So I find it extremely interesting to be reading both The Laramie Project and Vagina Monologues. I have seen performances in some way of both, but have never actually read the physical scripts. Especially with The Laramie Project, I found a sudden new connection to the show. Somehow, reading the written transcripts right there was so much more powerful than watching a movie, or seeing a (not so great) production. I found myself focusing on the religious aspect of the piece and how the different characters connected to God.
The way the religious theme was presented in this show was really interesting to me. It seemed to be the one thing all the characters had in common: they all believed in something bigger than themselves. Whether this influenced their beliefs on homosexuality or not was almost secondary to me. I, instead, wanted to focus on the connection. Almost every person mentioned God, but there are a few that I found most compelling. One was Aaron Kreifels who found Matthew. He never once mentioned his beliefs about homosexuality, but instead focuses on why God chose him, of all people, to find Matthew. And I loved that he said it was because God didn’t want Matthew to die alone. Now take this and contrast it to the monologue that Dennis Sheppard says when addressing Aaron McKinney. He says quite clearly that Matthew was never alone when he was out there. The entire time he had his closest friends: the beautiful night sky, the daylight and the sun, the scent of the pine trees, the wind, and most important, God. These two monologues happen so close together, and present a view that God was not only with Matthew the entire time but also guiding someone to his rescue. And while I understand that these words were originally spoken by a real person and not made up by a playwright, it almost seems as if it was pre-meditated and written to be a specific contrast. Here, I must congratulate the playwrights on their editing and placement of the texts. This was one instance where I really felt that had a powerful affect on the reader and how they thought about Matthew Sheppard’s time on that fence.
On that note of the writing and editing on the piece, I just want to touch on how impressed I was with the overall presentation of this production. I love that theoretically, all of the words spoken by individual characters, if listed consecutively, would end up being one giant monologue. Yet these playwrights perfectly ordered each block of lines, compiling them into scenes focused on specific thoughts or moments. That was really beautiful to me. In a lot of ways, the whole show reminds me of documentary filmmaking. The writers/editors are given piles upon piles of interviews and speeches and then set with the task of somehow editing it down to one coherent, powerful piece of art. Using the moments as a way to order the play was extremely compelling to me. It allowed for the play to feel as if it moved chronologically and yet, we were probably jumping all over time with these different interviews. But by making it seem chronological, the reader or audience is able to a) follow the story better and b) keep track of all the characters better. Certain characters appeared at certain times, depending on the nature of the moment, and we were able to associate those characters with that subject matter. I think then moving it onto the stage it is even more clear. Here we see different distinct attributes of people, they are physically before us, so having the visual and the thematic connection of a character to a moment allows for further clarity.
I congratulate Moisés Kaufman and the entire Tectonic Theater Project on taking large amounts of interviews, often in monologue form, and turning it into a comprehensive dramatic show. They allowed us to know and connect to the characters, to feel as if we were seeing dialogue and not monologue, and still feel a deep and relevant connection to Matthew’s story. Makes me want to read more by him J
