Harlequin in Hogtown: George Luscombe and Toronto Workshop Productions 9781442631656

Citation preview

Harlequin in Hogtown George Luscombe and Toronto Workshop Productions Toronto Worksho p Production s wa s Toronto's firs t 'alternative ' theatre , and fo r thirty years, from 195 9 until its closure in 1989 , i t introduced audiences to a radically new form of theatre. Neil Carson's in-depth histor y of TWP traces the fortune s of many of its actors, writers, designers, and tech nicians - bu t the troupe's colourful artistic director, George Luscombe, is its central character . George Luscomb e brough t Toront o a ne w form o f theatr e base d o n the technique s an d theorie s h e develope d durin g th e fou r year s h e worked wit h Joan Littlewood' s Theatr e Worksho p i n London . Toront o Workshop Production s bega n it s activities in a smal l theatr e i n th e base ment of a factory i n 195 9 wit h Luscomb e a s artistic director. H e preside d over a progra m o f collectiv e play creation tha t fostere d cooperativ e collaboration amon g al l th e contributin g artists. A series o f origina l works and play s from th e Europea n repertoir e i n innovativ e production s wo n the compan y increasin g critica l acclaim. The compan y acquired it s own building i n 1967 , establishin g its reputation a s the mos t exciting theatre in th e city . B y the earl y 1970s , however , a growin g atmospher e o f Cana dian nationalis m caused TW P t o b e overshadowe d b y a numbe r o f new alternative theatres . Luscombe' s an d TWP' s visio n o f a n ideologicall y committed, technicall y experimental theatr e remaine d stron g fo r a number o f years, but i n th e en d a combination of internal and externa l prob lems overwhelmed the company. TWP's productions provoke d radicall y different response s amon g audiences, an d Luscombe' s particular style of drama — a combination of documentary, stylize d movement , an d musi c - remain s controversial . As a pioneer an d a s a stimulatin g teacher, however , Georg e Luscomb e ha s provided inspiratio n for countles s actor s an d directors . Carson' s boo k i s an invaluable addition t o the histor y of Canadian theatre . N E I L CARSO N i s a professo r o f English at th e Universit y o f Guelph , an d author o f A Companion t o Henslowe's Diary an d Arthur Miller.

Our job has to be to draw the raw material of the theatre from the community, interpreting it in our own way and giving it back to the community, not as real life but like an image in a purposely distorted mirror. George Luscombe

Harlequin i n Hogtow n George Luscombe and Toronto Worksho p Productions

Neil Carson

UNIVERSITY O F TORONT O PRES S Toronto Buffal o Londo n

© University of Toronto Press Incorporated 199 5 Toronto Buffal o Londo n Printed in Canad a ISBN 0-8020-0680-9 (cloth ) ISBN 0-8020-7633-5 (paper) (00)

Printed on acid-free pape r

Canadian Cataloguing in Publication Data Carson, Neil, 1931 Harlequin i n Hogtown : George Luscombe and Toronto Workshop Productions Includes index. ISBN 0-8020-0680-9 (bound ) ISB N 0-8020-7633-5 (pbk.) 1. Toronto Worksho p Productions. 2. Luscombe, George, 1926- . 3. Experimental theater Ontario - Toronto . I . Title PN2306.T62T673 199 5 792'.09713'54 1 C95-930446- 0

Unless otherwise stated, all photographs are from th e Toronto Worksho p Productions Archives in the Archiva l Collections of McLaughlin Library, University of Guelph. University of Toronto Pres s acknowledges the financia l assistanc e to its publishing program o f the Canad a Council and the Ontari o Art s Council. This book has been publishe d with th e help of a grant from th e Canadia n Federation fo r the Humanities , using funds provide d by the Socia l Sciences and Humanitie s Research Council of Canada.

TO AL L THOS E WH O MAD E I T HAPPE N

This page intentionally left blank

Contents

PREFACE i x

Prologue 3 1 Do n Valley Quixote 6 2 Strollin g Playe r 1 4 3 Buildin g a Company 2 5 4 Findin g a Voice 3 3 5 Collaborativ e Creatio n I : Hey Rube! and Th e Mechanic, 4 0 6 Addin g the Language : Before Compiègne 4 9 7 Goin g Professional 5 7 8 Collaborativ e Creatio n II : Woyzeckand Th e Golem of Venice 6 4 9 Th e Searc h for Audiences 7 2 10 Politica l Entertainment: Mr Bones 8 0 11 Broadwa y Beckons 8 8 12 Chroniclin g th e Revolution : Che Guevara 9 6 13 Collaborativ e Creatio n III : Chicago '70 10 5 14 Th e Europea n Repertoir e 11 3 15 Ne w Perspectives 12 0 16 Ol d Win e in Ne w Bottles : Te n Lost Years 12 7

viii Content s 17 Th e Indignan t Mus e 13 4 18 A Vintage Season 14 3 19 Lookin g Backward 15 2 20 Ne w Blood 16 0 21 Boar d Game s 16 6 22 Catastroph e Averte d 17 4 23 Harlequi n i n Hogtown 18 3 24 Fina l Act 19 1 25 Cu r tain-Call 20 1 Epilogue 20 7 C H R O N O L O G Y 20 9 N O T E S 22 1 I N D E X 23 5

Preface

Toronto Workshop Productions is the stepchild of the alternativ e theatre movement. Bor n a decade befor e it s better-known Toront o rivals , i t saw its own early achievements ignore d o r undervalue d b y a ne w generatio n of critics who, like doting parents , exclaime d ove r ever y faltering step of its younger siblings . The ten-yea r period during which TWP provided th e most vital theatre in the cit y was dismissed as the 'Dar k Ages' before The atre Pass e Muraill e discovered collectiv e creation. 1 It s highl y acclaime d productions o f th e 1970s , suc h a s Te n Lost Years (1974) , Le s Canadiens (1977), and Ain't Lookin' (1980), were considered someho w peripheral t o the significan t developments in th e city . Historian s of Canadia n theatr e continue t o distinguis h TW P from wha t they cal l th e 'majo r alternativ e theatres,'2 seein g it s work as somehow bot h les s 'collective ' tha n their s (because th e actor s were subordinate d t o th e director) 3 and les s 'Cana dian' (becaus e it s Canadian writers and actor s di d no t dea l wit h 'indigenous' material). This conventional assessment of TWP has always seemed inadequat e t o me. I remembered havin g been overwhelme d by the energ y and imagina tion o f TWP productions in the earl y 1960s, and I felt tha t the excitemen t of thos e production s ha d neve r bee n adequatel y communicated . Wha t was missing from th e usua l historical accounts was a sense o f th e novelty of the enterprise . Befor e TWP, mos t peopl e believe d tha t origina l Cana dian play s would neve r b e popula r i n th e country . Luscomb e an d hi s actors prove d the m wrong . I n effect , the y demonstrated th e viabilit y o f Canadian drama . In following the stor y of the company , I have been struck by its ambiguous outlines. TWP was unusual in having a clear aesthetic vision to which it remained faithfu l fo r almos t thirty years. If it was distinctive artistically,

x Prefac e however, i t wa s subject t o th e sam e politica l an d economi c force s tha t affected al l arts organizations in th e 1970 s and 1980s . TWP' s story, therefore, i s both singula r an d typical , representative an d unique . Thoug h i t marched t o a different drum, TW P was caught up in the same battles tha t engulfed al l the alternativ e theatres i n Toronto. The tas k of reconstructing those battle s has been mor e comple x tha n I anticipated. In spite of the existenc e of extensive archives (including playscripts, photographs, audiotapes , an d critica l reviews), the spiri t of many of TWP' s production s i s almos t irretrievabl y lost . Fortunately , I wa s assisted in my archaeological undertaking by many individuals who, in different capacities , ha d bee n connecte d wit h th e company . Foremos t among the m wa s George Luscombe, who in a series of interviews in 198 7 and 198 8 provide d m e wit h th e basi c information out o f which thi s history has been woven. In th e month s and year s following thos e interviews , I hav e spoke n t o a numbe r o f performers , administrators , civil servants, and other s wh o were themselve s involved in th e event s I was chronicling. Without exception , the y hav e bee n generou s wit h thei r tim e an d hav e provided m e wit h details an d anecdote s wit h whic h to enliven this story. To construct a solid foundation fo r the account , I have also consulted th e records of related organizations such a s the Canad a Council , the Ontario Arts Council, and th e Cit y of Toronto. I am grateful to the staff s of the several librarie s holdin g thi s material , includin g the Nationa l Archive s of Canada, th e Archives of Ontario, McMaster University Library, the Metro politan Toront o Referenc e Library , and th e McLaughli n Librar y of th e University of Guelph. I ow e a specia l deb t o f gratitud e t o th e lat e Norma n Walfor d an d t o Robert Sirman , bot h formerl y at th e Ontari o Arts Council, for grantin g me acces s to record s i n th e Council' s possession. Bu t my main apprecia tion goe s t o the man y individuals who were willing to share with m e thei r memories of their impression s of and relation s with the company , including Lo u Applebaum, Maj a Ardai , Michael Ayoub, Anne Bermonte, David Bolt, Caro l Bolt , Jeff Braunstein , Lee Broker , Steve n Bush , Tom Butler, Calvin Butler , David Clement, Suzett e Couture , Larr y Cox, Linda Desjardins, Le n Doncheff , Dian e Douglass , Arnol d Edinborough , Norma n Endicott, Ronal d Evans , Peter Faulkner , June Faulkner , Joan Ferry , Alan Filewod, Barr y Flatman, Bil l Glassco , Mil o Ringha m Gold , Dian e Grant , Robert Green , To m Hendry , John Herbert , Kar l Jaffary, Astri d Janson, Urjo Kareda , Nanc y (Jowsey ) Lewis , Olg a Kershaw , Derric k Kershaw , François Klanfer, Sonj a Livingston, Doug Livingston , William Lord, Mona Luscombe, Pete r McConnell , Catherine McKeehan , Richard McKenna,

Preface x i Leslie Mendelsohn , Jack Merigold , Pete r Millard , Victoria Mitchell, Ton y Moffat-Lynch, Kathlee n Crawford-Patterson , To m Patterson , Le n Peter son, Walte r Pitman , Susa n Puff , Geoffre y Saville-Read , Brook y Robins , Grant Roll , Robert Rooney , Toby Ryan , Oscar Ryan, Rick Salutin, Edward Sanders, Davi d Silcox , Florenc e Silver , Ros s Skene , Cedri c Smith , Ann a Stratton, Pau l Thompson , France s Walsh , Herber t Whittaker , an d Jac k Winter. Finally , I would lik e to than k th e Universit y o f Guelph fo r finan cial suppor t durin g a sabbatical year, which enabled m e t o work full tim e on th e project .

This page intentionally left blank

George Luscomb e playin g fo r a group o f CC F Youth Clu b members i n Toront o in th e 1940s .

Relaxation exercise s during a training period a t 47 Fraser Avenue . Note th e final shap e o f th e stage , wit h doubl e pillars , projectin g platform , and minuscul e 'inner stage. '

Rehearsal fo r An d They'll Make Peace (1961 ) a t 4 7 Fraser Avenue . The cas t an d Jack Winte r (i n th e checke d shirt ) liste n to Luscomb e (of f camera) giv e notes . Note th e bleache r seatin g and th e us e of ramps .

Hey Rube! (1961) . Left t o nghl: Barbara Armitage, George Sperdakos (wit h bac k to camera), Glen Reid , Tony Moffat-Lynch , Joan Marone y (Ferry) , Ha l Sheftel . Note th e clow n make-up , which wa s the inspiratio n for th e compan y logo .

Nancy (Jowsey ) Lewis . Courtes y o f Nanc y Lewis .

The automobil e routin e fro m Th e Mechanic (1964), at th e Universit y o f Waterloo. Left t o right: Larr y Perkin s (Le e Broker) , Lyndsa y Punchar á (seated) , Yvonne Adalian , Gregso n Winkfield , Edwar d Kelly , Victoria Mitchell .

The Death of Woyzeck (1965) , a t Frase r Avenue. Left t o right: Larry Perkin s (with back t o camera) , Do n Meyers , Gwen Thomas , Yvonne Adalian, Edwar d Kelly , Victoria Mitchell .

The Golem o f Venice (1967) , at Frase r Avenue. Left t o right: Geoffrey Read , Mar k Stone (wit h guitar) , Fran k Norris, Frances Walsh , Mil o Ringham . Not e th e elastic 'pages ' throug h whic h th e performer s entered . Phot o b y Robert va n de r Hilst.

The C.npliiin / Kiipenich (1967) , a t Stratford . Not e th e styli/e d movement s o f th e actors an d th e pavilio n theatre .

The compan y i n 1967-8 . Left to right: (bac k row ) Davi d Clement , Ra y Wlielan. George Luscombe , Françoi s Klanfer , Pete r Faulkner , Tom Fisher ; (fron t row ) Jack Boschulte , Dian e Grant , Mil o Ringham , Durang o Coy (Larr y Martin) , Barbara Walther , June Faulkner , John Faulkner . Phot o b y Robert va n der Hilst , courtesy o f Jun e Faulkner.

The theatr e exterior , 1 2 Alexander Street .

The theatr e interior , 1 2 Alexander Street .

Ray Whelan, Calvi n Butler, an d Mon a an d Georg e Luscomb e relaxin g i n Venice, 1969 .

Che Guevara (1969) . Left t o right: Cedric Smit h (wit h back t o camera) , Keith Dalton, Jac k Boschult e (kneeling) , Me l Dixon , Gay Rowan, Ra y Whelan.

The Good Soldier Schweik (197 3 revival; firs t produce d 1969) . Left to right: Ros s Skene, Len Doncheff,Jef f Braunstei n (i n front) , Allan Royal , Pete r Millard , Grant Roll , Françoi s Klanfe r (seated) , Mil o Ringham , Sonj a Livingston .

Ten Lost Yfars (1974) , western tour . Left t o right: Ross Skene, Ric h Payne , Michae l Burgess (wit h banjo) , Sand y Crawly (wit h guitar) , Rosemary Dunsmore , Iris Paabo (o n stool) , Pete r Faulkner , Diane Douglass , France s Walsh (sittin g on th e piano), Pete r Millard .

Mr Bones (197 2 revival ; firs t produced 1969) . I ¿ft t o right: Errol Slue , Do n Meyers (partiall y hidden), Ro n Weihs , Suzett e Couture , Michae l Marshal, Maj a Ardai, Alla n Royal , Jeff Braunstein .

Summer '76 (1975) . Left t o right: Rich Payne , Dian e Douglass , Gran t Roll.

George Luscomb e at 4 7 Fraser Avenue. Courtes y o f George Luscombe .

HARLEQUIN I N HOGTOW N

This page intentionally left blank

Prologue

On a chill y evenin g towards the en d o f 1958 , a numbe r o f young actor s gathered a t the Parliamen t Street Librar y in th e Cabbagetow n distric t of Toronto t o discus s the foundin g of a 'grou p theatre' i n th e city. 1 As the room filled, the group was welcomed by a gaunt, bespectacled youn g man who spoke softly but with great intensity of his plans to establish an acting ensemble which would produce Canadia n play s and introduc e audiences to som e o f the ne w European dram a the n practicall y unrepresented o n Toronto stages . Hi s nam e wa s Tony Ferry , an d a s h e describe d recen t developments in British theatre, h e spok e o f his hope of someday seeing a similar dramatic renaissance in Canada . Impassioned a s h e was , Ferry' s familiarit y wit h th e Toront o theatr e scene was still rather narrow. Indeed, h e and hi s wife, Joan Maroney , had only recently arrived i n th e cit y after severa l years abroad. The y had me t in Quebec , where Tony had com e a s a young refugee from England during the war, and where Joan ha d grown up i n a theatrical household, the daughter o f an acto r an d director . The y marrie d i n th e earl y 1950 s an d went to London, where Joan studied at the Central School of Speech an d Drama, and Ton y worked as a journalist for a London newspape r and, in his spare time , served as editor o f the theatrica l journal Encore? Discussion followin g Ferry's introduction was animated. There was no disagreement abou t th e need for such a theatre, and one of those present stood u p t o sa y that h e woul d be willin g to devote te n year s of his lif e t o the project. But no one seeme d t o know how the dream coul d be realized in th e absenc e o f an y immediat e sourc e o f financia l support . A s a first step, the y agreed t o presen t playreading s a t th e Librar y in a n effor t t o keep interest in the project alive. The firs t o f thes e reading s wa s deemed a success , but i t brough t th e

4 Harlequi n in Hogtown vision n o closer . Accordingly , Ferr y bega n t o pla n a summe r schoo l t o train th e kin d o f actors the y would need . H e contacte d Carl o Mazzone , the Italia n mime and forme r partner of Marcel Marceau, who was to be in Stratford, Ontario , durin g th e summer ; he wrot e t o Car l Weber, a director with the Berline r Ensemble; he approache d th e acto r Powy s Thoma s and th e voic e teache r Esm e Crampton ; an d h e phone d Georg e Lus combe, th e ten-yea r volunteer o f th e Parliamen t Stree t meeting , who m the Ferry s had know n briefly i n England. By the en d o f February, Ferry had rounde d u p a number o f intereste d instructors an d obtaine d idea l quarters , t o b e supplie d rent-fre e b y Toronto Industria l Leaseholds Ltd. 3 The y consiste d o f eigh t room s i n th e basement o f a printing plant on Frase r Avenue, in an industria l area just north o f th e sit e o f th e Canadia n Nationa l Exhibition . Finally , h e wa s ready t o announc e hi s plan s t o th e press . Th e newl y create d 'Theatr e Centre' woul d b e a combine d teachin g an d producin g organizatio n whose primar y functions woul d be t o develo p Canadia n play s and brin g small mobil e production s t o libraries an d schools . A n importan t par t o f the project , Ferr y said , woul d b e th e developmen t o f Canadia n play wrights. 'Dram a can't b e written in a vacuum,' h e tol d Deni s Braithwaite of th e Toronto Star. 'Playwright s shoul d b e intimatel y associated wit h th e theatre th e wa y Clifford Odet s an d Eugen e O'Neil l were . The y nee d t o associate wit h actor s an d othe r member s o f th e craft. ' Unti l suitabl e scripts wer e available , classical plays might b e adapte d t o Canadia n set tings t o giv e actors a n opportunit y t o lear n t o ac t 'naturally ' i n environments with which they were intimately familiar. Ferr y hoped t o be abl e t o finance th e wor k o f th e Centr e throug h th e fee s charge d th e studen t actors durin g th e summer . Then, i n th e fall , th e grou p would start with barestage production s suitable for touring. 4 Towards th e en d o f March , Ferr y go t a cal l fro m a n excite d Powy s Thomas t o say that their money problems were over. A group o f individuals who had bee n negotiatin g t o set up a National Theatre School i n Canada ha d contacte d Thoma s t o explore th e possibilit y of combining thei r efforts. Th e on e conditio n the y had mad e wa s that th e propose d schoo l not b e involve d i n production . Bot h Ferr y an d Luscomb e foun d thi s restriction unacceptabl e since , as far a s they were concerned , th e whol e point o f th e Centr e wa s t o integrat e trainin g an d production . Whe n Thomas accepte d th e positio n of director o f the National Theatre Schoo l a few days later, Ferry and Luscomb e decided t o go ahead on thei r own. Not surprisingly , Ferry's enthusiasm fo r hi s ne w projec t bega n t o b e reflected i n the article s he was writing for the Toronto Star. In one o f these,

Prologue 5 he launche d a n attac k o n th e Stratfor d Festival . Far fro m stimulatin g Canadian performers to develop a style out of their own experience, Ferry fulminated, th e Festiva l had simpl y perpetuated imitatio n British acting, producing no ne w work and makin g no visible effor t t o assemble ' a per manent troupe o f actors developing year by year toward an ensemble.' 5 It is unlikely Ferry could have anticipated the outrag e hi s attack would provoke. A lette r fro m Davi d Peddie , th e so n o f th e CB C radio acto r Frank Peddie , t o th e edito r o f th e Star captured muc h o f th e feelin g o f the time: In 1 5 years of Canadia n playgoin g I have yet t o se e a n audienc e especiall y inter ested in Canadian play s ... It seems to me a good case could be made on evidenc e of th e succes s o f th e Stratfor d Festival , for maintainin g tha t th e spiri t abroa d i n Canada toda y has a closer affinit y an d affection for the spiri t of the Shakespearean theatre tha n fo r th e spiri t o f th e play s written b y contemporar y writers . I f ou r young writer s ... could captur e som e o f the larg e sound s an d colourfu l image s of Shakespeare's plays they might be treated with equal reverence ... What is new and different i n Canadian theatr e is being done by the actor s an d directors . Whe n th e writers can equal th e performer s .. . then the y will be give n equal ran k i n the the atre. As yet, no Canadia n writer s of any significance have emerged.6

It wa s clear t o Ferr y and Luscomb e that th e transformatio n of th e Tor onto theatr e woul d never be undertake n b y those currentl y active in th e city. The figh t against fashionable West End bourgeoi s drama would have to be carrie d o n b y a generation o f actors and writers trained in th e new European idea s and techniques. It was the ai m of the Theatr e Centr e summe r school t o produc e suc h actors. I n July, twent y student s gathered fo r classe s in movement , voice, and actin g in th e basemen t o f 47 Fraser Avenue. Exercises in mim e an d commedia dell'art e wer e hel d outdoor s i n Hig h Park , an d rehearsal s begun o n a production of Goldoni's A Servant of Two Masters, which, it was hoped, th e grou p woul d perform i n Toront o parks . No t unexpectedly , the enterprise prove d to o ambitious. By the end o f the summer, the partners had ru n ou t o f money. Tony Ferry rejoined th e Star, Carlo Mazzone went back to Italy , and Georg e Luscomb e prepared t o resume his career as a freelance actor.

1 Don Valley Quixote

But i f Ferry and Luscomb e seeme d read y to allow the Theatr e Centr e t o die, the students were not. For them, th e experience ha d been exhilarat ing an d th e actin g classe s unlike anything they had previousl y encountered. Six of them approache d Luscomb e and aske d him t o continue hi s teaching int o th e fall . Thoug h understandabl y flattered , Luscomb e was initially hesitant. He had long dreamed o f forming a theatre, bu t h e ha d recently married an d had responsibilities to others. Indeed , h e had bee n considering moving to the Unite d States, where he fel t ther e wer e bette r opportunities fo r a freelance career. Attractive as the prospect o f a school of his own might seem, he was reluctant t o make a commitment h e coul d not honour.1 Luscombe's hesitatio n reflecte d a scrupulous nature , bu t i t was also a product o f hi s upbringin g i n th e Todmorde n distric t o f Eas t York . Tucked int o a sweepin g curve o f th e Do n River , East York i s separate d from th e res t o f Toronto b y a broad ravine , which forms something o f a physical an d psychologica l barrie r betwee n i t an d th e surroundin g regions. I n th e earl y years of th e century , the are a develope d a distinc t personality reflectin g th e characte r o f th e firs t settlers , mostl y AngloSaxon immigrants , wh o forme d a relativel y homogeneous communit y secure in their sens e of themselves and stron g i n their loyalty to the British Crown. Like many of their neighbours , the Luscombe s had arrive d in East Yor k followin g th e Firs t World War . George' s father , Edward , was from Devon ; his mother, Ann, was of Irish descent bu t ha d grow n u p i n Liverpool. Wit h thei r daughter , Kaye , bor n i n 1919 , the y move d int o a modest hous e o n Westwoo d Avenue. A son, Jack, was born i n 1923 , an d George, th e youngest, in 1926 . During th e thirties , th e solidl y conservativ e complexio n o f th e are a

Don Valley Quixote 7 began t o change. At the height of the depression, 47 per cent of the working populatio n o f East York, som e twelv e thousand individuals , were o n relief. In thos e har d times , political convictions began t o shif t t o th e left . Speakers at political rallies debated th e idea s of Karl Marx, and a grou p known a s the Eas t York Workers was formed t o spea k for th e interest s of unorganized labour . Although th e communis t fring e o f the politica l lef t never gained control , the period produce d a hard core of CCF support in East York which coloured th e politic s of the regio n fo r many years.2 In compariso n wit h thei r neighbours , th e Luscombe s suffere d rela tively little. Edward, who worked in the Canadia n Nationa l railway shops, never los t his job, s o the thre e Luscomb e childre n wer e protecte d fro m the wors t effects o f the depression . Today , Georg e recall s quarrels abou t money bu t n o actua l deprivation . Wha t stick s in hi s min d ar e isolate d impressions - th e walk s wit h hi s father dow n Potter y Road ; th e bric k works wher e th e migran t unemploye d woul d slee p i n th e lingerin g warmth o f the ovens ; the frien d to o poo r t o own shoes who appeared a t school on cold days in a pair of his mother's. George's school , Cheste r Public , wa s probabl y no t untypica l o f th e Ontario educationa l system in the 1930s . Its curriculum was patterned o n British models , and it s approach t o pedagogy coloure d b y English ideals of clas s and self-discipline . I t was an atmospher e Georg e foun d particularly unstimulating. After hi s initial delight a t finding all his friends in his class, his mind began t o wander; he foun d himself unable t o understan d what the teacher s were talking about o r t o grasp th e relevanc e of the lessons, an d s o lost interes t i n learning . Findin g no outle t fo r hi s increas ingly activ e imagination , Georg e wen t t o th e botto m o f th e clas s an d stayed there. His extracurricula r activitie s were scarcel y more successful . Th e Lus combes ha d manage d t o acquire a piano in th e years before th e depres sion, and although Georg e admire d hi s sister's abilit y on that instrument, he harboure d a n ambitio n t o maste r th e Hawaiia n guitar . No t surpris ingly, his parents would have preferred tha t their son might find an outlet for hi s musical talent on th e instrumen t they happened t o own. George , however, was not t o be distracted. Finally , his parents promise d tha t if he learned t o swim , the y would ge t hi m a guitar. Doggedly , George bega n classes at th e YMCA . Hi s first day at th e poo l i s one o f his cleare r child hood memories: There wa s a great bi g iro n doo r and w e stripped naked , shiverin g i n th e cold . They opened the door and there you were facing the tank. The swimming instruc-

8 Harlequi n i n Hogtown tor was dressed in nice warm clothes whil e we were lik e earwigs with our lip s turn ing blu e wit h th e cold . Her e w e were goin g t o lear n t o swi m fifty yards. Whe n you'd learne d that , you were n o longe r a beginner. If you didn't succee d i n th e tests, you were punishe d b y being give n a 'sinker,' a great heavy washer, very , very heavy, which you had t o wear around your neck. I n explaining this , the instructo r pointed with great gle e to a retarded boy in the clas s and said , This boy won ALL the sinker s one day. ' We all laughed, o f course, bu t I thought t o myself , 'Oh my God, I don't want to get a sinker.' Well, on tha t first day of instruction, I managed to collec t al l five sinkers. Ever y one o f them . Ever y one o f them ! I can't tel l you how devastate d I was to go home. And I was so honest that I wore the m home . I was ashamed , bu t I fel t oblige d t o tel l th e truth . An d thi s wa s the YMC A - th e Young Men's Christian Association!

George learne d t o swi m hi s fifty yards and eve n became a lifeguard. But he never got his guitar, and in the end h e settled for lessons on the piano . During his last year of public school, th e long-expecte d wa r in Europ e broke out . I t wa s t o alte r th e Luscombes ' live s drastically . Althoug h Edward ha d serve d i n th e merchan t marin e i n th e Firs t World Wa r an d had man y unpleasant recollections, h e fel t oblige d t o enlis t once again . He wa s driven no t b y any politica l ideology bu t b y an inbre d loyalt y t o Britain, inherite d alon g with his rural an d conservativ e prejudices fro m his Devon family. So , in spite of the fac t tha t he wa s over forty, h e joined the army and was almost immediately posted overseas . But if he was absent in body, his influence was still strong in th e house . Edward Luscomb e wa s a taciturn , quick-tempere d ma n wh o fel t deepl y but ha d difficult y expressin g hi s feelings. Though undemonstrativ e him self, h e ha d a kee n sens e o f injustic e and woul d ac t impulsivel y i n th e defence o f thos e mor e vulnerable . Hi s decision t o com e t o Canad a ha d been suc h an impulse, made on the spur of the moment, as he listened to his father complain about th e foo d his daughters wer e serving him. Having been in the navy , Edward knew the deprivatio n many people ha d suffered durin g th e war, and suddenl y he coul d stand his father's selfishness no longer. In Canada, that same sense of fairness resulted i n Edward's being some what isolated. Persuade d agains t hi s better judgment t o join a union, he stood u p a t his first meeting to complain abou t th e way in which he ha d been recruited . Whe n h e wa s ridiculed fo r hi s objections , h e lef t an d never returned. I n arguments with his elder son, Jack, an ardent CC F supporter, abou t th e 'rights ' of the Eas t York Workers, he coul d be hear d t o mutter that there wasn't a 'worker' among them .

Don Valley Quixote 9 His sens e o f propriet y wa s equall y well developed , s o muc h s o tha t sometimes it was at odd s with his instinctive fairness. Once, o n a visit t o the Ar t Galler y of Toronto with his two young sons, h e wa s embarrasse d when Jack was rebuked b y a guard fo r slidin g down a banister. Later , at home, he too k his rambunctious son to the basement for a hiding. Wideeyed George , spare d th e corpora l punishmen t administere d t o hi s brother, was suitably impressed bot h b y the way the Art Gallery was set u p to discourag e th e ver y kin d o f creativ e exuberanc e tha t produce d th e painting, and by the extent to which his father's rigid code supported tha t repression. Edwar d Luscombe was, as his son remembers, ' a very honourable man i n the awfu l Englis h sense of that word.' The transitio n from Cheste r Publi c School t o East York Collegiat e was not a s liberating a s George ha d hope d i t would be. Her e to o th e dea d hand o f discipline held back any expressions of enthusiasm or revolt. The school wa s run o n th e 'prefec t system, ' whereb y certain student s wer e recruited t o spy on thei r fellows. This English technique of 'turning little boys into informers' was an abominatio n t o George Luscombe , who ra p idly found himself at odds with the new set of teachers. The matriculation subjects were no longer of interest to him - Englis h literature least of all so of course h e failed miserably. At home , i t was decided tha t i f George couldn' t wor k with hi s brain, then perhap s h e shoul d b e enrolle d i n a technical school, where at least he coul d lear n t o wor k with hi s hands . Accordingly, he wa s sent of f t o Danforth Technica l Institute with the idea that he would follow his father into th e shops . H e dutifull y registere d i n th e first year of industrial arts, but with no clear idea of what he wanted to do. At th e en d o f his second attemp t a t grade nine , George wa s very little farther ahead . I n desperation , h e applie d t o be transferre d int o the sec ond yea r of the commercia l art optio n an d wa s accepted. Ther e th e academic atmosphere wa s much more congenial . Not only was the ar t class a relatively small group, but th e teacher s lef t th e students alone, accordin g to George , 'becaus e the y weren't importan t t o th e wa r effort. ' Th e stu dents wer e taugh t a littl e ar t histor y and take n t o churche s t o loo k a t stained-glass windows. But i f th e progra m lacke d somethin g i n intellec tual rigour , i t provided Georg e wit h scope fo r hi s rebellious an d exhibi tionist tendencies . He discovere d th e Frenc h impressionis t painters an d would tak e his sketching pad int o the Do n Valley to daub awa y for hours. When h e emerge d a t the en d o f the day , covered with paint and wit h his hair unfashionabl y long , Westwoo d Avenu e mothers woul d regar d hi m apprehensively and mov e to protect thei r children as he passed by.

10 Harlequi n i n Hogtown It was not onl y his painterly talents tha t foun d a n outle t durin g thos e years. His skill as a drummer an d pianis t won him a plac e i n th e schoo l band an d eve n go t him som e jobs playing with groups at night. Bu t perhaps the mos t important developmen t wa s his discovery of the Co-opera tive Commonwealt h Yout h Movement . Hi s brother , Jack , ha d founde d the East York CCF Club while still in his teens, and tha t club, like others of its kind , provide d entertainmen t an d politica l education fo r young peo ple. George wa s attracted t o the group because i t was made u p o f individuals who, like himself, were beginning t o question th e world and t o look for mor e satisfyin g answers than th e ones provided b y entrenched author ity. N o hotbe d o f revolutionar y intrigue , th e clu b offere d discussion s focusing o n th e visionar y ideas o f George Bernar d Sha w or Edwar d Bellamy rather tha n o n th e dialectic s of Karl Marx. Communism was seen a s a threa t t o th e ideal s o f socialism , which , a t th e Eas t Yor k CC F Club, tended t o b e anythin g bu t ideological . Fo r Georg e a s wel l a s fo r hi s friends, politic s wa s a matte r o f active involvemen t - producin g shows , singing unio n songs , o r entertainin g worker s o n a picke t line . From a young age, Luscomb e came t o think of politics and entertainmen t a s two sides of the sam e impulse. Towards th e en d o f the war , George's fathe r returned t o Canad a i n ill health and, before he could be demobbed, suffere d a sudden hear t attac k and died . Hi s death wa s a shock. For George, i t meant th e los s of a stern and emotionally remote ma n whom he had never really known. When h e thought of him, he remembered th e walks they had take n in the Don Valley and detail s of his appearance - th e well-worn overalls, his invariable weekday costume ; th e blu e Ti p To p Tailo r Sunda y suit; and th e strong , rough hands , permanentl y curled fro m a lifetime of manual labour. For Jack, th e traged y ha d grave r consequences . Becaus e o f th e strai n and th e tim e h e spen t arrangin g hi s father's affairs , Jack faile d t o attai n the 7 5 per cen t average h e neede d t o continue hi s studies at the University of Toronto. That meant that he became subjec t to the draft, and som e months after his father's death h e receive d hi s call-up for military service. After a brief basic training , h e wa s sent t o Belgium into th e las t stages of the war . From there , h e wrot e t o George , tellin g him no t t o follo w hi m into th e army . The advic e was unnecessary. George ha d com e t o his own conclusions abou t patriotis m an d th e internationa l struggl e agains t fascism. His circle knew that fascis m was not confine d t o Hitler's Germany : they had friend s whose house s had bee n raide d b y the RCMP . So he fel t that whil e hi s fathe r an d brothe r ha d bee n righ t t o follo w thei r con sciences, he would fight fascism in his own way.

