An Appreciation for a Colleague

I attended the Bridgewater State Univ. production of The Importance of Being Ernest on Thursday evening. It was the final BSU production directed by my long-time colleague and friend Dr. Suzanne Ramczyk. She follows me into retirement after a three-decade career in teaching theatre at BSU.

Oscar Wilde's "'Ernest" is delightful and a light-hearted tease on the social program of marriage and the absurdity of British class practice. It was well done and featured two alumni in older character roles.

I have been reflecting on our long run collaboration, and the shows Suzanne directed that I designed:

[left: Comedy of Errors]

Machinal (2011), Cabaret (2009), An Ideal Husband (2008), How I Learned to Drive (2008), Urinetown (2006), "Theatre on the Edge" (2005), The Secret Garden (2003), Antigone (2002), Hotel d'Amour (2000), The Scarlet Letter (1999), Jack the Ripper (1997), Marisol (1995), No Trifling with Love (1994), Life Chains (1992), Step on a Crack (1992), The King Stag (1991), Madwoman of Chaillot (1989), Comedy of Errors (1988), Lock Up Your Daughters (1987), The Threepenny Opera (1986), Company (1985). I may have overlooked one or two.

I designed many shows for other directors over the years, but working with Suzanne was always an artistically rewarding experience. She and I shared a passion for exploration, innovation, social commentary, and the highest artistic standards we could muster. We both were followers of the revolutionary theatrical experiments in the 1960s and 70s. She received her doctorate at the University of Oregon, and she once trained under theatre fundamentalist Jerzy Grotowski.

Dr. Ramczyk is perhaps the most prepared and grounded director of any of the dozen or so with whom I have worked. I was particularly engaged by her openness to and respect for my perspectives on the work. Often beginning with a simple image or phrase, we would find a touchstone and anchor for artistic explorations in the production. It is notable that she challenged me to be more exploratory, she trusted my responses and defended my choices.

Scores of students over the years have benefited from her zealous investment in performance studies, the training she provided in movement and voice, and her continuing support in their performing careers. A life in professional theatre and film is difficult, the work is irregular and usually at night on stage, and out of town for film. Yet many students have realized that dream by way of her mentoring.

Suzanne and her husband Ed Zeldin deserve a long and rewarding retreat. I suspect she will find a way to remain active in theatre. I wish them happiness and great health for a well-earned retirement.

Arthur L. Dirks

30 April 2017

Reading the Country

One of the more difficult things for some people, including myself, is coming to terms with the difference between political sentiments where one lives and those elsewhere in the country.

I live in New England, specifically in southeastern Massachusetts. It's a working class world for the most part, with deep immigrant and ethnic histories. Historically, this region was and remains the first stop off the boat for many populations. Some towns are populated more solidly by one group or another, as evidenced in the surnames of the time, giving rise to small traditions and a character of sentiment in the town.

Taunton, MA, town flag

Taunton does have a long and proud history. It flies the "Liberty and Union" flag, commemorating it's status as earliest to commit to revolution. For well over two centuries it was a significant regional manufacturing center, but none of that remains as the last silver plant closed. It is a struggling mix of retail and services, somewhat passed by as expressways built through adjacent, less built towns.

The city consistently votes Democrat, but also likes less doctrinaire Republicans. Many of us believe mixing parties is necessary to keep the governing bodies honest. We sometimes refer to "Republican lite" to characterize those office holders. They tend to embace fiscally conservative ideas but recognize that poverty usually is not a personal choice.

It's pretty hard sometimes to read the comment streams on news items and social media. If you consciously seek a balanced understanding of what people think elsewhere, the result is really disheartening. The vitriol, the terms used, the extremes espoused do not endear me to more conservative parts of the country. While I may dislike conservative opinion, I still hope we can have a conversation.

Nevertheless, I do share the view on the left that our current president is incompetent. That is not based on his politics, which are fractured and expedient. The man appears to have no principles beyond service to his own needs.

A Bull, A Fearless Girl, Art and Respect

Popular culture partisans have been trading somewhat predictable arguments about the retention of the statue of a Fearless Girl that faces  down the Wall Street bull in a small plaza in New York's financial district. The Charging Bull was created by Arthur Di Modica in the late 1980s, and was placed originally in front of the New York Stock Exchange, but it was moved to a tight little park or plaza nearby.

Early in March 2017 a "fearless girl" statue appeared in the plaza facing the bull. The girl statue by Kristen Visbal was commissioned by a Boston financial firm. It has been given a year's lease on the plaza. Di Modica says he'll sue. Female comment predictably wants to make the installation permanent.

It would be easy to pick sides in this. I think I'm in a male minority. I like the bull statue and experienced it by accident a decade or so ago. We were walking around the financial district on a sight-seeing Sunday, the only day you can get around down there leisurely. We turned the corner and suddenly confronted this enormous bull in charge mode. It was very powerful. I don't know if the location now is the same tiny, forever-shadowed plaza it dominated when we encountered it.

At first one catches a glimpse of part of it, and in walking further around corners, the whole enormous beast comes into view. It is dynamic, powerful, and awe-inducing. It weighs 7000 lbs.

What does it mean? It's placement as I saw it was so incongruous and unexpected, lurking and dominating. I interpreted it as a symbol of the dynamic power and dominance of markets, the focus of nearby firms. As such, I thought it was an intriguing and artful abstraction. But it wasn't so purposeful in its origins. Di Modica had to push for its installation, where it was, for a time, near the NYSE. The Times notes that it was self-commissioned by the artist. The financial district has little interest beyond its own functional activity, and largely comprises its own audience. Public relations through artwork is unimportant.

The "Fearless Girl" was installed in March 2017 facing the bull. The girl was commissioned by a Boston financial firm and stands just over 4' tall. It was not designed specifically for the installation, where she appears to be defiantly facing down the bull, and was intended to promote workplace gender diversity.

Social media have some pretty strident positions on the statue. The easy interpretation is a celebration of the power of women in the market. The comment streams turn themselves inside-out on issues of power, authority, and gender in general. Some feminists find the Fearless Girl statue "infantilizing," and focuses too much on the personal power of women and not on the structural forces of feminism. (While nothing escapes critique, that just sounds like a refusal of any accommodation.)

One thing is certain. Many women find the installation to be very powerful and want it to be permanent. Fair enough, but I'm with the bull's artist Di Modica, who is going to court to restrict the installation of Fearless Girl. Whatever his intention of meaning in the bull, and the meaning one acquires in contemplation, it is changed and shaped - and perhaps trivialized by the Fearless Girl. As for the Girl, its meaning, too, is shaped by the bull. It makes the defiant attitude specific and targeted, not a profound stance to the world, which I think should be more meaningful.

In museums, great works are juxtaposed to enhance and deepen their meaning and appreciation. Usually this is exhibition-based placement, and the works will be re-positioned over time. The placement of Fearless Girl speaks to the times we are in, but it does also overlay and narrow the meaning of both pieces, in my view. It should not be permanent.


Arthur L. Dirks