

My issue with this nihilistic idea at the core of a play is that writing a play is a monumental effort. You could not write one believing that there is no point. We laugh at Russ for his obstinate return to this idea until we understand the pain that brought him to believe it, and then we are uncomfortable wanting him to get beyond it. Bruce Norris masterfully exposes our discomfort with other people's grand sufferings, a middle-class "make nice." Yet, a writer who believes that there is no point in our efforts to communicate wouldn't waste effort writing, since writing's only purpose is communicating. Writing there is no possibility of communication is a lie. Or at least a cop out. There may be truth on the page, but not the whole truth the writer is able to give us. In Clybourne Park, I do not ask for a happy Hollywood ending, nor do I expect to be given a philosophy. I would hope to see through the heart of the writer, Bruce Norris, to the true unfolding of his or her vision. We share stories to see the world that is more clearly - which this play does flawlessly - but also to make meaning of our lives so that we can move though the world that is with more grace - and here I felt let down. There were luminous moments such as the look on Betsy's face (Annie Parisse) as Karl (Jeremy Shamos) and Russ (Frank Wood) rage at each other. That whole scene alone is worth the price of a ticket and a trip to the theater. Nevertheless, I wouldn't go back to see it again, much as I enjoyed it. What's the point?

Clybourne Park
The Mark Taper Forum
January 11-February 26, 2012
written by Bruce Norris
directed by Pam MacKinnon
cast (in alphabetical order)
Crystal A. Dickinson
Brendan Griffin
Damon Gupton
Christina Kirk
Annie Parisse
Jeremy Shamos
Frank Wood





