Don Valley Quixote 1 1 His decisio n wa s shatteringly reinforce d on e afternoo n earl y i n 1945 . George ha d gon e with his class to see Hamlet at the Roya l Alexandra The atre an d was enjoying the first professional theatrica l production h e ha d ever seen . Par t wa y through th e performance , a n ushe r tappe d hi m o n the shoulder , signallin g for hi m t o follow . After makin g his way up th e dark aisle , George emerge d fro m the auditoriu m t o see a neighbour wait ing t o speak t o him . There was no nee d fo r explanations ; even befor e a word was uttered, Georg e kne w his brother had bee n killed . Jack's earl y death lef t Georg e strugglin g t o determin e wha t direction his own life would take. Drawn towards a career i n the art s but unsure just how he shoul d proceed , he was tempted fo r a short tim e to join a danc e band o n a cruise ship plying between Toronto an d Port Dalhousie. In the end, h e mad e wha t he though t wa s a more practica l decisio n an d joine d the ar t departmen t o f th e Toronto Daily Star. Such modes t succes s in th e world o f commercial art, however , did littl e to satisf y hi s deeper creativ e needs, an d whe n h e hear d tha t th e Toront o CC F Club ha d starte d a drama schoo l h e decide d t o enrol . Ther e h e me t An n Marshall , whose approach t o theatr e wa s to change hi s life. Marshal l not onl y taught he r students the rudiments of drama, introducing the m i n the process t o the ideas an d method s o f Stanislavski , bu t als o inspire d the m wit h a ne w vision o f art. For her, theatr e wa s not a n escape ; i t was a means of engag ing with the world, a means whereby true socialist s could fee l thei r socialism a s well a s think it. Here wa s what George ha d bee n lookin g fo r - a value system that embraced bot h politic s and art ; an aesthetic that joined theatre t o life . In th e sprin g o f 1946 , afte r severa l month s o f trainin g an d prepara tion, th e clu b presented it s first public performance . Marshal l and a few other professiona l actor s performe d Noe l Coward' s Fumed Oak, and th e students playe d i n a piec e sh e ha d writte n abou t a youn g pianis t (per formed b y George). Th e even t was successful enough t o encourag e th e group t o repea t it . The nex t year the y did a second progra m o f one-ac t plays. Th e Lonely b y Ann Marshall , Sweet Twenty b y Floyd Dell, and Possession by George Middleton , a play about divorce , were presented fo r a single nigh t a t Jarvi s Collegiate . Soo n Georg e wa s seekin g ou t othe r opportunities t o act. H e playe d a small role i n th e Ne w Play Society production o f Th e Time o f Your Life wit h th e CB C radi o acto r John Drainie , and h e auditione d fo r th e CBC . The rea l turning-poin t i n hi s career , however, cam e i n 1948 , whe n h e hear d tha t E.G . Sterndal e Bennet t o f the Roya l Conservatory o f Musi c neede d additiona l actor s fo r hi s Peo ple's Repertor y Threatre , a touring compan y h e ha d forme d t o give his

12 Harlequi n in Hogtown drama student s som e practica l experience . Luscomb e auditione d an d was accepted . This unexpecte d tur n o f events presented Luscomb e wit h som e har d decisions. His salary at the Storwa s something like $75 a week, soon to rise to $145 unde r a union contract . As a member o f the People' s Repertor y Theatre, h e would be working for his board an d a share of any profits lef t over a t th e en d o f th e week . No t unexpectedly , mos t o f hi s friend s thought h e wa s crazy. As Luscombe remembers : 'Peopl e i n Todmorde n thought tha t for someone t o get a job a s an artist downtown in the cit y of Toronto was a tremendous accomplishment . But I couldn't se e being tied to a desk. And afte r a while eve n an ar t boar d become s a desk. So I quit my job - burne d m y bridges. Everybod y advised me against it including every member o f the ar t staf f a t the Star, because once you quit you never get hired back again. But I said, "No, I'm going, " because you've only got one tim e around, yo u know. To me th e opportunit y t o become a professional actor, to spend al l day working at theatre was fantastic, a mind-boggling thing.' So the group worked all that summer preparing thre e plays . The actor s put $10 0 into a pot, an d sinc e he ha d bee n working, Luscombe contrib uted doubl e tha t amount . The y bought a n ol d arm y truck for $800 , an d Mrs Sterndale Bennet t doled ou t th e balance of the money to enable th e group t o eat unti l the first box-office receipt s were collected. I n th e fall , the studen t actors and Georg e Luscombe , ex-commercial artist , climbed into thei r converte d van , the scener y on on e sid e an d th e actor s on th e other, and set out. They travelle d throug h rura l Ontario , sleepin g i n chea p motel s or , sometimes, i n privat e homes arrange d fo r b y thei r sponsors . B y spring, the company was broke an d ha d t o dissolve. The student s set out t o look for othe r work; Sterndale Bennet t lef t th e Conservator y and establishe d his ow n academy , whic h h e calle d th e Canadia n Theatr e School ; an d George Luscomb e began t o contemplat e th e vagarie s of lif e a s a profes sional actor. It was obvious to him tha t if he was ever going to make a living from acting, he would have to learn more about th e craft . Accordingly, he went to the Roya l Conservator y of Music and signe d u p fo r lesson s i n voice . H e recalls: 'Of course I believed that I didn't speak correctly. I couldn't possibly since I came fro m th e eas t end o f Toronto. S o twice a week for abou t fifteen week s I tried t o correct thes e things.' But the Conservatory was not teaching hi m wha t h e wante d t o know , an d graduall y h e becam e con vinced tha t i f h e wa s serious abou t makin g a caree r i n th e theatre , h e

Don Valley Quixote 1 3 would hav e t o go where th e theatr e wa s - Ne w York o r London . Sinc e George's parent s wer e Britis h and h e stil l ha d relative s in England , th e choice seeme d obvious . B y late 1949 , therefore , h e ha d mad e u p hi s mind. In December, however, another misfortun e struck the family . George' s sister, Kaye , neve r a n outgoin g girl , ha d latel y become mor e an d mor e withdrawn. Now her behaviou r was becoming errati c t o the poin t where her mothe r coul d no longe r contro l it . On Ne w Year's Eve, George aske d the famil y docto r t o commi t his sister t o a mental institution, where sh e could be properly cared for. Kaye's illness and hi s mother's inevitabl e lonelines s made Luscombe' s decision t o leave Toronto seem even more heartless. But he kne w that his life was at stake too. He kept remembering a CBC radio play he had hear d while on tou r with th e People's Repertor y Theatre. I t was a work entitled Burlap Bags, b y Le n Peterson , tha t deal t wit h th e situatio n o f peopl e chained t o desks , lathes, kitche n stoves , and othe r machines . Although the chains were not locked , the people wer e unable t o escape becaus e of 'duty.' George knew that if he was ever to realize his talent, he would have to get away from Toronto . H e would have to resist the appeals to his sense of filia l responsibilit y and th e 'reasonable ' argument s o f friend s an d neighbours. Howeve r painful i t would be, h e woul d have t o brea k thos e chains. S o with th e kin d o f resolv e tha t woul d characteriz e hi s action s throughout his life, h e bought a one-way boat ticket to Liverpool, packed his belonging s i n a trunk, and too k th e trai n t o Montreal . As he se t sai l from ther e for England he didn't know when he would be coming back.

2 Strolling Player

Upon his arrival in London i n January 1950 , Luscombe began t o explore the Englis h theatrica l scene . Britis h theatr e i n th e immediat e postwa r years was in the doldrums. West End stages presented a seemingly endless round o f mindless farces or drawing-room comedie s of wearying predictability. Playwrights such as Terence Rattiga n focused narrowly on th e psychological problem s o f member s o f th e uppe r middl e clas s an d rarel y dealt with controversial subject s such as politics or religion . Theatre ha d become an industry and i n the proces s had los t contact with th e community. Luscombe missed the seriousness of purpose h e had admire d i n Ann Marshall. He was beginning t o learn tha t theatr e wa s much mor e varie d in expression tha n he had previously imagined. He was also discovering that it was more competitive . As he laboriousl y went throug h Spotlight, th e actor' s 'Bible ' which listed the variou s reper tory companie s i n th e countr y an d th e opening s available , h e wa s impressed b y the résumé s o f a n alarmin g numbe r o f experience d per formers, al l infinitel y mor e qualifie d tha n h e was . Neve r on e t o b e daunted b y unfavourable odds, however , Luscomb e diligentl y sent ou t hundreds o f letters of application an d sa t down to wait. The silenc e was overwhelming. Just a s he wa s beginning t o despair , h e receive d a telegra m fro m th e manager o f a company in Nayland, Wales, called th e Midlan d Repertor y Theatre. It read 'Come . Be here by Monday morning an d d o no t accep t this letter a s a contract.' Puzzled by the noncommittal gist of the communication, Luscomb e nevertheles s decide d h e wa s hardly in a strong bar gaining position . Accordingly , h e packe d hi s bags , sai d goodby e t o London, and boarded the train to Wales. Settling into his seat, he reread th e letter , which told hi m to come pre -

Strolling Player 1 5 pared t o play the rol e of Clive in Philip King's See How They Run. Ever conscientious, he took out the script he had bought befor e leavin g and bega n to memoriz e th e lines , keenl y awar e o f ho w badl y h e neede d thi s job . Unfamiliar with British geography an d afrai d of passing his stop, he spen t the nigh t peerin g a t th e diml y lit, unpronounceable name s o n deserte d Welsh railwa y stations. A s mornin g broke , th e trai n finall y pulle d int o Nayland. Wit h a mixtur e o f drea d an d excitement , h e gathere d u p hi s possessions and descende d t o the platform . It was the end o f the line . After passin g throug h th e ticke t barrier, h e foun d a membe r o f th e company, wh o greete d hi m warml y an d too k hi m t o mee t hi s ne w employer. Jimmy James wa s a bright-eyed Dickensia n figure even shorte r than Georg e himself . But if there was a twinkle in hi s eye, it did no t hid e the toughnes s whic h ha d enable d Jame s t o surviv e i n th e har d an d demanding worl d o f theatrica l touring . Afte r startin g a s a vaudeville clown, James ha d marrie d a n actres s an d founde d hi s own theatre com pany. In the years since then, he, his wife, and thei r daughter ha d becom e virtual gypsies, continually on th e mov e through Wale s and th e Midlands without ever settlin g down into a real home . H e had earne d an adequat e living, bu t sinc e th e wa r th e competitio n o f televisio n had bee n drivin g companies lik e the Midlan d Repertory Theatre ou t o f business and eras ing the las t vestiges of a theatrical tradition going back to medieval times. At the moment , however , business in Nayland was thriving. Surveying his new Canadian recruit , James enquire d jovially, 'Well , di d you stud y your part? ' 'Ye s Sir, ' replie d Luscombe , ' I spen t th e nigh t o n the trai n memorizin g Clive's lines.' 'Clive, ' sai d James, lookin g puzzled. 'No, no , m y boy. Lione l i s your part.' I n som e consternation , Luscomb e produced th e letter assignin g him the wrong role. James was momentarily nonplussed bu t quickl y regained hi s composure. 'Well, ' h e said , 'you'v e got tonigh t to learn it , so sit down and hav e a cup o f coffee. ' After a fitful sleep, Luscombe ros e th e nex t morning a t five and studie d until ten. Rehearsal was a walk-through with the actors simply mumbling at the pages, incomprehensible t o a young Canadian convince d of the social importance o f drama and accustomed t o the methods of Stanislavski. As he was gettin g read y t o g o o n fo r hi s firs t performanc e tha t evening , Luscombe's hand shoo k so badly he could not apply eye liner. When he mad e his entrance , h e fel t h e wa s stepping of f a cliff ; wit h no prompte r i n th e wings, he had nothing upon which to rely but his own ability to ad lib and th e willingness of the other actors t o help him out. Somehow, he got throug h the performance, but his initiation into the rigours of provincial stock had only begun. The compan y stayed in Nayland for eight weeks, and ever y day

16 Harlequi n in Hogtow n Luscombe had to prepare a new role. By the end of the period, he found that he could memorize a part after a couple of readings. Travelling u p an d dow n Wale s brough t Luscomb e int o contac t wit h audiences o f a kind he ha d neve r befor e encountered . Th e Wels h are a passionate people wh o love melodrama, and th e Midland Repertory The atre gav e them what they wanted. They played Th e Sign o f the Cross, Maria Martin a t the Red Barn, even Sweeney Todd- nineteenth-centur y pot-boilers that wer e creak y in th e 1890 s whe n Georg e Bernar d Sha w was trying t o drive the m fro m th e Londo n stage . Wha t astonishe d Luscomb e wa s the power these pieces still had t o move an unsophisticated crowd . Spectator s from th e Wels h valleys, who had see n nothin g o f television and relatively few films, fel t n o nee d fo r elaboratel y detaile d an d realisti c settings. T o them, the realit y was in the performanc e an d in the simplicit y and direct ness of the emotion s portrayed . When a clergyman came backstag e afte r The Sign o f the Cross to tel l Luscombe what an inspiratio n hi s performanc e had been , th e complimen t wa s more tha n a tribut e t o th e actin g o f a rather bras h Toront o atheist; it was testimony to the emotiona l opennes s of the audience. Luscombe learned t o cherish tha t openness . Because fe w of thei r venue s ha d prope r facilities , th e actor s ha d t o bring in virtually all the equipment they needed. Backdrops consisted of a series o f roll s abou t twent y fee t i n lengt h suspende d o n a fram e an d rolled dow n like window blinds for different scenes. Footlights were port able two-by-four s wit h socket s nailed int o them ; light s and cable s ha d t o be transporte d an d hung ; costumes and propertie s wer e packed i n hampers s o larg e tha t i t too k fou r me n t o wrestl e the m i n an d ou t o f th e school an d churc h hall s where the y performed. I n additio n t o playing, the actor s ha d t o work like circu s roustabouts, haulin g the scener y fro m station t o hall, setting up, and the n dismantlin g everything for the trip to the next town. The work was physically exhausting and seemingl y endless. The old-timer s in th e compan y treated actin g as a craft, no t a n 'art' ; a job, no t a means of ego gratification or a substitute for psychoanalysis. For Luscombe, who hated th e socia l aspects o f amateur theatr e i n Toronto, this attitude was refreshing. He bega n t o understand th e 'working ' tradi tion o f theatre , whic h centre d o n th e actor s an d stretche d bac k i n a n uninterrupted lin e throug h th e Edwardia n and Victoria n period s t o th e Elizabethan clown , the commedi a dell'art e performer , an d th e Roma n mime. Suddenly, he sa w Jimmy James, th e clown-turned-manager , a s one of the las t links in this long chain. And he realized that ther e were impor tant lesson s t o b e learne d fro m suc h actors , lesson s abou t professiona l attitudes and, above all, about methods of survival.

Strolling Player 1 7 After a year and a half of travelling in Wales, however, Luscombe bega n to think about movin g on. Valuable a s he ha d foun d th e experience , h e did no t pla n t o spend th e res t o f his life i n 'fi t up. ' No t onl y was the lif e too demandin g physically , but i t was becoming to o ingrown . Isolate d i n their vagabond life , th e player s tended t o se e themselves as outcasts an d the res t of the world as 'yabos.' For Luscombe, a further complication was the clos e link he ha d forme d wit h Jimmy James. H e had alread y becom e almost a member o f the family , an d ther e wa s an unexpresse d bu t grow ing feeling that perhap s h e would marry the James's daughter . On e day, Luscombe discovered James readin g on e of his letters and in a fit of anger wrote a note o f resignation, which he presente d t o James wit h the words 'Here, you can rea d thi s while you're a t it!' The inciden t passe d off , but clearly the tim e was fast approaching when he would have to leave. A littl e later, whe n th e ai r ha d cleared , James helpe d Luscomb e ge t a job i n Manchester wit h a larger repertor y theatre . Th e Mancheste r company performe d onl y one sho w a week, for whic h he woul d b e pai d th e princely sum of eight pounds. Now , Luscombe thought, it would be possible for him to get his teeth int o his parts. His first role, the Blac k Sheep i n the pantomim e B o Peep, was anything but complex , an d h e ha d t o admi t that the actors around hi m were doing some shoddy work. But he took his performances seriousl y and fel t that he had attaine d a level of relative luxury. In th e Mancheste r compan y was a gentl e ma n b y the nam e o f James Lovell, wh o wa s t o b e instrumenta l i n redirectin g th e cours e o f Lus combe's career . Lovel l had ha d hi s own repertory compan y unti l a new board o f director s ha d fire d him , whereupon h e wa s forced t o tur n t o scene paintin g i n orde r t o survive . The tw o struck u p a friendshi p an d began roomin g together . O n fre e afternoons , the y would huddl e ove r a coal fire and tal k about theatre . I t was Lovell who gave Luscombe his first understanding o f Shakespeare , b y introducing hi m t o th e rudiment s of textual criticism and showin g him ho w the play s were printe d i n th e seventeenth centur y — without stag e direction s an d frequentl y withou t marked ac t divisions. In thi s format, Luscombe coul d se e how the dram a was intended t o flow uninterruptedly from scene t o scene . Lovell als o explaine d th e natur e o f th e Elizabetha n theatre , wit h it s projecting stag e and encircling audience. Fo r Luscombe, who had had n o experience i n anythin g but a prosceniu m theatre , Lovell' s insights provided a glimps e int o a ne w world. H e comments : 'Th e architectur e o f Shakespeare's theatr e ha d a social context. I t was an ag e of popular the atre an d it' s tha t socia l conten t whic h you hav e i n th e play s and i n th e

18 Harlequi n i n Hogtow n building which became s o important t o m e i n th e creatio n o f new work. The TW P stage is a result of those conversation s aroun d th e fire.' 1 It was Lovell too wh o i n 195 2 tol d Luscomb e abou t Joan Littlewood' s Theatre Worksho p an d urge d hi m t o get in touch wit h her. S o when th e company's seaso n ende d i n August, instead o f going t o London wit h th e other out-of-work actors, Luscombe journeyed nort h t o Edinburgh, wher e Theatre Workshop was performing i n th e Festival . There, i n th e Oddfel lows Hall , h e watche d a rehearsal o f Th e Travellers b y Ewan MacColl an d was dazzled by the skil l and intensit y of the acting. This, at last, was what he had been lookin g for - a n ensemble wit h total commitmen t t o a socialist view of lif e whic h could nevertheles s produce work tha t was entertaining and interesting . He knew then that he had to get into that company . Talking with Littlewood and th e actor s after the show , he expressed a n interest in joining them , but n o commitment s were mad e o n eithe r side . Back in London , ful l o f enthusiasm an d hope , he waite d i n vain for further word and at last reluctantly joined another repertor y company . Then one da y a telegram arrived , asking him if he stil l wanted to work with Theatre Workshop. By that time, he was making seven or eight pounds a week (a very good living) , and h e kne w that with Littlewood there would be n o security and hardl y any wage. But he als o knew that working with Theatre Workshop was what he had t o do. He replied tha t he would come a s soon as he coul d ge t fre e o f his curren t contract . No t lon g after , havin g bor rowed th e far e fro m a fello w actor , h e boarde d th e trai n fo r Glasgow , where th e compan y was staying. Theatre Workshop had bee n forme d i n 193 4 (firs t as Theatre o f Action and late r as Theatre Union) by Ewan MacColl and Joan Littlewood. 2 MacColl, the so n of a radical Scottish ironworker, had grow n u p i n poverty in the Mancheste r suburb o f Salford. There, humiliate d b y the condescend ing charit y of the wome n for whom hi s mother worke d as a charwoman , he ha d develope d a passionate hatre d o f the Britis h socia l syste m alon g with a keen sens e of identification with the industria l working class. Littlewood had com e t o Manchester from London an d was working as assistant stage manage r wit h a local repertory theatr e whe n sh e met MacColl , who by then ha d forme d hi s own theatre group . Th e tw o discovered tha t they shared man y interests , an d the y bega n t o wor k togethe r explorin g ne w theatrical ideas. What began a s a part-time collaboration o n a 'living newspaper'-style productio n o f a n America n pla y calle d Newsboy develope d into a thirty-year artistic partnership . From th e beginning , MacCol l and Littlewoo d wante d to create a political theatre whic h would comment o n contemporar y socia l and economi c

Strolling Player 1 9 problems fro m a Marxis t perspective. I n th e pursui t o f thi s aim , the y turned for inspiration to developments i n Europe, especially to the political theatre tha t had emerged i n Russia and German y after th e First World War. I n Russia , the twi n catastrophe s o f revolution an d civi l conflic t ha d given ris e t o unprecedented experimentatio n i n al l the arts . I n th e the atre, thi s experimentation ha d take n th e form of a radical questioning of the very foundations of the drama . Ever since its advent in France and it s subsequent developmen t i n Germany and Russia , naturalism had com e unde r increasin g attack by those who felt tha t its attempt to create a 'slic e o f life' o n th e stag e was wrongheaded. Dadaism, surrealism, symbolism, and expressionis m were various manifestations o f a widesprea d impuls e t o broade n th e scop e o f th e drama t o embrac e fantasy , dreams, an d othe r irrationa l o r psychi c phe nomena. I n Russia , naturalism had foun d it s most powerfu l practitione r in Konstanti n Stanislavski, whos e wor k a t th e Mosco w Art Theatr e ha d been on e of the glories of tsarist theatre. To the new directors of the revolution suc h a s Vsevolo d Meyerhold , Alexande r Tairov , an d Evgen i Vakhtangov, however , naturalis m wa s moribund , synonymou s wit h th e despised bourgeoi s life . The y wishe d t o creat e a theatrica l styl e mor e appropriate fo r the new, classless society then coming into being. To achiev e this , the y felt, require d a complet e rejectio n o f th e bour geois naturalisti c theatr e o n ideologica l a s wel l a s aestheti c grounds . Where naturalis m strov e t o separat e acto r an d audience , th e ne w approach woul d bring them closer together ; i f naturalistic stage designer s emphasized th e oppressiv e limitations of environment, the ne w designers would eliminat e all trace s o f realisti c illusion ; where th e ol d dramatist s had focuse d o n th e psychologica l problem s o f th e individual , the ne w playwrights would dea l wit h th e politica l concern s o f th e group ; wher e previously actors ha d appeale d t o the spectator' s emotions , i n the future they would call for a critical understanding o f them. To help the m effec t this revolution i n dramatic style, directors an d designers not only drew on recent anti-illusionis t movements bu t als o ransacke d th e histor y books , borrowing conventions from Greek , Elizabethan, Italian, and oriental theatre in an effor t t o discover the fundamental laws of the art . By the mid-thirties , when MacColl and Littlewoo d had begu n thei r own search fo r ne w forms , experimentatio n i n politica l theatr e ha d largel y come t o a n en d i n Europe . Russia n authoritie s ha d starte d t o cur b th e work of anti-illusionist directors in the nam e of 'socialist realism,' while in Germany th e Nazi s ha d initiate d thei r ow n ruthless purge. I n England , MacColl an d Littlewoo d were fre e fro m suc h extrem e stat e repression .

20 Harlequi n i n Hogtow n Nevertheless, the y face d obstacle s o f a differen t kin d i n thei r effort s t o achieve socia l chang e throug h thei r productions . No t th e leas t o f thes e obstacles was the peculia r complacenc y of the Britis h public. Nowhere in the countr y was there th e kin d o f discontent o r factionalis m which ha d led t o revolutio n i n Russi a and Germany . Polarizatio n alon g clas s lines was more eviden t in the industrial north, where the company performed , but eve n ther e a combinatio n o f reticence an d apath y militate d agains t prolonged socia l violence. I n th e perio d befor e th e Secon d Worl d War , therefore, th e wor k of Theatre Unio n cause d fe w ripples o n th e Britis h social or theatrical scenes . In 1945 , however, the revived troupe, no w operating unde r th e name of Theatre Workshop, bega n t o attract critical notice throug h suc h works as The Flying Doctor (an adaptatio n o f Molière) an d Johnny Noble by MacColl. In 1946 , the compan y had anothe r hi t i n MacColl' s Uranium 235. During the nex t si x years, convinced tha t thei r aim s could b e accomplished onl y if the y performe d t o working-class audiences, th e compan y stage d thei r productions i n union an d minin g halls throughout England , Wales, and Scotland. The y als o travelle d t o Norway , Sweden , Wes t Germany , an d Czechoslovakia. B y 1952, many of th e actor s were beginnin g t o weary of this exhaustin g itineran t life . Whe n Luscomb e arrive d i n Glasgow , h e found th e compan y settled i n a large hous e outsid e th e city , rehearsing a production o f Twelfth Night for schools. Luscombe had bee n cast as Sebastian, a role he loathed, and was immediately flung into the busy routine of the group . Theatre Worksho p ha d bee n establishe d a s a combine d productio n unit and trainin g school ; rehearsal s alternate d wit h sessions designed t o enlarge th e technica l an d imaginativ e scop e o f th e actors . Durin g th e mornings, the compan y worked on exercise s derive d fro m Stanislavsk i to develop concentration, memory , and adaptation an d improvisatio n skills . These exercise s woul d b e followe d b y movement trainin g base d o n th e theories o f Rudolph Laban , a Czec h dance r an d invento r o f a system of ballet notation, wh o united a practical metho d o f analysis with an almos t mystic vision of movement as the foun t of human spiritua l life. Luscomb e found th e sessions exhilarating . Afternoons wer e given ove r t o rehearsals , an d ther e Luscomb e bega n to founder. Th e ordinar y difficultie s o f fitting int o a new company were compounded b y the fact tha t the Theatre Worksho p actor s had evolve d a distinctive an d characteristi c styl e o f acting , th e resul t o f nearl y twent y years of work and though t o n th e par t o f the compan y and it s founders. The styl e combine d Russia n psychological realis m with a variety of non -

Strolling Player 2 1 realistic techniques inspire d by commedia dell'arte , orienta l theatre , an d agitprop. Luscombe ha d littl e trouble copin g wit h th e physica l demands o f hi s role, bu t h e was confused by the director's approac h t o the play. Unfamiliar wit h th e work s o f Shakespear e (havin g ha d onl y a shor t serie s o f classes at the Roya l Conservatory of Musi c in Toronto) , Luscomb e was unprepared fo r Littlewood's radical interpretation, whic h treated th e ser vants as the heroe s o f the work . Her interes t i n the aristocrati c lovers, by contrast, was perfunctory at best, an d th e tim e sh e spent wit h Luscomb e correspondingly brief . T o mak e matter s worse , Luscomb e ha d troubl e with hi s lines and ofte n ha d t o resort t o ad libbing. At the en d o f his first performance i n front of a school audience , ther e wa s an ominous silenc e from hi s fellow actors . Shortly afte r th e openin g o f Twelfth Night, member s o f th e compan y met t o discus s an issu e of critical significance to thei r future . Gerr y Raffles, the busines s manager, ha d rente d a theatre i n London fo r six weeks to explor e th e feasibilit y o f settin g u p permanentl y i n tha t city . I t soo n became eviden t that the company was split on th e issue. MacColl strongly opposed th e move , whic h h e fel t woul d betra y th e company' s origina l ideals. H e wa s convinced that the theatr e woul d lose it s spirit if it lost its contact wit h a working-class audience. Other s argue d tha t the y would be drawing a simila r audienc e fro m th e working-clas s neighbourhood sur rounding thei r ne w theatre, i n London' s Eas t End. Settlin g int o perma nent quarter s woul d enable th e compan y to escape th e relentles s rigours of touring. When th e vote was taken, a majority favoured the move . Early in th e ne w year, therefore , Luscomb e an d severa l others packe d themselves int o a statio n wago n an d drov e fro m Glasgo w t o London . Their ne w headquarters, th e Theatr e Roya l and Palac e o f Varieties, was situated i n Angel Lane, not far from the Stratfor d underground statio n in east London . Th e building , whic h ha d bee n partiall y cleane d u p b y a small advanc e party , stil l bor e evidenc e o f years o f neglect . Th e audito rium was dingy and musty , the workshop under th e stag e damp an d dirty, the dressing-room s crampe d an d i n need o f a coat o f whitewash. But for the firs t tim e i n thei r histor y the compan y ha d a permanen t hom e with reasonably adequate productio n facilities . Luscombe foun d th e firs t coupl e o f weeks at th e ne w theatre i n Strat ford Eas t hardl y les s hectic tha n hi s day s in 'fi t up. ' Morning s were stil l given ove r t o exercises in movement an d voice , afternoons t o rehearsals , and evening s to performances . Afte r unsatisfactor y experiences wit h on e or tw o designers, th e compan y began buildin g thei r ow n sets unde r th e

22 Harlequi n i n Hogtown direction o f John Bury , who wa s later t o becom e hea d o f desig n a t th e National Theatre. Tha t meant further labour, in the dungeon-like atmosphere o f th e subterranea n scen e shop , sometime s unti l tw o or thre e i n the morning. Ever y second weekend involved a 'changeover,' the dismantling o f one se t and th e puttin g u p o f another. I n recompens e fo r thes e fourteen- an d sixteen-hou r days , member s o f th e compan y share d th e box-office profits , which in the first year provided eac h actor with a weekly salary of about tw o pounds. Fortunately, Luscombe had learne d ho w to cope wit h poverty. He bargained fo r bruised tomatoe s a t the loca l market and, in contravention o f the city' s fir e regulations , slep t i n hi s dressing-room . Thes e inconven iences were, in his opinion, more tha n compensated fo r by the rewards of the work . What h e particularl y enjoyed was the politica l commitmen t of the company . Mos t of th e actor s fel t the y were mor e tha n entertainers . They were prophets, th e vanguard of a social and cultural revolution, and therefore responsibl e fo r understanding th e issues of the day and conveying their understandin g t o their audiences through thei r work. In thi s politically charged atmosphere , i t was inevitable tha t Luscomb e would begi n t o examin e hi s own convictions. The socialis t ideas he ha d picked u p fro m Jac k an d other s i n th e CC F Youth Movement began t o seem a little naïve when compared wit h th e profoun d radicalis m of MacColl and Littlewood . He began t o wonder if he should become a Communist: 'I didn't lik e the ide a of being wishy-washy. I was pretending t o be a socially concerne d person , bu t I wasn't putting it on th e line . I felt ba d being par t way. But I didn't want to make a foolish commitment. Because where was I going t o get th e mone y to pa y the dues ? As it turne d out , I never di d sig n a card o r pa y any dues, bu t m y intention was firm. Everybody in the theatre kne w that I had made a decision, whereas some of the others ha d no t and were not going to . Making a commitment gives one a sense o f values and th e strengt h t o take action, in a strike for instance. I t eliminates the gre y areas. You know which side you're on.'3 He als o bega n t o broade n hi s idea s abou t acting . I n th e ligh t of hi s disastrous débu t i n Twelfth Night, h e kne w that hi s day s as a membe r o f Theatre Worksho p might well be numbered. Th e possibilit y of being dismissed was something h e could hardly bear t o think about, havin g finally found wha t h e considere d hi s theatrica l home . A s luck woul d hav e it , however, h e wa s able t o sho w himself to better advantag e i n th e secon d production, Molière' s Th e Imaginary Invalid. H e recalls : ' I playe d th e ingenue, an d evidentl y I di d suc h a goo d jo b tha t Littlewoo d ha d a change o f heart about me. And she went to Jobie, who I was working with,

Strolling Player 2 3 and aske d him , "Ho w is this young fellow? " Jobie wa s very pleased wit h our scen e together . I t require d m e t o d o extraordinar y physica l things which I was very good at. So she came to me and said , "Would you like t o stay with us?" So I won my spurs in Molière.' At th e en d o f th e firs t season , havin g produce d te n play s i n twent y weeks, th e grou p wa s barely solven t and consequentl y unable t o pa y the actors fo r th e summer . Nevertheless , Littlewood resolved t o tr y anothe r season i n Londo n an d tol d th e player s to repor t bac k i n th e fall . Lus combe got a job i n the theatr e a s janitor an d s o had a place to sleep, and a base fro m which to eke out a meagre livin g painting houses in the area . During any free time , he retreated t o the prop room ove r the stage , from which ther e was access through a skylight to the roof . He remembers : 'I n that room , I was surrounded b y the histor y of art an d th e histor y of the atre - a whole pile of books. So I slept there an d read al l day long. Some days I never got dow n into the theatre ; I could liv e just i n tha t room an d on the roof. That was a real education. High school for me was not a place of education, but where I learned a trade called commercial art. I tried to learn wha t I could, but tha t stoppe d a t about grad e seven . I got m y real education at Theatre Workshop.' 4 The compan y reassembled i n August and too k productions of Th e Imaginary Invalid an d Chekhov' s Uncle Vanya t o th e Edinburg h Festival . O n their retur n t o London, Littlewoo d continued he r attempt s t o revive the classics o f world theatr e i n way s tha t would be relevan t for th e workingclass audienc e o f th e Stratfor d East district . She di d a mordan t produc tion ofjonson's bitte r satire of bourgeois greed, Th e Alchemist, in October , and earl y in January 195 4 mounted a n anti-establishmen t Richard II. In all these productions , Littlewoo d and he r actor s were more concerne d wit h the inne r actio n tha n wit h th e poetry . Her intentio n wa s to explor e th e fear, oppression , an d hatre d o f th e fourteent h century . Th e Richar d played b y Harr y Corbett , on e o f th e olde r member s o f th e troupe , brought ou t th e arrogance, cruelty , and ultimat e self-pity of the king. What Luscombe found fascinating was the way in which Littlewood led the actor s throug h improvisation s to hel p the m understan d socia l an d political realities: Richard //was a real milestone fo r me in my career. W e used t o get on th e stag e in the mornin g an d for m tw o rows. Improvisations consisted o f trying to get throug h people trying to stab you in the back. We did a lot of that in order to get that sens e that Go d was resting o n you r shoulder , bu t ther e was also someon e righ t behin d you read y t o sta b you. I remember Joan tryin g to poin t ou t t o u s tha t me n wh o

24 Harlequi n in Hogtown spend thei r lif e o n horsebac k o r o n foo t woul d b e differen t physically . The cos tume ladie s wer e i n o n thes e conversation s too , sinc e i t would affec t th e wa y you wore you r clothes . Clothe s wer e no t decorative , bu t ha d specia l functions . W e could inven t our ow n costumes i n keepin g wit h th e interpretation . Tha t kind of inventiveness was encouraged al l the time. 5

By 1955 , som e of the olde r member s of Theatre Workshop , like Harry Corbett an d Georg e Cooper , ha d bee n wit h th e compan y fo r eigh t o r nine years and wer e beginning t o thin k tha t thei r pioneerin g day s were over. Luscombe to o was starting to weary of the communa l living and th e endless scroungin g fo r money . He ha d hear d tha t thing s had starte d t o change i n Canada an d tha t it was now possible t o earn a living in theatr e and televisio n in Toronto . Perhap s th e tim e ha d com e t o retur n t o hi s own countr y and t o explor e th e meanin g o f political theatre i n a mor e familiar environment.

3

Building a Company

Early in 1956 , therefore , Luscomb e packe d hi s few worldly goods and se t sail o n a retur n voyag e t o Canada . I n Toronto , h e auditione d fo r CBC television an d settle d down t o awai t results, which were no t immediatel y forthcoming. Meanwhile , h e ha d ampl e opportunit y t o rene w hi s ac quaintance with his native city. On th e face o f it, little had changed . True, there wa s a new professional theatre, th e Crest , operating i n a converte d movie-house in a prosperous residentia l area , an d Toronto theatre-goer s spoke enthusiastically about th e recently established Shakespearean Festi val in Stratford, just one hundre d mile s away. But when Luscombe visited these institutions, his heart sank . The repertoir e o f the Cres t was indistinguishable from tha t of any English provincial repertory company, and th e acting seeme d nothin g bu t a pale imitatio n of the mos t mechanical West End attitudinizing . In Stratford, th e production s move d gracefully ove r a boldly conceived thrus t stage, but th e performer s lacke d the energ y an d the critica l perspective tha t mad e Littlewood' s angular an d abrasiv e pro ductions o f Shakespear e s o exciting . Luscomb e wa s particularl y dis appointed b y the actors ' movement , whic h he foun d stiff , awkward , and without a sense o f period . So when th e possibilit y of creating hi s own actin g schoo l aros e i n th e autumn o f 1959 , Luscomb e wa s more tha n a littl e intrigued. Th e shor t summer trainin g progra m ha d demonstrate d jus t ho w difficult i t would be t o buil d th e kin d o f theatre h e was interested in . Not onl y was there nothing i n Canad a comparabl e t o th e traditiona l Englis h touring com pany or t o such enduringl y popular Europea n entertainment s a s variety, pantomime, o r puppe t theatre , Canadia n actor s wer e unaccustome d t o using thei r bodies , man y o f the m havin g performe d almos t exclusively either i n front of a microphone i n radio o r i n the constricte d setting s of

26 Harlequi n in Hogtown realistic drawing-roo m comedy . Furthermore , ther e wa s practicall y n o conception o f dram a a s anything but escapis t entertainment . Th e ide a that theatre coul d challenge audiences, enlighten them , change them, ha d hardly occurred t o his students. It was clear tha t a proper theatr e schoo l would hav e t o d o mor e tha n teac h acting ; it would nee d t o provid e a n extensive cultural and politica l education. Resolving at last to accept what he recognize d a s a major challenge, Luscomb e notifie d the student s tha t he would be willing to begin furthe r acting classes in September. But , h e emphasized, suc h classe s would b e closel y integrated wit h a program o f public performances . T o underlin e tha t intention , h e calle d th e ne w organization Workshop Productions. The actor s who gathered a t 47 Fraser Avenue that autumn all worked at jobs during the day, so classes were held in the evening, three times a week. The session s bega n punctuall y and wer e highl y disciplined. Stretching , bending, and relaxing exercises were followed by more concentrated work on th e body. 'Impersonating a dramatic character,' Luscombe explained , 'consists of more tha n simpl y speaking the lines. It means showing us th e personality of that character through bod y language. You can't creat e th e world of Hamlet or Othello if you move like a modern busines s executive.' To hel p th e actor s develo p greate r flexibilit y an d contro l ove r thei r bodies, Luscomb e returne d t o exercise s based o n Laban' s theories . Lik e Schopenhauer an d th e symbolists , Laban postulate d th e existenc e o f a deeper leve l of reality . Messages from thi s world o f silenc e were carrie d not b y words (whic h touche d onl y the fring e of existence), nor b y music (which wa s mor e penetratin g tha n words) , bu t b y sequence s o f move ments.1 At the hear t of the huma n searc h fo r values, Laban maintained , are primitiv e impulses, whic h h e calle d 'efforts. ' Thes e impulse s giv e shape t o movemen t (o r wha t he preferre d t o describ e a s 'effor t expres sions') i n three strata : the motion s of everyday life, conventiona l gestures, and th e art s o f dancing , singing , and acting . H e maintaine d tha t eve n speech an d though t were manifestations of these basic efforts . Luscombe explained to his students that all action, according to Laban , could b e analysed in terms of its fundamental components - space , time, and weight. Thus, movement could be described a s direct or flexible, sudden o r sustained , fir m o r gentle ; th e variou s possible combination s o f these component s produce d eigh t 'pur e efforts. ' Fo r example, a gestur e that is firm, direct, an d sudde n Laba n calle d a 'thrust. ' Luscombe' s work with th e 'efforts ' no t only strengthened th e actors physically but provide d them wit h a vocabular y of movement s out o f which to creat e thei r ow n body language .

