or not David imagines his interactions with Marissa, but any observer of The Observatory will want these interactions to be real. We are asked to like her, to love her, to believe her innocent of any crime, and we do. Kate Lane rides the currents and riptides of captivity with a steely eyed will that won’t allow her captors whatever it is that they want, even if she does not seem to know what that is. Kate Lane is a rare talent whose performance is less about portraying a character and more about becoming someone else. Kate Lane is definitely one to watch.

With a dynamite script by Vincent Truman and amazing performances from Colin Fewell and the incredible Kate Lane, The Observatory should be playing to packed houses every night and extending its run; unfortunately, the house was half-empty the night I saw the show. We who love the theatre are voyeurs of a kind. We love to observe people, and love to observe actors performing the things they have learned by observing people. The Observatory is a show that will appeal to science fiction fans, doomsayers, those strongly on either side of the privacy-versus-safety debate, or anyone who enjoys fantastic theatre. Make sure that you come to a complete stop at every red-light camera as you rush to the theatre to observe The Observatory. DO NOT MISS this show.