Game On

Mercy me! It's been nearly a year since my last entry. But then you know, Passion has never been far away from my mind even if it has not been in my fingers typing the blog. As you can tell from the title of this post, the game is on. One of the most challenging aspects of this production was securing a venue in time to fully take advantage of marketing opportunities such as group sales. Drum roll please..........

Passion will presented in March 14-23, 2013 in the Blackbox Theatre at the Skip Viragh Center for the Arts on the campus of Chaminade College Preparatory School. Whew! That is a mouthful.

That was so important, other information seems trivial now. So I'll save other information for another post. Til then!

This is the last of three entries that have been on my mind for the last month. Below are excerpts from my response to a friend's email regarding producing Passion. Be warned, it is fairly long.

You always write the most thoughtful and insightful things. I take no umbrage at answering your questions and feel no provocation, at least not in the negative sense. If you've provoked my thinking -  fantastic! I'm happy to illuminate as best I can, my reasons, my vision, my goals.

The thing that struck me first from your email was the ackowledgement of my Catholic bias. You're absolutely right, I am steeped in Catholic doctrine, at least knowledge of it. I don't think I'm a very good Catholic when in comes to following all of it and I was so grateful for Dianna's input when I had her to bounce ideas off and theories around.

I am, in fact, probably much more in line with the Protestant (Reformation?) thinking about my relationship with God and Christ than what the Catholic church puts forth. As I said in a blog post, my bible reading was sorely lacking in my formative years. Yes, I know many stories but as far as the contrasts put forth between not only the four gospel writers, but the whole idea of the God of the Old Testament and the God in the New Testament, well that's relatively new to me and I'm fairly sure I have not actually reconciled the whole thing in my head.

Ironically enough, Matt just bought me a 24-lecture course in Lost Christianities and the speaker talks at length about those differences (OT vs. NT) and even more about how factions of Christianity in the 400 years following Jesus' death, had widely differing opinions - even more pronounced than today's group of denominations. Some things he puts forth include the question of belief in the divinity/humanity of Jesus and the question as to whether, as a believer, to keep or abandon Jewish laws and customs. I'm not all that many lectures in but it sure is intriguing.

To look for a Catholic church as a venue ( the second biggie of your email for me) poses some issues. First, Catholics are, in general known for some of the strictest doctrine. The church and it's proponents can be very judgemental (Catholic guilt?) and while you can find priests who are fairly modern and forward thinking, they ultimately have to answer to the chain of command. Technically speaking, I never been inside a Catholic church with stage lights and projection screens. I need those things.

One of the main reasons I wanted to adapt Passion directly from the bible is because it takes denominations and doctrine out of the picture. No one can tell me I included something trivial (really? from the Bible?) and excluded something supremely important. If I were adapting the entire ministry of Jesus, maybe, but I'm pretty sure I'm hitting all the high notes in the passion story. And really, the story I'm telling does tend to focus on Christ's humanity because that's what's accessible to us humans. There is no "God" mic, no angels, no supernatural, unless you count Jesus still being amazingly ALIVE to even experience the crucifixion after the torture and beatings inflicted upon him. So, a belief in religion, in a denomination, or even whether he really walked the earth isn't necessary to be moved by the story. For me, it's the story of a man.

And if, in telling this story I'm evangelizing, than so be it. I find it more palatable than someone spewing doctrine and rules at me, telling me if I don't fit certain criteria, I am not one of God's children and I'm destined for Hell. I think a great majority of people could use a little more spirituality, a little humility, a little compassion. But I've no compunction to aid them in their journey (other than the play) or lead them to one denomination or the other because I do believe that the most important thing is the one-on-one with God, Jesus, Allah, Yahweh, the Universe, Whatever. If one is content in life and it's one filled with integrity, generosity, humility, compassion and love, then who the hell am I to tell them they've got it all wrong?

Somewhere in the scheme of things, we need those big, confident, gregarious evangelists (Simon Peter) but I don't see Jesus as one of them. He lived his life on the fringes of society; he was abundantly blessed but possessed no hubris; and he didn't damn people who didn't believe in him.

The final thing that hit home in your email, was to take my time, a la the Sistine Chapel. And again, so insightful, you are right on target. As difficult as it was for me to cancel the piece this past January, it was absolutely the right thing to do. I had no desire to minimize, compress, or bare bones the story. And moreoever, I couldn't - not technically, not without losing my integrity.

I am confident I will produce Passion with my story and vision intact. I will find the perfect venue. It will be a huge success artistically and financially. I just need to be patient and wait for the pieces to fall into play....place.