Building a Company 2 7 After th e physica l workout , Luscomb e woul d mov e o n t o exercise s designed t o stimulat e and liberat e th e actors ' imaginations . As all teachers of acting have realized, the major challenge fo r the performer i s to recreate a previousl y rehearsed actio n a s thoug h fo r th e firs t time . Th e problem i s ho w t o mak e th e actio n ne w (that is , no t conventiona l o r clichéd) an d ho w to keep i t fresh (no t mechanical). Like most of his contemporaries, Luscomb e base d hi s own teaching o n th e pioneerin g wor k of Stanislavski. But whereas American teachers of 'the method,' based on Stanislavski, emphasized emotiona l memor y and th e nee d t o experienc e the subjectiv e emotions of a role, Luscombe had been conditioned b y his work a t Theatr e Worksho p t o focu s o n wha t Laba n calle d 'movemen t thinking.' Laba n taugh t that whereas naturalistic acting captures th e surface, interpretin g characte r throug h dancelik e mim e movemen t pene trates to th e individual' s essence. 2 Luscombe's exercises i n improvisation led the actors from th e external 'given circumstances' to the internal feelings, from th e verbal t o the sub-verbal , from th e rationa l to th e intuitive, from th e realistic to the essential. Moving amon g hi s student s i n stockin g feet , Luscomb e woul d spu r them o n b y givin g the m th e circumstance s o f a situation . 'You'r e i n Union Station . A boat-train ful l o f immigrant s has just com e in . Doug , you're a n immigratio n man . Let' s hav e tw o mor e i n this , tw o relatives waiting. Okay, go on.' As the actors created a scene based o n th e situation described, Luscomb e would watch them wit h a kin d o f glazed intensity, circling them , twitching his body in sympath y with thei r movements . H e would sometime s sto p the m o r sugges t othe r possibilities , but h e neve r told the m what to do. Not infrequently, he would explode in frustration. 'Hold it! You're losing the spirit of the thin g by thinking up words. Words are onl y th e surfac e layer.' 3 The n h e woul d tr y t o forc e th e student s through tha t layer by getting them to do a scene in an invented language . Or h e would pile a number of chairs on th e stag e an d tel l them t o imagine tha t the y wer e caveme n jus t emergin g int o a prehistori c jungle . Describing his methods Luscombe would explain: 'The imagination is not static. It can grow. The abilit y t o see further, t o see clearly, so see well these are things that can be learned. S o you have to create a n atmosphere in which the actor s can develop their imaginations.' 4 In Luscombe' s ide a o f theatre , th e imaginativ e contributio n o f th e actor wa s paramount. Hi s experiences wit h Theatre Worksho p ha d per suaded hi m that the most exciting performances were those produce d by the collaboration o f creative individuals among whom none was supreme. Theatre Workshop ha d bee n ru n a s a collective i n which actors , design -

28 Harlequi n i n Hogtown ers, playwrights , directors, an d technician s al l worke d togethe r a t al l stages of rehearsal an d share d equally in the fashioning of the final product. This did not, of course, mean artistic anarchy. Success depended o n a precarious equilibriu m between th e opposin g tendencie s o f democrac y and dictatorship . No t th e leas t o f Joan Littlewood' s talents a s a directo r was he r abilit y t o cajole , browbeat , an d inspir e he r actor s t o level s of achievement they could never have reached o n their own. Luscombe had formed hi s ideas about leadership, loyalty, hard work, and dedication during his time with Jimmy James and Joan Littlewood and fro m thei r example, and h e held thos e idea s with an intensity which continually surprised those who did not understand him . An exampl e o f what some peopl e regarde d a s Luscombe's 'fanaticism ' occurred i n Decembe r 1959 . Durin g rehearsals fo r th e one-ac t play s the company was preparing for presentation a t the end o f their first season of classes, th e acto r playin g the lea d rol e i n Garci a Lorca' s Th e Love o f Don Perlimplin an d Belisa i n th e Garden brought som e friends to 4 7 Fraser Avenue t o see the facilities. Luscombe arrived to find them walking across the stage. 'Yo u can' t walk o n m y stage,' h e shouted . 'Ge t out.' Considerably nonplussed b y this red-faced and evidentl y berserk individual, the friend s left. But feeling that he had been insulted, the actor confronted his director and threatened t o quit unless Luscombe apologized. Knowing that the play was to open i n a short time , the acto r n o doubt though t h e had th e upper hand . H e was astonished, therefore , when Luscombe said simply, 'Fine. Go ahead,' an d promptl y hired a replacement. Recallin g the incident year s later, Luscomb e said , 'I don' t kno w what hit me , bu t I had a bad feelin g seeing the m laughin g on th e stage . I felt i t was important to show th e othe r actor s tha t you have to hav e reverence for th e plac e you work in.' 5 At the en d o f the first year of evening classes and afte r th e productio n of fou r one-ac t plays , Luscombe wa s pleased wit h wha t his student s ha d accomplished. Nevertheless , h e realize d tha t a s long a s hi s actor s were unable t o devot e al l their tim e and energ y t o th e theatre , th e compan y would be able to make only limited progress. Lacking material and finan cial resources, Workshop Productions seemed doome d t o relative obscurity. But in 1961 , just a s Luscombe was beginning to resign himself to th e status quo , representative s o f th e executiv e o f th e Art s Theatr e Clu b approached hi m with a proposal tha t seemed heaven-sent. They suggested an amalgamatio n o f th e Art s Theatre Clu b and Worksho p Productions, and invite d Luscombe to be artistic director o f the merged companies . At th e tim e of th e proposal , th e Art s Theatre Clu b had bee n i n exist-

Building a Company 2 9 ence abou t tw o years and was under the direction of Basya Hunter. I n tha t time, it had grow n to nearly three hundre d members , each o f whom paid an annua l fe e o f $12.50 , whic h entitle d a membe r t o ticket s t o profes sional productions sponsore d by the Club and provided an opportunity to attend study sessions and act in studio shows. The Clu b had stage d several plays, including Ibsen's An Enemy o f the People, Eugene O'Neill's Th e Iceman Cometh, and Brecht' s Th e Great Scholar Wu, most directed b y Basya Hunter. By the en d o f 1960, however , Hunter ha d decide d tha t he r healt h would not le t her continu e a s artistic director o f the Club , and i t was her posi tion tha t th e executive was offering t o George Luscombe . From Luscombe' s perspective , th e pla n ha d muc h t o recommen d it . The Art s Theatre Clu b had succeede d i n getting suppor t fro m th e Can ada Council where Workshop Productions had failed, an d thei r executive implied tha t the y would be abl e t o obtai n suc h assistanc e i n th e future . Furthermore, th e Clu b had buil t up a secure financial foundation base d on membershi p fees . Th e executiv e fel t tha t thos e coul d b e increased , and spok e o f revenue i n th e region o f $5,000 a year. There was also th e prospect o f movin g productions fro m th e Frase r Avenue basement the atre t o th e centrall y located an d mor e prestigiou s Centra l Librar y The atre, a t Colleg e an d S t Georg e Streets , wher e th e Art s Theatr e ha d presented thei r work. The amalgamation seemed tailor-made . In his open letter agreeing t o the merger, Luscomb e wrote glowingly of his hopes. What Toronto needed, h e asserted , was a 'theatre unafrai d to experiment... a theatre where young actors, writers and director s [would be] trained. ' Eve n in hi s earlies t pronouncements, however , Luscomb e could no t refrai n fro m preaching . 'Yo u d o no t pa y your membership fe e to see shows,' he declared . 'Yo u pay to sponsor shows . You do no t participate in the art for what you can get out of it, but what you can give into it.' He reassure d hi s readers, 'Th e mor e yo u give of yourself, the mor e you receive.'6 Suc h idealis m wa s inspiring , bu t no t al l th e member s ha d thought of their relationship to the Club in quite that way. Early in Septembe r 1961 , wor k bega n i n earnes t o n th e first joint pro duction o f the amalgamated Workshop Productions/Arts Theatr e Clu b Aristophanes' Lysistrata. Luscombe ha d appeare d in a Theatre Workshop production o f th e pla y i n 195 3 an d ha d prepare d a preliminar y script based o n wha t he coul d remembe r o f Ewa n MacColl' s adaptation . Now, however, he wishe d to expan d th e wor k by having the actor s contribut e through improvisation. As rehearsal s go t unde r way , however, it becam e increasingl y evident that the marriag e between the Arts Theatre Clu b and Workshop Produc-

30 Harlequi n in Hogtown tions wa s in trouble . Th e origina l agreemen t specifie d tha t Luscomb e would hav e complete artisti c freedom an d tha t Arts Theatre would pro vide a producer . Thi s seeme d a reasonable arrangement , bu t whe n th e producer insiste d tha t fund s shoul d b e place d i n a ban k accoun t i n hi s name, Luscomb e became uneasy . Further problems aros e when the producer objecte d t o th e painte r Joyce Wieland's highly graphic poste r fo r Lysistrata, i n whic h she ha d depicte d character s a s Gree k comi c actor s with prominentl y displayed phalluses . Wielan d solve d th e proble m b y adroitly changin g al l the phalluse s to swords , but no t befor e Luscomb e had overreacted t o what he considered interference with his prerogatives. The situatio n was one designe d t o exacerbate hi s natural pugnacity, and he recall s with som e embarrassmen t that 'h e ma y have thrown the pro ducer out of the theatre.' 7 To complicat e thing s still further , th e 1961- 2 membershi p campaig n had bee n a disaster. Of some 28 8 members, barel y 20 had renewe d thei r membership, so that, instead of the subsidy originally mentioned, the Arts Theatre Club could provid e no more tha n $300 plus a guarantee o f $650 in persona l loan s from th e executive . By mid-November, it was clear that the merge r was benefiting no one an d tha t the proposed production was in serious jeopardy. At the eleventh hour, a grant from th e Canada Council enabled th e compan y to proceed with thei r plans , and o n 2 8 December 196 1 Luscomb e opene d hi s mos t ambitiou s productio n t o date , a collectively adapted version of Lysistrata retitled An d They 'II Make Peace. Peace closed on 3 February 1962, having brought in almost $2,000 at th e box office . Thes e receipt s along with a Canad a Counci l grant o f $1,25 0 enabled th e compan y to sho w a modes t profi t o f $415. Bu t th e figure s were no t representativ e of the group' s tru e financial situation, since th e actors were still no t bein g paid an d ther e wa s no immediat e prospec t of income wit h whic h t o pay the ren t o n thei r basemen t theatre . The security Luscomb e ha d hope d fo r throug h th e amalgamatio n wit h th e Art s Theatre Clu b had faile d t o materialize, and i t was evident that to survive, let alone grow, he would have to come up with some new ideas. In orde r t o kee p a nucleu s of actor s togethe r ove r th e summer , Luscombe planne d a tou r o f th e Haliburto n cottag e countr y nort h o f Tor onto. Three brother s h e ha d know n on Westwoo d Avenue, the Martins, had acquired a farm nea r Huntsville, Ontario, an d h e persuaded the m to let hi m us e th e propert y a s his base. Wit h money donated b y the actor s and contribution s from well-wishers , th e grou p bough t a n ol d truc k and some army surplus parachutes, which they shipped up to the Martin farm. With this material, the brothers constructed a tent theatre tha t would seat

Building a Company 3 1 three hundre d o n thei r property on Hall' s Lake. By the en d o f July 1962, five actors (Barbar a Armitage, Eleano r Beattie , Dougla s Livingston, Marian McLeod , and Ton y Moffat-Lynch ) ha d resolve d t o tr y to surviv e the summer on what they could earn fro m acting. During June and July, they prepared a repertoire o f three one-ac t plays , Chekhov's Th e Marriage Proposal and Th e Boor-ana a Pirandell o adaptatio n entitle d Th e Evil Eye. Th e company gav e a 'preview ' performanc e o f their summe r program a t th e Fraser Avenu e theatre, fo r which the admissio n price was canned good s instead o f money . Th e nex t da y the y packe d thei r supplies , pile d int o their truck , and se t of f nort h t o th e Marti n far m o n Highwa y 35, afte r which they called themselves 'Theatre 35.' The troup e playe d t o loca l resident s an d vacationers , man y of whom had neve r seen a liv e pla y before , ove r th e nex t month . The y carrie d a minimum se t - blac k drapes - whic h the actors mounte d an d struck at each location . Tuesday s the y performe d i n th e Fenelo n Fall s Arena , Wednesdays in th e Minde n Recreation Centre , Thursdays and Friday s in the ten t theatre a t Hall's Lake, and Saturday s in an open-air theatr e built specially for them at the Red Lion Inn i n Bobcaygeon. Their first night in Minden the y playe d t o on e spectato r an d a dog. 8 Althoug h audience s improved thereafter, th e actors eked out a frugal existence , living precariously on slender box-office receipts . They ate porridge an d bough t gas for the truc k on Luscombe' s credi t card. 9 Gradually, however, as news of th e company sprea d b y word of mouth, audiences bega n t o increase . B y the time th e compan y returned t o Toront o i n September , the y ha d onl y a modest deficit , which Luscombe was able t o pa y off with part o f his Canada Council grant. The tou r had hardly been a commercial triumph, but i t confirmed Luscombe i n his belief that he should be reaching out to a popular audience . 'Theatre is not rea l life,' h e tol d a reporter i n Haliburton, 'no r is it a religious rite . Ba d theatre pretend s t o b e on e o r th e other . Whe n peopl e [have no t bee n spoiled ] b y bad theatre , thei r sens e o f what is true an d theatrical i s that muc h stronger . An d thei r enthusias m .. . communicates itself to the actors.' Feeling tha t th e tou r i n man y ways ha d bee n th e mos t excitin g thing the grou p ha d done , Luscomb e wa s determined t o reac h a similar audience i n Toronto . Wit h tha t goa l i n vie w an d t o pu t th e theatr e o n a sounder lega l basis, he decided t o incorporate th e organization under letters patent. Henceforth , the compan y would be known as Toronto Workshop Production s and would dedicate itsel f to a number o f general aims : producing plays; training actors, directors, designers, stage managers, and

32 Harlequi n i n Hogtow n production technicians ; operatin g a permanen t repertor y company ; encouraging Canadia n playwrights ; and promotin g publi c interest in th e arts generally . Whil e mer e incorporatio n di d no t mak e th e newl y envis aged compan y a reality, nevertheless, the official-lookin g document , wit h its impressive seal, seemed quietl y reassuring.

4

Finding a Voice

From th e beginning , Luscombe envisage d hi s new company as part o f an international contingen t o f artist s determine d t o furthe r th e caus e o f socialism throug h art . H e sa w himself as part o f a tradition which sough t to brin g abou t chang e b y 'educational' rathe r tha n politica l o r revolu tionary means . The functio n of the artis t was not t o get ou t o n th e hust ings o r t o ma n th e barricades ; i t wa s t o demonstrat e th e socia l an d economic law s governin g society . Unfortunately , Canadia n audiences , unlike thei r counterpart s i n Russia , Germany , o r England , appeare d t o be stubbornly indifferent t o live theatre. 1 The challeng e facin g the ne w company , therefore , wa s how t o brea k through tha t indifferenc e and mak e thei r audience s loo k a t themselves and thei r countr y wit h ne w eyes . Ideally , what was needed wa s origina l Canadian play s that woul d ri p awa y the familia r surface o f lif e t o thro w light o n th e ignore d an d unexamine d corner s o f th e Canadia n experi ence. Unti l suc h ne w works were available , however , Luscomb e an d hi s actors would have to mak e up thei r repertoir e fro m th e existin g stock of world dramati c literature . Bu t instead o f treating thes e 'masterpieces ' of bourgeois theatr e wit h the respec t normall y paid t o them , Luscomb e in tended to follow th e example of Vsevolod Meyerhold, Erwin Piscator, Bertolt Brecht, and Joan Littlewood. Those directors ha d shown how the classics of earlier periods coul d be made relevan t to contemporary audiences . For hi s firs t program , Luscomb e selecte d tw o one-ac t plays , on e o f which wa s Chekhov' s farc e Th e Boor. Chekho v ha d bee n th e principa l dramatist o f th e Mosco w Art Theatre , wher e Stanislavsk i had develope d an intimatel y realistic style of acting to convey the playwright' s subtle mixture o f ridicule an d compassion . Followin g the Russia n Revolution, however, producer s suc h a s Vakhtangov had take n a very different approac h

34 Harlequi n in Hogtown to Chekhov's works. The ne w Soviet audiences, they argued, could hardly be expecte d t o sympathiz e with th e ineffectua l representative s o f th e upper middl e clas s tha t mad e u p Chekhov' s dramatis personae . Suc h characters shoul d b e presente d o n stag e a s laughable , contemptibl e examples of an evil society. Accordingly, a more objective, satirical style of acting wa s developed, t o mak e clea r tha t th e Chekhovia n figure s wer e deserving of ridicule rather tha n sympathy. To achiev e th e critica l perspectiv e h e though t necessary , Luscomb e introduced a number o f 'estranging ' technique s which had bee n devel oped b y Russian and Germa n director s bu t wer e practically unknown in Toronto in 1959 . The productio n wa s staged o n a small proscenium stag e built i n th e larges t o f th e basemen t office s a t 4 7 Frase r Avenue . Bu t instead o f usin g th e resource s o f th e theatr e t o reinforc e a n illusio n of reality, Luscombe highlighted th e artificialit y o f the play . Nathan Cohe n of the Toronto Star described th e scene : 'The set shows the backstag e with the actors waiting to go on. A property girl is present too. When the suitor pulls a rop e t o b e admitted , sh e swing s a bell i n harmon y with his gestures. When a hat roll s off the table , or a glass falls down, she picks them up.' 2 Cohe n wa s entrance d b y thes e distancin g effects , whic h h e fel t enriched th e natur e o f th e audience' s enjoymen t an d paradoxicall y brought the m into closer contact with the idea at the play's core. In a second progra m of one-act play s produced a few months later , in May 1960 , Luscombe mounte d anothe r Chekho v farce, Th e Marriage Proposal. Continuin g hi s experiment s wit h audienc e alienation , Luscomb e tried t o ge t hi s actors t o achiev e a Brechtia n disengagemen t fro m thei r roles. I n this , he face d mor e intractabl e obstacles . Ton y Moffat-Lynch , who played Lomov, recalled hi s efforts t o capture th e styl e Luscombe was after. Convince d by his previous work in th e theatr e tha t th e actor' s tas k was t o 'fee l hi s role, ' Moffat-Lync h ha d worke d har d o n creatin g a detailed psychologica l profile of the character. On e nigh t after the show, Luscombe came backstage in a rage, proclaiming loudly that if Tony ever gave a performance like that agai n h e wa s out. At a loss to know what he had don e wrong , Moffat-Lync h aske d Luscomb e t o explai n an d wa s informed onl y that he had been 'acting. ' No further enlightened, Moffat Lynch s o exhauste d himsel f with worr y over th e nex t tw o days that hi s emotions seemed t o disappear. O n stage , h e fel t h e wa s somehow stand ing aloo f watchin g himself perform. Afte r th e performance , Luscomb e came round t o tell him he had been brilliant. Moffat-Lynch realize d the n what Luscombe had been after , an d sa w that in previous performances h e had allowe d his emotions to gain control of him on stage. 3

Finding a Voice 3 5 Having teste d hi s company on one-ac t plays , Luscomb e fel t the y were ready t o mov e o n t o mor e ambitiou s fare. Toward s th e en d o f 1961 , i n association wit h th e Art s Theatr e Club , h e selecte d Aristophanes ' sar donic commen t o n mal e warmongering, Lysistrata. Severa l internationa l developments mad e th e choic e see m especiall y relevant . Th e Berli n blockade, th e constructio n o f the Berli n Wall, and th e Cuba n missil e crisis ha d raise d th e Col d Wa r tension s t o almos t unbearabl e level s an d brought th e threa t of nuclear war closer than eve r before. H e aske d Jack Winter, a playwrigh t who b y then ha d take n Ton y Ferry' s plac e a s Luscomb's associate i n th e summe r sessions, to help hi m an d o n 2 8 December 196 1 opened th e collaborativ e adaptation An d They'll Make Peace. The audienc e sa t on thre e side s o f a series o f platforms rising fro m a ramp t o a n altar-lik e structure designe d b y Joyce Wieland . As the hous e lights dimmed, the theatr e was filled with th e sound s of drums and eeri e birdlike noise s comin g fro m behin d an d beneat h th e seats . Natha n Cohen describe d th e effec t o f the scene on him: At firs t th e voice s see m fa r awa y an d alien : the n the y ar e close r an d familiar ; at length the y have th e awful , awesom e impac t of a whole world of women shriekin g their grief, a s it were, softl y int o our ears . A muted thunde r of drums begin s shortly after th e femal e sobbing, and issue s at first from fa r awa y and lon g ag o (establishin g for us , as does the weeping , tha t this is something tha t deal s wit h yesterday bu t affect s u s now, today) the n rise s in volume an d emotiona l power , unti l it blots out th e women's cries . Signifyin g war, the drummin g herald s the adven t of two bands of men in uniform arme d for com bat. An d then , th e women' s voice s extinguished , th e drumbea t stops . Fo r a n instant ther e i s dead silence , th e silenc e tha t i s the prelud e t o th e figh t t o th e death. [Ther e ensues ] a stylize d battle i n semi-darknes s .. . between fou r me n i n headbands and nos e guards and loose-flowin g burlap shoulde r capes .. . and fou r other men in exactly the same unifor m except that their shoulde r cape s are blackish gree n i n colour . Tw o pai r of f i n turn , matchin g shield s an d broa d sword blades, execut e thei r shor t stylize d dance, freez e int o immobilit y while another two take over t o go through th e sam e beautifu l and ghoulis h manoeuvres. 4

After th e battle, shadowy figures move onto th e stage foraging among th e bodies fo r the spoil s of battle. They are th e women of Athens, who begin the play. Unfortunately, th e res t o f th e productio n faile d t o liv e u p t o it s early promise. Ther e were probably many reasons for that failure. Not only was Luscombe workin g with fairl y ra w performers, bu t hi s most experience d

36 Harlequi n i n Hogtow n actress was wrong for the leading role in which she was cast. An even mor e damaging shortcoming , however , wa s th e earnestnes s wit h whic h Lus combe and Winter had approache d th e script. Their introduction o f contemporary allusion s and song s tende d t o be preach y an d heavy-handed . Lysistrata hersel f wa s turned int o a moder n sloganeerin g revolutionary . 'When th e hous e i s dirty,' sh e admonishes he r followers , 'sweep it out when th e wall s ar e rotten , tea r the m down . We need no t liv e foreve r i n the house o f yesterday.' Herbert Whittake r o f th e Globe and Mail generousl y praise d a certai n 'nimbleness o f wit ' i n th e writin g bu t fel t th e collaborativ e creatio n o f some scene s resulted i n a 'blurring of essential fact.' Apart from thes e res ervations (an d a definite faintness in hi s praise o f the acting) , Whittaker admired Luscombe' s abilit y t o inspire hi s performers, t o draw them int o the situatio n presented an d hel p the m believ e in it. He calle d Luscomb e himself 'ver y likel y th e mos t dedicate d an d origina l creativ e talen t working in our theatre.' 5 Nathan Cohen wa s less charitable. Apart from his praise o f the openin g moments, he dismissed the entire production a s 'feebly adapted, radically miscast an d incompetentl y performed . I f it were t o b e pu t o n b y profes sionals i n a commercia l house , i t would immediatel y b e recognize d fo r the claptrap i t is.' Then, i n the avuncular tone h e adopted whe n lecturin g those h e fel t ha d strayed from th e path h e wanted them t o tread, h e went on: 'Wit h thi s ferociousl y misguide d productio n [Luscomb e is ] bein g unfaithful t o hi s principles a s an artis t an d a huma n being , t o hi s com pany, an d t o th e tru e need s o f theatre i n thi s community and th e coun try.' 8 Cohen's revie w was a serious set-bac k t o th e company . Nevertheless, it forced Luscomb e t o re-examine his work and t o conclude that , i n his preoccupation wit h the socialis t and pacifis t messag e o f the play , he ha d no t sufficiently explore d th e satire . Working with Jack Winter, he trie d t o salvage th e production . The y eliminate d som e o f th e contemporar y refer ences an d introduce d a numbe r o f ne w scenes . A mont h afte r th e première, th e pla y had undergon e considerabl e revision , with th e intro duction o f a balletic drea m sequence , severa l surrealistic battles, and th e near assassination of a warmonger. In a column in the Toronto Star, Winter promised that , i n th e revise d version , 'the seriou s an d th e jocular blen d into a curious and naiv e power.'7 But his formulation of the play's underlying theme - 'tha t peace may be won by fools but can only be maintaine d by men' - gav e little indication tha t the company had come an y closer to the ribal d and fantasti c spiri t of Aristophanes.

Finding a Voice 3 7 When Luscomb e looked a t the work objectively in the ligh t of the neg ative criticism , he cam e t o th e conclusio n tha t h e had , i n fact , bee n car ried awa y by his own ingenuity in th e staging . Too often , he saw , he ha d filled th e stag e wit h excitin g behaviou r withou t making sur e tha t eac h actor contribute d t o th e overal l picture. 8 And i n a simila r way, he ha d allowed his own political convictions to lead hi m int o oversimplifications. In rehearsals, conducted durin g th e Cuba n missile crisis, the importanc e of th e play' s message ha d seeme d overwhelming . But tha t ver y urgency had give n rise to an earnestness probably less effective tha n a more ironic approach woul d have been. Nevertheless, Luscombe felt that, in Peace, the company had develope d ' a new style of acting and theatre.' 9 And They'll Make Peace raised severa l practica l problem s o f dramaturgy and staging . Th e ne w ope n stag e o f th e company' s basemen t theatr e demanded a new relationship between actor and spectator . Furthermore , the adaptation of classic works for Canadian audiences was fraught with difficulties stemming from th e thinness of the theatrical tradition in the country and th e resultin g ignorance o n th e par t of Torontonians o f the major works of world theatre. Techniques of irony, parody, or estrangement were doomed t o misinterpretatio n wher e th e original s bein g modifie d wer e unknown. The difficult y of finding a theatrical metaphor throug h which to express Canadia n realities was significantly increased b y the na'ivet y of th e audience. To overcome some of that difficulty, Luscomb e decided t o work on a mor e recen t play . Sometimes calle d th e firs t proletaria n tragedy , Georg Buchner's Woyzeck was written in 183 7 by a twenty-four-year-old medical student, who was inspired by the real-lif e story of a German barber-sol dier wh o murdere d hi s mistres s in a fit of jealous rage . Th e soldie r was tried, condemne d (despit e lega l an d medica l contention s tha t h e ha d been insan e at the tim e of the murder) , and publicl y executed i n Leipzig in 1824, in the first such execution in that city in thirty years. Just what drew the youn g Buchne r t o th e stor y i s not clear . Hi s attitud e t o Woyzec k i s remarkably sympathetic, but there ar e also clear indications in the dram a that Woyzeck is mad (h e suffer s fro m hallucinations) , and th e stor y ends with the protagonist's deat h b y drowning rather tha n execution . Luscombe was attracted t o th e wor k because o f its spare bu t evocativ e dialogue an d because it s fragmentary nature - th e play remained unfin ished a t Buchner's deat h - allowe d scope fo r improvisation. He also fel t drawn toward s the centra l character, whom he sa w not a s a madman bu t as a victim of society. In December 1963 , he bega n workin g on improvisations, with a script based o n a new translation from th e Germa n by two of his students.

38 Harlequi n i n Hogtown One ai m was to strengthe n th e stor y line, which in th e origina l move d confusingly fro m scen e t o scen e withou t transitions or explanations . T o bridge on e suc h transition an d t o emphasize the militaris m of Woyzeck's society, Luscomb e introduce d a numbe r o f arm y drills. Douglas Livingston, a member o f the company , had acquire d a stereophonic soun d system for the theatr e an d placed speakers around the auditorium and even under th e stage . B y controlling th e variou s channels, he was able t o give the effec t o f a militar y ban d movin g fro m plac e t o place. 10 Th e drill s emphasized th e powe r and eve n sadism of the officer s an d th e dehuman ization o f th e enliste d personnel . Luscomb e wa s influence d i n thes e scenes, and i n other scenes involving an army doctor, by what he had see n on a visit to Auschwitz during a trip to Poland in 1955. !1 But he also recollected hi s ow n experience s o f regimentatio n a s a chil d i n publi c schoo l and coul d identif y wit h the wa y in which authority could intimidat e an d crush imagination. The schoolyard , as he remembered it , was not tha t different from th e parade ground . Sympathy for Woyzec k was also evoked in th e productio n b y emphasis on the viciousness of the world around him - a world of arrogant captains and lecherou s dru m majors . Even th e treatmen t o f Woyzeck's mistress, Marie, was brutal. While the pres s release describe d he r a s 'the only creature who ever loved [Woyzeck], ' the production tende d t o stress her infi delity, he r impatienc e wit h her child , an d th e generall y sordi d lif e sh e lived amid prostitutes and poverty. One o f th e mos t strikin g features of th e productio n wa s Luscombe's creation o f a raucous world of brothels and fairground out of the meagr e materials a t hi s disposal. Th e settin g consiste d o f no mor e tha n severa l platforms an d a ro w o f door s a t th e bac k o f th e stag e t o serv e a s th e houses o f prostitute s o r th e entrance s t o carniva l tents . Luscomb e believed tha t whateve r illusio n o f environmen t was require d o n stag e should b e create d wit h bodie s rathe r tha n wit h pain t an d canvas . H e wanted hi s actor s t o convey by their movement s the differenc e betwee n walking on gras s and walkin g on concrete , betwee n standing i n a jungle and standing in a desert. Perhaps his greatest triump h was his staging of Woyzeck's drowning. In the script, the action move s from a tavern, where Woyzeck falls under suspicion because of blood on his hand, to a river bank, where he tries to get rid o f th e murde r weapon . I n Luscombe' s staging , a s Woyzeck rushed from th e room , th e actor s playing the character s in th e taver n suddenly began t o move in th e stylize d 'efforts ' o f Laban, giving the impressio n of weightlessness and collectivel y representing the water. As Woyzeck moved

Finding a Voice 3 9 into the 'river ' among them, his clothes were seized by the 'waves. ' His hat was taken by one actor and passed to another's arm and a third's shoulder and finall y to the floor. Suddenly, all the actors, including the one playing Woyzeck, moved off, leavin g only a pile of clothing on th e stage. 12 In addition t o helping the actors improvise individual scenes and bits of business, Luscomb e sometimes divided th e actio n i n orde r t o juxtapose certain character s o r themes . Fo r example , h e counterpointe d th e offstage love-makin g in th e brothe l wit h Marie' s arguments with he r neigh bours, and opposed th e drunken philosophizing of two apprentices to the anguished despai r o f Woyzeck. By breaking up th e pla y in tha t way, Luscombe hoped t o prevent the audience from bein g completely seduced by the surfac e considerations of the work and t o force them t o contemplate deeper impressions and meanings. 13 Woyzeck opene d a t th e Frase r Avenu e theatre o n Friday , 29 May 1963, and attracted considerable critical attention. In a generous gesture of su p port tha t was as characteristic as his acidity , Natha n Cohe n commente d on th e productio n i n hi s column in th e Star even thoug h th e sho w had already been reviewe d in th e paper . H e calle d it 'a stunningl y conceived and dynamicall y execute d ventur e i n th e resource s o f tota l theatr e .. . a complete marriag e o f theme an d treatmen t .. . It is quite th e finest thing Mr Luscombe has done.' He sa w Woyzeck as a kind of universal man, 'an apotheosis o f a desir e fo r materia l securit y and spiritua l certainty. ' H e especially admired th e stagin g as 'bursting with lif e an d colo r .. . tremendously concentrated in its interdependent leaves of experience and enter tainment ... a truly passionate work of art.'14 Woyzeck marke d a particularly satisfying triump h in its thorough vindication o f Luscombe's conviction that actors could find truths in a dramatic text tha t coul d mak e i t especially relevant for contemporar y audiences. The succes s o f th e productio n strengthene d hi m i n hi s belie f tha t th e author wa s merely one membe r o f a creativ e tea m whos e contributio n could, and should , be modifie d by that of the othe r collaborators i n th e production process . In hi s search fo r original Canadian works, he wa s to draw increasingly on th e creative input of his acting company.

5 Collaborative Creation I: Hey Rube! and Th e Mechanic

The importanc e o f improvisation a s a too l fo r teachin g actin g wa s first recognized by Stanislavski, who passed the technique on to followers such as Meyerhol d an d Vakhtangov . Whereas Stanislavsk i ha d directe d hi s early exercises inwards, encouraging student s to recall and explor e thei r own emotiona l life , however , Vakhtangov focused outwards , on physical action an d atmosphere . H e woul d participat e wit h hi s student s a t th e Third Studi o o f th e Mosco w Art Theatr e i n improvise d scene s o n th e theme of a play in order t o build up the necessary creative atmosphere o r to fin d th e 'grain ' o f a scene. 1 Often thes e 'etudes ' wer e undertaken t o work out th e best way of conveying the company's attitude to an author's characters - fo r example, to show that Chekhov's speeches of hope were really th e vai n dreamin g o f delude d bourgeoi s landowners . A t othe r times, they were used to eliminate peripheral detai l and allo w concentration o n th e cor e o f a problem s o that th e 'mirror ' o f the stag e reflected essences rather tha n merely the surface of life. 2 Luscombe was particularly attracted t o Vakhtangov's 'fantastic realism,' which combine d inne r trut h wit h powerfu l stag e images . H e looke d t o improvisation in his teaching, therefore, to do two things. One was to give the acto r a bette r understandin g o f hi s o r he r ow n nature an d o f th e social contex t o f a play. The othe r wa s to find the concret e gestur e tha t would bes t projec t a n emotio n o r a n ide a t o th e audience . Durin g th e autumn o f 1960, the compan y had spen t severa l weeks remodelling thei r basement theatre a t 47 Fraser Avenue to increase its capacity and enlarg e the playin g space. The y had decide d t o remove yet another o f the parti tions, an d i n doin g s o the y ha d expose d tw o steel pillar s with obviou s structural significance . Afraid o f bringin g th e buildin g dow n aroun d their ears, they decided t o leave the pillars where they were and design an

Collaborative Creation I : Hey Rube! and Th e Mechanic 4 1 open stag e tha t woul d surround an d incorporat e them . Ove r th e nex t seven weeks, the company constructed a raised playin g space from an old revolving stage acquire d fro m th e defunc t Jupiter Theatre , remove d th e proscenium an d exposed th e lighting equipment, and scavenged the Spadina Avenue garment distric t for salvageabl e lumber, ou t o f which they built tiered seatin g on thre e side s of the stage . The finishe d auditorium , with seatin g fo r on e hundre d spectators , surrounde d a three-quarters open stage with two prominent pillars. The redesigne d performanc e spac e soo n bega n t o affec t th e group' s work. On e night , durin g a n improvisatio n exercise , on e o f th e actor s began t o juggle. Soon th e others responded, an d a brief circus act materialized. Later, one o f the actresses , who had bee n eatin g a t the theatr e t o cut down on expenses, improvised a cooking scene.3 It suddenly occurred to Luscombe that their new quarters would be perfect for a play about circus life . H e ha d know n circus performers i n Wale s while travelling with Jimmy James, an d h e understoo d thei r way of life. 4 Furthermore, th e circus milieu provided a perfect context for the exploratio n o f that physicality which was so much a part of Luscombe's idea of theatre. Tony Moffat-Lync h ha d als o been very interested i n clown s during his youth i n Englan d an d fel l easil y into thei r comi c mode . Man y o f th e actors, however , had littl e knowledge of th e circus , and Luscomb e sen t them out to do research on the various clown traditions and to investigate juggling, high-wire , an d trapez e routines . A s the wor k progressed , Lus combe pushe d hi s actors to imagine the circumstances of itinerant circus life. He told them of the acrobats' nee d fo r continual practice, the bickering brough t abou t b y long an d clos e association , th e strai n o f livin g o n the fring e of an indifferent o r hostile society. Some of these aspects of circus lif e Luscomb e kne w b y report; other s h e coul d vouc h fo r fro m hi s own experienc e of touring in W rales. The Canadia n actor s to o ha d littl e difficulty i n responding , becaus e the y themselve s fel t threatened : th e company ha d recentl y received a n evictio n notic e fro m thei r landlord , Industrial Leaseholds , who ha d a t las t found payin g tenant s anxiou s t o move int o 4 7 Fraser Avenu e in December . A s the actor s contemplate d their own desperate circumstances , their improvisations took on a heightened urgency . To ad d t o hi s problems, Luscomb e soo n discovere d tha t improvisation an d collectiv e creation ha d certai n limitations . While th e actors coul d interac t wit h on e anothe r t o develo p isolate d scenes , they found i t much mor e difficul t t o agree o n a n overal l shape for th e dram a or t o collaborate i n th e constructio n of a story line with focus , compres sion, and significance.

