2006-2007 Season
Mr. Marmalade
by Noah Haidle
Directed by James Yost
Produced by James Yost and Anne Lambert
At the Duke Power Theatre in Spirit Square
345 N. College Street in uptown Charlotte
$5 parking for theater patrons in the Bank of America Corporate Center parking garage
Shows are Thurs., Fri. & Sat. at 8 p.m., Feb. 8-24, 2007
Thursday, Friday and Saturday at 8 pm
Sunday, Feb. 18 at 2:30 p.m.
Tickets: Thursdays & Sundays $15 adults & $12 students/seniors
Friday & Saturday $20 adults & $15 students/seniors
By phone (704) 372-1000 or on-line at www.carolinatix.org
or walk up to buy tickets on the day of the show; box office opens 1 hour before curtain
Friday, Feb. 9 is Pay What You Can Night for walk-up patrons.
Saturday, Feb. 10 - stay for a "LivePulse" post-show talk-back hosted by Creative Loafing's Perry Tannenbaum.
Want to bring your group to Mr. M? Call (704) 332-5300 x 2 and leave a message.
This production is made possible by the generous support of our patrons; please consider a gift to BareBones!
What They Said About It...
The imaginary friendships of a 4-year-old girl get a little too real.
By Julie Tork Coppens, The Charlotte Observer
Feb. 14, 2007
A few friendly parenting tips from "Mr. Marmalade," the dark comedy at Spirit Square:
- Your teenage sitters are having sex instead of watching your kids.
- When your 4-year-old stands on the coffee table and yells, "Get the f--- out of my house!," the playdate's over.
- Come to think of it -- best avoid parenthood altogether.
BareBones Theatre Group's latest, featuring the adult Beth Yost as a potty-mouthed pre-schooler with a scary imaginary friend, hits all the shocking and hilarious notes in Noah Haidle's script. What we don't hear are echoes of the real world that presumably reverberate in little Lucy's fantasies.
Where did Mr. Marmalade -- a cocaine-snorting, workaholic porn hound who neglects Lucy and tortures her with dreams of playing house -- come from? Director James Yost and company don't answer that, though Robert Lee Simmons captures this charismatic chimera so perfectly that we almost don't care.
Set designer Chris Timmons has given the cast a colorfully off-kilter playhouse where Pee-Wee himself might feel at home. Watching this romper room become increasingly littered with the fallout from Lucy's mind games is part of what makes this "Marmalade" so delicious. (Simmons finally hauls out an industrial-strength leaf blower to clean the place up.)
But I think Haidle intended something more meaty.
By Perry Tannenbaum, Creative Loafing
Feb. 14, 2007
Space doesn't permit me to extol all the intricacies and virtues of Lynn Nottage's Intimate Apparel, at Actor's Theatre through Feb. 23. Kim Watson Brooks and Sidney Horton make a fascinating couple, dogged by poverty and mutual deceit, while Tanya McClellan and Joseph Klosek offer able support.
Even more remarkable perhaps is Noah Haidle's high energy satiric fantasy, Mr. Marmalade, now at Spirit Square through Feb. 24. Gotham critics savaged the piece last year, effectively dissuading me from seeing the Broadway version. After seeing the BareBones Theatre Group edition, directed by James Yost, I'm left wondering whether it was the press or the original director who missed Haidle's brilliance. With over-the-top regression from Beth Yost, melodramatic excess from Robert Lee Simmons and Robert Haulbrook's signature servility, there are no subtleties here. Just abundant delights.
Imagine That: An Interview with Noah Haidle
(courtesy American Theatre Magazine)
BY CHRISTOPHER DURANG
CHRISTOPHER DURANG: You primarily
write stylized and nonrealistic comedies.
NOAH HAIDLE: I don't try to write comedy
per se. The more I try to write comedy,
the worse it is. But I think I'm definitely drawn
to "nonrealistic." I don't want to see any representation
or mimesis of reality on stage.