Thank you for always giving me the opportunity to explain my choices and for making me really think about why I made them.

conservative v. intolerant

Man, I just lost this whole post so let's see if I can recreate and perhaps be a bit more succinct in recreating it.

Most small towns are conservative. The smaller the number of people, the more rules, the narrower the parameters for what is considered acceptable. Now, there may be crazy liberal towns (like Las Vegas) but that's actually a world-class city. I'm talking small, usually rural, towns. Living in a small town, as I have been for the last few weeks, I can almost always use the word conservative interchangeably with intolerant especially when conversing with religious types. (yeh, weird how I don't really put myself in the "religious type" category although I am Roman Catholic and currently writing a blog about my thoughts on faith and the Passion of Christ!)

I understand conservatives. I am married to one, my best friend is one, you get the picture. But I am pretty much a bleeding-heart liberal. I like to help people, feel a civic duty to do so and like to think I'm open-minded about how people live their lives. (In all honesty, I could not care one hoot about people's sexuality or preference and hope they are not sitting around thinking about mine.) But I know some folks who've made choices I would not have made for myself and dangit, they are still wonderful people.

But this small town thing has got me scratching my head. And the list of unacceptable things keeps getting longer: they drink, they're gay, they are having sex, they don't go to church, they cuss (guilty, Lord, guilty, guilty, guilty) they say off-color jokes, they are actors. But the biggest one has got to be that "they" don't live their lives like we do, believe in the same things we do, behave in the same ways we do, love who God says is acceptable." And when those things are accompanied by "cuz Jesus said so," I can barely speak.

Let's get some things straight: Jesus was poor and for all intents and purposes, homeless for most of his ministry; his friends were whores, and tax collectors and all those who live on the fringe of society; he didn't say squat about homosexuals - just "love one another as I have loved you" [subtext, you lying, imperfect, whoring friends of mine whom I love warts and all], and BTW, if the gay issue didn't even make the top ten in the Old Testament, how important could it have been?; he broke the Sabbath by healing, he worried his mother; he was a feminist; he drank wine - daily; he hated the posturing of those who thought they were better than Everyman Mike (Pharisees anyone?). And the thing is, this intolerance becomes so exclusive as to who can be on the train to heaven, that it ends up sounding like crazy talk! That's not at all what was intended. That's one of the big differences between God in the Jewish and Christian faiths. I'm being very simple here, but the savior they still believe is to come, is for the Jewish people. Christ, the new covenant, is for everyone, Jew, Gentile, and everything in between.

There are two ways that I see to go about this issue: you don't like what someone does or believes? Then don't vote for them, frequent their place of business or maybe try to avoid them (good luck in that small town of yours!). Or you can ask them to explain why they believe this or behave that way in an attempt to understand. I used to tour with a woman who was a born-again Christian and she often could be heard saying, "I don't mean to judge..." Stop. Hold the phone. You just judged. And sometimes that's ok, when we use it as a filter for things like:
-do I have enough time to make this turn without getting sideswiped?
-I bet I probably will get $1,000,000 if I answer this email and send $35 Western Union to Africa!
-this place seems really filthy - can I eat here without getting ptomaine?
-I don't think I'd better drive home after those 7 margaritas.

But when we weigh in on humanity, other's humanity and then make a judgement along the lines of "I'm better than you and Jesus loves me more," well, it's not at all what he intended. And frankly, it's not our job.

So to my seemingly close-minded neighbors in small towns, here are some gems of Jesus' (and I'm paraphrasing).

Let him who is without sin be the first to cast a stone.
It is not what goes in the mouth that defiles it, but what comes out of the mouth that defiles it.
How is it that you notice the speck in your neighbors eye but not the log in your own eye?
In response to Peter asking how many times a person should be forgiven? Not seven times, but seventy-seven times.

So, lighten up Francis, it's not for you to judge.

Passion, by the Sower

This is the first of three posts. I have been working out of town and have no desire to do this through my phone, so in my three days at home with a computer, I'm finally getting down my thoughts.

I have attended services with a friend in Rolla, MO for the last two weeks. It's a Christian church and they call themselves Disciples of Christ. This past weekend, the scripture reading was the story of the sower, who scatters seeds: on rocks, on the path, in some weeds/thorns, and on good soil. I am going to assume that this story might ring a bell and get on to what was clarified for me. We (Christians) are the SOWERS, we are NOT the ones who harvest. It is our job to scatter the seeds, not to see if some will take or some will die, or some will germinate at a later time. That's all in God's hands. He just wants us to be the sowers. We do this by living a life of purpose, not judging and tending to our own garden.