42 Harlequi n i n Hogtown Accordingly, Luscombe asked Tony Ferry to attend rehearsals and work with th e compan y i n th e developmen t o f the script . Ferr y found a boo k about Englis h circuses 5 an d transcribe d th e actors ' dialogu e durin g improvisations. Afte r rehearsals , Luscomb e an d Ferr y would go ove r th e scenes lookin g fo r way s t o provid e continuity . Gradually , a serie s o f vignettes was developed, focusing on th e conflic t between th e performer s in a run-dow n circu s an d th e loca l citizens , o r 'rubes, ' o f th e tow n i n which the y wer e playing . A young toug h come s t o tak e ou t on e o f th e high-wire artists; a boy from the tow n wants to join th e circus ; news arrives that a local girl is missing and tha t one o f the clown s is suspected o f having seduce d her ; th e clow n confesses unde r cross-examination ; the ne w boy is killed attemptin g a hig h dive ; and loca l hoodlum s attac k th e per formers, triggerin g th e circu s emergency cry of 'Hey Rube!' As they worked together , Luscomb e and Ferr y disagreed abou t th e significance o f th e script . Ferry , writing out o f a sens e o f 'persona l artistic doom,'6 saw the beleaguere d performer s as typical victims in a society hostile t o th e arts ; Luscombe, somewha t more optimistic, was excited b y the circus as offering a n essentially theatrical language . He captured tha t feel ing in the speec h h e wrote to begin th e play: A hundred years ago this night

A tent was raised an d peopl e entere d Paid the price , laughed a t clowns And understoo d th e meanin g of a show that never closed. A hundred year s before tha t time, another plac e another town A child laughed when a clown fell down And i n that moment he learned mor e tha n all his books could tell. Time is nowhere, all is present Past and futur e bot h combine d A world of madness, songs and storie s Fools and wisemen , which is which? Who but you can tel l us that?

The line s illustrat e Luscombe' s convictio n tha t th e cor e o f theatrica l meaning i s in gestur e an d tha t th e responsibilit y for interpretin g stag e images lie s with th e audience . I t wa s a convictio n tha t Ferry , himself a n aspiring playwright, did not share . As th e en d o f Novembe r approached , th e compan y worke d ou t a n agreement wit h Industria l Leasehold s tha t allowe d the m t o remai n i n their basement theatr e fo r a nominal monthly rent. To pay that rent, they

Collaborative Creatio n I : Hey Rube! and Th e Mechanic 4 3 needed t o perfor m befor e th e public , however, an d th e ne w circus play was in trouble . B y the en d o f December, muc h o f the wor k still remaine d rough, an d Ferr y thought th e plo t neede d furthe r development an d pol ish. But Luscombe wanted to get the actors in front o f an audience. In th e end, Luscomb e prevailed , an d o n 6 February 196 1 th e compan y opened its first original play, Hey Rube!. During th e initia l week, the y dre w audience s o f fewe r tha n a dozen . Those who found thei r wa y to Fraser Avenue descended a flight of stairs to a wide hallwa y decorate d wit h posters o f European theatrica l produc tions. Passin g throug h th e door s a t th e en d o f th e hall , the y came int o an are a wit h bleacher s o n thre e sides . Th e ceilin g was covered wit h a draped parachut e resemblin g th e undersid e o f a bi g top , an d on-stag e were tw o 'tent poles' painte d a brilliant red. A s they entered, th e specta tors wer e greete d b y variou s member s o f th e circu s alread y busil y engaged i n sweepin g u p o r i n puttin g o n thei r make-up . B y the tim e everyone wa s seated , ther e wer e ofte n fewe r spectator s i n th e audito rium tha n actor s o n th e stage . Whe n th e newspape r critic s finall y attended a performanc e a wee k afte r th e opening , the y di d s o i n th e company of just seven othe r people . Nathan Cohe n reporte d tha t he foun d th e stor y of Hey Rube! weak an d the character s incompletel y drawn . Muc h o f th e dialogue , h e felt , wa s bereft o f colour an d psychologica l perception, an d th e them e go t los t in murky symbolism. Nevertheless, he was impressed b y the actors ' dazzlin g use o f pantomime : 'T o a n ear-splitting , pulse-pounding , blood-tinglin g fanfare o f drums an d trumpets , tw o girls perform a high wir e act. Grace fully the y make their ascents, gingerly each put s a foot forward to test th e wire's slack, confidently the journey i s made. (But , in fact, neithe r ha s lef t the ground . Th e acrobatic s ar e simulated.)' 7 H e als o like d th e wa y in which Luscomb e an d hi s performer s ha d integrate d al l th e element s of performance int o what he called 'tota l theatre,' thereby achieving a 'genuinely meaningful relationship between playmaker s and playgoers. ' With an enthusias m wholl y uncharacteristi c o f Toronto' s mos t aci d theatr e critic, Cohe n describe d th e productio n a s 'a n exhilaratin g adventur e among th e theatr e art s ... [ a performance which ] stand s head s [sic] an d shoulders abov e mos t dram a production s show n i n Toronto, or likel y t o be shown, this season.'8 Herbert Whittake r wa s no les s enthusiastic, but fo r differen t reasons : 'It is the skil l and sensitivit y of Mr Luscombe's metho d o f teaching theatr e and it s meaning which invests these [scenes ] wit h a completely absorbin g reality ... These ar e not ordinar y actors. They are almost inconspicuous as

44 Harlequi n i n Hogtown personalities, bu t ar e nonetheles s convincing for all that. Thei r lif e i s the life o f th e circu s peopl e wit h who m the y hav e s o thoroughl y identifie d themselves. I n fact , whe n a more practise d actor , Georg e Sperdakos , ha s the stage t o deliver th e rich line s of the ringmaster, one finds oneself curi ously resentful of his carefully develope d theatricality.' 9 With thi s endorsemen t fro m th e critic s of th e majo r Toront o dailies , Hey Rube! ran fo r fiv e weeks . At th e conclusio n o f wha t ha d bee n thei r longest seaso n t o date , eightee n actor s an d technician s eac h receive d $37.83 as their shar e o f the profit on thirty-on e performances. 10 The show played t o more than tw o thousand peopl e an d establishe d Workshop Pro ductions a s th e mos t forward-lookin g theatrica l grou p i n th e city . Whittaker linke d it with other recent development s suc h as the opening o f the O'Keefe Centre , th e five-week season o f the Nationa l Balle t at th e Royal Alexandra, th e Crest' s reviva l of Willi s Hall' s Th e Long, the Short, an d th e Tall, and th e ten-wee k run o f Jack Gelber' s Th e Connection at the Hous e of Hambourg. I t appeared that , at last, a truly indigenous theatr e wa s taking root in English-speaking Canada . The circu s milieu o f He y Rube! had provide d Luscomb e wit h th e idea l context i n whic h t o explor e hi s ideas . Th e backstag e scene s coul d b e played with a psychologically based realis m in a style which tacitly ignore d the audience . Bu t thes e scene s wer e intersperse d wit h circu s act s o f a flamboyant theatricalit y in whic h acrobat s an d clown s played directl y t o the encirclin g crowd . The disjointe d and episodi c metho d o f storytelling enabled Luscomb e t o juxtapose th e publi c and privat e worlds of his characters. I n tha t way, he coul d avoi d the sentimenta l or th e mawkis h and a t the sam e tim e illustrat e th e economi c an d socia l force s a t wor k i n th e characters' lives . The structur e o f the work was rhythmic rather tha n logi cal, an d th e stor y remained open-ende d instea d o f moving to a pat con clusion. The centra l situation was a metaphor fo r the precariou s positio n of th e artis t i n a society driven b y greed an d ignorance . Bu t thi s seriou s point was made deftl y with the 'swor d of laughter.' The succes s o f He y Rube! prompte d Luscomb e t o investigat e othe r forms of collaborative pla y creation. T o obviate the nee d to invent a plot, he decide d t o adap t a Renaissanc e comed y b y findin g moder n equiva lents for the origina l characters . Th e pla y he chos e was Molière's L'amour médecin (Love, th e Best Physician), itsel f an adaptatio n o f conventional cornmedia dell'art e motifs . The Molièr e wor k tell s the familia r stor y o f th e daughter outwittin g he r obtus e fathe r t o marr y th e ma n o f he r choice . With th e hel p o f Lysetta , he r maid , Lucind a convince s he r father , Sganarelle, tha t sh e is dying because sh e cannot marry . Sganarelle bring s

Collaborative Creation I : Hey Rube! and Th e Mechanic 4 5 four physician s to examin e her , bu t the y cannot agre e o n a treatment . Lysetta, meanwhile, has arranged fo r th e youn g lover t o disguis e himself as a doctor an d bring s him t o the house . H e persuades Sganarell e tha t it is Lucinda' s min d tha t mus t b e treated , an d tha t sh e wil l b e cure d b y being mad e t o g o throug h a simulate d marriag e contract . Sganarell e agrees, onl y to find ou t to o late that the contract i s legally binding. Luscombe an d hi s actor s searche d fo r moder n equivalent s o f thes e archetypical comi c figures . The y foun d the m amon g th e conventiona l characters portraye d i n films and th e contemporar y worl d o f jazz. Th e obtuse fathe r becam e th e moder n businessma n worrie d abou t hi s health, th e mothe r wa s represented b y the societ y matron, an d th e rival lover wa s transforme d int o a coo l hipster . Th e mos t origina l insight , however, wa s tha t th e chicaner y whic h Molièr e ha d attacke d i n th e medical professio n wa s no w t o b e foun d i n th e worl d o f mechanica l appliances. I n a societ y o f relentles s consumerism , th e indispensabl e witch-doctors are th e repairmen . S o in th e hand s o f the actor s and thei r dramaturge, Jac k Winter , Molière' s disguise d docto r becam e a n auto mobile mechanic. For Luscombe , th e exercis e provide d a n opportunit y t o explor e th e conventions and practice s of commedia dell'arte. Luscomb e was attracted to the professional Italian comedy of the sixteenth century because it represented a style of acting diametrically opposed to that of the Shakespear ean tradition . Wherea s Richar d Burbage , Edwar d Alleyn , an d othe r Elizabethan actor s played a dazzling array of different parts , th e comme dia actor s spen t thei r live s perfectin g a singl e role . Shakespeare' s col leagues spok e th e line s h e provide d fo r them ; th e Italia n actor s improvised thei r dialogue following only a brief outline of the plot . Every commedia performanc e was unique, with each o f the performers contrib uting ne w lazzi o r allusion s to contemporar y scandal s o r politica l events. The commedi a actor , therefore, was more tha n a performing puppet ; h e was an alert , widely read individua l whose every performance wa s a demonstration of skill and intelligence. The ne w work evolved slowl y durin g th e sprin g o f 196 4 a s th e actor s built u p thei r characters , improvisin g incidents and bit s of business suggested b y the origina l play. Much of the comedy was physical, inspired serendipitously durin g rehearsa l an d ofte n onl y tenuousl y related t o th e story. Some of the gags , such as Lucinda's father's getting stuck in a tuba , seemed pointles s and extraneous . Others were riotously surrealistic. One lazzo tha t regularl y brough t th e hous e dow n wa s a routin e i n whic h Donald Meyer s as the mechani c tested an d repaire d a 'car' played by the

46 Harlequi n in Hogtown other member s o f th e company . An ingeniou s combinatio n o f physical actions suggestin g tires , pistons , an d othe r mechanica l paraphernalia , together with sound effect s produce d b y such unlikel y instrument s as a sewing machine , a ti n whistle , an d pot s an d pans , create d a brilliantly comic pantomime which regularly stopped th e show. Winter woul d tak e note s durin g improvisation s and the n wor k the m into a fina l script . H e describe d th e proces s a s follows: 'Afte r consulta tions between directo r an d dramaturge , certai n broad line s of character, theme an d situatio n wer e discusse d wit h th e actor s an d technicians . Then, withi n give n circumstance s suggeste d t o them , improvisation s began. Som e le d nowher e an d wer e dropped. Som e le d t o insight s and were buil t upon. And slowl y .. . characterization deepened, inter-relationships developed meanin g an d .. . a narrative line began t o emerge [and ] dialogue began t o be written: at first closely related to what was being suggested i n the improvisations, and the n gradually freer an d wider until the script bega n t o sugges t scene s an d character s whic h ha d no t ye t bee n introduced.'11 In spite of some signal successes, the proces s of collaboration employe d by the compan y proved exceptionall y time-consuming. After tw o months of rehearsal s an d preparation , th e sho w was little mor e tha n a one-ac t play. To stretch it into a length suitabl e for presentation a t the Universit y of Waterloo, where the compan y had contracte d t o perform i n July, Luscombe got a friend to make a short film of street action t o be screened as a secon d ac t prior t o th e improvise d automobil e routine . Eve n wit h thi s addition, th e pla y came dow n early, so Luscombe devise d a curtain-call, using the five doors in the permanent backgroun d of the Waterloo stage, which went on almos t as long as another act.12 The Molièr e adaptation, no w called Th e Mechanic, opene d a t th e Uni versity o f Waterloo o n 2 7 July 196 4 and was , according to Herber t Whittaker, 'mor e o f a happenin g tha n a pla y .. . concentratin g o n actio n [rather] tha n o n words.' Whittaker felt tha t staid audiences might find it frivolous or even facetious, but he admired the energy of the production , saying that it had 'al l the bounce o f early silent film comedy,' and though t Luscombe's use of the Waterloo thrust stage was inspired.13 The compan y continued t o work on th e productio n ove r th e nex t fifteen month s and presente d a n expanded versio n in Stratford in the summer o f 196 5 prior t o bringin g it t o Toronto as the openin g pla y of thei r winter season . Ronal d Evan s o f th e Toronto Telegram welcomed th e irre pressible high spirits of Th e Mechanic. H e particularl y admired the settin g by Nancy Jowsey, a 'tube , bottle an d bulb-strun g back-wall, tha t could b e

Collaborative Creation I : Hey Rube! and Th e Mechanic 4 7 either th e stockroom of a garage o r a cross-section of a human body.' The car repai r routin e h e calle d 'on e o f th e mos t magnificentl y hilariou s scenes I'v e eve r seen, ' an d h e urge d hi s readers , i f they ha d eve r wondered wha t had happene d t o fun in theatre, to see the production. 14 Herbert Whittaker , th e onl y Toronto criti c t o hav e reviewe d th e pla y out o f town, feared tha t Winter's script was in dange r o f 'being swamped by th e accumulate d comi c business. ' 'Almos t ever y secon d word, ' h e remonstrated, 'i s a cu e fo r th e Luscomb e stoc k compan y t o improvis e funny thing s t o do. ' Man y o f these , h e admitted , wer e highl y inventive and ' a fine demonstration o f the mimeti c and rhythmi c accomplishments of th e group. ' Bu t at times , 'the rushin g about t o word s comes clos e t o tedium.' 15 Nathan Cohe n als o complaine d o f ennu i brough t abou t b y a 'fast paced kaleidoscop e o f impressions' tha t was nevertheless 'flat an d drab. ' He compare d th e company' s styl e t o tha t o f a n animate d cartoo n an d praised th e wa y in whic h ever y ingredient o f theatr e ha d bee n brough t into synchronized play. At the end o f the first act, for example, eight member s o f the cas t evok e a n uproariousl y nightmaris h pictur e o f traffi c i n a state o f anarchy. Without movin g from thei r place s at the bac k of the three-side d stage, the y moun t a n effec t o f ear-splittin g tumul t an d vehicula r pandemo nium.To pursue th e cartoon comparison , th e car s become a flock o f birds of various size an d win g strength. Throw n int o a sudden panic , th e bird s swoo p u p an d down an d across , threate n t o bump int o one anothe r and miraculousl y miss collision, bu t nevertheles s tr y by some kin d o f collective unconsciou s t o continu e o n their give n direction . A s the actor s execut e thei r physica l gesturings, ther e i s the accompanying roa r o f wheels slidin g an d slitherin g an d turning . Th e jangle o f traffic signal s changing fro m 'stop ' t o 'go ' wit h ever-increasin g frequenc y i s coupled wit h light s spanglin g th e player s a t th e sam e pac e wit h ever y colo r o f th e spectrum.

But fo r Cohe n suc h effectiv e entertainmen t wa s no t enough . Con vinced that drama is fundamentally a verbal art, Cohen deplore d wha t he saw as the usurpin g of the writer' s rol e b y the actors . 'Wha t Jack Winter started t o develo p a s a seriou s dramati c statemen t complet e wit h vision and power, ' he wrote, 'turns, in the circumstances, into a lively but lifeles s spectacle. The languag e lose s its muscularity and clarifyin g meaning . Th e characters dissolv e into object s i n a mirage. The troubl e i s not tha t the y are symbols, but that they have been removed from Mr . Winter's authority and poure d int o a group-think , a spirituall y mechanize d an d spoo k

48 Harlequi n in Hogtown imprint.'16 Not for the first time, Cohen had put his finger on a weakness in th e TWP method whic h Luscombe had t o acknowledge. Improvisation alone coul d no t produce th e ideal combination o f words and action s that constituted the best drama; actor and writer had t o work together. Bu t in Luscombe's experience th e alliance was a difficult one .

6

Adding the Language: Before Compiègne

The earl y development o f TWP reflect s th e interest s an d difference s of three o f it s firs t architects , Ton y Ferry , Georg e Luscombe , an d Jac k Winter. Ferr y provided th e initia l impetus for th e creatio n o f th e grou p and firs t articulate d th e company' s aims . Understandably , thos e aim s reflected hi s own experience i n England with the ne w British drama an d the so-calle d Angry Young Men. Winter was a later arrival , but h e rapidly established a stron g presenc e a s dramaturge , drafte r o f gran t applica tions, an d genera l spokesman . Hi s backgroun d wa s academic (h e wa s working on a PhD thesis on Bernar d Shaw) , and h e was attracted t o som e of the newe r dramatic theories of figures such as Antonin Artaud and th e experiments in the smal l off-off-Broadway theatre s such as Gaffe Ciñ o an d Cafe L a Mama (th e L a Mama Experimental Theatre Club) i n Ne w York. Not surprisingly , tensions develope d amon g th e thre e friends , eac h o f whom had uniqu e strengths, and eac h o f whom tended to underestimate the importanc e o f th e others ' contributions . Ferr y an d Winter , bot h aspiring playwrights , were bette r educate d tha n Luscomb e an d ha d a wider familiarity with th e theor y and literatur e of theatre. Bu t Luscombe had th e practica l experience (alon g with th e leadershi p ability) , and th e two writers recognized tha t he wa s the ke y to th e realizatio n of their own artistic ambitions. It was Ferry, the original partner, who argued that TWP should produc e Canadia n plays , an d i t wa s Ferry wh o persuade d Lus combe t o stag e th e Canadia n Burlap Bags, a n adaptatio n o f Le n Peter son's radi o play , along with Chekhov's Th e Marriage Proposal in 1960 . Bu t his effort s o n hi s own behalf wer e les s successful. Gropius, a pla y he ha d submitted fo r consideration , ha d bee n rejected , an d h e ha d com e t o a bitter fallin g out wit h Luscomb e over the scrip t for He y Rube! Following hi s disagreement wit h Luscombe, Ferry left th e compan y t o

50 Harlequi n i n Hogtow n help establish a legitimate theatre in a former burlesque hous e o n Queen Street. Th e Civi c Square Theatre opened on 2 January 196 2 with the help of a $10,000 gran t fro m th e Canad a Council . Afte r just tw o productions , the compan y ra n ou t o f money and th e schem e collapsed . I n th e mean time, Ferry' s plac e a t TW P ha d bee n take n b y Jack Winter , wh o ha d approached Luscomb e afte r seein g He y Rube!. Realizin g tha t h e woul d need th e service s of a writer, Luscomb e invite d Winter t o participat e i n the Haliburto n summe r schoo l h e and Ferry had organized , an d late r h e invited Winter to work with him on th e adaptatio n o f Lysistrata. The tw o me n rapidl y establishe d a congenia l workin g relationship . Winter wa s som e te n year s younge r tha n Luscomb e an d a t firs t ver y much th e disciple . He was glad of an opportunity to work closely with th e director an d th e actor s who would be developing his plays, and too k nat urally t o th e company' s collaborativ e methods . Fa r fro m resentin g th e actors' suggestions , Winte r seeme d t o agre e wit h Luscomb e tha t actor s are ofte n bette r abl e tha n a writer to explor e th e nuance s of psychological conflict. After thei r wor k on An d They 'II Make Peace, Winter and Luscomb e col laborated o n The Evil Eye, an adaptatio n o f Pirandello's Th e License. Then, early in 1963 , possibl y inspired b y Shaw, Winter began workin g on a play of his own about Sain t Joan. The wor k went slowly but wa s well advance d by early spring. The script , about the last days of Joan of Arc, presented a n interestingly sardoni c vie w o f th e much-mythologize d peasan t girl . Winter's Joan arrive s at Troyes as an emissar y of Charles VII , the kin g whom she has recently crowned a t Rheims. But instead of the sain t triumphant, this is a rough-mannered far m girl who leads a small, dispirited arm y and has lost faith i n her caus e and he r voices. In the field before th e city , she is met by Catherine, Countes s of Troyes, who offers he r supplie s left behin d by th e Englis h an d promise s t o le t he r hea r he r ow n voices, which sh e claims are from the Virgin Mary. Seeking to restore he r faith , Joan accom panies Catherine , t o find uniforms and gunpowder but not the supernat ural sig n sh e wa s hoping for . I n a n effor t t o provok e a respons e fro m heaven, sh e firs t take s of f he r masculin e attir e an d then , whe n sh e remains unpunished, seduces Catherine's young servant, François Villon. When Catherin e returns , bringin g the crystal ball which is the sourc e of her 'voices,'Joa n break s th e glass , ties up Catherine , an d accuse s he r o f planning t o betray her . A t this point, Françoi s claim s that h e ha s see n a vision o f stars in th e field s outsid e thei r hideawa y and tha t h e ha s heard voices calling for the Maid . Thinking tha t perhaps thi s is the sig n she ha s been seeking , Joan goe s of f with François and i s presumably killed in a n

Adding the Language : Before Compiègne 5 1 explosion off-stage . Alone, Catherine exult s that sh e ha s been successful in destroyin g he r enemy . 'Sh e loose d th e shadow s an d the y ar e every where - everywhere . She has gone to meet them - gone to glory - we have led her bac k to God.' Luscombe and th e actors liked much about th e play but thought i t seriously flawed . Ther e was a good dea l o f vigorous writing, and a provoca tively materialisti c view o f Joan whic h presented he r voice s a s delusion s and he r Go d as a cause of exploitation and war . But much of the symbolism was confusing - Catherine' s function was not at all obvious - an d the conflicts wer e presente d i n a rathe r old-fashioned , eve n melodramatic , format. Luscomb e encourage d th e actor s to analyse the scrip t in order to find the underlying motivation of the characters, and le d them i n improvisations exploring th e give n circumstances of each situation . He encour aged th e performer s to reach into their own imaginations to flesh ou t th e scenes an d t o fin d specifi c action s t o illuminat e character. A s a resul t o f those exercises , th e compan y move d toward s a collectiv e understandin g of the play , which was incorporated i n revisions of the script . As i t stood , th e dram a wa s too subjectiv e for Luscombe' s taste . Th e focus wa s on individua l psycholog y (Joan' s disillusionment , Catherine' s desire fo r revenge , Francois's ambitio n t o go t o Pari s to becom e a poet ) rather tha n o n th e objectiv e facts and issue s behind th e characters ' pri vate lives . There neede d t o be mor e explici t examination o f war and th e economic basi s o f war . It wa s necessary to distanc e th e audienc e fro m Joan s o that they could se e her no t onl y as a suffering individua l but als o as a pawn i n internationa l politic s and a dupe o f false politica l and reli gious ideologies . Accomplishin g this would mea n rewritin g the secon d half o f the pla y and restagin g certain scene s s o that th e actor s woul d b e less immerse d i n th e psychologica l complexities of thei r character s an d freer t o demonstrate th e limitations of those characters . Accordingly, Luscomb e hire d fou r additiona l actor s t o pla y soldier s who would serve as a kind of chorus an d provid e a more objectiv e framework for th e persona l story . He als o persuaded Winte r to shif t th e scen e of th e pla y from Troyes t o Compiègne , whic h i n it s associations wit h th e signing of the Armistice and th e surrende r o f France t o Hitler, had reso nances Luscombe wanted to bring into th e performance . Fo r Luscombe , Joan's experiences illustrate d the ideologica l basi s of violence and i n tha t respect were related t o events of more recen t history. Winter wrote a n openin g choru s i n whic h h e linke d Compiègn e with Joan's betraya l an d captur e a s well a s with othe r manifestation s o f ideological prejudice. He als o eliminated Joan's seduction o f François and a n

52 Harlequi n in Hogtow n episode in which Catherine seem s a s eager to don a soldier's unifor m as Joan is to wear a dress. Further excision s removed Joan's rather improba ble desir e t o hea r Catherine' s 'voices ' an d he r hop e tha t dressin g a s a woman would, by provoking hi m t o retaliation, establish the existenc e of God. On Friday , 13 December 1963 , TWP opened its first fully scripte d original play , Before Compiègne. Most of the critic s were gratifyingly enthusiastic. Herbert Whittake r haile d th e wor k a s a justification o f th e company' s early promise. For the first time, he felt, TWP had actor s talented enoug h to matc h Luscombe' s imagination . H e particularl y welcomed th e com pany's ne w emphasi s o n language , languag e whic h h e describe d a s 'strong, poetic , an d lively. ' 'Th e play, ' h e wrote , 'confront s th e warrio r saint at her lowes t ebb with a tempter who is a good match for her. Winter has had th e good sense to make the tempte r a woman, his extension o f a historical figure - a false visionar y named Catherin e d e la Rochelle. Her temptations are those of a woman, including clothes and powe r over men ... The tw o women, true an d false , circl e warily as the choru s o f soldier s juxtapose a runnin g documentatio n o f historica l events , pas t an d t o come.'1 Ronald Evan s of the Telegram was equally enthusiastic. He was struck by the unconventiona l portrait o f Joan, ' a cropped, cocky , cursing Joan i n a sweat-greasy, drie d cowhid e jerkin [whose ] ear s ar e tune d t o th e coars e barracks song s an d stories. ' Evan s sa w the stor y a s on e o f betrayal , i n which Joan i s tricked an d mus t choos e betwee n ' a cynica l allegiance t o the English-allied Duke of Burgundy or death.' 2 This relativel y fulsome prais e lef t Luscomb e an d Winte r unprepare d for th e devastatin g reactio n o f Natha n Cohen . I n th e past , Cohe n ha d been particularl y generous i n hi s prais e o f th e company , and partl y o n that accoun t Winte r had sen t hi m a copy of the scrip t of Compiègne prio r to the opening . Now , instead o f the encouragemen t the y had hope d for, Cohen mete d ou t savag e criticism . Acknowledging tha t ther e wa s wit, intelligence, and th e possibilit y of a good narrativ e lin e in Winter's conception, Cohen nevertheles s felt that the writer had been 'encouraged ' to fatten th e play' s trim, essentially anecdotal shape. But h e reserve d hi s most scathing condemnatio n fo r th e director . 'M r Luscombe,' he proclaimed, 'instea d of giving the play the hard, clean, sardonic treatmen t i t call s for, ha s stage d i t pretentiously , an d wit h grea t gobs o f artistic vulgarity ... In tryin g to inflat e Before Compiègne far beyon d its dimensions , M r Luscomb e ha s don e hi s playwrigh t a disservice , and once agai n calle d attentio n t o a chroni c failin g i n hi s ow n work , on e

Adding the Language : Before Compiègne 5 3 which he mus t overcome i f his efforts ar e eve n [sic] t o take healthy roots.' Although h e acknowledge d tha t th e productio n wa s not a waste, he fel t that it was 'naggingly, harassingly and cruciall y inadequate.' 3 Not content t o confine his remarks to the pla y he was reviewing, Cohen surveyed Luscombe' s caree r i n orde r t o analys e what he considere d th e director's shortcomings . Thes e wer e a n insensidvit y t o speec h variatio n and a focu s o n th e interrelationshi p o f character s rathe r tha n o n thei r inner lives . H e als o maintaine d tha t Luscombe' s emphasi s o n ensembl e and lac k of interest in psychology meant tha t he was ineffective i n his handling o f performers, a conclusion h e arrive d at from the fac t tha t no pro fessional acto r associate d wit h TW P ha d conspicuousl y improve d a s a result o f th e experience . (Cohe n ignore d th e fac t tha t Luscomb e ha d been force d t o work almost exclusivel y with amateurs.) Cohen acknowledge d tha t wit h certai n play s suc h a s He y Rube! o r Woyzeck Luscomb e coul d 'blen d hi s effects wit h a singular resourcefulnes s and extrem e intensit y of impact. He ca n achiev e distinguishe d fusion s o f sound, light , color (throug h costume s especially) and movement , leading to flash-flood climaxes. On suc h occasion s too , howeve r murk y the mate rial, h e register s a n acut e politica l consciousness. B y defining, sometime s forcefully, sometime s throug h tende r silences , but alway s clearly, a play's economic an d socia l framework , h e make s a cogen t commen t o n lif e today and th e values which characterize it. ' Attempting t o explai n thi s apparen t paradox , Cohe n suggeste d tha t Luscombe wa s at hi s bes t whe n dealin g wit h skeleta l scripts . Theorizin g that hi s nature fitte d hi m o r tha t experienc e ha d conditione d hi m t o be the creato r o f prim e forc e i n a dramati c presentation , Cohe n suggeste d that Luscomb e ha d difficult y whe n h e approache d a tex t wit h a stron g organization i n whic h the characters , dialogue , conflicts , an d resolutio n were basically fixed. 'In suc h circumstances, ' h e pronounced , 'Luscomb e is forced t o b e a translato r only , to subordinat e himsel f to th e vanishing point, an d th e conflic t produce s a contractio n o f hi s imaginative facult y and disciplines. ' The n 'ther e i s an acut e los s o f focus . Th e device s ar e often banal . Th e actor s flounde r abou t o n a landscap e withou t guide lines. Th e climaxe s are reache d a t th e wron g tim e an d hav e th e wron g stress. The effect s misfire . That was how i t was with And They 'II Make Peace,' Cohen concluded , 'an d that' s ho w it is ... with Before Compiègne.' 4 Luscombe was stunned, no t onl y by Cohen's negativ e respons e bu t als o by th e vehemenc e wit h whic h i t ha d bee n expressed . Epithet s suc h a s 'vulgar,' 'banal, ' 'inadequate,' and 'pretentious ' were painfull y mortifyin g to read , especiall y i n th e colum n o f a criti c h e respected . Reluctantly ,

54 Harlequi n in Hogtown Luscombe ha d t o admi t tha t Cohe n ha d bee n righ t abou t An d They'll Make Peace. Could i t be that he was right again? Were there shortcoming s in hi s methods tha t th e othe r critics did no t see ? If Cohen wa s wrong in particular, could h e b e right in general? Did Woyzeck an d He y Rube! constitute the company' s best work? And if so, was the group now moving in th e wrong direction? Winter and Luscombe had a n opportunity to rework the play for revival at the Colonnade Theatr e i n April. For the new version they explored var ious non-realistic theatrical convention s such as commedia dell'arte, Chinese opera , an d silen t film. In place o f the four soldiers, they introduce d a couple of 'zanies,' a sort of medieval Laurel and Hard y duo who livened the actio n wit h variou s lazzi whil e commentin g o n th e proceeding s an d occasionally taking over the major roles in the play. Another addition was that o f a minstrel figure who , like th e orchestr a i n a Chinese opera, pro vided musica l accompanimen t t o an d commen t o n th e action . Dougla s Livingston played a variety of instruments (includin g drums and ocarina) to supply sound effects an d a 'medieval' atmosphere. Th e result was a radically differen t handlin g o f th e script , which in man y respects remaine d the same. Speeches were taken from som e character s and assigne d t o others so that lines which had been serious or portentous i n the original version became ironic or comic. The change s succeede d i n markin g a cleare r distinctio n i n th e pla y between the 'feeling ' an d 'detached ' sides of Joan's character. Comment s which ha d give n a rathe r cynica l slan t to th e Mai d were assigne d t o th e new comi c observers . Thi s mean t tha t Joan's disillusionmen t whe n sh e learned o f Charles's betraya l was more poignan t an d he r refusa l t o yield to the blandishment s of Catherine an d becom e a mere mercenary mor e credible. Unfortunately , i t als o shifte d attentio n awa y fro m th e centra l character an d pu t undu e emphasi s o n wha t seeme d lik e extraneou s comic turns. The ne w version of the play also put slightl y less stress on th e religious basis of war and introduce d a final speech whic h suggested tha t Joan gave herself up in an act of something lik e existential despair. Not al l the critic s were please d b y the alterations . Ronald Evan s called the productio n 'no t th e fin e powerfu l piec e i t was four month s ag o .. . Some o f the strengt h o f the pla y has been sappe d of f to sweete n u p th e production.' H e fel t ther e wa s more laughte r bu t les s potency , partl y because Joan ha d bee n pushe d asid e an d attentio n switche d to th e two clowns. Evans preferred wha t he called the 'sturd y chorus of four soldiers ' and deplore d th e 'Mac k Sennet t capers. ' While acknowledging that Lus combe's stagin g wa s the mos t imaginativ e and excitin g i n an y Toronto

Adding the Language : Before Compiègne 5 5 theatre, h e though t th e pla y itself needed t o b e restore d t o it s 'original cogency.'5 Oscar Ryan , wh o wrot e unde r th e pe n nam e Marti n Ston e i n th e Canadian Tribune, wa s mor e sympatheti c t o th e ne w mode . H e calle d the Colonnad e productio n ' a ne w and ver y differen t play. ' H e admire d the extraordinar y and brilliantl y imaginative staging, in which the actor s 'soar o n wing s o f fantasy, ' singing , clowning , dancing . Whil e h e wa s beguiled b y the comi c acting o f Donal d Meyer s and Edwar d Kell y a s th e two zanies, Dijon an d Muchmor e (th e latte r mischievousl y name d afte r a Toront o clergyman) , h e admitte d tha t th e centra l ide a o f th e pla y tended t o becom e obscure d i n th e fireworks. 6 Ralph Hicklin , writin g i n the Globe, had no t see n th e earlie r production , bu t h e to o sense d a lack of focus . Th e play , h e felt , 'di d no t hav e th e fina l singl e impac t which its separat e moment s promised. ' Hickli n als o note d wha t othe r critic s were t o comment o n a s a recurring weakness in th e compan y - a 'com mon tendenc y t o stridency.' 7 Natha n Cohe n refuse d t o cove r th e pro duction o n th e ground s tha t i t wa s onl y a reviva l o f a sho w h e ha d already reviewed. Following th e Colonnad e production , Winter and Luscomb e decide d to carry out furthe r revision in preparation fo r performance s at th e University o f Waterlo o durin g a shor t summe r seaso n there . The y incorpo rated som e o f the comi c business of the tw o clowns into the mai n action, eliminating Dijo n and Muchmor e and givin g som e o f their line s t o Joan and th e Captain . I n man y respects, thi s revision represented a retur n t o the origina l Fraser Avenu e staging, except tha t Joan becam e mor e amus ing. A further lightening of the effec t wa s achieved b y having some o f th e narrative (suc h as Joan's final capture and execution ) sung in ballads by a minstrel. The endin g remaine d somethin g of a problem . I n thi s version, Joan's capture was reported rathe r than shown, with the resul t that the climax wa s weakene d slightly . Kem p Thompson , th e Kitchene r critic , thought th e Waterlo o productio n wa s 'more effectiv e tha n th e versio n [he ha d seen ] durin g th e winter. ' Bu t h e fel t th e pla y taile d of f rathe r than comin g to a strong conclusion. 8 Nathan Cohe n ha d bee n persuade d t o atten d a specia l performanc e given fo r hi s exclusive benefit prior t o th e company' s return t o th e University o f Waterlo o i n October . Sittin g alone i n th e uncomfortabl e base ment theatr e watchin g a performance i n which Luscomb e had t o replace Ed Kelly as the Captain , Cohen wa s converted. 'In its new form', h e wrote, 'Before Compiègne ha s becom e a pla y entitle d t o seriou s critica l attention. No longe r i s it a wasteland of false motive s and ponderou s vers e ... It no w

56 Harlequi n i n Hogtown has a true verbal and emotiona l flow ... The whole has point an d dynamic sensibility'9 As the compan y prepared t o launch it s fifth season i n its out-of-the-way basement theatre , i t could affor d t o tak e som e prid e i n it s achievements. Not onl y had i t won hig h praise , i t ha d don e s o primaril y with origina l Canadian work . In th e summer , i t had wo n the Telegra m Awar d for bes t Canadian pla y for Before Compiègne. And i n September Natha n Cohen ha d included He y Rube! in a list of all-Canadian theatr e production s whic h h e considered indisputabl y firs t class . O f th e production s name d - Ra y Lawler's Th e Summer o f th e Seventeenth Doll an d Chekhov' s Three Sisters a t the Crest , Molière's Le malade imaginaire and Brecht' s Th e Threepenny Opera at the Théâtr e du Nouvea u Monde , Th e Fantasticks a t the Re d Barn , Tennessee Williams' s The Glass Menagerie at the Neptune , an d He y Rube!-on\y the las t was an original Canadian play .