That's just outdated and can be done so much
better in film and TV. Part of the enjoyment
of watching Mr. Marmalade is watching a
twentysomething actor play a four-year-old
and walk around in a tutu. Your imagination
has to work harder as an audience member
than it would watching film or TV.
I take the play on two levels: One, it's this
alternative universe where children at age
four attempt suicide, and, more significantly,
have imaginary friends who are not
very nice. At the same time, these child
characters learn this imagined world from
the real world that surrounds them. The
conceit that this four-year-old has an imaginary
friend who ends up acting like an
abusive husband is very funny, I think.
CD: How did audiences respond to it?
NH: Well, there were some funny letters to editors.
One letter said, "We're canceling our
subscription to South Coast Repertory. It's
become a red-light porno-district theatre."
But, is it funny, especially when he starts doing
cocaine and hitting her and having porno?
I mean, it's a little bit of both, and it's pretty
awful to watch. It seemed to be the natural
progression of the character. Again, it's
imaginary. She's a 26-year-old actress. It's
amazing—people would come up to the
actress afterwards and be like, "Are you
okay?" I thought that part of the success of
the play was that they really lost the sense
that she was an actress.
I like it when comedy and/or oddness can
be married with real emotion. Was working
that way a conscious choice, or just something
that happened as you got older?
I think it was something that I always tried
to do, even back in undergrad days, but
not as successfully. In spite of very strange
circumstances, if the characters aren't
grounded in emotional reality, then who
cares? What's the point?
CD: The first time I met you, you were the only
sophomore in a class I taught at Princeton.
Had you been writing for long before that?
NH: No, not really. I grew up in Michigan with
no connection to the theatre at all. I think I
saw my first play when I was 17 or 18... Our
Town... I loved it. I think it's the best play ever.
I love Our Town, too.
CD: You actually asked me to write you a recommendation, but I
never did. That was terrible of me.
NH: Maybe that was how I got into Juilliard.
You felt guilty.
CD: If you weren't always going to be a playwright,
did you have other thoughts about
what you wanted to do?
NH: I wanted to be a physicist very much, but I
realized, to my heartbreak, that I really
wasn't very good at math. Then, all of a sudden,
I decided that I was going to be a playwright.
I said to myself, "Okay, I have no
access to theatre. I know no one who does
this professionally. So how can I do this?" So
I read plays. I was kind of a dork about it.
I would read plays and take notes and read
them again and take notes about what to do.
I don't read novels very often. Thornton
Wilder was obsessed about novels versus
plays -- about the hand of narration. In novels,
there's someone telling you what happened.
Theatre at its best really is about what is happening.
That seems so much more satisfying
to me. I find that my most satisfying theatrical
experiences are on the page. Reading.
CD: On to another topic, I know you write on a
typewriter—why is that?
NH: It sounds like an affectation to write on a typewriter
now, but for some reason I really
like it -- I like the feel of the paper when it's
done, because it feels like Braille on the
back. It feels like you've done something with
your day. I like how hard it is to actually strike
the keys. I like the look of it very much. I like
the weight of the paper after you're done. And
I don't trust computers. The distance between
me and the font -- it looks like anybody's
writing. I don't like it. I remember at Princeton
you'd see manuscripts by Joyce Carol
Oates or whoever just sitting around on
regular computer paper. And all of a sudden
it wasn't as neat.
CD: This play has very funny scene headings. In
production are they indeed used, and how?
NH: Well, I was reading Don Quixote at the
time and it's literally like a page telling you
what is going to happen: "Of Don Quixote
and his servant and the adventures..." and
they just go on and on. This being my first
produced play, I really didn't know how
they would function. I just wrote them
because I was amused.
They ended up being done as titles. We
had a curtain that came down between each
scene and they would come on line by line.
They timed it—really to an eighth of a second—
when the next one would come on.
They really helped out with the pace of the
play. People would laugh at them. I remember
at an audience talkback a guy said, "I
thought those titles were very good. How did
you write them like a four-year-old would
write?" And I was like, really? I tried to
write them as a 25-year-old would write
them.
Reprinted by permisson from the February 2005 issue of American Theatre magazine, published by Theater Communications Group.
|