I have always been wary of evangelists. They seem to be shoving Jesus down my throat, and my first instinct is to choke. In much the same way I could never understand why one would want to sit FACE to FACE with a priest to confess my sins (whose idea was that anyway?) I think our connection with God and Jesus is more personal, more intimate, and I, for one, don't need to be shouted at about it. Nor do I feel the need to shout to anyone else about their relationship with the Almighty. I want my "evangelizing" to be evident everyday in my actions: I live a life of faith and kindness and generosity of spirit. (At least that's what I strive to do.)

So bringing this back to Passion, the story of the sower is a perfect metaphor for how I have long envisioned presenting this play. I don't want to preach to the audience, have a call to worship or check to see who's accepted Jesus as their Savior, or try to convert patrons. I just want to tell the story and let the seeds fall where they may. In terms of the "religiousness/Christianity" of the play, some may feel enriched, some may grab hold for just a bit and then let it go, some will be choked out by other influences, and some will need additional time to germinate. And that's OK. That task is not mine - to wonder if and how everyone takes what I'm saying. That's the job of a higher power. My job is to create an amazing story which moves people and leaves them breathless. I'm totally up for that!

Laying it all out

My search for a venue has once again begun in earnest. I have a couple already identified and I'm working on getting a letter out before I leave for Rolla on June 21. The thing is, I can't really speak about Passion in short, bullet-points. There has been so much work done on the project in terms of working through staging, the sound design, the set, etc, that I find myself going on and on. Below is what I've tentatively written out to accompany the letter to prospective venues, most of which are churches, btw.

The story concentrates on the universal themes of love, betrayal and redemption, but also on the primordial relationships of mother/son and devoted friends. Contemporary touchstones include a justice system swayed by political pressures and the execution of someone who is innocent.


The text of Passion is from the Bible, sacred music and Jewish prayers. The Old Testament provides text for Mary, Mary Magdalen and Judas, and verses used as projections to reveal prophecies fulfilled. The most dramatic elements of the story are drawn from all four gospels. Creating the bulk of Passion solely from the Bible allows a straightforward telling of the story devoid of specific denominational doctrine, derogatory remarks or anti-semitism.


The music follows the arc of the story, starting with taize music - chants with one line of text and a single melody. As the show progresses, more text is sung and harmonies are added until the crucifixion which has the most complicated music in the show, Benjamin Britten's One Ever Hangs/Agnus Dei, from his War Requiem. Music is sung by the principal actors and a separate chorus.


The concept for Passion is based on Suzuki and Viewpoints, two very physical approaches to theatre, to recreate sacred works of art (DaVinci's Last Supper, Michelangelo's La Pieta) and accomplish the brutal physicality of the story. Projections highlight the fulfillment of prophecies from the Old Testament and the set is extremely simple. The production rests on the structure of a tenebrae service with seven candles lit at the beginning of the show and being snuffed out one by one until Christ's death on the cross. The audience also plays a role in Passion. From the staging, to seating arrangements, to sound design and music, they are meant to be an integral part of the story.

The players include union and non-union professional theatre artists, community players designated as disciples (non-speaking roles) and Simon of Cyrene, and a singing chorus. 

So I ask you, my 4 followers, does this make things clear?

No church and no bible

Twice, I have travelled to countries who are known as devoutly Catholic: Italy (2006) and most recently Ecuador, and here's my conundrum: these people who shout that they are Catholics don't go to church much at all. I have seen so many breathtakingly beautiful churches with no one in them. In fact, in Italy, people are very proud to tell you they are Catholic but when you ask if they attend mass, they say, "oh...no." Perhaps it is due to the very real lack of ordained priests but that's not my first inclination.

The last two years has seen my nose in a bible more than all the time prior to 2009. Oh, I know the bible stories - old and new testament - but as for sitting down to read the bible myself and hook the stories and lessons together, that was never required of me in my Catholic upbringing. A fact I had confirmed by my mother-in-law about a month ago when she said, "I don't know the bible very well. We never read it much." Whaaaaaa??? I know, right?!