7 Going Professional

The summe r experience wit h Theatre 3 5 had convince d Luscomb e tha t he mus t reach ou t t o a popular audience , one unspoile d b y exposure t o 'bad' theatr e an d abl e to respond naturally , and tha t th e kin d of theatre he wanted to create could be produced onl y by professional actors able to devote all their time to the task . In May 1962, therefore, he an d Jack Winter submitted a proposal t o the Canada Council to establish a permanent company wit h a nucleu s o f si x actors, who m h e propose d t o pa y $50 a week. H e estimate d that , playin g fro m Augus t t o March , th e compan y would attrac t an averag e of 45 per cen t attendance i n thei r hundred-sea t theatre, an d that , with ticke t prices at $1.50, the y would face a deficit o f about $16,500 . Luscomb e an d Winte r aske d th e Counci l t o underwrit e this anticipated deficit. 1 In August , Luscombe learne d tha t th e Counci l ha d turne d dow n hi s application but awarde d him an individua l arts grant of $4,000, for which he had no t applied. What he did not kno w at the tim e was that the Counc'l's decision, through a n ironic turn of fate, ha d bee n influence d by the activities o f hi s former partner , Ton y Ferry . Alarmed b y the precipitou s collapse o f the Civi c Squar e Theatre , o n whic h the Canad a Counci l ha d risked a considerable investment , Peter Dwye r a t the Counci l had mad e enquiries abou t th e qualit y of th e actor s a t Worksho p Production s an d had bee n tol d tha t the y were 'no t entirel y professional. ' Onc e burned , the Counci l decided t o move more cautiousl y in their support o f theatrical enterprises in Toronto.2 While the awar d was less than Luscomb e and Winte r had hope d for , it represented a mild vote of confidence in their work and enable d the m t o continue wit h unpai d actor s t o produc e a seaso n o f tw o play s during 1962-3. In th e sprin g of 1963 , however, they approached th e Counci l for

58 Harlequi n in Hogtown support for a more ambitious program. Thei r new proposal envisage d setting u p a professiona l compan y o f si x actors an d producin g thre e ne w shows a year. Eac h pla y would be rehearse d fo r te n t o twelv e weeks and then playe d fo r abou t th e sam e lengt h o f time. June an d July would b e given ove r t o revivals o f th e mos t successfu l production s o f th e season . Such a program , the y estimated, woul d run u p a defici t of $10,800 , an d they aske d th e Counci l to mak e the m a gran t o f tha t amoun t t o cove r their anticipated losses. 3 While h e waite d for a reply from th e Council , Luscombe conducte d a number o f acting workshops in differen t part s o f the province . Toward s the en d o f August, he returne d t o Toronto to the welcome news that th e Council ha d awarde d Toront o Workshop Production s a grant o f $3,600 . In a state of jubilation, Luscomb e contacted Winte r to tell him th e news. Once th e initia l euphori a ha d subsided , however , h e bega n t o conside r some o f the implication s of his new, state-subsidized status . As he rerea d the Counci l letter mor e carefully , severa l fact s bega n t o troubl e him . At first the su m of $3,600 ha d seeme d a welcome bonanza, bu t th e amoun t awarded wa s in fac t just one-thir d o f th e su m h e ha d requested . Tha t meant tha t th e origina l plans , whic h ha d calle d fo r th e year-roun d employment o f a cor e o f professiona l actors , woul d hav e t o b e aban doned. Th e salarie s he had budgete d fo r his actors were already minimal, and i t woul d b e ou t o f th e questio n t o reduc e cost s b y cuttin g th e amounts an y further . Furthermore , th e gran t wa s earmarke d fo r th e production o f a Canadian play , and i t was evident that a professional production o f Winter's work would consum e th e entir e subvention . Conse quently, the fund s provide d b y the Canad a Council would cover no mor e than a third o f the year. Upon stil l close r examination , it appeared tha t th e su m mentione d i n the lette r was not a n outrigh t grant a t all, but a basic grant o f $1,800 plus an equa l amoun t payabl e only if the theatr e wa s able t o raise a matching $1,800 fro m sources other tha n th e box office. Tha t meant tha t th e ener gies o f a n alread y understaffe d an d overworke d administratio n would have to be stretched furthe r in the searc h for alternative financing. While these limitation s were explained logicall y in terms of a decrease i n fund s available t o th e Canad a Counci l an d th e nee d fo r TWP to begi n privat e fund-raising, Luscomb e fel t tha t fa r from freein g his hands t o devote hi s full tim e t o directing , th e Counci l had, i n D r Johnson's phrase , merel y 'encumbered him with help.' Nevertheless, in spit e o f his reservations, the prospec t o f establishing a fully professiona l actin g company was too enticin g t o le t slip . By Septem-

Going Professional 5 9 her 1963 , Luscomb e was auditioning actors an d negotiatin g wit h Actors ' Equity t o dra w up a specia l studi o contract . Accordin g t o it s terms, th e actors would receive $30 a week during ten weeks of rehearsals and $5 0 a week fo r performances . Afte r a serie s o f auditions , Luscombe selecte d seven actor s (Joa n Marone y Ferry, Tony Moffat-Lynch [late r replaced by Will Albert] , Géraldin e Douglas , James Beggs , Le n Doncheff , Wilso n West, an d Larr y Perkins), who becam e th e firs t professiona l TW P com pany. Several members of the earlie r troupe who failed to qualify as actors in th e professiona l grou p agree d t o sta y o n a s volunteers. Sonja Livingston and Eleano r Beattie, both veterans of earlier Luscomb e productions, agreed t o do props, and Joe Hatt-Coo k tried his hand a t publicity. Brooky Robins, the youn g wife o f a rising Toronto lawyer , offered t o ac t a s business manager. In additio n t o thes e TW P veterans, th e ne w compan y include d fou r important newcomers whom Luscombe had met as a result of his summer teaching a t th e Quetic o Centr e i n Atikokan , Ontario . John an d Jun e Faulkner were an English couple who had bee n activ e in Little Theatre i n Atikokan. To allo w more tim e for his theatrical interests , John ha d given up a job a s surveyor with a steel company, turned t o teaching, and worked for a year in an India n school in the north . In Toronto, he go t a position at a high school in Don Mills , but h e spen t all his spare tim e at the Frase r Avenue theatre , an d afte r thre e an d a hal f month s h e resigne d t o work full tim e for Luscombe at $25 a week.4 Faulkner was quiet in manner an d a genuin e bohemian ; describe d a s th e blac k shee p o f a n aristocrati c English family, 5 he ha d spen t a couple o f summers with the circu s in Sweden befor e comin g t o Canada . Passionatel y interested i n th e technica l side of theatre and a n artist of considerable ability, he brought a painter's eye to the art o f stage lighting. His wife, June, as devoted t o the theatr e as her husban d bu t force d by circumstances to spend mos t of her tim e su p porting th e family, helpe d wher e sh e could - washin g floors, preparing publicity, an d workin g i n th e office . A frien d o f th e Faulkners' , John Jowsey, who ha d als o just com e t o Toront o t o wor k for Ontari o Hydro , was helping John wit h lighting. June suggeste d tha t Luscomb e mee t his wife, Nancy , a graduat e o f th e Ontari o Colleg e o f Art who ha d worke d with the New Play Society in the 1940s . Nancy Brown Jowsey had grow n up in Toronto and move d to the Lakehead wit h her husband ; now returned to Toronto with a young family, sh e wanted t o get bac k into theatre a s a designer. Luscombe asked her t o do an inventory of the company' s wardrobe an d suggeste d tha t sh e prepar e a fe w costume sketche s for Before Compiègne, assuring her tha t there were 'hundreds' of volunteers to do th e

60 Harlequi n in Hogtown sewing.6 That was the beginnin g o f an artistic relationship tha t was to last for th e next ten years. By early 1964, with the productio n o f Before Compiègne, the newl y professional compan y could begi n t o savou r its success. In th e secon d wee k of January, Brook y Robins received a lette r fro m th e Provinc e o f Ontari o Council for the Art s announcing a gran t of $5,400, of which $3,600 was specifically intende d t o suppor t th e permanen t company . Th e new s meant tha t th e company' s future wa s more secur e an d tha t i t would be possible t o extend th e ru n o f their current production . When Luscombe broke the news to the actors, however, he was unable to get general agree ment on the terms for a longer engagement. Upse t by what he considere d a lack of dedication an d loyalty , he closed the show, fired the entire acting company, and resolve d to begin again with a clean slate . Early i n Februar y 1964 , therefore , Luscomb e hel d ope n auditions , which brought some seventy-five aspirin g actors to the Fraser Avenue theatre. Fro m them , Luscomb e selecte d one-thir d t o wor k with hi m fo r a month without pay or an y guarantee o f employment. At the en d o f tha t time, he chos e seve n actors (Victori a Mitchell, Gwen Thomas, Larr y Perkins, Donal d Meyers , Edward Kelly , Yvonn e Adalian, and Edwar d Sanders), who m h e offere d two-mont h studi o contracts . The n h e bega n rehearsals for a revised version of Before Compiègne. The four-wee k seaso n a t the Colonnade , a n innovativ e apartment an d shopping comple x o n Toronto' s fashionabl e Bloo r Street , wa s a crue l introduction t o th e realitie s o f Toronto theatr e economics . I n spit e o f unprecedented publicit y not onl y for the play but for the ne w Colonnade Theatre, audience s reached onl y about 3 3 per cent in the first week. They rose to 45 per cen t i n the thir d week, only to tail off again t o less than 30 per cent. That even with thei r best-publicized production TW P could no t attract mor e tha n a hundred spectator s a night pose d seriou s question s about th e company' s future. I t was clear that thei r surviva l would depend on thei r abilit y to fin d outsid e suppor t t o supplemen t wha t they coul d earn a t the box office . In 1964 , fundin g for art s organization s i n Toront o cam e fro m thre e agencies: the federally supported Canad a Counci l (founde d in 1957) , the Province o f Ontari o Counci l fo r th e Art s (founde d i n 1963) , an d th e Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto (grants first approved i n 1956). During the early sixties, the mos t important figure determining grants policy was Peter Dwyer, arts officer fo r the Canada Council. Dwyer was an Oxfordeducated civi l servant who had come to the Council from a position on th e Privy Council. He brought with him a passionate interest in the arts, a wide-

Going Professional 6 1 ranging intelligence, a keen sens e of fairness, but an essentially elitist faith in hig h cultur e an d 'professional ' standards . Dwyer' s conviction s were shared b y other Council officers, an d thei r views usually carried th e da y at Council meetings . Thei r influence was reflected i n th e Counci l policy of denying direct grants to amateur organization s and in a policy of reinforcing success - mos t usually in the dominant arts organizations in the country, suc h a s th e Nationa l Ballet , th e Canadia n Oper a Company , th e Toronto and Montrea l symphonies, and th e Stratfor d and Sha w festivals. Although no t intende d t o be interventionist, such a policy, directing a s it did th e allocatio n o f substantial sums of money, was to hav e a significan t effect o n th e development of theatre i n the country. Nowhere wa s this true r tha n i n Toronto , where , betwee n 196 2 an d 1967, Counci l decision s (n o doub t reflectin g advice receive d fro m con sultants in th e city ) literall y transformed th e loca l scene. Toronto theatrical lif e durin g th e previou s decade ha d bee n dominate d b y the tourin g shows playin g the Roya l Alexandra an d th e O'Keef e Centr e (opene d i n 1960) an d b y th e loca l production s o f th e Cres t Theatr e (founde d i n 1953). I n th e earl y sixties, thi s status quo cam e unde r attac k from critic s such a s Natha n Cohen , wh o objecte d t o th e attemp t o f th e Cres t t o impose an alie n (British ) aesthetic on Toronto audiences. 7 In an attempt to respond t o such criticism, the Counci l had somewha t rashly awarded a grant of $10,000 to the Civic Square Theatre i n 1961 , only to see that organization collapse within a matter o f months. Rather more dramatically , in 1964 th e Counci l suddenly withdrew its support fro m th e Cres t Theatre, which action led directly to the demise o f that company two years later. As Luscombe launche d int o th e turbulen t se a of publi c subsidy , he wa s to find ou t ver y quickly just ho w unpredictable wer e th e wind s of political favour. Following the four-wee k run o f Before Compiègne at th e Colonnade , Lus combe an d Winte r prepared a n applicatio n fo r a grant o f $20,000 fro m the Canad a Council to run a forty-four-week professiona l season i n 19645. Thei r plan s calle d fo r a seaso n o f thre e plays , Before Compiègne, Th e Mechanic, an d a ne w work, Th e Steambath, all by Jack Winter . I n addition , they intended t o operate a theatre school . In Augus t 1964 , member s o f the Counci l met t o consider th e request . They wer e informe d tha t inquirie s mad e i n Toront o o n behal f o f th e Council had suggeste d i t might be impossible for Luscombe to contribute substantially to Canadian theatr e becaus e he 'foun d i t difficult t o come t o terms with other members o f his profession an d coul d no t b e influentia l if he remaine d outsid e the mainstream.' Without naming the anonymous

62 Harlequi n in Hogtow n consultants, Dwye r accepte d thei r basi c assessmen t an d reporte d t o th e Council that Luscombe's 'sever e approach to the theatre may have served to limit the number of playwrights and actor s who can cooperate wit h him and .. . that ther e i s a real danger o f inbreeding i n such a situation.' 8 Nevertheless, h e note d tha t i n th e previou s year th e compan y ha d earne d about 42 per cen t of its budget fro m operatin g revenu e an d had finance d the balanc e with grants and donations , leaving a relatively small deficit of $140. After som e deliberation , th e Counci l voted t o award TWP a grant of $10,OOO.The news was communicated t o the theatr e o n 1 7 August. Once again , Luscombe' s jubilation a t receivin g Counci l suppor t wa s tempered b y his awarenes s tha t th e gran t wa s only half o f what he ha d asked for. Nevertheless, it represented a substantial increase over the pre vious year's subvention . With th e expectatio n o f a simila r increase fro m the province, Luscombe decided t o commit himself to a year-round oper ation. O n th e las t day of August, he signe d seve n actor s t o annua l con tracts at $25 a week with tw o weeks of paid holidays . The studi o contracts worked out with Equity allowed the performers to supplement their somewhat meagre guarantee d earning s with odd jobs in film or television. 9 But for th e first time Luscombe could be assured that his actors would be abl e to spend mos t of their time at the Fraser Avenue theatre . Paradoxically, th e wor k of pla y development suddenl y seemed t o ru n into trouble. An adaptation o f Woyzeck schedule d t o open in the fall , a late addition t o the program, wa s delayed until the new year, and th e new Jack Winter play s (now identified as Th e Steambath and François) neve r materialized. Instead, after eigh t weeks of Th e Death of Woyzeck, th e compan y was forced t o reviv e Before Compiègne and pla y it i n repertor y with Th e Death of Woyzeck o n weekends during March 1965. Attendance a t these two productions (averagin g 2 8 pe r cen t an d 2 5 pe r cent ) wa s disappointing. 10 Undaunted b y what they hoped would be a temporar y set-back , i n 196 5 Luscombe and Winter approached the Canada and Ontario Art s councils with thei r mos t ambitious plans to date. They propose d raisin g th e basi c salar y of th e actor s t o $75 a week an d substantially increasing the publicit y and administratio n budget s t o allow for th e hirin g of professional staff. They suggested tha t the increase in th e company's budge t shoul d b e share d betwee n th e theatr e an d th e grant giving agencies. I f the tw o councils would rais e thei r operatin g grant s t o the theatr e fro m $10,00 0 t o $25,000 , TW P would undertak e t o tripl e its box-office receipt s (t o $20,000, or 25 per cen t of the budget) an d doubl e its fund-raising (to $10,000). In view of the fac t tha t a recently appointe d board ha d raise d clos e to $5,000 i n donations durin g th e year, Luscomb e

Going Professional 6 3 and Winte r fel t reasonabl y optimisti c tha t thei r appea l woul d receiv e a sympathetic hearing. They were to be bitterly disappointed . When i t cam e i n Septembe r 1965 , th e Canad a Council' s awar d o f $10,000 represente d n o increase a t all over the previou s year's grant. Th e decision t o hol d th e compan y t o tha t leve l of funding was based o n th e feeling tha t TW P ha d bee n les s productive tha n expecte d an d tha t to o small a part of their budge t (1 8 per cent ) cam e fro m operating revenue . Unless thes e problem s wer e addresse d an d th e Counci l give n clea r evidence tha t TW P ha d increase d it s audienc e an d improve d it s quality, Peter Dwyer informed the company , further assistance would not be pro vided.11 The respons e o f the Provinc e of Ontario Council for the Art s was even more discouraging . No t onl y was the tota l gran t ($9,000 ) les s tha n the y had bee n awarde d i n th e previou s year, but i t was restricted b y crippling conditions. I n hi s letter, afte r expressin g disappointmen t a t th e lo w proportion o f revenue coming fro m th e bo x offic e an d privat e fund-raising, the chairma n went on t o say that h e hope d th e awar d would serve as 'an impetus fo r [th e company's ] financia l campaign. ' T o thi s end , h e ex plained, th e Council grant ha d been divide d int o tw o halves - $5,00 0 as an outrigh t grant an d $4,00 0 t o become availabl e when th e theatr e ha d raised $10,000 on it s own. From th e perspectiv e o f th e theatre , th e grant s seeme d perverse . No t only had th e councils denied the m th e resources necessar y for hiring the personnel they needed (al l the administrative staff were unpaid), but they had added to the workload of the theatr e b y imposing fund-raising conditions whic h were wel l beyond thei r presen t capability . To ad d insul t t o perceived injury , th e lette r accompanying the initia l grant of $5,000 fro m the provincia l agenc y informe d th e theatr e tha t the y considere d them selves on e o f TWP' s 'benefactors ' an d a s such wer e mos t intereste d i n future plan s and aspirations. Luscomb e and Winter felt the y had spelle d out thos e aspiration s fairl y clearly , and wondere d ho w it would be possi ble t o persuad e th e cultura l mandarin s o f the importanc e an d difficult y of producing origina l Canadian rather than previousl y published plays. The creatio n o f a permanent , professiona l actin g company , fa r fro m solving th e theatre' s difficulties , ha d i n som e way s compounde d them . The discrepanc y between 'professional ' an d volunteer staff was beginning to produce tension s in the company. Some means would have to be found to coordinate th e creativ e efforts o f the man y talented peopl e Luscomb e had gathered aroun d him .

8 Collaborative Creation II: Woyzeck an d Th e Golem of Venice

The earl y collaborative production s o f the company - He y Rube! and The Mechanic- had been ver y much orchestrated b y George Luscombe. Working wit h amateu r actor s an d a n inexperience d writer , h e ha d foun d i t necessary to keep a fairly tight rein o n th e creative process. H e had drawn on th e imaginativ e contributions o f hi s collaborators, bu t i n mos t case s those contribution s had bee n develope d fro m his suggestions and incor porated int o a n overal l structur e o f hi s devising . I n th e cours e o f thei r experiments, th e compan y ha d learne d muc h abou t ho w t o combin e political idea s wit h stag e image s t o creat e metaphor s tha t wer e bot h arresting in themselve s and symbolicall y suggestive. Sometimes, a s in Hey Rube!, scenes of slapstick comedy or acrobatic expertis e becam e emblem atic, hinting at the discipline, alienation, an d dange r that are part of the life o f any artist. At other times , th e impersonatio n o f inanimate objects such a s an automobile , usin g nothing bu t th e actors' physica l ingenuity, conveyed a subtle social criticism. During the earl y years, the compan y had als o experimented profitabl y with th e underlyin g structur e o f drama , searchin g fo r non-naturalisti c narrative convention s tha t would enabl e the m t o disti l or compres s th e essentials of plot a s Laban had reduce d the element s o f movement in his identification o f the pur e 'efforts. ' Thi s distillatio n involve d eliminating traditional narrative elements (a s found in the novel and realistic drama) and substitutin g fo r the m technique s borrowe d fro m musi c an d film , such a s juxtaposition an d contrast , rhyth m and pattern . Abandoning th e fairly straightforwar d storytellin g metho d o f He y Rube!, th e compan y had experimente d i n successiv e versions o f Before Compiègne, takin g th e play apar t an d reassemblin g i t i n a numbe r o f differen t forms . I n Th e Mechanic, the deconstructio n o f narrative plot was carried eve n further as

Collaborative Creation II: Woyzeck and The Golem 65 the basi c Molière story was displaced int o the twentiet h century and the n broken apar t a s improvisations base d o n individua l character type s too k the tale in unexpected directions. Now tha t the y ha d succeede d i n recruitin g a professiona l company, Luscombe and Winter were anxious to continue thei r journey of exploration. Both agreed that th e function of drama was to communicate a truth about lif e i n quintessentiall y theatrical terms, whic h meant reflectin g th e world no t photographicall y bu t i n a heightened , coloured , o r distorte d fashion. Turning thei r back on naturalism , Luscombe and Winter sought to return t o the primitive origins of theatre . Implicit i n th e ide a tha t dram a i s sophisticated ritua l o r myt h i s th e notion that the actors must rediscover the sources of their art in the deepest levels of their own unconscious. Luscombe believed that improvisation exercises coul d uncove r truth s abou t huma n natur e an d society . Both Luscombe an d Winte r wer e anxiou s t o tak e advantag e o f th e longe r rehearsal period s no w available with a professiona l compan y to explor e those deeper strata of improvisation. Their first opportunity came during rehearsals for Woyzeck i n th e fal l of 1964. Severa l month s earlier , Luscomb e ha d receive d a scrip t abou t prison lif e i n th e Guelp h reformator y called Fortune an d Men's Eyes. Th e play, b y John Herbert , was obviously very powerful, bu t it s stark realism was foreign t o th e theatre' s style , an d Luscomb e fel t personall y uncomfortable wit h th e homosexua l theme . Eage r t o develop Canadian writers, however, he had suggeste d tha t Herbert prepare an adaptation o f Woyzeck for hi s consideration. T o hi s surprise, th e scrip t arrived o n hi s desk on e day i n th e summer . H e decide d t o us e i t a s his openin g productio n fo r the 1964- 5 season. Rehearsals fo r th e ne w version o f th e Buchne r play , to b e calle d Th e World o f Woyzeck, go t unde r wa y in September . Luscomb e began b y breaking th e scrip t int o unit s an d takin g th e actor s throug h improvisations . When h e aske d Herber t to incorporate som e o f the dialogu e fro m thes e improvisations int o th e play , however , Herber t refused . Hi s response , combined wit h Luscombe's increasin g dissatisfaction with th e realis m of the piec e an d th e 'cursin g an d swearin g tha t mean t n o mor e tha n i t said,'1 gave rise to an atmosphere of tension in the theatre - tensio n tha t was only heightened b y the silent, morose presenc e of Jack Winter during rehearsals. In November, t o assess the progres s o f their work, the compan y staged a week of unpaid an d unreviewe d previews. 2 Following one o f these, Winter and Luscombe retired t o a pub, where Winter persuaded hi s colleague

66 Harlequi n in Hogtow n that the work was taking the company in the wrong direction an d tha t h e could do a better job o f adaptation. Whe n Luscomb e told Herbert he was turning the script over to Winter, Herbert threatene d t o sue the company if the y use d an y o f hi s work . Undeterred , Luscomb e decide d t o scra p everything they had don e so far and star t anew. The ne w version, which he an d Winte r produce d wit h th e actor s over the next six weeks, proved t o be one o f the company's most radical exper iments. Nanc y Jowsey redesigned th e costume s an d propertie s i n a non realistic style , an d Luscomb e an d Winte r brok e u p an d rearrange d th e sequence o f th e scenes . Wherea s previousl y they ha d see n Woyzec k in political terms as the victim of social oppression, no w they became preoc cupied b y the theme s of sexual passion an d jealousy. What emerged fro m the ne w improvisation s wa s a serie s o f startlin g sexua l image s ofte n expressed i n animalistic symbolism. To link these images , Luscombe an d Winter employe d a circu s moti f reminiscen t o f He y Rube!, alternatin g scenes fro m Buchner' s pla y wit h carnivalesqu e episode s i n wha t the y called 'Lecher y Fair. ' Character s were sometime s transforme d int o pu p pets or animals, and th e seductio n o f Marie by the Majo r was presented a s the matin g dance of a couple of birds. The play , now calle d Th e Death o f Woyzeck, finall y opene d o n 9 January 1965 and playe d three nights a week to almost universall y mystified audi ences. Man y found the vision o f the production , th e world as freak show, unduly bleak an d faile d to grasp th e satire . Luscombe ha d onc e agai n i n his own mind associated th e Doctor' s treatmen t o f Woyzeck with the hor rors o f th e Naz i scientifi c experiment s o n Jew s i n th e concentratio n camps. But he refuse d t o explain thi s in program notes , feelin g that th e play had t o communicate on it s own terms. That it failed t o do s o is, perhaps, scarcely surprising. Many of the scenes , such as those i n the tavern, which ha d give n s o much humanit y an d colou r t o th e first version, had been eliminated . I n thei r place , Luscomb e ha d introduce d actio n tha t was a s far fro m simpl e realis m a s imaginable . I n som e cases , h e woul d have an acto r ste p outsid e a role t o act as circus barker, commenting o n the action s o f othe r characters . A t othe r times , h e experimente d wit h sound an d movemen t in an almost abstract way. Some of these novelties intrigued th e critics. Ronald Evans found 'quite brilliant' a moment when 'the whole company forms a chorus o f creaks, peeps, groan s an d hiccup s whil e th e her o bounce s tentativel y up an d down on th e stage.' He also praised Yvonne Adalian and Larry Perkins for their 'ma d mating dance' and Victoria Mitchell for her 'marvellou s mime interpretation o f a skitteris h performing horse. ' Bu t he objecte d t o th e

Collaborative Creation II: Woyzeck and The Golem 67 fact tha t 'non e o f thes e impressiv e turn s doe s a thin g t o advanc e th e action o r revea l character. ' H e compare d th e production , whic h h e described a s 'a n enormou s torren t o f bafflin g word s an d bewilderin g action,' t o a modern painting , lashed an d spattere d wit h dark stream s of colour, giving an immediate impact but defyin g patter n o r purpose. 3 Like Evans, Natha n Cohe n admire d certai n aspect s o f the productio n - th e fusion o f mime and erotic a i n Victoria Mitchell's astronomical horse, th e carnival setting , an d th e physica l virtuosity and vigou r of the actors . But, as a committed socialist, he objected t o the fatalis m of the piece, which he described a s an 'amorphous , chichi dirge of resignation.'4 If Toronto critic s familiar wit h Luscombe' s work were perplexed , out of-town journalist s wer e totall y baffled . Th e Montrea l criti c Do n Bel l thought th e productio n a n exampl e o f the absurdit y 'abstraction i n th e theatre ha s le d u s [to]. ' Apparentl y quite unfamilia r with (o r unsympathetic to ) experimenta l movement s in European theatr e i n the twentieth century, Bel l though t th e cas t ha d no t memorize d th e line s an d wa s improvising them during performance. In spite of, or perhaps because of, his incomprehension , however , Bell give s a vivid accoun t o f th e styl e o f the production : 'A s th e pla y opens , seve n figures , fou r mal e an d thre e female, tro t out on the stage. To the background o f regimental marching music, the y chirp lik e birds, squeal, grunt, perfor m shor t eroti c dances , assume variou s yoga-like positions, sometime s mak e utterance s o n th e predicament o f mankind. But every scrap of dialogue is an isolated entity , bearing little or no communio n with th e dialogue immediatel y before o r after it.' 3 Only Herbert Whittaker retained fait h i n Luscombe's theatrical investigations, comparin g hi s developmen t t o tha t o f Ingma r Bergma n i n hi s 'extraordinarily persona l grou p o f films.' He recognize d that , i n suc h a 'vivid, non-representationa l creatio n fo r th e stage, ' 'sequenc e mean s nothing, atmosphere an d satirica l comment ar e all.' H e als o understoo d that th e styl e mad e n o concession s to th e audienc e an d recognize d tha t the spectator s woul d hav e foun d i t easie r t o follo w th e pla y i f they ha d been give n a roug h outlin e o f th e plot . Bu t while Whittaker also found the evenin g puzzling and fel t tha t h e misse d th e significanc e of some of the stag e imager y an d dialogue , h e though t i t ' a fascinatin g world i n which t o dip. ' Fa r fro m dismissin g Luscombe' s effort s a s pervers e o r wrong-headed, Whittake r though t tha t Th e Death o f Woyzeck showe d th e director 'a t hi s most creative, most integrated an d mos t experimental ... our only true experimentalist.' 6 When the 1964-5 season ended in mid-April, the company immediately

68 Harlequi n in Hogtown began workin g to develop new plays for its repertoire. This time, however, instead o f basing their improvisation s on a n existin g script the y resolved to explor e thei r ow n concerns an d t o le t th e shap e o f the wor k emerg e naturally fro m thos e explorations . Ver y soon th e difficultie s inheren t i n such a method becam e apparent . Chie f among the m wa s the conflicting interests o f th e variou s partie s involved . Winter, a Jew, was intrigued b y prejudice an d it s intimate connectio n wit h religion ; Luscombe , equally fascinated wit h anti-semitism , o f whic h h e ha d see n plent y i n th e Eas t York of his childhood, tende d t o be mor e intereste d i n th e politica l tha n the religious dimensions of the problem. 7 The actors , disturbed b y stories of bigotry and rac e riot s from th e American South an d b y Western intervention i n Vietnam, wanted t o trac e th e root s o f violence and racis m in their ow n huma n nature . No t surprisingly , the compan y improvisation s began t o move in differen t directions . On e o f these too k th e actor s t o an examination o f class. Improvisations focused o n a steambath, one o f th e few place s where prejudic e base d o n clothin g an d statu s doe s no t exist . The steambat h suggeste d t o som e th e horror s o f the Naz i deat h camps , where prisoner s wer e lured t o their deat h wit h the fals e reassuranc e tha t they were simpl y being take n fo r a shower, and le d t o improvisation s on the holocaust . Th e ide a o f prejudic e prompte d a consideratio n o f th e contempt bein g manifes t for 'Asiati c huma n beings ' b y white force s i n Vietnam. In a n effor t t o identif y mor e deepl y with th e 'enemy, ' th e com pany improvised scene s o f rural lif e involvin g singing songs and workin g in rice paddies. 8 Another directio n le d t o th e origin s o f religion. Th e actor s create d a primitive triba l society in which the childre n aske d th e elder s t o describ e the origi n o f life . Amon g th e creatio n myth s narrated wa s one dealin g with th e differentiatio n o f th e races : i t tol d ho w Go d ha d faile d i n hi s early attempt s t o mak e ma n fro m bake d clay ; onl y on hi s third attempt , after producin g a burnt blac k man an d a n undercooke d whit e man, di d God finally achieve his purpose - a golden-yellow human being . Another creation stor y was from Jewish folklore; it focused on th e makin g of a protector, a 'golem,' who would defend th e Jews against their enemies . Grad ually, these tw o stories were combined int o a series of ritualistic quests for the purifie d ingredients (earth , air, fire, and water) necessar y for the con struction o f a defending champion. Th e various elements becam e identi fied with differen t kind s of movement as expressed throug h th e 'efforts. ' Individual actor s woul d lea d th e improvisation s o f th e separat e quests , sometimes wit h genuin e enthusias m but ofte n wit h n o understandin g o f where the exercise wa s leading.9

Collaborative Creation II : Woyzeck an d Th e Golem 6 9 While Luscomb e stimulate d th e performers , providin g a contex t fo r their work , Winter would make notes of the actors ' improvise d dialogue . But a s th e week s wen t by , th e proces s seeme d t o brea k down . A s Luscombe subsequentl y explained, 'Th e writin g not onl y faile d t o kee p u p with the work on stage, but ever y attempt t o extend th e work of the actor s into languag e failed.' 10 Whe n i t becam e apparen t tha t th e company' s efforts were going nowhere, Luscombe decided t o abandon th e project in order to prepar e Th e Mechanic and Before Compiègne for a two-week season in the par k at Stratford. It was 1966, almos t a year, before Luscomb e an d Winte r could resum e their explorator y work , and whe n the y di d i t wa s with a n entirel y new company. Mos t of the member s o f the first professional group had lef t a t the en d o f th e 1965- 6 seaso n eithe r i n disillusionmen t or i n a mov e t o fresh theatrica l pasture s suc h a s th e newl y create d Neptun e Theatr e i n Halifax. Their departure had necessitate d th e auditioning and trainin g of a whol e ne w company o f actors , who ha d t o b e rehearse d i n th e reper toire fo r th e 196 6 'Theatre-in-the-Park ' seaso n i n Stratford . Unde r pres sure from the Canad a Council, that season was supposed t o include a new play. To give shape t o the material developed th e previous spring, Luscombe and Winte r decided t o us e th e tria l scene fro m Th e Merchant o f Venice as a foundation. I n constructin g thei r ow n play about commerc e an d preju dice, however , the y altere d thei r sourc e i n th e sam e wa y they ha d dis torted th e plot s o f Molière' s L'amour médecin an d Buchner' s Woyzeck. Antonio, the merchant , became a poor tailor; Shylock, the moneylender , was reduced t o an indigen t pawnbroker; and th e Duk e of Venice became a spokesma n fo r th e city' s commercial interests . Portia , i n additio n t o being th e chie f prosecutor o f Shylock, became a champion o f the Chris tian church . Int o th e Shakespearea n framework , Winte r introduced tw o Jewish rabbis , representin g Easter n an d Wester n Judaism, alon g with th e story of the golem . Winter though t o f the pla y as a companion piec e t o Before Compiègne (i t was set at about th e sam e time) and a s a vehicle for his own sardonic views about th e hypocris y of religion s an d th e triump h o f nake d self-interest . But Luscomb e wa s primarily interested i n th e theatricalit y of th e piec e and resolut e tha t it should not become a soapbox. Indeed , so determined was Luscombe on this point that the lines were sometimes cut to the poin t where they were obscure eve n to the actors. Those who sought out Winter for clarificatio n of his intention ha d t o do s o in secre t t o avoid offending Luscombe, wh o woul d have been furiou s if he ha d known. " As the pla y

70 Harlequi n i n Hogtown took shape , Nancy Jowsey helped t o establish th e ton e o f the productio n through he r fancifu l designs . Sh e devise d a sort o f fairy-tale setting con sisting o f a hug e boo k wit h elasti c page s fro m whic h th e character s entered into the play. The stag e was strewn with large children's alphabet ical blocks , and th e costume s suggeste d a combination o f Mother Goos e and oute r space . ^Characteristic of Jowsey's work was a witty use of materials, suc h a s meta l po t scrubber s a s wigs . The ton e o f th e whol e was underlined b y the incorporatio n o f nursery rhymes sung to the accompa niment of a glockenspiel. The play , entitled simpl y Th e New Show, premiered i n Stratfor d o n 1 6 July 1966 . Critica l respons e wa s mixed. Natha n Cohe n though t th e com pany by far the stronges t an d mos t personable Luscomb e ha d eve r assembled. H e welcome d wha t h e sa w a s a mov e awa y fro m a 'misguide d theatricality' an d credite d Winter' s influenc e fo r th e company' s 'fres h awareness o f th e valu e o f language. ' H e fel t Th e New Show was th e firs t work since Hey Rube! to have a 'genuinely radical temper.' 13 Work on Th e New Show was discontinued followin g the Stratfor d seaso n while the compan y mounted a revival of Hey Rube! to open its 1966-7 season. Onc e tha t pla y wa s launched , however , Luscomb e an d Winte r returned t o the production , whic h both fascinate d an d baffle d them . I n Stratford, on e o f the highlight s of the pla y had bee n Len Doncheff s performance a s the rathe r feckles s tailor , Antonio. Whe n Donchef f left th e company in th e fall , instea d o f recasting th e rol e a s written, Winter an d Luscombe transforme d th e par t int o tha t o f Antonio's widow and gav e it to Milo Ringham. Winter's bitterl y ironi c vie w o f religio n i s communicated i n th e pla y by a serie s o f outrageou s paradoxes . H e intersperse s scene s derive d from Shakespear e wit h other s recountin g th e creatio n o f a gole m b y two of Shylock's visiting friends, Rabbi Joseph, fleein g fro m th e Spanis h Inquisition, an d Rabb i Gerontius , a wealth y Jew fro m Constantinople . When new s o f thei r succes s i n creatin g th e powerfu l defende r reache s the court , Porti a an d th e Magnific o (standin g i n fo r Shakespeare' s Duke) joi n i n th e enterpris e fo r thei r ow n benefit . Th e discussio n among thes e fou r abou t ho w thei r new-mad e Frankenstei n shoul d b e used constitute s a bitter satir e o n th e wa y in which self-interes t and real politik subver t ideology . Rabb i Joseph wishe s to emplo y th e gole m t o destroy th e Inquisition , whil e th e Christia n Porti a propose s t o se t u p her ow n secular Inquisitio n in Venice, with the gole m a s Grand Inquisi tor, t o destro y th e foreig n investor s wh o threate n t o undermin e Ven ice's commercia l supremacy . Sh e als o suggest s tha t th e destructiv e

Collaborative Creation II : Woyzeck an d Th e Golem 7 1 power o f th e gole m migh t b e teste d b y directing i t a t th e Jewish ghett o in what she describes a s a 'slum clearing project. ' A problem tha t plague d th e developmen t o f th e wor k was uncertainty about th e symboli c significance of the gole m itself , though t o f in genera l terms as a force for good or evil which ultimately turns against its creators. Originally associate d wit h mone y o r th e economi c system , i t graduall y became identifie d with nuclear power . Relativel y late i n rehearsals , Winter an d Luscomb e introduce d broadcas t speeche s o f th e America n nuclear physicis t J. Robert Oppenheimer an d Genera l Groves of the Manhattan projec t t o lin k th e creatio n o f the gole m wit h the buildin g of th e atom bomb . When Th e Golem of Venice finally opened i n Toronto on 1 7 March 1967 , it attracte d littl e attention . Onl y Herber t Whittake r fro m th e majo r papers attende d the première, an d he found the revised production a disappointment. 'On e sense s a schism, ' h e wrote , 'betwee n directoria l an d writing achievement. Sometimes the playwrigh t and directo r see m almos t in oppositio n .. . One wishe s Winter woul d trus t hi s audience mor e an d allow th e play' s perspectiv e - linkin g hi s Venice an d ou r worl d - t o develop withou t th e electroni c nudg e [o f speeche s throug h th e loud speakers] . His writing is already so staccato an d involute d tha t we would welcome mor e opportunit y t o concentrat e o n it.' 14 H e dislike d what h e called th e 'bodiles s documentar y commentary ' derive d fro m Oppenhei mer's writings and testimon y and faile d t o se e (o r a t leas t comment on ) the relationshi p i t implie d betwee n Hiroshim a an d th e holocaust . Th e general publi c was equally puzzled; most spectator s fel t tha t th e passio n which lay behind th e work had no t been moulde d int o a coherent form . The experienc e o f working on th e developmen t o f Th e Golem o f Venice had bee n somethin g o f a strain o n al l members o f the company . Under pressure, Luscombe could be demanding an d ruthless. His obsession with the work often made him oblivious to the concerns an d feelings of others, with th e resul t tha t h e frequently , though unintentionally , gave offence and cause d suffering . During th e lon g gestation perio d o f Th e Golem, ten sions betwee n Luscomb e an d th e actors , an d eve n mor e betwee n Lus combe an d Winter , ha d reache d suc h a poin t tha t b y the en d o f th e process Luscomb e an d Winte r were scarcely speaking t o one another . In the spring , Winter announced tha t he was leaving the company , and Luscombe realize d h e would have to find other ways of forging drama ou t of the disparate element s o f gesture and language .

9

The Searc h fo r Audience s

A parado x o f Luscombe' s metho d o f creatin g play s was tha t whil e h e steadily professed an interest in reaching a popular o r working-class audience, his style of theatre effectivel y preclude d hi s doing so. However vehemently he might insist on the political orientation o f his work, the fact was that th e immediat e relevanc e o f th e play s wa s sometime s opaque . I f Nathan Cohe n coul d appreciat e th e 'radica l temper' o f Th e Golem of Venice, th e majorit y o f spectator s wh o sa t through tha t obscur e productio n were a t a los s to se e a connectio n betwee n it s convoluted narrativ e an d stereotypical characters and thei r ow n lives. The ver y experimental tech niques tha t appeale d t o sophisticate d theatr e lover s an d left-leanin g intellectuals prove d a n obstacl e t o th e cultivatio n of a genuinel y untutored public. It is an irony of history that, like Meyerhold and Vakhtangov, the Russia n experimentalists he admired , Luscomb e was to be overshad owed in the 1970 s by Canada's ow n version of socialist realism. The declin e of TWP was many years in the future , bu t ther e were some who foresa w th e dange r i n th e mid-sixties . Although Natha n Cohe n ha d the highes t hopes for the company , he fel t tha t it was failing t o realize its potential. 'N o other organization in Canada, ' Cohe n wrote , 'i s as fundamentally political in the broa d sense. I f it took hol d .. . it could becom e a truly liberating force. It could open up a vast new world of experience fo r a genuinel y new audience [and ] .. . force th e playgoe r t o reexamin e hi s society and its values.'1 He felt that TWP should be going into areas where people wer e unaware of theatre; the y should be organizing regular meet ings and exhibition s or mounting 'prickl y new interpretations o f the classics.' Instead , th e compan y seemed t o Cohe n t o be drawin g 'virtually all of it s support fro m th e peopl e [they ] leas t want to reach : tha t slive r of middle clas s Torontonians o f th e professiona l an d academi c class , who

The Searc h fo r Audiences 7 3 always go to the theatr e an d who are ever ready to cheer what seems to be socially or aesthetically revolutionary so long as it is rarefied and no t pub lically dangerous.' Luscomb e was all too awar e of the problem , but i t was not a s easily resolved as Cohen implied . The difficult y wa s getting th e proper people into th e prope r setting. It was not simpl y a matter o f taking plays into a working-class environment. Luscombe ha d turne d down the opportunity to set up a union-sponsored theatre t o tou r factorie s fo r th e sam e reason s tha t Ewa n MacCol l ha d abandoned performin g a t factor y gates : i t wa s impossible t o creat e th e requisite circle of enchantment in suc h uncontrolle d circumstances . He had t o acknowledge, however, that he had failed to attract a working-class audience int o his theatre a t 47 Fraser Avenue. He had discovered , as Joan Littlewood ha d befor e him , tha t movin g into a working-class neighbourhood does not guarantee tha t the locals will come to your door. The company' s mos t consisten t effor t t o reac h ne w audience s too k place i n Stratford , wher e TW P organize d a serie s o f summe r program s which the y called 'Theatre-in-the-Park. ' Th e pla n was launched o n a trial basis in July 1964, with two performances o f Before Compiègne given free o f charge befor e a n audience of passersby not fa r from th e Festiva l Theatre . The experimen t prove d successfu l enoug h t o encourag e Luscomb e t o undertake a more extende d progra m th e followin g year. In January 1965 , Brooky Robins began makin g enquiries about rentin g th e Avo n Theatr e for th e purpose . Th e negotiation s were unsuccessful, bu t followin g a suggestion b y the Stratfor d Festival general manager , Victor Policy, the company secured th e us e of the Se a Cadet building on th e shor e of the Avo n River. Meanwhile, Nanc y Jowsey began t o conside r th e proble m o f ho w t o mark out a suitable playing space for the performances. Takin g her inspiration fro m primitiv e 'boot h stages, ' Jowsey created a comple x o f three small ten t pavilions with scalloped fringe s and flutterin g pennant s which could provide entrances to, and a background for , an open playin g space. The stag e itsel f was a platform raised abou t tw o feet of f the ground , pro viding sufficien t heigh t fo r th e actor s t o b e easil y see n b y the audience , seated i n stacking chairs on th e surrounding grass. The whole design ha d a distinctly medieval or fairground atmosphere appropriat e t o Before Compiègneand th e commedi a dell'arte character o f Th e Mechanic. In spite of their gay pavilion theatre, however , TPWs first Stratford season prove d les s successful tha n the y had hoped . Th e weathe r was unseasonably damp (tw o performances ha d t o b e calle d of f because o f rain) , and audience s wer e smal l (averagin g onl y abou t twent y spectator s pe r

74 Harlequi n in Hogtown performance). 2 Som e o f the actor s disliked playing outdoors, feeling that the inevitabl e distractions of busy park lif e mad e a profitable actor-audience relationship impossible . The combination o f inclement weather and indifferent crowd s proved fata l t o the theatre' s hopes , and th e season lost a considerable amoun t of money.3 Following the financia l failur e of their 196 5 Theatre-in-the-Park season , TWP approache d Victo r Polic y wit h a reques t tha t th e Festiva l include information abou t thei r outdoo r performance s with the regular Stratford promotional material . Policy and th e artisti c director, Michae l Langham, agreed to distribute TWP's material along with their own and even undertook t o sel l ticket s to thei r production s throug h th e Festiva l box office . Luscombe therefor e ha d ever y reaso n t o fee l optimisti c about th e pros pects for the nex t season, which he schedule d t o run fo r four weeks. The compan y that assemble d i n Stratfor d i n July 196 6 was one o f th e strongest Luscombe had developed . Mos t of the actors stayed in the Fryfo gel Inn , nea r th e villag e of Shakespeare, bu t som e mad e othe r arrange ments. Le n Donchef f slep t i n th e ten t unti l forbidde n t o d o s o b y th e Stratford park s board, an d Dougla s Livingston played piano and orga n a t the Dominio n Hote l t o hel p subsidiz e hi s accommodatio n there . Luscombe, his wife, Mona , and thei r tw o small daughters slep t in a trailer in the park . During the summer , they were visited by members of a local circus, who were so impressed by Doncheff s performance a s Pandro i n Hey Rube! that the y invited him t o tak e part i n thei r show. 4 In man y respects, that Stratfor d seaso n seeme d lik e th e culminatio n o f th e company' s efforts, th e final justification of what they were trying to do . The actor s gave two performances a day, at eleven in th e mornin g an d two-thirty in th e afternoon , bu t da y after da y most o f the thre e hundre d chairs they had rented fro m the board of education remaine d empty . The promotion o f the productions throug h th e Festival' s mailing list had pro duced n o more tha n fifteen ticket s per performance in advance sales. The company's own publicity had bee n curtailed, partly through lac k of fund s and partl y becaus e June Faulkne r wa s not abl e t o hel p ou t durin g th e summer. Nanc y Jowsey, i n additio n t o he r responsibilitie s a s designer , doubled a s publicist. On day s when Th e Mechanic was performed, Douglas Livingston trie d t o attrac t attentio n o n hi s wa y to th e ten t theatr e b y riding a child's tricycle through th e par k wit h hi s tuba o n hi s back. Th e jaunty pavilion and th e gail y costumed actor s attracted crowd s of curious children an d contemptuou s motorcycl e gangs, bu t relativel y few paying customers. B y the en d o f the season , includin g the thre e morning s they had bee n raine d out , Mon a Luscombe, a s box-office manager, reporte d

The Searc h fo r Audiences 7 5 total sale s o f 2,558 , o r a n averag e o f 1 7 pe r cen t attendance . Agains t income o f $4,303, sh e recorde d expense s o f over $7,000 , s o that th e los s on th e summer operatio n wa s almost $3,000 . Disappointed bu t stil l convince d o f th e long-rang e valu e o f th e Strat ford season , Luscomb e resolve d t o exten d th e progra m t o si x weeks the following year. But developments prio r t o their openin g highlighte d how crucially important i t is for a company to have complete contro l ove r th e environment i n whic h i t plays . Whe n TW P bega n negotiation s fo r th e 1967 season, the y were tol d tha t th e Se a Cadet buildin g by the rive r was unavailable, and i n spit e of interventions on th e company' s behalf by Victor Polic y th e park s boar d faile d t o com e u p wit h a suitabl e alternative. The onl y building the y were abl e t o ren t wa s the Optimis t Clu b House , located clos e t o th e Exhibitio n Hal l o n Nil e Street. 5 As a result , TWP's 'Theatre-in-the-Park' wa s reduced t o something more lik e a theatre i n th e parking lot. The Optimis t Club refused t o grant the m permissio n to operate a coffee sho p o n th e premises , and th e board of education tol d the m that th e chair s the y ha d rente d i n the pas t would not b e available. Noise from passin g car s and motorcycles , dust from th e road , an d rai n al l contributed t o a disastrou s season . I n a final reckoning, June Faulkne r estimated that , in th e thre e year s they had playe d i n Stratford, th e compan y had los t close to $15,000.6 Clearly, the attempt t o reach a new audience in Stratford ha d bee n a failure. Much more successful wer e the company's efforts t o arrange fo r performances fo r young people i n Toronto itself . Luscomb e ha d attempte d t o interest th e Cit y of Toronto Department o f Parks and Recreatio n in spon soring performances b y the compan y as early as 1963, bu t i t was not until three years later, in 1966 , tha t tha t bod y finally agreed t o underwrite two free performance s i n Natha n Phillip s Square , i n fron t o f th e ne w Cit y Hall. The firs t o f these, a performance o f Hey Rube!, took place o n a Sunday afternoon , o n th e stag e designe d fo r Stratford , befor e a n estimate d fifteen hundred spectators. 7 In that setting , much o f the play' s drama go t lost in th e vas t acoustical voids of the plaza , but th e Star critic Arthur Zeldin fel t th e 'play' s theatricality gleamed lik e a jewel.'8 The succes s of the publi c performance s convince d Luscomb e tha t th e audience h e wa s trying t o reac h existe d i f onl y h e coul d fin d a wa y to bring the m t o his plays. But getting Mohammed t o come t o the mountai n seemed eve n mor e difficul t tha n movin g th e mountai n t o Mohammed . Nor was the natur e o f the difficult y a t all obvious. The Frase r Avenue theatre ha d man y disadvantages. I t was small and ding y and fa r from the centre o f th e city . Nevertheless , th e compan y ha d no t don e significantl y

76 Harlequi n in Hogtown better busines s in th e ne w Colonnade Theatre , locate d i n th e very heart of fashionabl e Toronto . Increasingly , however , th e limitation s o f 4 7 Fraser Avenue were being brought home to Luscombe and his colleagues. The Canad a Counci l had expresse d concer n abou t th e modest audienc e figures th e theatr e ha d reported , an d wa s beginning t o suggest that continued suppor t woul d depend o n th e expansio n o f that audience. 9 It was daily becomin g mor e apparen t tha t th e compan y would ultimately have to find a larger, more centrall y located theatre . Accordingly, Luscomb e an d Jun e Faulkne r bega n t o scou r th e city . They looked at several warehouses, one or two churches, and a synagogue on Spadin a Avenu e that appeale d t o Luscomb e becaus e o f the workingclass histor y o f th e area. 10 The n Faulkne r remembere d watchin g a rehearsal of the Canadia n Player s in a building off Yonge Street nort h o f Garitón an d too k Luscomb e to loo k a t it . Originally a hardware store , i t had bee n cu t u p int o 'studio ' space s b y temporar y partitions . I f thes e could b e cleare d out , the spac e availabl e would be just adequat e fo r th e construction of a stage and smal l auditorium, with cramped bu t adequat e dressing-room facilitie s a t th e rear . It s location - 1 2 Alexander Street , between the high-tone d ambience of Carman's restaurant to the east and the burgeoning sex shops and body-rub parlours of the Yonge Street strip - wa s ideal. Wha t bette r plac e - jus t a musket-sho t fro m th e hom e of William Lyo n Mackenzie - t o conduct a theatrical campaig n agains t the bastions of power and privilege? Sitting in Luscombe's car outside the building on a September evenin g in 1967 , Luscombe and Faulkner considered thei r alternatives. The Coun cil's support ha d bee n contingen t o n thei r finding a larger theatre , an d their experienc e a t 47 Fraser Avenue reinforced thei r opinio n tha t they could no t surviv e an d gro w i n suc h smal l quarters. O f course , the y ha d absolutely n o mone y - bu t tha t mean t the y ha d nothin g t o lose . S o although the y ha d n o ide a wher e the y would fin d th e necessar y funds , they hesitated onl y briefly before deciding to take out a lease.11 Next, they had t o consider th e desig n o f the ne w space. Luscombe had become full y committe d to the thrus t stage, but fe w architects or builders had experienc e wit h suc h theatres . The n the y remembered Geral d Rob inson, wh o ha d designe d th e Colonnad e Theatre . Robinso n expresse d great interest in the project, and he agreed t o design th e theatre for nothing i n consultatio n wit h Luscomb e an d John Faulkner . Preliminary estimates indicate d tha t th e cos t o f th e undertakin g woul d b e i n th e neighbourhood o f $25,000. At th e en d o f November, John Faulkne r began dismantlin g th e parti -

The Searc h fo r Audiences 7 7 tions in th e Alexande r Street buildin g in preparatio n fo r redesignin g its interior. B y 2 December, he and hi s crew had cleare d th e warehouse back to it s walls t o revea l a cavernou s spac e covere d b y a steel-trusse d roof . With th e hel p o f th e architect , th e compan y located a contracto r who , once h e ha d ascertaine d tha t TWP was supported b y government grants, was willing t o procee d wit h th e wor k without an initia l down payment . The desig n calle d fo r a n ope n stag e backe d b y tw o levels o f dressingrooms on one side and a costume room on the other. In front o f the stage would be a steeply raked se t of bleacher-like seats with th e tw o ends ben t around th e thrus t stage . Tw o control booth s wer e t o b e buil t int o th e upper corner s o f the auditoriu m fro m whic h soun d an d ligh t operator s would hav e a ful l vie w of the stage . In wha t had a t on e tim e been a windowed showroo m at the front of the building, the architect had designe d a bo x office , tw o public washrooms, and a n administrativ e office fo r th e theatre staff. 12 Work on the renovations to 12 Alexander Street proceede d at a hecti c pac e throug h December . John Faulkne r pu t i n twelve - an d fourteen-hour days , runnin g th e lightin g fo r th e productio n a t Frase r Avenue a t nigh t an d labourin g throug h th e da y to ge t th e ne w theatr e ready fo r a n openin g i n lat e December . Meanwhile , the actor s wer e spending equally long hours rehearsing th e second productio n o f the season. Had member s o f the compan y had leisur e to reflect o n thei r situation, they migh t have been struc k b y a numbe r o f paradoxes. I n man y Canadian cities , such a s Vancouver, Winnipeg, and Halifax , theatre wa s thriving. Th e Vancouve r Playhous e ha d som e si x thousand subscriber s an d had jus t opene d Georg e Ryga' s highly successful Th e Ecstasy o f Rita Joe; Winnipeg's Manitob a Theatr e Centr e continue d t o attrac t stron g sup port for its program an d ha d include d Ann Henry' s Lulu Street in its Centennial yea r schedule ; Halifax' s Neptune Theatr e wa s touring Canad a with a highl y acclaimed productio n o f Synge' s Th e Playboy o f th e Western World an d a les s admired Canadia n pla y by Arthur Murph y entitled Th e Sleeping Bag. Elsewhere, Canadian dramatist s were receiving new recognition, partly through th e requiremen t tha t the 196 7 Dominion Drama Festival b e mad e u p entirel y o f Canadia n play s an d partl y throug h th e production o f a Centennia l play sponsored b y th e Centennia l Commission. By contrast, the situatio n i n Toronto was chaotic. A variety of amateur and semi-professiona l companie s compete d fo r th e theatr e space s avail able, an d al l thos e i n differen t way s seeme d eithe r inadequat e o r unaf fordable. Th e O'Keef e Centr e an d th e Roya l Alexandra Theatr e wer e

78 Harlequi n i n Hogtown booked almos t entirel y by imported productions ; medium-size d theatres such as the Crest and th e Bayview Playhouse stood empt y as the combine d Crest-Canadian Player s organizatio n trie d t o resurrec t itsel f fro m th e ashes of its financial collapse ; pocket theatres such as the Colonnade , th e Poor Alex , th e Centra l Library , and th e Hydr o Theatr e playe d hos t t o assorted, usuall y short-lived, producing organizations . Fresh fro m a trip t o Europe, where he ha d foun d cities of comparabl e size supportin g thre e an d fou r professiona l theatres , Natha n Cohe n was struck ane w by the shortag e o f theatr e facilitie s i n Canada' s mos t popu lous an d prosperou s English-speakin g city. Becaus e o f thi s shortage , h e complained, th e cit y had misse d out o n man y of the attraction s available during th e Centennia l year, includin g tourin g production s b y the Nep tune, Théâtr e d u Nouvea u Monde , Holida y Theatre , an d Rolan d Peti t Ballet a s well a s th e Manitob a Theatr e Centre' s productio n o f Brecht' s Galileo.13 The shortag e wa s compounded b y the destructio n by fire of th e Hydro Theatre i n August and b y the protracte d deliberation s of the Tor onto Arts Foundation, which continued t o mire th e S t Lawrence Centr e for th e Arts in controversies and delay . Conceived a s a Centennial project to hous e a world-class repertory company , th e Centr e wa s still tw o years from completion . In th e atmospher e o f uncertainty, jealousy, and competin g aesthetic s which was the Toronto theatre scene , Luscombe stood alone . H e had created a full y professiona l company o f som e twent y member s who m h e employed betwee n fort y an d fifty-two weeks a year ; h e ha d introduce d Toronto theatre-goer s t o a n entirel y new repertoire, Canadia n a s well as European; and h e ha d a very clear notion o f the rol e h e though t theatr e should pla y in lif e an d th e wa y TWP would fill that role . H e als o ha d a growing sens e o f alienatio n fro m th e mainstrea m an d a convictio n tha t whenever th e S t Lawrenc e Centr e wa s completed, TW P woul d no t b e asked to be the resident company. As December dre w to a close, therefore, it became increasingl y imperative in Luscombe's min d t o make a gesture tha t would establish the pres ence and th e nature o f his company. The newl y formed Theatre Toronto under it s imported artisti c director, Cliffor d Williams , was preparing t o launch its first season i n the Roya l Alex. It had chose n a s its opening pro duction a n Englis h version of a Canadian pla y written in Frenc h b y Jean Basile about lif e i n eighteenth-centur y Quebe c entitled Th e Drummer Boy. Resolved to upstage th e ne w manifestation of what he expecte d woul d be nothing but a reincarnation o f traditional, British-inspired , colonial Tor onto theatre , Luscomb e determine d t o ope n hi s ow n ne w sho w before

The Searc h fo r Audiences 7 9 the end o f the year. Construction continue d throug h Christma s week, but by 30 December th e theatr e wa s still not finished . Nevertheless , Luscombe led hi s actor s int o th e incomplet e facilities , wher e o n Ne w Year's Eve, 1967, the y gave their first performance i n what was to be thei r permanen t home.

10

Political Entertainment: Mr Bones

It was a smal l band o f loya l follower s wh o struggle d throug h on e o f th e worst snowstorm s of th e winte r to atten d th e Ne w Year's Eve preview at Toronto Workshop Productions' ne w theatre. Pickin g their wa y through a stil l unfinishe d lobby , spectator s mounte d a fligh t o f step s whic h brought the m t o th e to p o f a steepl y rake d auditorium . Th e seatin g extended th e ful l widt h of th e auditoriu m an d wa s arranged i n a three segmented ar c aroun d a protruding thrus t stage. N o curtai n o r prosce nium arch separated th e playing space from the auditorium, so the actor s and audienc e share d th e sam e overarchin g space . Th e gloo m o f th e black-painted auditoriu m wa s relieve d b y th e ligh t reflecte d fro m th e brightly coloure d setting , already in ful l vie w o n th e stage . Tha t settin g consisted o f an elevate d chair surrounded b y a number o f boxes painte d in red , white, and blu e stripes. As the audienc e grew quiet with anticipation, the y were suddenly assaulted b y the sound s o f guitars, banjos, an d tambourines a s the performer s surged ont o th e stag e i n a dazzling burst of colour and movement. 1 The productio n with which the company had chosen t o open their new theatre wa s called Gentlemen Be Seated, and i t was the resul t of nearly three years of collaborative effort goin g back to th e sprin g of 1965 . Inspire d by concern abou t th e Vietnam war, the arm s race, and th e civi l rights movement i n th e America n South , th e grou p ha d attempte d t o explor e th e roots o f rac e prejudice . Thei r improvisation s had focuse d o n tw o main areas, anti-semitism and th e hostilit y between whites and blacks . The first of thes e subject s had bee n develope d i n Th e Golem o f Venice; th e second , through severa l stages, in the present work - a sort of documentary-political-historical-minstrel show. Early i n th e evolutio n of th e work , Luscombe ha d decide d t o us e th e

Political Entertainment: M r Bones 8 1 American minstre l sho w as an informin g theatrical metaphor . Th e origi nal minstrel s wer e blac k troubadours , socia l outcast s wh o entertaine d their audience s wit h a combinatio n o f music and politica l commentary . The centra l character s i n ever y improvisation wer e Mr Tambo (th e mid dleman), M r Bone s (th e radical) , an d M r Jethro (th e conservative) . I n their skits , the y argue d curren t socia l o r politica l question s wit h a sar donic attitud e t o thei r self-appointe d friend s a s well a s to thei r acknowledged class enemies.2 White imitators of the minstrel s perverted it s original intention , reduc ing it to a hideous lampoo n i n which the blac k culture was caricatured by performers i n blac k face . The conventiona l for m o f thi s white minstrel show was a three-part sequenc e i n which crosstalk, music, and skit s alternated. Th e principa l rol e wa s played b y a central figur e calle d M r Inter locutor wh o acted a s master o f ceremonies, engage d i n comi c exchange s with tw o end men , M r Tambo an d M r Bones , an d generall y supervise d the res t o f the entertainers . Thi s hybri d form, one o f the fe w indigenous American theatrica l genres , seeme d th e perfec t vehicl e wit h whic h t o trace th e escalatin g violence of th e civi l right s movemen t t o it s roots i n the reconstructio n perio d following the Civi l War. The earlies t versio n o f th e pla y dre w parallel s betwee n th e characte r relationships i n th e conventiona l minstre l sho w an d th e histor y of th e Civil War . M r Interlocuto r becam e Abraha m Lincoln , an d th e minstrel s represented th e slav e populatio n o f th e South . I n th e earl y improvisations, a running plo t involvin g various scheme s o n th e par t o f a numbe r of assassins to do awa y with Lincoln was alternated wit h scenes of the Pres ident wit h hi s wife an d member s o f his cabinet. The origina l pla n calle d for th e actio n t o be confine d t o a single day, 1 4 April 1865 , durin g which Lincoln's activities would be trace d unti l his death a t Ford's Theatr e tha t evening. Thi s actio n woul d b e complemente d physicall y b y the gradua l construction durin g th e pla y of th e theatr e bo x i n which Lincoln would finally watch the show (the minstrels) and i n which he would be shot. Th e work was thought of , therefore, a s a self-referential structure in which the theatre itsel f brought togethe r 'rea l life ' an d it s distorted representatio n in a complex performanc e metaphor . Early in th e play' s evolution, however, it became apparen t tha t Winter and Luscomb e ha d differen t idea s abou t how the wor k shoul d b e developed. Winter's researches turne d u p a wealth o f interesting detail s about southern bigotr y and abou t th e lives of the majo r figures which he wanted to includ e i n th e story . Bu t Luscomb e wa s interested i n gettin g beyon d the privat e fate of the individual . Like Piscator, h e believe d that 'feeling s

82 Harlequi n in Hogtown must be pressed int o servic e as evidence t o support ou r worl d view.' 3 Luscombe foun d tha t th e mor e individualize d the character s became , th e more the y were confined t o their ow n period. Accordingly , he wanted t o shift th e focu s away from th e characters ' privat e lives and ont o the paral lels between th e assassinatio n of Lincoln and tha t o f President Kennedy . In tha t way, he hope d t o compel th e audienc e t o see the contemporar y relevance of the historica l events. By th e fal l o f 1966 , th e scrip t ha d reache d it s fina l for m a s a minstrel show wit h scene s dealin g alternatel y with th e scheme s o f th e assassin s and th e frustratio n o f thei r plot s throug h luc k o r accident . A seriou s weakness i n th e wor k wa s that i t provide d n o clea r motivatio n fo r th e assassination, which was presented no t a s the ac t of a demented individ ual bu t a s par t o f a mysteriou s conspirac y bein g directe d fro m abov e through rathe r crypti c sealed orders . No t improbably , th e developmen t of thes e scene s gre w ou t o f a convictio n o n th e par t o f th e write r an d director tha t histor y was a produc t o f economic force s rathe r tha n per sonal grievances . Bu t b y the tim e Winte r gav e u p wor k o n th e project , no satisfactor y way had bee n foun d t o lin k the operatio n o f those force s in 186 5 wit h thei r rol e i n th e civi l right s movemen t an d th e Kenned y assassination a hundre d year s later . Th e necessar y connectio n wa s provided by Jan Carew . On hi s return fro m Stratford in August 1967, Luscombe was anxious to find a replacemen t fo r Winter , wh o ha d resigne d i n th e sprin g o f tha t year. He arrange d a meeting with several writers interested i n working in the theatre . Amon g thos e wh o attende d a gatherin g a t hi s hous e wer e Tony Ferry, Len Peterson, Hugh Webster , Michael John Nimchuk, Austin Clark, and Jan Carew . Carew was a West Indian writer living and teachin g in Toronto wh o had establishe d a reputation a s a novelist. But he ha d little experienc e o f th e theatre , an d nothin g ha d prepare d hi m fo r hi s encounters wit h Luscombe and th e actors at TWP. Working with the materia l lef t b y Winter, Carew introduced th e figur e of Thaddeus Stevens , a radical Republica n wh o had advocate d sweepin g reforms following the defea t o f the Confederat e states . Arguing tha t free ing th e slave s would be futil e unles s the black s were give n th e mean s t o support themselves , Steven s advocate d th e confiscatio n an d redistribu tion o f souther n property . B y giving prominence t o Stevens' s opinions , Carew was able to portra y Lincol n as something of a reactionar y and to show mor e clearl y how his refusa l to tak e difficul t decision s in 186 5 ha d simply postponed th e inevitable. Thus, not peac e but escalating black violence was the rea l legac y of Lincoln's failure of nerve. B y implication, th e

Political Entertainment: Mr Bones 8 3 solution toda y was the sam e a s the solutio n the n - th e repudiatio n o f compromise an d th e final empowerment o f the blacks. Carew was totally taken abac k by the wa y in whic h his work was freel y adapted an d change d i n the proces s o f rehearsal. Luscombe' s techniqu e was to determine wha t a scene could no t d o without and the n eliminat e almost everything else.4 Sometimes this technique ha d th e virtue of tightening th e actio n an d prunin g unnecessar y exposition . Bu t Luscombe' s conviction tha t a n acto r wa s often th e mos t reliabl e guid e t o th e emo tional hear t o f a scene tende d t o distres s writers. It i s said tha t afte r th e opening-night performance , Care w was so angry at what had bee n don e to his script that he storme d int o th e TWP offic e an d tor e u p th e phon e book.5 Sometimes, Luscombe' s succes s i n makin g actio n spea k loude r tha n words was electrifying; h e could sum up i n a gesture o r sound what would seem laboure d o r to o explici t i n dialogue . A t other times , however, h e simply obscured th e meaning . Suc h was the cas e with the endin g o f this play. Presumably , th e assassinatio n o f Lincol n b y John Wilke s Booth , played b y a minstrel, was intended a s a kind of theatrical endorsatio n o f black militancy. In performance, however, the murde r was highly stylized. Instead o f being sho t in the bac k of the head , Lincol n was invited to join the minstrel s in their concluding dance. Whe n he did so, his place in th e box besid e Mr s Lincoln wa s taken b y a silen t and impassiv e Booth. Th e implied conversio n o f whit e libera l opinio n (Lincoln ) t o th e caus e o f black power was neatly symbolized by this bit of choreography . In th e sho w that finall y opene d a t 1 2 Alexander Stree t o n Ne w Year's Eve, th e acto r wh o playe d Mr Interlocutor an d Lincol n was dressed i n a black froc k coa t an d sa t centr e stag e durin g muc h o f th e actio n lik e a copy of the Lincol n Memorial. The minstrel s were dressed i n white jump suits decorated with black stars and stripe s and wore swirling half capes of black line d i n brigh t paste l colours . Thes e 'minstrels, ' non e o f whom wore black face, double d a s assassins or member s of Lincoln's entourag e by using the cape s a s skirts or reversin g the m t o revea l th e coloure d lining. Th e transformation s wer e accompanie d b y changes o f lightin g brightly coloured illuminatio n for the minstre l routines and a bare white work light for the conspirac y scenes. The compan y demonstrated considerable dexterit y i n thes e changes , bu t th e absence o f black fac e dimin ished the central theme o f racial conflict and seem s to have puzzled some spectators. Unfortunately, non e o f the majo r Toronto dram a critic s attended th e official openin g o f the play , on 1 0 January 1968 . Their substitutes, for th e

84 Harlequi n in Hogtown most part, were baffled b y the comple x political allegory (fo r which Luscombe and Carew had provided little explanation i n the house program). Jim McPherso n o f th e Telegram admitted quit e cheeril y that h e wa s 'less interested i n what the production ha d t o say than th e brilliant manner in which i t says it.' H e considere d th e performanc e ' a splendid exampl e of how music and drama, light and design , may be skilfully blended int o one splendidly evocative experience .. . infinitely mor e importan t and satisfac tory than what the playwrigh t is saying.'6 Not everyon e wa s so indifferen t t o th e ideas . Osca r Rya n speculate d that Gentlemen B e Seated probabl y represente d th e firs t tim e th e Negr o position in United States history had bee n examine d in a theatre through a Marxis t perspective. He considere d th e 'debunking ' o f Lincoln t o b e timely and usefu l i n helping audiences 'understand the force s which for a century have prepared today' s American crisis.' 7 The productio n ra n fo r four weeks, averaging about 32 per cen t attendance. While pleased , o n th e whole , with th e company' s first presentation i n their ne w home, Luscomb e wa s bothered b y thei r failur e t o brin g th e piece t o a satisfactor y conclusion . As Oscar Rya n ha d complained , th e play 'ends' bu t 'isn' t really over.' This was a continuing problem i n thei r work, related in part to their essentially exploratory method an d in part to their avoidanc e o f simpl e narrativ e forms . A premis e o f th e play , o f course, was that the assassinatio n of Lincoln was indeed no t a n en d bu t the beginning of the black revolution. Nevertheless, it was apparent fro m the response of critics and audienc e alike that the play had faile d t o make a strong connection betwee n th e event s of 1865 and th e conditio n o f the blacks i n Americ a today . Severa l month s later , Luscomb e sa w a wa y to make that connection clearer. The origina l cast of Gentlemen Be Seated was all white, and Luscomb e ha d deliberately avoided the use of black face for the production. Toward s th e end o f 1968 , however , two events coincide d whic h mad e i t possibl e fo r him t o re-examin e th e problem s o f the play . He hire d tw o black actors, Mel Dixon and Calvi n Butler, and h e invite d Jan Care w to return t o work with th e actor s to incorporate som e referenc e to contemporary black lif e into a revival of the play . Carew suggested introducin g tw o slavelike characters, Willi e an d Bush , representin g urba n an d rura l outlook s an d roughly parallel to th e Bones-Jethr o relationship of the origina l minstre l shows. The actor s began improvisin g around thi s idea, but neithe r Carew nor Luscomb e wa s clear abou t th e directio n i n whic h the y wanted th e work to go.8 In it s focus o n th e ideologica l conflic t between Lincol n and Thaddeu s