Matt (my husband) thinks the Catholic church wants to concentrate on the lessons which is why we never discuss the history of the bible or the inconsistencies in many of the gospel stories, even thought EVERY SINGLE PRIEST learns this stuff at seminary. That makes it so much more interesting to me!!!  Matt says that's what a bible study class is for. Now for those who know me pretty well, I don't consider myself a very good Catholic. I'm not murdering, stealing, worshipping false gods, coveting my neighbor's goods or anything, but as a Catholic, you're supposed to be "all in" with the doctrine and this is where I have some issues. There seems to be quite a bit of doctrine I cannot find anywhere in the gospels, which, as far as I know, is the only bit of text we have on what Jesus said. Not gonna get into that right now (maybe another post) but suffice it to say, I would rather take my studies of Jesus' teachings on their own and live my life in that fashion.

I go to mass: because I find comfort in the service, because it's familiar and I like the music, because often times the readings seem to address exactly what I'm dealing with at a particular time. AND, I read the bible, most often the gospels, because that story interests me most of all. I will continue to bat around the idea of no church and yet devout, believer in Jesus as my savior without the doctrine and trust that eventually I will be able to see what adjustments to make and given the motivation to make them.

Oh, and I still need an Alleluia, dangit.

The reading!

So last night, Bill Rauch, Adrienne Gleeson, Kristen Robinson, and Sarajane Alverson did the reading of Passion. (I've changed the font for this posting to verdana, because that's what the script is in.) I popped in occassionally with the reading of the projections, stage directions and musical moments. It was wonderful to hear the language (kind of formal, see previous post) and see the movement (in my head) and find out where the holes were (there weren't many, thank goodness!)

We breezed through the scourging and the crucifixion - not a lot of talking! But those scenes in particular, made me consider just what the sound design should be. In the theatre, you can only listen to the mob for so long before you file it away as annoying background noise and it loses it's punch.

Obviously, there is not a lot of humor in the show. It will take a concentrated effort to find moments of lightness, given the ongoing tragedy. And I don't mean moments of "ha ha, funny stuff" just times when there are conversations taking place, times where the audience can take a breath and regain their equilibrium. It's an exhausting story to tell and an equally exhausting story to watch.

After the reading, the actors gave me feedback regarding text, and context. One of the things I really wanted to include in this story, which is NOT in any of the gospels, is Judas' torment at what he's done. The gospels state very simply that Judas was consumed by Satan and took his own life. I've had issues with Judas for a while but have made the artistic decision that he needs to tell us and show us what he's feeling, which I think creates a touchstone for the audience. Who hasn't been tortured over a poor decision we made? Thankfully, in discussions with dramaturg Dianna Thomas last year, I came to the decision that Judas wasn't just a pawn in the game. He exercised his free will and committed the betrayal. Otherwise, wouldn't we be celebrating him as a saint who did his part in moving along the events that would kill Jesus and then have him rise? Like Jesus, who questions his Father in the garden, Judas could have chosen NOT to take part, NOT to take the money from the Sanhedrin. And he was so tormented, he couldn't even ask for forgiveness, because it would have been given to him if he'd asked. Instead, he acted on his free will again, and took his own life. As Kristen read Judas' monologue last night and knowing that it is against the background of Jesus' scourging, I heard how selfish he was, and that he didn't fully believe in the mercy of God. He wasn't all in,but held a piece of himself back and that sealed his doom. For those wondering just how Judas is saying all this in keeping with my "no created dialogue" rule, most of his lines come from Job (who also had a rather volatile relationship with God) and from Lamentations (woe is me stuff).

Much of the text in the gospels is circular. And repetitive. And repetitive. It's kind of the Department of Redundancy Department. The gospel stories were told in an oral tradition for centuries and the storytellers knew that for something to sink in, they needed to say it more that once. No where is this more evident than in the Last Supper. I have made the Last Supper purposely long because I figure it will take quite a while to wash the feet of 12 people.  In my church's Holy Thursday service (the washing of the feet), 12 chairs are lined up and we don't really even get to see the washing because the priest is in front of them and we only see his back. In Passion, Jesus calls each disciple up one at a time and we get to see the personal interaction. We actually did feet washing a couple months ago at SATE training and it was a very eye opening experience. Everyone washed and got washed. It is a humbling experience on both sides - intimate yet bold, loving, and nurturing. It makes you really consider who is the servant. Anyhoo, that scene, taken mostly from John's gospel because apparently, Jesus was really chatty at the Last Supper, is what covers most of the time spent washing feet. And even with all the text, I still want there to be moments of silence where only the sounds of the water can be heard. So that scene may receive substantial chopping in the end, cutting out much of the circular talk and that would be fine.

So I have some adjustments to make. And I still have to find a dern Hallelujah that is joyous and upbeat. Oh. And a venue.