Political Entertainment: Mr Bones 8 5 Stevens, Gentlemen had condemne d th e half-hearte d policies of the recon struction perio d bu t ha d no t show n clearly enough thei r consequences . With tw o black actors i n the company , Luscombe wanted t o juxtapose th e real experienc e o f the black s with th e trivializatio n o f that experienc e b y the white s in th e minstre l show. The framewor k for th e juxtaposition h e wanted was in th e structur e o f the minstre l show itself. Traditionally, such entertainments were divided into three elements - th e chorus work of the minstrels, th e crosstal k betwee n M r Interlocuto r an d th e tw o end men , and th e 'olio, ' a small playlet, usually a crude farc e wit h a plot taken fro m a curtain-raise r from th e Englis h stage. Gentlemen had combine d th e first two of these t o create th e tw o worlds of the minstrel s and th e assassins . In his reworkin g of th e play , Luscomb e introduce d a thir d world , tha t o f contemporary blac k life . Fro m th e perspectiv e o f th e present , th e blac k actors served as observers, commenting on the actions of the characters in the play . Bu t h e foun d tha t while thi s techniqu e gav e th e necessar y contrast between the rea l an d th e 'distorted ' lif e i n th e work , i t did no t con vey the presen t situatio n with sufficien t force . One day , Calvin Butle r brought Luscomb e a book entitle d New Plays of Black Theatre, whic h include d Mission Impossible b y th e America n write r Ben Caldwell . It dealt i n harrowin g realism with lif e i n th e blac k ghettos in th e 1960s . Suddenly , Luscombe realized tha t thi s dimension wa s what was needed t o roun d ou t Gentlemen Be Seated. Just a s the origina l minstrel shows dre w o n th e Victoria n stag e fo r th e 'olio, ' h e woul d borro w fro m the Blac k Theatr e fo r th e sam e purpose . I f th e languag e an d opinion s expressed wer e violen t o r shocking , tha t woul d simpl y illustrat e more graphically th e consequence s o f th e policie s pursued afte r th e American Civil War. On 2 2 Apri l 1969 , afte r a wee k o f previews , the play , no w calle d M r Bones, opened t o brilliant reviews. Herbert Whittake r hailed th e pla y as a 'masterwork.' Georg e Luscombe , h e wrote , 'i s Canada' s mos t improve d director.' Whereas in Gentlemen Be Seated the focu s was on Lincol n and th e political arguments, in Mr Bones it starts with the Negro. 'Th e satire on th e Civil Wa r attitude s pointin g towar d thei r present-da y consequences , i s now sharpened wit h the commen t of the principa l victims. The tw o Negro characters, Willi e an d Bush , wh o ope n th e show , hav e thei r individua l musical expressio n burlesque d a s th e Minstrel s tak e over . The y ar e reduced t o being onlookers , o r servants , to th e ensuin g action bu t thei r presence i s never lost.' 9 Ralph Hickli n o f th e Telegram admire d severa l features o f th e produc tion - th e quic k role change s b y which the actors , attire d i n white cover-

86 Harlequi n i n Hogtown alls decorate d wit h star s o n on e le g an d stripe s o n th e other , switche d from assassin s to cabinet members with a simple alteration o f hat or cloak; the macabr e humou r o f the assassinatio n scene , carrie d ou t i n th e dar k with th e onl y sound afte r th e sho t a voice saying 'Good shot Booth!'; and the positionin g o f the powerfu l scene o f ghetto deat h t o follow upo n th e warning o f Thaddeus Steven s that, withou t proper reparation , th e Civi l War will b e fough t over an d ove r unti l the lan d i s reduced t o ashes . Hi s enthusiasm eve n cause d hi m t o compar e th e strugglin g Toronto Workshop Production s wit h on e o f the mos t successfu l Toront o theatrica l fixtures, Spring Thaw, which had opene d the previou s evening. 'Mr Bones,' h e estimated, 'containe d i n it s first five minutes more theatre , mor e intelligence, mor e imagination , mor e socia l comment , an d mor e entertain ment than th e entir e tw o acts of the revu e at the Roya l Alexandra.'10 Nathan Cohen was particularly impressed b y the skilfu l juxtaposition of politics and entertainment , wha t he calle d 'ar t and societ y aptly mated.' He though t th e compan y playe d wit h ' a believabl e sens e o f individual feeling an d voca l clarity ' an d welcome d thei r 'unaccustomed ' apprecia tion fo r characterizatio n an d respec t fo r th e spoke n word . H e to o was struck b y th e powerfu l juxtaposition o f th e Lincol n assassinatio n scen e and th e Caldwell play dealing with death i n the ghetto. 'Tha t time-smashing conjunction of present an d past, ' he wrote, 'the coupling of yesterday and no w and the bloody préfiguration of tomorrow, is, in every respect social, aesthetic, political - th e highlight of the deeply-felt presentation.' Unlike some of his colleagues, Cohen di d not mak e the mistak e of thinking tha t because th e pla y was set somewhere else , it had n o relevanc e t o Canada, o r tha t because i t was infectiously entertaining, it could no t con tain a serious view of life. 'Whe n minute s after th e fatefu l shot , th e com pany springs into th e finale, strumming their guitars and banjos, banging their tambourine s an d spoons , singin g an d dancin g as they connect th e U.S. tension s with the Canadia n scene , the y are no t engagin g i n a hypocritical momen t o f breas t beating . Tha t i s rather th e indispensabl e las t ingredient i n the pattern, a jolting warning that we too have been cultivating a harvest of racial wrath and th e da y of reckoning i s closer tha n mos t people think.' 11 In spit e o f glowing reviews, attendance durin g th e firs t fe w weeks was poor, hoverin g aroun d 3 0 pe r cen t o f capacity . Wit h th e contracto r threatening t o issu e a writ against th e theatr e t o collec t th e mone y stil l owed hi m fo r renovations , an d th e Boar d o f Contro l (Cit y Executive ) delaying a decisio n regardin g it s capital grant , th e situatio n fo r th e the atre wa s desperate. I n mid-May , Nathan Cohe n too k th e unusua l step of

Political Entertainment: Mr Bones 8 7 appealing directl y to audience s an d governmen t i n hi s column . Review ing the company's history, he commented o n th e significan t strides mad e in th e las t year. He noted a 'marked improvement in the standard s of the acting [an d a] fres h stres s upon th e importance o f the text.. . For the theatre t o have to curtail its operations afte r makin g such progress, ' he pro claimed, 'woul d b e .. . much mor e seriou s i n it s consequences tha n th e disappearance o f Theatre Toronto.' 12 Whether o r no t i t wa s responsible , Cohen' s ple a coincide d wit h a change i n fortune. Audiences began t o pick up; the Cit y of Toronto came through wit h a gran t fo r $15,000 ; an d o n 2 9 May, a lette r arrive d a t 1 2 Alexander Stree t invitin g th e compan y t o perfor m a t th e Internationa l Theatre Festiva l at th e Venice Biennale . Befor e Luscombe coul d appea r at what Cohe n calle d th e 'mos t importan t cultura l showcas e t o which a Canadian dram a organizatio n ha s bee n invited,' 13 however , h e ha d a n even mor e excitin g persona l engagemen t t o fulfil - hi s first opportunity to direct in New York.

11 Broadway Beckon s

It wa s a parado x characteristi c o f artisti c lif e i n Canad a tha t whil e Luscombe an d TW P wer e havin g difficult y establishin g themselve s in Tor onto, the y wer e slowl y buildin g a reputatio n abroad . Interes t i n th e company was strongest i n Ne w York, where several producers ha d mad e overtures with a view to sponsoring the m in that city. But Luscombe's attitude t o th e Ne w York commercia l theatre , one o f wary suspicion border ing o n outrigh t hostility , ha d previousl y stoo d i n th e wa y o f hi s negotiating successful arrangements . B y the beginnin g o f 1969 , however, circumstances had altere d sufficiently tha t he was willing to test the waters south of the border. Luscombe's receptiveness to an invitation to direct in New York in 196 9 may hav e been affecte d b y the failur e o f simila r negotiations some fou r years earlier. In tha t case , protracte d an d ultimatel y unsuccessful discussions abou t th e appearanc e o f Th e Mechanic off-Broadwa y ha d seriousl y undermined th e moral e o f hi s firs t professiona l compan y an d contrib uted i n n o smal l way to it s ultimate demise. Those initia l talk s had take n place i n Stratfor d durin g th e company' s first Theatre-in-the-Park seaso n in 1965 . June Faulkner , the n workin g as a voluntee r publicit y assistant, had manage d t o arrang e he r holiday s to coincid e wit h th e company' s Stratford season . There she me t Pete r Witt , a New York agen t i n th e cit y to se e th e Festiva l productions , who m sh e persuade d t o atten d Th e Mechanic. S o impressed was Witt that he brough t th e Ne w York producer Alexander Cohen t o a subsequent performance. Cohen initiate d negotiations wit h Luscomb e an d Winte r t o includ e Th e Mechanic i n hi s Nin e O'clock Theatre Serie s at the John Golden Theatre i n New York. While th e negotiation s continued , however , Luscombe bega n t o pon der th e implication s of the invitation. The prospec t o f a New York appear -

Broadway Beckons 8 9 anee wa s obviously exhilarating, but h e ha d t o balanc e i t agains t othe r considerations. Th e kin d o f creativ e wor k Luscomb e wa s interested i n could b e done properly onl y by a group willin g to devote al l their tim e to it. The compan y he ha d buil t was developing nicely , and h e was reluctant to jeopardize tha t progress . Furthermore , a seaso n i n Ne w York woul d considerably complicate planning. Should he tr y to run a Toronto season with a secon d company , o r shoul d h e gambl e tha t th e Ne w Yor k ru n would be short and tha t he could return fo r a Toronto opening i n the late fall o r early winter? In th e end , the decisio n was taken out o f his hands. By th e middl e o f September , development s i n Ne w York ha d altere d Cohen's plans . A newspape r strik e had seriousl y affected th e box-offic e receipts o f his curren t production , Baker Street, and hi s financia l commit ments to tw o new shows , The Devils and Th e Cherry Orchard, made i t impossible fo r hi m t o procee d wit h th e planne d Nin e O'cloc k series . Tha t meant tha t th e anticipate d invitatio n to Th e Mechanic would not b e forthcoming.1 Fo r th e tim e being , a t an y rate , th e prospec t o f a Ne w York engagement faded . Nevertheless , th e ide a o f America n celebrity , onc e awakened, wa s difficul t t o suppress . Luscomb e contacte d Pete r Wit t i n New York to see if Paul Libin and Te d Man n might be interested i n bringing Th e Mechanic mío thei r theatre, th e Circle in the Square . Negotiation s dragged o n throug h th e fal l an d winte r in a n atmospher e o f uncertainty and increasin g tensio n betwee n th e actor s an d Jack Winte r o n th e on e hand an d Luscomb e an d th e genera l manager , Brook y Robins, o n th e other. Towards th e en d o f February 1966 , Witt informed the compan y that h e had bee n successfu l i n interesting Ted Man n in a possible sponsorship of the grou p an d tha t Man n wante d t o com e t o Toront o t o se e th e sho w himself. Hope s fo r a Ne w York engagement , whic h ha d bee n dashe d b y the terminatio n of the negotiation s with Alexander Cohen, were suddenly revived. There was an electri c excitemen t in the ai r on th e final Saturday performance wit h Man n i n th e house . A t a post-performanc e meeting , Luscombe, Winter, and Robin s decided the y would go to New York to discuss the practica l details of a short season there . On 2 March , th e tri o me t Witt , Mann, and Libi n a t th e Russia n Te a Room fo r an extende d lunch . The Canadian s kne w little about th e problems o f theatrica l productio n i n Ne w York, no r wer e the y unanimous in their attitud e t o th e project . Fo r Winter, the prospec t o f a New York pro duction wa s understandably intoxicating. Bu t fo r differen t reason s nei ther Luscomb e no r Robin s was totally committed t o th e idea . Luscomb e feared tha t th e creativ e work of the grou p migh t be jeopardized b y com-

90 Harlequi n i n Hogtown mercial success as Theatre Workshop had bee n damage d by its triumphs in th e Wes t End . Robin s was worried abou t th e financia l implications . The compan y wa s rapidl y approachin g a crisis . Th e firs t hal f o f thei r grants ha d bee n spent , an d the y wer e nowher e clos e t o raisin g th e $10,000 necessary to claim the balanc e of their Province of Ontatio Council for th e Art s award. Box-office incom e from a New York run migh t tide them over , but th e chance s o f financia l disaste r seemed , o n th e whole , much greate r tha n th e prospect s o f success . Afte r failin g t o reac h a n agreement tha t afternoon, the three Canadian s flew back to Toronto and went directly to a further meeting a t Robins' s home. Afte r late-nigh t discussions, whic h this time involve d Brooky's husband, a Toront o lawyer , the grou p decide d tha t the y were no t ye t ready t o tackl e th e jungle o f Broadway. News of the outcom e wa s communicated to the actor s in Toronto an d undoubtedly contribute d t o th e decisio n o f several o f the m t o leav e th e company at the end o f the winter season. Durin g the nex t thre e months, Victoria Mitchell , Yvonn e Adalian, and Donal d Meyer s went to th e Nep tune Theatr e i n Halifax ; Larr y Perkins, Ed Kelly , E d Sanders , an d Greg son Winkfiel d resigne d t o fin d les s stressfu l theatrica l employment . T o replace them , Luscombe held auditions and bega n trainin g a second pro fessional company . He promote d thre e apprentic e actors , Pete r McConnell, Mar y Jes s Walton , an d France s Walsh , an d welcome d bac k Le n Doncheff, wh o ha d worke d with him o n th e origina l Before Compiègne. T o this core , h e adde d a numbe r o f youn g newcomers , includin g Davi d Clement, Geoffrey Read , and Mil o Ringham. He persuade d Dou g Livingston an d hi s wife, Sonja , to rejoin the m for the summer . With this group, he began workin g on th e repertoire fo r the second Stratfor d season . The company' s appearances at Stratford were not successful financially, but the y brought th e compan y to the attentio n o f a wider audience tha n they could reach i n Toronto. Amon g the spectator s attracte d t o Stratford for performance s at the Festival Theatre wer e representatives of the inter national theatr e community . During th e summe r o f 1966 , Chery l Crawford, a Ne w Yor k produce r an d co-founde r o f th e Grou p Theatre , attended al l four production s o f TWP's Theatre-in-the-Park season . I n a letter to the Rockefeller Foundation, she reported : Last weekend I saw seven production s a t Stratford , Ontario . I though t th e Strat ford one s wer e dullis h bu t I fee l compelle d t o writ e yo u abou t a ver y excitin g young group who did fou r production s i n repertory out o f doors ... They are very talented actor s wh o also dance , mime, sing and pla y musical instrument s .. . They

Broadway Beckons 9 1 are dedicated an d idealisti c and seriou s in a laughing way ... I saw their four shows with audience s about equall y mixed between middl e age and youth . All were very responsive an d I fel t th e play s an d idea s an d freshnes s o f presentatio n reall y stirred th e youn g i n a wa y that ou r commercia l production s seldo m d o .. . For myself, I found it the mos t interesting theatre I have seen fo r a long time. 2

Gratifying a s i t was, such privately expressed critica l acclaim had littl e effect o n th e fortune s o f th e compan y i n th e immediatel y succeedin g months. Successe s lik e He y Rube! were followed b y failures like Th e Golem of Venice, with the resul t that the compan y found itself on a kind of critical roller-coaster, alternatel y praised an d condemned . TWP's love-hat e relationshi p with th e Canadia n critic s was put unde r new strain afte r th e company' s move t o Alexander Stree t i n the winte r of 1967-8. There the inauguration of a subscription series had necessitated a change i n programmin g whic h at first seemed t o alienat e th e critic s still further. Th e ne w playin g schedule , callin g fo r a differen t pla y eac h month, mean t not only that productions would have to be mounted mor e quickly but als o that the compan y would hav e to rely much mor e heavily on th e establishe d internationa l repertoir e tha n i n th e past . Suddenly , the proble m o f selectin g play s took o n a ne w urgency , and everyon e i n the compan y was canvassed for ideas . The first attempts to design a season fro m existing scripts proved disas trous. A rushe d productio n o f Th e Alchemist expose d th e performers ' almost fata l inexperienc e wit h classica l drama , a s the actor s floundere d hopelessly throug h Be n Jonson's tortuou s blan k verse. Attendance wa s a pitiful 1 4 per cent , and th e productio n wa s withdrawn at the en d o f three weeks. To complicat e thei r plan s stil l further , th e runnin g expense s fo r th e new buildin g wer e mor e tha n fou r time s th e cos t o f operating a t Frase r Avenue. To bring in additional revenue, therefore, th e company was compelled t o rent th e theatr e t o other organizations , includin g the Toront o Children's Theatre , th e Studi o Children' s Theatre , th e Toront o Reper tory Ensemble, and th e Toronto Dance Theatre. In April, they brought in an America n productio n o f Arthur Miller' s A View from th e Bridge to cover the rehearsa l period o f their next schedule d production , Ewa n MacColl's anti-war allegor y Th e Travellers, whic h ha d s o impresse d Luscomb e i n Edinburgh. Th e respons e o f th e critic s t o Ewa n MacCol l was even mor e hostile tha n t o Be n Jonson, an d i n disma y th e compan y wa s forced t o withdraw th e productio n afte r onl y eleve n performances . B y mid-May 1968, therefore , just fou r an d a half month s afte r movin g into thei r new

92 Harlequi n i n Hogtown quarters an d wit h two successive box-office an d critica l failures, the com pany faced imminen t financial collapse. With a sense o f desperation, Jun e Faulkner appealed t o Nathan Cohe n for help . 'We'r e desperat e fo r a scrip t tha t wil l work, ' sh e admitted . Cohen gav e he r a typescrip t o f a work by the Ne w York write r Norma n Kline called Faces, a collection of comic sketches about middle-clas s suburbanites. June rea d i t an d conclude d tha t i t woul d neve r interes t Lus combe 'i n a millio n years. ' Nevertheless , sh e showe d i t t o he r husban d and, later , t o Nancyjowsey, bot h o f whom liked it. 'All right,' sh e said t o Jowsey, 'you take it to George and tel l him what you see in it.'3 Jowsey had recently done a number o f slide shows inspired in part by the imaginativ e photographic exhibits she had see n a t the Czech pavilion at Expo 67 . She took th e Cohe n scrip t to Luscombe an d describe d he r conceptio n o f the production a s a kind of animated comi c strip using screens and bac k pro jections.4 Intrigued, Luscomb e agree d t o try it. The company Luscombe' retained t o work on Faces - Sylvi a Tucker, Len Doncheff, Ton y Sibbald , Ray Whelan, Diane Grant, and Frances Walsh included onl y two of the actor s who had begu n th e seaso n with him. Nevertheless, al l the performer s ha d worked with Luscombe before an d wer e familiar with his methods an d responsiv e t o his way of directing. Th e set , devised b y Jowsey, consiste d o f tw o rows of fou r translucen t panels , on e above th e other . I n front o f the uppe r ro w was a narrow platform accessible from th e groun d b y a spiral staircase. With the help o f a series of rear projectors, th e eight panels could be filled with cartoon image s or used as screens fo r silhouettes . Th e whol e was evocative both o f th e panel s o f a newspaper cartoo n stri p and o f the honeycomb existence of big-city apartment life . The actor s worked wel l together , an d thei r physica l style seemed idea l for th e low-key , Thurber-lik e comed y o f th e sketches . Kline' s wistfu l humour an d th e neurotic self-absorption of the characters seeme d a t first very foreign t o the usua l Luscombe mode . Bu t he became fascinate d with the way in which Kline moved from what looks like a logical situation int o an off-bea t developmen t an d the n bac k again . I n rehearsals , h e demon strated a surprisin g affinit y fo r th e material , an d th e performer s responded brilliantly . To pa d ou t th e rathe r shor t script , Luscomb e an d the actor s invente d a prologue an d epilogu e involvin g a group of friends showing home movies . The actor s improvise d the scene , working out th e given circumstance s (wh o owned th e house , wh o were in love , who were new to th e group , an d s o on), and the n conveye d al l that information in pantomime an d i n 'dialogue ' which consisted o f nothing bu t th e name s

Broadway Beckons 9 3 of th e characters . Th e routin e becam e on e o f th e skit s mos t frequently admired b y the critics , who, of course, knew nothing of its origin.5 Faces opene d o n 2 8 May 1968, afte r a week o f previews . Kline himself flew u p from New York to see the production - th e first professional staging of the piece - and , along with most of the critics, was delighted. Whittaker calle d th e productio n ' a happ y unio n o f tw o styles': 'That familiar cartoon rhythm , th e emphasi s o n mim e an d postur e rathe r tha n dia logue, th e chameleo n touc h o f th e Luscomb e actor s - al l thes e hav e found thei r mos t compatibl e autho r i n th e unassumin g Kline.' 6 Cohen , understandably predisposed t o the script , called th e productio n a 'tantalizing, and ofte n effective entertainment.. . a kaleidoscope of short scene s anatomizing lif e amon g th e sodalit y of white, middle-class American sub urbia. No t exactl y a revue , o r a vaudeville, or a cartoo n strip , i t has th e qualities of all three. I n those frequen t moments when there was an imaginative compatibilit y between th e materia l an d th e performers, ' Cohe n felt, Faces spun ' a magic web.'7 Audiences were equall y enthusiastic, and th e productio n ra n fo r nine weeks. I t the n move d o n fo r a week' s engagement a t th e Internationa l Theatre Festiva l at Brandéi s University , where TWP share d th e progra m with theatr e companie s suc h a s Cafe L a Mam a from Ne w York an d th e Traverse Theatr e fro m Edinburgh. 8 Th e directo r To m O'Horga n wa s there, beginnin g rehearsals fo r Hair, a s was the playwrigh t Megan Terry . June Faulkne r fel t rathe r embarrasse d tha t th e compan y was presenting an 'idioti c middle-clas s comedy ' whic h was not a t al l representativ e o f TWP's work, but th e critics loved it, and no t even a case of food poisonin g could altogethe r dampen th e actors' sense of triumph.9 On hi s return t o Toronto, Luscombe began t o plan hi s next season an d soon forgo t abou t Faces. Earl y i n Februar y 1969 , however , he receive d a letter from Peter Witt, now acting as TWP's New York agent, who told hi m that th e produce r Leonar d Sillma n was interested i n mounting a production o f th e pla y in Ne w York and, o n Norma n Kline' s insistence, wanted George t o direct. After onl y a little hesitation, during which he wondered if America n actor s woul d b e abl e t o adap t t o hi s methods , Luscomb e decided tha t th e opportunit y wa s too goo d t o pas s u p an d cable d hi s agreement. Prior t o setting off on thi s new adventure, Luscomb e collecte d a letter of referenc e fro m Natha n Cohen . I f Faces succeede d i n Ne w York, wh o could tel l what doors migh t swing open? Testimony from Toronto's leading dram a criti c migh t prov e useful . Certainly , i t was remarkably gener ous. T n m y considered judgment,' wrote Cohen, 'Luscomb e is the single

94 Harlequi n i n Hogtow n most enterprising an d resourcefu l directo r i n Canada, an d hi s is, overall, the mos t artistically adventurous compan y tha t we have. His every produc tion bear s hi s personal signatur e i n term s of the styl e of the players , and the pointing out and u p of the theme o f the play through movemen t an d gesture borderin g ofte n o n pur e dance , bu t neve r becomin g effet e o r decadent. I t i s my further opinion , that , a s a theatr e figure , Luscomb e stands alone. I know no on e els e in Canada o r th e U.S. , in Broadway, offBroadway, regional an d communit y theatre wh o works in th e sam e man ner o r is able t o produce th e same exciting results.' 10 But when Luscombe arrive d i n New York, he began t o wonder wha t he had le t himsel f in for . The America n actor s lacke d th e skil l o f hi s Cana dian cast , having little ability in movement and n o trainin g in or tast e for improvisation. Accustome d t o bein g instructe d i n ever y aspect o f thei r performance, the y were baffled b y Luscombe's insistenc e that the y com e up with their own ideas. Furthermore, th e production budge t allowe d for only three weeks of rehearsal wit h a week of previews. Growing more an d more despondent , Luscomb e ha d littl e inclination t o mee t ne w people and spen t mos t of his free time in his room. Meanwhile, th e Toront o theatr e communit y watche d event s i n Ne w York wit h th e usua l mixtur e o f hop e an d envy . Cohen, wh o ha d bee n responsible for findin g th e Faces script in the first place, too k a somewhat proprietary interes t in th e proceedings . Thre e day s before th e opening , he ra n a Saturday column devote d t o the achievement s of Toronto Workshop Production s and it s determined, uncompromising director . Th e difference betwee n Luscomb e an d othe r director s intereste d i n th e grou p theatre ideal , h e suggested , wa s tha t Luscomb e wa s 'constantl y bein g tempted awa y fro m hi s chase, an d steadfastl y resisting the enticements. ' He was far more intereste d i n the company's tri p to Venice than i n direct ing on Broadway . 'With all his mistakes, the difficultie s peopl e have working with him, the discrepancy between his commitment to the group ideal and hi s dominan t personality , Luscomb e ha s bee n givin g Toronto th e only consistent exciting and meaningfu l local theatre i t has known durin g the las t decade. ' Wit h evidenc e tha t Luscombe' s kin d o f theatr e wa s finally gaining acceptanc e fro m audience s i n Toronto, Cohe n wondere d how success might affect hi s idealism." He need hardly have worried. On Tuesday , 1 6 September 1969 , Faces, retitled Th e American Hamburger League to avoid confusion with the John Cassavete s film, opened to scathing reviews and close d afte r on e performance . Cohen , wh o had travelle d to New York t o attend th e event , put th e bes t possible fac e on i t by blaming the cast , which he sai d was 'empty of quality both a s varieties of social

Broadway Beckons 9 5 types an d a s entertainers. ' Th e qualit y of 'gaiet y an d unassertiv e irony ' which he admired i n the Toronto company was lacking, and th e performers were heav y and cloying . But he als o expressed hi s disappointment in Luscombe's direction , sayin g (wit h hi s characteristi c pungenc y o f utter ance) tha t hi s effect s traile d of f into 'substandar d televisio n variety program banalities and trivia.' 12 Understandably, th e experienc e severel y undermine d Luscombe' s composure. A s the fina l rehearsal s wer e fallin g apar t owin g to th e pro ducer's continua l interference , Luscombe ha d considere d patrollin g th e lobby o f the theatr e o n openin g nigh t with a sig n Th e Directo r o f This Play Has Resigned. 13 But now not onl y was he prevente d fro m expressin g his bitter disappointment, both with himself and with the whole New York system, h e ha d t o confron t member s o f th e Canadia n pres s an d actor s from hi s ow n company , suc h a s Calvi n Butler , who ha d flow n dow n t o attend th e opening . Th e nex t morning, after a grim vigi l waiting for th e New York reviews , he sa t in th e hote l lobby trying to explai n t o Si d Adilman o f th e Telegram jus t wha t ha d gon e wrong . Althoug h h e neve r dropped hi s façade of pugnacious optimism, by the tim e he arrive d back in Toronto his mood wa s one o f black frustration. Never again, he vowed, would he los e control of a production a s he ha d los t control of Faces.

12 Chronicling the Revolution: Che Guevara

Luscombe returne d t o Toronto just thre e day s before th e compan y was due t o fl y to Ital y for it s appearance a t th e Venic e Biennale. Plans called for th e presentatio n o f tw o productions, M r Bones and a pla y about th e Argentinian revolutionar y Che Guevara. The secon d work was of particular interes t t o th e Italian s and wa s the on e t o which th e compan y owed their invitation to th e festival . Mari o Fratti, the Italia n author o f Ch e Guevara (whic h ha d ha d a successfu l ru n a t TWP in Decembe r 1968) , was a personal frien d o f th e directo r o f th e Biennale . H e ha d suggeste d tha t the TWP production o f Ch e might be a worthwhile addition to the Venice festival an d ha d contacte d th e theatr e i n Februar y 1969 , askin g them t o send informatio n t o Venice . I t wa s not unti l April , however , tha t June Faulkner finall y go t aroun d t o puttin g th e materia l i n th e mail . O n 2 4 May, a telegram asking for an estimate of their expenses had arrived , and three day s late r a n officia l invitatio n guarantee d the m ful l boar d an d accommodation i n Venice plu s a partial contributio n t o the performers ' salaries. Faulkner sent off a provisional acceptance. 1 With Luscomb e i n Ne w York , preparation s fo r th e Venic e tri p ha d been lef t in John Faulkner's hands. Faulkner was a soft-spoken, mild-mannered ma n wh o was extremely popular wit h almost everyone wh o kne w him. While his commitment both to the theatre an d t o left-wing ideas was probably a s deep as Luscombe's, h e wa s more diffiden t abou t imposin g his will on others . As a result of a considerably more relaxe d atmospher e in the theatr e durin g the summer, the internal dynamics of the company had begun to change . Because of Luscombe's political orientation, actors attracted t o his theatre tende d t o have strong political convictions, or to develop them fairl y quickly after the y had been hired . This disposition was particularly true of

Chronicling the Revolution : Che Guevara 9 7 the 196 9 company , whic h wa s much mor e representativ e tha n earlie r groups o f the tension s a t work in th e societ y outside th e theatre . Several of th e actors , includin g Jack Boschulte , Françoi s Klanfer , Steve n Bush , and Cedri c Smith , had stron g leftis t sentiment s and vehementl y opposed American involvemen t i n Vietnam . Me l Dixo n an d Calvi n Butler , bot h blacks, wer e a s intensely concerne d abou t civi l rights . Thes e tw o issue s had profoundl y divided American society during th e previous year, which had see n th e assassination s of Martin Luthe r Kin g and Rober t Kennedy, the polic e brutalit y at th e Democrati c Nationa l Convention i n Chicago , and, finally , th e electio n o f Richar d Nixon , generall y regarde d a s a n enemy to the left . As usual, these American concern s overflowe d int o Canada, where they significantly affecte d Canadia n yout h cultur e an d th e emergen t alterna tive theatre . Inspire d b y ideas of the American Ne w Left, th e TW P actors saw themselves as political activist s working in th e vanguar d o f a revolution tha t would bring peace, love , self-fulfilment, an d universa l participatory democracy. Heightening th e intoxication of this notion was the mor e chemical euphoria induce d b y widespread us e of marijuana. In thi s atmosphere , whil e the ca t was conveniently away i n Ne w York, the actor s began t o find fault with Luscombe's restrictiv e style of manage ment. TWP, the y felt, wa s a false collectiv e unduly dominated b y the per sonality o f on e man . The y wante d mor e sa y in th e choic e o f plays ; they wanted t o do mor e guerrill a theatre ; they talked o f taking over the com pany an d eliminatin g the 'dehumanizing ' disciplin e of th e 'efforts ' an d the manipulatio n o f th e analysi s of a pla y throug h th e extensiv e discus sion o f unit s an d objectives . Durin g August, such sentiment s influenced their rehearsals o f Ch e Guevara and M r Bones. By th e tim e Luscomb e returne d fro m Ne w York, th e actor s wer e anxious to show him th e result s of their work. In hi s absence, the y had take n the opportunit y t o 'improve' thei r role s b y adding naturalisti c props and bits of psychological realism. They had als o introduced a number o f realistic bac k projections , especiall y int o a scen e a t th e beginnin g i n which the CI A explains why Che mus t be eliminated. Luscomb e was furious. He raged at John Faulkner, whom he blamed fo r changing th e conception o f the production , an d h e trie d i n a single afternoo n t o restore some o f the fantasy which had been lost. When th e company arrived in Venice on Monda y afternoon, therefore , they wer e i n a n agitate d stat e - confuse d b y apparently contradictor y directions an d exhauste d fro m th e overnigh t flight and four-hou r sto p over in Paris. Undaunted, Luscomb e calle d a rehearsal fo r that afternoon .

98 Harlequi n i n Hogtown After hastil y registering i n their hotels , th e dispirite d actor s gathered in a damp an d evil-smellin g basement, wher e th e combinatio n o f foul ai r an d exhaustion soo n mad e mos t o f them ill. 3 Reluctantly, Luscombe gav e u p the work. He would simply have t o hope tha t the disciplin e he ha d trie d to insti l in th e compan y woul d enabl e i t t o get throug h th e fou r sched uled performances . The doubl e bil l the company had brought t o Venice was representative of tw o aspects o f TWP' s work. Mr Bones was perhaps th e mos t successful example o f a pla y which ha d originate d wit h th e actors ' improvisation s and subsequentl y been give n shape by a writer. Che Guevara illustrated th e company's othe r way o f working - buildin g an d shaping a performanc e on th e foundation o f a playwright's script. Mario Fratt i wa s a n Italia n dramatis t an d criti c livin g i n Ne w York , where he taugh t play-writin g at Columbia University. Fratti had grown u p in Italy ; there , th e defea t o f th e wartim e partisan s an d th e postwa r re emergence o f th e fascist s i n position s of power an d influenc e had mad e him a committe d Communist . H e emigrate d t o Ne w York i n 196 3 an d found a countr y whic h h e though t wa s on th e brin k o f revolution . Bu t there wer e feature s of the American scen e which could not b e explaine d by classic Marxist economic theory . The Wester n Hemispher e seeme d t o produce a kind of enlightened capitalis t quite unlik e anything Fratti ha d encountered i n Europe. Th e middle-clas s 'drop-out,' th e wealthy altruist, the privilege d politicia n such a s Robert Kenned y read y t o ris k assassination fo r a n ide a h e believe d i n - thes e wer e apparen t contradictions . When Fratt i rea d o f the deat h o f Che Guevar a in the Bolivia n jungle, h e resolved t o dramatize th e lif e of this paradoxical 'ne w man.' 4 Che Guevara , an Argentinian revolutionar y who had lef t th e security of a positio n i n th e socialis t government o f Fidel Castro i n Cub a t o fomen t revolution i n Bolivia , had bee n tracke d dow n b y Bolivian an d America n security troops i n th e fal l o f 196 7 and finall y kille d on 2 7 October of tha t year. Alive, Che ha d bee n somethin g o f an embarrassmen t t o his friends; dead, h e became a hero and martyr . More tha n any other contemporar y figure, he seemed t o embody th e selfless devotion to a revolutionary ideal that appealed s o powerfully to the youth of the period. Fratti had sen t a number o f plays to Toronto Workshop Productions in the earl y years of the decad e withou t so much as an acknowledgement. I n July 1968 , however , he receive d a letter fro m June Faulkner askin g to see more o f his work.5 He bundled u p a copy of the newl y completed Ch e Guevara and pu t i t in th e post . Whe n Luscomb e go t aroun d t o reading th e play after returnin g fro m th e festiva l a t Brandéis University, he like d th e

Chronicling the Revolution : Che Guevara 9 9 subject bu t though t th e scrip t would hav e t o b e revise d drastically . Th e original wa s an almos t actionles s sequenc e o f lecture s o n revolutionar y theory by a Christlike Guevara, who was finally executed i n a symbolic tableau betwee n tw o co-revolutionaries. Luscombe though t h e sa w beneath the naïv e an d clums y symbolism a stor y tha t coul d for m th e basi s for a strong dramati c production . Wit h th e seaso n stil l no t planne d an d pres sure mountin g fo r hi m t o mak e a decision, Luscomb e phone d Fratt i i n New York to see if he would be willing to rewrite the play. Like man y artists , Luscomb e sa w life throug h th e pris m o f hi s ow n obsessions. A s he explaine d t o Fratti , he wa s not intereste d i n Ch e a s a Christ figure or saintl y martyr. What excited Luscombe was the imag e of a man, flawed and imperfect , who nevertheless was able to persevere i n th e course h e ha d chose n b y virtue of his resources o f courage an d optimism. Luscombe's interes t was not i n the detail s of Che's biograph y so much as in capturing th e essenc e of Che's struggl e and illustratin g its relevance to the present . This essence he saw as the conflict between the visionary individual an d th e reactionar y interest s preventin g th e realizatio n o f hi s vision. Luscomb e suggeste d tha t Fratt i com e t o Toront o t o discus s th e matter further. 6 Fratti arrived i n September an d foun d Luscomb e i n the mids t of auditions for a new company. He was excited by the vitality of the young group but somewha t dismayed b y Luscombe's metho d o f choosing his performers. Instea d o f askin g th e actor s question s abou t thei r previou s experi ence, h e would quiz them abou t thei r political awareness. 'Did the y read the papers every morning? Who is the president o f Bolivia? Who owns the copper mine s there?' 7 Followin g detaile d discussion s wit h Luscombe , Fratti returne d t o Ne w Yor k an d bega n reworkin g th e script . B y early November, h e ha d writte n a n additiona l sixt y page s an d eliminate d several of the origina l characters . Rehearsals began i n early November 1968 , an d ther e was a sense i n th e company tha t thi s was to b e somethin g o f a nove l departure . Luscomb e had recruite d severa l ne w actors an d brough t bac k a numbe r o f forme r company members suc h as Milo Ringham, Jack Boschulte, and Larr y Perkins. Dail y session s began wit h warm-up exercises followe d by improvisations designe d t o hel p th e actor s understan d th e give n circumstances of the story . The actor s devoted hour s t o capturin g th e physica l reality of such action s a s sitting round a camp-fire, climbing mountainous terrain , digging i n rock y soil . Awkwar d o r laz y actor s woul d cring e unde r Lus combe's fury. ' I don't want any of that CBC acting,' he would shout, bearing down o n th e haples s offender. 'I want to see sweat. I want to see dirt.'8

100 Harlequi n in Hogtown Within days , Larry Perkins had resigne d an d bee n replace d i n the rol e of Che b y Cedri c Smith , a folk-singe r and acto r wh o ha d recentl y bee n deported fro m the United States.9 From th e beginning , Luscomb e wa s determined t o stag e th e produc tion i n a non-realistic or symboli c way as a counterbalance t o th e realis m of the script. That mean t that gunfire and bombs , fo r example, were no t conveyed by realistic effects, bu t b y music; guns were not imitatio n rifles , but pieces of driftwood an d iron pipe . Over the entire stage floor, he ha d projected th e familia r imag e of Che i n his black beret. Nancy Jowsey and John Faulkner experimented wit h fabrics, shapes , and lights. Jowsey hung ropes an d rop e ladder s fro m th e gri d an d distribute d wove n boxes ove r the stage ; Faulkne r created a pattern o f dappled gree n ligh t to giv e th e impression o f sunlight filtered through leaves . To hel p establish that th e play had a relevance for Canadian audiences , Luscombe got each acto r t o think u p a story about revolutio n that h e o r sh e coul d relat e t o person ally.10 Cedri c Smit h wa s accustomed t o regalin g a n audienc e wit h tha t kind of anecdote, but som e of the othe r actors found it difficult a t first to step out o f character in the midst of a performance. In spit e of Fratti's revisions, much of the scrip t remained flaccid: characters were two-dimensional, speeches wer e too lon g an d abstract , ther e was little or n o conflic t o r plo t development . Luscomb e cut grea t swaths of narration and got his actors to improvise incidents to flesh out th e live s of individua l characters. As usual, th e improvisation s often gre w out o f personal experiences . A discussion of seasicknes s recalled th e foo d poi soning the actors had suffere d followin g a seafood dinne r during the festival a t Brandéis ; a routin e involvin g Che actin g a s a dentis t reflecte d Luscombe's own traumatic experience a few months earlier when he ha d had al l his teeth removed . As th e productio n developed , Luscomb e began t o incorporat e musi c with the othe r elements of performance. He chose works by the Beatle s as most representativ e o f th e revolutionar y spiri t i n Nort h America . Th e actors bega n t o gro w thei r hai r an d t o assum e more o f the dres s o f th e youth cultur e of the time . They also introduced dance , which became a n important dimension of the show , both a s a symbol of the youthful , revo lutionary spirit and a s a means of moving from on e scen e to another. Finally, th e compan y held a week of preview performances startin g o n 12 December 1968 . Receipt s from th e previou s production ha d bee n dis appointing, and fund-raisin g effort s ha d falle n behin d expectations . Th e contractor was becoming more an d mor e insisten t that his bill for renova tions to the theatre b e paid. Bankruptcy seemed imminent. As the officia l

Chronicling the Revolution : Che Guevara 10 1 opening nigh t of 17 December rolle d around , th e ver y future o f the com pany rode on th e succes s of Che. Reviews o f th e productio n i n th e principa l Toront o newspaper s wer e lukewarm a t best. Jim McPherso n of the Telegram described th e pla y as a compilation o f 'biographica l an d philosophica l vignette s ... of Che's las t few month s i n th e Bolivia n bush. ' H e fel t th e wor k di d no t revea l th e forces shapin g Guevara, and though t tha t Luscombe's effort s t o flesh ou t the rathe r fla t tex t wer e no t ver y satisfactory. 11 Herber t Whittake r als o faulted th e play , saying its blaze o f admiration faile d t o revea l Che' s fea tures with great clarity . He acknowledged, however, that 'this rather irreg ular stage-piece ' inspire d som e o f Luscombe' s bes t work as director. H e also admire d Nanc y Jowsey's setting , which 'with a fe w ropes and lot s of dark space beyond effectivel y suggeste d th e Bolivia n jungle.'12 The Star review was written b y Don Rubin , a youn g America n dram a instructor fro m Yor k University , substitutin g fo r Natha n Cohen . Rubi n felt th e pla y lacked focus . 'I t never make s up it s mind whether it wants to be a dramatic examination of the psych e of a revolutionary,' he wrote, 'or just a Brechdan-style d biograph y o f Guevar a himself.' Th e character s a s written, he felt , were thin an d lifeles s an d were given no extr a dimension in th e performance . Whil e he complimente d Luscombe' s directio n an d Jowsey's design , h e dismisse d th e productio n a s a whol e a s 'fa r to o sof t and swee t to work as anything more tha n a kind of romantic tribut e t o a contemporary fol k hero.' 13 The combinatio n o f coo l review s an d th e Christma s seaso n playe d havoc wit h th e bo x office . I n th e middl e o f Christma s week , Faulkne r phoned Natha n Cohen , tol d hi m tha t th e sho w was dying, and begge d him t o come t o see it. On Ne w Year's Eve, Cohen's ow n evaluation of th e play appeare d i n hi s regular entertainmen t colum n unde r th e headlin e 'Che, th e Bes t Play Locally in a Year.' Cohe n agree d wit h hi s colleague s about th e merit s of the script . 'T o understand wha t director Georg e Luscombe an d hi s compan y ar e doing, ' h e wrote , 'yo u mus t realiz e tha t Mario Fratt i ha s writte n an abominabl e play. ' Describin g it a s 'amateu r reportage,' he concluded tha t Fratti had n o ability whatever to probe situ ation o r character . Th e Ch e h e ha s created , Cohe n concluded , 'i s no t flesh an d blood , [but ] a n indiscriminat e assortmen t o f bana l attitude s about th e revolutionar y hero - loyal , brave, self-sacrificing, a man of the people, patient , fair , a lover of women (bu t ever so chaste about it) , a 100 per cent bore.' Cohen's admiratio n wa s reserved fo r th e production , whic h he calle d an 'audaciou s an d invigoratin g experience.' I n working around th e tex t

102 Harlequi n in Hogtow n itself, he felt , Luscomb e had shape d a performance which established 'a n inspiring yet down-to-earth imag e o f Che an d what he stoo d for.' Unlik e several o f th e critics , who mistoo k th e actors ' persona l experience s fo r those o f th e characters , Cohe n admire d th e wa y in which thes e remem bered incident s connected 'tha t tin y struggle in Bolivia with othe r large r struggles.' H e foun d Smith' s deliberatel y jerky an d emotionles s perfor mance deepl y moving , 'steadil y growin g in forc e an d conviction. ' Over coming, fo r once , hi s previousl y expressed bia s towards text , Cohe n marvelled that TWP 'could do so much with what is really just a title and a nebulous notion.' 14 Largel y as a resul t of Cohen' s enthusiasm , business began t o pick up, until , by 14January, Chehad becom e th e best-attende d and mos t controversial TWP attraction since Hey Rube!. Now in Venice, Luscombe hoped the compan y would be able to recapture som e o f tha t earlie r excitement . Thei r playin g schedule, however, called fo r tw o performances of M r Bones to preced e th e presentatio n o f Che. So on th e evenin g of Wednesday, 23 September, th e actor s gathered in th e theatr e in th e Palazz o Grassi and awaite d the nin e o'cloc k curtai n for M r Bones. A s th e hou r approached , th e three-hundred-sea t space , which ha d bee n se t u p i n a bee r garde n wit h a temporar y roof, 15 remained empty , and th e actor s began t o wonder aloud i f they would be playing to a vacant house. Overhearing their concern, thei r hosts assured them tha t Italian audiences never arrived on time , and indeed , b y about nine-thirty the hous e was full an d th e performance began. It was not a grea t success . The simultaneou s translators ha d difficult y keeping u p with th e pac e of the show , and man y of the audienc e seemed puzzled b y the interpretatio n o f Lincoln as a reluctant liberal. To ad d t o the problems , th e performanc e wa s errati c an d generall y uncoordi nated.16 Nevertheless, the spectator s thoroughly enjoyed the visual effects and the music. One Italia n critic, confessing that he had expected (o n the basis o f unidentifie d reports) t o fin d Canadia n actin g to b e i n th e stai d British drawing-roo m tradition, was surprised b y the yout h and vitalit y of the company . After th e show , eighty or ninet y members o f the audienc e stayed t o discus s th e production , an d the n th e compan y wen t of f t o a reception arrange d by the Canadian consul. It wa s Ch e Guevara, however , that mos t intereste d th e Italia n theatre goers. Even before the production opened , strong feelings had been gen erated. Some though t Fratt i a lightweight dramatist who had n o business writing abou t Guevara ; other s fel t tha t a compan y lik e TWP , whic h received th e bul k of its funding from government, could no t possibl y be

Chronicling the Revolution : Che Guevara 10 3 revolutionary. Durin g th e openin g performance , th e capacit y audienc e became mor e an d mor e vigorou s i n it s expressio n o f displeasure . Th e translators, wh o relie d i n par t o n th e script s whic h ha d bee n sen t i n advance, were baffle d b y the stag e version, which bore littl e resemblance to what they had i n fron t o f them. As the translatio n faltered, spectator s began t o his s the actors , who in thei r tur n becam e rattled . B y the inter mission, Calvin Butler feared there would be a riot in the theatre. 17 Fortunately, thing s quieted dow n during th e secon d half , an d no t sur prisingly a record crow d stayed for the ope n discussion . Very quickly what was supposed t o be a debate abou t th e merit s of the productio n becam e an examinatio n of the reliabilit y of the play . Mario Fratti, who ha d bee n unable to come t o Venice from Ne w York himself, was represented b y others. Hi s German translato r denounce d th e productio n a s a perversion of the author' s intentio n a s incorporated i n hi s origina l script . Admitting that he had made changes, Luscombe claimed that he had cleared al l the alterations wit h Fratt i an d tha t th e dramatis t ha d see n th e sho w an d approved it . The brie f altercation was symptomatic of the ga p betwee n th e Europe ans and th e Canadians . The Italia n Communists, who had live d throug h the horror s o f the war and it s aftermath only to see privilege reinstated in their country, took revolution seriously and foun d th e TW P treatment of Che trivial . The TW P actors might think of themselves as revolutionaries, but the Italians regarded the m as little mor e tha n innocent childre n play ing at politics. One membe r of the audience pu t the feelin g into words by saying that the company was wasting its time fooling around i n the theatr e and tha t 'the only place for the revolution was in the revolution.' 18 Luscombe found the experienc e exhilarating. Here a t last was an audience as passionately committed to politics as he was himself. Against those critics who maintaine d tha t ar t wa s peripheral t o politics , he argued , a s had Joan Littlewood before him , that the politica l artist could contribut e to socia l chang e throug h a transformatio n o f a n audience' s awareness . Furthermore, h e asserte d tha t i t was the theatr e artis t who, in Canad a a t any rate , ha d th e mos t freedo m o f expression . Bu t Luscomb e di d no t speak for everyone in his company. Many of the actor s were drawn from a generation wh o saw the relationshi p between theatr e an d politic s somewhat differently. T o them , the dram a wa s not s o much a 'weapon' i n th e class war as a vehicle for personal expression. When accused b y a member of the audienc e o f failing t o get into th e characte r o f Che, Cedric Smith had illustrate d thi s ideological differenc e by saying that h e wa s less inter-

104 Harlequi n in Hogtown ested i n gettin g into th e characte r h e wa s portraying than i n expressin g his ow n feelings. 19 Althoug h th e ultimat e incompatibilit y of thes e tw o ideas was obscured in the general excitement of the Venetian experience, it was to become mor e apparent when the company returned t o Toronto and t o the problems of mounting a regular season .

13

Collaborative Creation III : Chicago '70

In th e fal l o f 1969 , Luscomb e and th e compan y plunged rathe r precipi tously int o th e plannin g o f th e 1969-7 0 season . O n th e suggestio n o f Cedric Smith , who though t th e pla y might len d itsel f to interestin g psychedelic effects , th e theatr e opene d wit h a production o f Shakespeare' s The Tempest. I t was not wel l received, and ra n fo r only three weeks . In January, the grou p premiere d a n origina l pla y by the youn g Canadian playwright Caro l Bolt . Se t in th e seventeent h centur y an d dealin g wit h th e Indian wars of the period , Daganawida proved puzzlin g to audiences an d critics alike . Th e tota l box-offic e revenu e fo r th e tw o production s amounted t o less than $4,000 . With tw o flops in a row, the actor s began t o ask whether the proces s of script selectio n migh t no t b e a t fault . Th e questio n o f repertoir e ha d always presented a problem, an d i t was compounded b y the desir e o f th e actors in 197 0 to have greater sa y in the operation o f the theatre . Inspire d by th e self-expressiv e theorie s o f actin g associate d wit h experimenta l groups suc h a s th e Livin g Theatre , th e TW P performer s continue d t o chafe unde r Luscombe' s restrictiv e discipline . Although th e threatene d rebellion o f the previou s summe r ha d no t materialized , ther e was a lingering resentmen t o f Luscombe's autocrati c styl e o f choosing plays . Several o f th e actor s fel t tha t th e compan y shoul d b e confrontin g contemporary politica l issue s directl y (rathe r tha n obliquel y a s TW P seemed won t to do), and the y pointed t o the succes s of Mr Bones and Che as evidence o f an audienc e fo r work with a strong political stance. What the publi c wanted, the y believed, was not reworke d classic s or historica l plays, but guerrill a theatre tha t would attack social injustices directly. While Luscomb e an d hi s actors share d a common visio n of social justice, they differed i n thei r notion s of how the theatr e could hel p to reor-

106 Harlequi n in Hogtow n der th e world . Luscombe , derivin g hi s idea s fro m Brech t an d th e formalist traditio n o f th e Russians , thought o f th e theatr e a s a mediu m which distorte d realit y so a s t o mak e th e audienc e se e i t throug h ne w eyes. The purpos e o f drama was revelation, not exhortation . Fo r the per formers, mos t of whom were ten or fifteen years younger than Luscombe , the relationship betwee n politics and theatr e was more intimate. The politica l consciousness of the actors ' generatio n ha d been forme d not, as Luscombe's had been, on Spain and the Second World War but on American experience s o f th e sixties . The rapidl y developing technolog y which enable d televisio n news cameras t o project images of events, virtually a s they happened, int o th e tranquillit y of private homes mean t tha t ignorance of , o r indifferenc e to , worl d event s wa s impossible . Conse quently, the imagination s of a large numbe r of the youth maturing in th e sixties wer e forme d b y images o f th e brutalit y and herois m o f th e civi l rights movemen t or th e agon y and sufferin g i n Vietnam. The realitie s of social injustice and militar y power, which previous generations ha d bee n spared throug h th e abstraction s of news reports, were brought hom e t o the generation o f the sixtie s with unprecedented clarity . One consequenc e of the televisio n revolution was a blurring of the distinction betwee n realit y and art . As warfare and polic e brutalit y became 'theatricalized' o n th e evenin g news, theatre bega n t o take to the street s and t o infiltrate political action. Increasingly, organizers began t o realize that 'dramatic ' protes t coul d exer t a n influenc e disproportionat e t o its size throug h th e creatio n o f images that would be broadcast throug h th e mass media. Th e alienate d young , wishing to change a system which perpetrated racis m and militar y aggression but from which they seemed to be excluded, turne d increasingl y in th e lat e sixtie s t o what were essentially theatrical o r symboli c attacks on th e establishment . Attempts, for exam ple, t o levitate the Pentagon were not reasonable politica l actions but dramatic gestures suggestin g the failure of 'rational' politics. From it s inception, th e yout h culture o f th e sixtie s was beset b y internal, unacknowledge d contradictions . It s advocac y of a socia l revolutio n and th e democratizin g o f powe r wa s fundamentally irreconcilable with the doctrin e o f self-realization. As David Farber ha s pointe d out , partici patory democrac y implie s a consensua l politic s inconsistent with 'doin g your own thing.'1 As long as the revolution remained personal , it could be embodied i n a mor e o r les s innocent hedonis m o f sex, drugs, an d roc k music. But as soon a s collective action on a large scale was attempted, th e inherent contradiction s i n the movement threatened t o break it up. The demonstratio n organize d i n 196 8 to coincide with th e Democrati c

Collaborative Creation III : Chicago '70 10 7 National Conventio n i n Chicag o wa s just suc h a n action , an d i t marked the en d o f a phase i n th e movement . Designed t o catch th e attentio n of the nationa l new s media , th e demonstratio n brough t togethe r a loos e confederation o f protes t group s i n a n uneas y alliance. Among th e mos t active of them wer e the Mobilizatio n to End th e War in Vietnam (Mobe), the Yippies , an d th e Blac k Panthers ( a blac k activis t organizatio n which had com e t o symbolize a new black militancy after th e deat h o f the paci fist Marti n Luthe r King) . These group s cam e t o Chicag o wit h variou s motives. Ostensibly, they were protesting no t agains t the Democrati c convention but agains t the very system of which it was a part. To most of those gathered i n th e park s and street s of the city , who kne w how blacks in th e South ha d routinel y been exclude d fro m th e politica l process, th e con vention epitomize d th e giganti c charad e b y which a close d syste m masqueraded a s a democracy.2 But th e mor e militant leaders o f some o f the organization s such as the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) were looking for a showdown in which, by provoking retaliation on th e par t of the polic e and th e military , they would be able to discredit and possibl y shake the structures of power. As the extremist s had hope d an d predicted , th e antipath y felt b y the Chicago authoritie s towards the protester s le d to a clash in which police were shown o n nationa l televisio n wielding clubs and bludgeonin g unarme d young people in an orgy of violence. In th e investigatio n and nationa l soul-searchin g that followe d the riot , there were conflicting conclusions, which themselves demonstrated ho w deeply America n societ y was divided. Som e commentator s fel t tha t th e police had bee n th e aggressor s and went so far as to describe the incident as a 'police riot.' A Survey Research Center pol l conducted followin g th e event, however , foun d tha t littl e mor e tha n 1 0 pe r cen t o f al l whites polled though t to o much force had bee n use d by the police (althoug h 63 per cen t of all blacks thought so). Even amon g thos e opposed t o the war in Vietnam , only 1 2 per cen t expresse d 'extrem e sympathy ' fo r th e pro testers.3 Immediately following th e convention , Attorney General Ramse y Clark was unable t o fin d evidenc e that th e variou s groups organizin g the dem onstration ha d bee n par t o f a conspiracy, and refuse d t o prosecut e any one. Afte r th e electio n o f Presiden t Richar d Nixon , who ha d ru n o n a promise o f 'la w an d order, ' however , the administratio n too k a harde r line. The Justice Department under it s new attorney general, John Mitchell, launche d th e prosecutio n o f eight o f the Chicag o protes t leader s Jerry Rubi n and Abbi e Hoffman , th e founder s of the Yippies , To m Hay -

108 Harlequi n i n Hogtown den, Davi d Bellinger , John Froines , Renni e Davis , an d Le e Weine r o f Mobe, and Bobb y Scale of the Blac k Panthers.4 The tria l of the so-calle d Chicag o 8 got unde r wa y in Septembe r 1969 , with the defence attorney, William Kunstler, arguing before Julius J. Hoff man, a seventy-four-year-ol d judge wit h a reputatio n fo r becomin g per sonally involved in the cases he tried . I t rapidly gained nationa l attention. Against the arbitrar y and seemingl y hostile behaviour o f Judge Hoffman, the defendants use d all their considerable skil l in the technique s o f street theatre t o disrupt the proceedings . I n the fac e o f open disrespec t fo r th e authority of the court , th e legitimac y of the proceedings , an d th e dignity of his person, Judge Hoffma n wa s provoked int o actions and judgment s that calle d th e whol e judicial process int o disrepute. Afte r repeated out bursts, Bobby Scale was gagged an d tie d t o hi s seat i n th e courtroom . By the en d o f the trial , Judge Hoffma n ha d sentence d ever y defendant an d their tw o attorney s t o term s o f fro m tw o t o fou r year s fo r contemp t o f court. To man y of the America n TWP actors , suc h as Steven Bus h and Jac k Boschulte, th e proceeding s i n Chicag o ha d bee n o f intens e interes t because the y seemed t o epitomize the very rigidity and impenetrabilit y of the American system against which the young had been protesting. I n th e course o f rathe r desultor y rehearsal s fo r a Polis h pla y calle d Th e Police which Luscomb e wa s preparing a s the thir d productio n fo r th e season , Jack Boschult e brought i n a copy of Ramparts, a left-wing America n journal, which contained a n articl e about th e Chicag o trial . As Bush read th e article, he cam e t o a transcript o f some o f the proceeding s an d bega n t o act out the parts of the participants. Soon som e of the other actor s joined in, an d the y all moved dow n t o th e stag e an d bega n actin g out a scene. 5 Suddenly, th e rehearsa l proces s cam e alive . Here was material t o which the actors fel t they could relat e directly and which could form the basis of a passionate wor k of theatre. The y suggested to Luscombe tha t instead of The Police the y work o n a collectivel y created docudram a base d o n th e Chicago trial . Cool t o th e ide a a t first , Luscomb e graduall y len t hi s suppor t t o th e project. Th e actor s collecte d whateve r materia l the y coul d fin d o n th e trial, but sinc e reporters were prevented fro m makin g notes i n the court room, new s was scanty. Jack Boschult e travelle d t o Chicag o t o se e if h e could ge t more up-to-dat e information . He attended som e of the sessions and bega n compilin g transcript s o f th e tria l fro m memory . Soo n th e actors i n Toronto were getting almost daily reports o f the cour t proceed ings.

Collaborative Creation III : Chicago '70 10 9 By mid-February, the sho w was beginning to develop, bu t ther e was disagreement abou t wha t shap e i t shoul d take . Bus h an d som e other s wanted it to be true t o the ideals of collective creativity as embodied in th e hippie culture . The y fel t tha t Luscomb e wit h hi s attentio n t o dramati c structure wa s suffocating thei r spontaneit y an d liveliness. 6 Fo r hi s part , Luscombe ha d littl e sympath y for creativ e anarch y an d maintaine d a strong guidin g hand. On e day , Steven Bush brought i n a copy of Alice in Wonderland, suggestin g that there were parallels between th e Chicago trial and tha t of Alice. The company spread th e material they had gathered o n the firs t tw o rows of seats in th e theatre , an d th e actor s picke d u p thei r 'lines' when inspired to do so. Meanwhile, Nanc y Jowsey created a versatile unit setting ou t o f meta l pipes an d shin y tinsel . At centre stage , a n elevate d platfor m reminiscen t of the scaffoldin g at a construction sit e an d flanke d b y stairways on eac h side serve d a s the judge's seat . Behind it , o n a stand, wa s a huge Britis h judge's wig surmounted b y a crown, which was used i n the 'Alic e in Wonderland' scenes. Beneat h it , in a cramped spac e crammed wit h electroni c equipment, wa s a broadcas t booth . Downstage , a numbe r o f wood-andpipe stool s of various sizes served a s chairs, tables , or othe r structures, as the actio n demanded . Th e whol e was enclosed b y a backdrop o f alumi nium foil , whic h reflected th e stag e light s with a kind o f garish vulgarity. The actor s wer e dresse d i n a n eclecti c mixtur e o f flowere d shirts , mini skirts, psychedeli c flare d trousers , embroidere d vests , an d headbands , and mos t had beard s an d lon g hair. The visua l effec t wa s rather like that of a disco bar . As the wor k evolved, the actor s combine d th e litera l transcripts of th e trial with group improvisations. Those sometime s parodie d th e event s in the Chicag o courtroo m an d sometime s suggeste d outrageou s parallel s with schoolroom scenes , fashion shows, or incidents from the tria l in Alice in Wonderland. Sometimes , Luscombe would encourage th e actor s to work with particula r object s supplie d b y him. Dian e Gran t selecte d a re d hat , which sh e used t o play Alice and reverse d whe n she represented th e Chicago jury.7 The resul t was a characteristic TWP mixtur e of documentar y 'truth,' culle d fro m researc h int o primar y material s suc h a s th e cour t transcripts, an d a politica l attitud e conveye d b y caricature , irony , an d deliberate theatrica l distortion . Ther e i s no questio n tha t i t was a one sided vision of reality. But Luscombe and hi s actors were not intereste d i n objectivity. While they maintained it was the Hellzapoppin ' aspect s of th e situation, th e 'complet e madnes s o f the trial, ' tha t attracte d them, 8 they obviously identifie d deepl y with th e defendants. 9 T o them , th e Chicag o

110 Harlequi n i n Hogtown 'conspiracy' was a protest against racism and injustice . It was a cause they felt they were a part of and on e t o which their theatr e wa s dedicated. The play , entitled Chicago '70, which opene d o n 1 0 March 1970 , fea tured on e o f th e stronges t companie s Luscomb e ha d assembled ; i t included Me l Dixon , Jim Lawrence , Calvi n Butler , Nei l Walsh , Steve n Bush, Pete r Faulkner , Diane Grant , Françoi s Klanfer , Ra y Whelan, Rick McKenna, an d Caro l Carrington . I t playe d t o a sold-ou t hous e an d a standing ovation . The productio n wa s recognizably in th e TW P tradition of Hey Rube! and M r Bones, but it s impact was greater tha n their s because i t spoke mor e directl y to it s audience. Th e Chicag o tria l seeme d t o epito mize a judicial and politica l system devoid of all credibility. The onl y rational respons e t o such a system was ridicule. On th e whole, committed leftist s an d th e young praise d th e pla y unre servedly. Oscar Rya n calle d th e productio n 'on e of the mos t colorful an d inspired eve r mounte d b y TWP.' 10 Sand y Naiman o f Seneca compare d i t with tw o other production s runnin g i n Toronto at th e sam e time , saying that it made 'Dionysus i n 69 look lik e pointed toe d shoe s of years gone by and Hair lik e a poorl y rehearse d kindergarte n recital.' 11 Herber t Whittaker agree d tha t n o othe r productio n tha t seaso n ha d anythin g like the play's immediacy. 'Hair describes a five-year old flower culture, ' he wrote, 'Striker Schneiderman [a t th e S t Lawrence Centre ] goe s bac k t o 191 9 an d Spring Thaw doesn't g o anywhere in it s topicality.'12 As for th e productio n as a whole, he though t tha t Luscombe had contribute d som e o f the 'best , most amusing , origina l an d pointe d directoria l touche s o f hi s creativ e , iíí career. But ther e wer e othe r critic s who expresse d wha t wa s to becom e a n increasingly familiar complain t about Luscombe's work - tha t it sacrificed serious politica l analysi s for sloganeerin g an d chea p effects . Som e o f this criticism cam e fro m th e right . Jim McPherson , in th e relativel y conservative Telegram, though t th e productio n 'superficia l an d obvious ' an d regretted that Luscombe had compiled suc h a one-sided analysi s from the wealth o f materia l a t hi s disposal. 14 Pau l Levine , writin g i n Canadian Forum, objected tha t th e Alic e in Wonderlan d analog y allowed th e audi ence t o laug h of f the tria l a s 'nothing but' theatr e an d quote d Brecht' s comment tha t 'th e ma n wh o laugh s ha s no t ye t been tol d th e terribl e news.'15 But th e mos t trenchan t criticism , as usual, came fro m Natha n Cohen , whose leftis t sympathie s were apparently no t engaged . Starting fro m th e somewhat surprisin g premise tha t the avant-garde no longe r ha d an y real application i n th e arts , Cohe n argue d tha t Chicago '70 would hav e bee n

Collaborative Creation III : Chicago '70 11 1 stronger if the player s had le t the fact s spea k for themselves . 'The show is at it s best whe n i t is most straightforwar d - whe n poe t Allan Ginsberg is explaining hi s concept o f spiritualit y - whe n Abbi e Hoffma n i s telling how he and a band o f others showere d th e New York Stock Exchange with money - whe n Mayo r Daley of Chicago i s talking abou t th e instructions he gav e th e polic e o n th e ev e of the conventio n i n 196 8 .. . when Bobbi e Scale i s insisting on hi s righ t t o cross-examin e witnesse s since h e ha s n o lawyer. But these moment s ar e brief. Fo r the mos t part, th e productio n is adulterated b y devices, flourishes , interpolations , and artificialitie s which blur th e issues , stunt the characters , an d diminis h the dram a o f the occa sion.'16 What i s surprising about thi s response i s that, afte r te n year s of follow ing the fortune s of TWP, Cohen stil l failed t o understand it s aesthetic. For those 'devices , flourishes , interpolation s an d artificialities ' that Cohe n deplored lay at the ver y heart o f Luscombe's theatre . Misunderstandings of that kind were to plague Luscomb e and hi s company for years. As Canadian playwright s turned t o what Cohen calle d th e 'theatre o f fact ' an d audience s sough t ou t realisti c treatments o f Canadian histor y and socia l problems, Luscombe' s theatr e o f gesture seeme d more and more old-fashioned. Spectators wh o shared Luscombe' s deligh t in a danc e o r a pratfal l neve r learne d t o shar e hi s convictio n tha t suc h things were mor e significant, and ofte n communicate d mor e 'meaning, ' than words . The succes s of Chicago '70 resulted i n th e company' s bein g invite d t o perform a t th e Internationa l Festiva l of Theatr e Art s i n Wolfville , Nov a Scotia, i n July. Even mor e excitin g was an arrangement , worke d out with Ted Man n an d Pau l Libin , for TW P to appea r i n Ne w York. Plan s called for th e Canadia n compan y t o open a t the Martiniqu e Theatre o n 1 5 May for tw o weeks of previews and t o play through June, afte r which an American cas t would take over if attendance warranted it. The Ne w York opening wa s everything such occasions were supposed t o be. After th e show , the cas t went t o th e producers ' offic e t o wai t fo r th e notices. A typesette r a t th e Ne w York Times phone d i n Cliv e Barnes' s review, which praised th e players ' brilliance, vigour, and gusto . H e called the wor k 'a n interestin g piec e o f politica l theatre , imaginativel y fash ioned, deftl y acted , amusin g in part, movin g in part, tha t makes no bone s about it s partisanship.' H e conclude d wit h a congratulatory exclamation, 'Right On!' 17 Ther e wa s euphoria i n th e office , th e producer s poure d champagne, and th e compan y left fo r Sardi's. The othe r American reviewer s were spli t alon g th e sam e line s as their

112 Harlequi n i n Hogtow n Canadian counterparts . Severa l objecte d t o th e rathe r mani c style , dismissing i t as 'mindless ' o r 'youthful' ; som e fel t th e pla y was nothing bu t propaganda. Undoubtedly , man y o f th e review s wer e coloure d b y th e political leaning s o f th e writers . One wh o wa s obviously sympathetic was Martin Washburn of the Village Voice. 'O f the severa l plays I have seen tha t claim to reconstruct courtroo m scene s in order t o comment o n injustice, ' he wrote , 'Chicago '70 seems to me b y far th e best... . The integrit y of Chicago '70 is such that i t does no t attemp t t o hide it s satirical inspiration ... . They hav e foun d a way to legitimatel y go beyon d th e confine s of court room dram a (whic h I think are far too limited to carry any serious theatri cal intentions ) an d t o attemp t reconstruction , withou t subvertin g th e aesthetics of the stage.' 18 Jack Krol l i n Newsweek mad e on e o f th e mos t perceptiv e comment s about th e relationshi p betwee n fac t an d fantas y i n politica l satire . H e found tha t the us e of the Alice in Wonderland paralle l an d th e attendan t doubling of roles created a dual focus, the effec t o f which was 'to sharpe n immensely th e "existential " outline s o f personalit y .. . Chicago '70 makes you think becaus e i t makes you react, whether with laughter o r anger , t o reality.'19 In spit e o f Barnes' s review , busines s a t th e Martiniqu e Theatr e wa s poor. On e night , Jerry Rubi n an d Abbi e Hoffman , finall y fre e o n bail , came t o a performance . The y too k th e actor s ou t fo r a drin k afte r th e show. Calvin Butler still remembers Rubin' s parting words to th e Canadi ans, 'Don' t forget t o buy my book.'20 Finally, after playin g to disappoint ing houses, the pla y was taken off on 1 4 June. During thi s time , tension s betwee n th e actor s an d Luscomb e ha d increased. Th e performer s fel t Luscomb e wa s insufficiently radical , an d Luscombe thought th e actors were plotting an insurrection. The frictions were intensifie d at th e festiva l i n Wolfvill e b y the actors ' effort s t o pro mote Chicago '70, which was playing to very poor houses in a five-hundred seat theatre. Compan y members attending a Joan Baez concert wit h thou sands of spectators announce d a special, two-for-one pric e o n Chicago '70 tickets. When Luscombe , who had not bee n consulted , heard of the offer , he wa s furious an d mor e convince d than eve r tha t th e actor s were trying to seize 'his' theatre . Afte r th e final performance, he went to the perform ers' dressing-room s an d announce d grimly , 'Al l right , th e revolutio n i s over. '

14

The European Repertoire

The tension s which had surface d i n th e compan y during the productio n of Ch e and Chicago '70 were a reflection of the time . It was a period whe n talk of 'revolution' invade d al l areas of public discourse, from censorshi p and dru g law s t o colleg e curricul a an d fro m th e rol e o f th e militar y t o Quebec nationalism . The aspiration s o f th e Ne w Left , wit h it s emphasis on hedonism an d individual self-realization, were ultimately repugnant t o Luscombe, brough t u p on th e Ol d Lef t principle s of discipline in the ser vice o f a supra-persona l ideal . Whil e h e coul d shar e hi s younge r col leagues' passio n for equality between th e race s and fo r individual dignity, he was suspicious of the incipien t anti-rationalism among th e young, who seemed susceptibl e to demagoguery and mysticism . In th e end , thes e differences, an d Luscombe' s inflexibl e retention o f artistic control, spli t the company an d brough t abou t a n almos t complete turnove r o f personne l in th e summe r o f 1970 . The ne w group tha t assembled in the autum n of that year was attracted by the politica l reputation o f the theatr e bu t unfamilia r with Luscombe's methods o f working. Nevertheless, they responded enthusiasticall y to th e physical challenge s o f hi s styl e an d th e left-win g stanc e o f th e produc tions. A politica l allegor y base d o n th e Pie d Pipe r legen d writte n b y Nancy Jowsey an d produce d unde r pressur e wa s a critica l failure, a s was the stagin g by Geoffrey Rea d o f Brendan Behan' s Th e Hostage. Those pro ductions prompted Natha n Cohen t o return t o a theme tha t had been an important moti f of his criticism from the beginning - th e importance of text-based theatr e an d th e need for the compan y to go beyond th e development o f original Canadia n work s to explor e th e Europea n repertoir e so sadly neglected o n Nort h American stages. 1 Because of his convictions, Luscombe was interested i n producing onl y

114 Harlequi n i n Hogtow n work with a socialist (o r at least a humanist) world-view, but ove r the years he ha d introduce d Toront o audience s t o a numbe r o f Europea n play s that expressed hi s own outlook o n th e world. One o f these wa s Carl Zuckmayer's Th e Captain ofKôpenick, th e las t production th e compan y staged i n its tiny basement theatre , i n the autum n o f 1967. Written by the autho r o f the filmscrip t for the internationall y acclaimed Th e Blue Angel, the pla y is a genial satir e on th e Germa n lov e of military ostentation an d unquestion ing respec t fo r authorit y an d regulations . I t i s based o n th e tru e stor y of an almost illiterate middle-age d Prussia n who in 190 6 succeeded i n taking over th e tow n hall of Kôpenick by disguising himself as an office r i n a uniform purchase d fro m a second-hand shop . Although th e historic Wilhelm Voigt's exploit laste d fo r little more tha n a n hour, he was able t o parlay it into somethin g lik e national fame , an d Zuckmaye r remembered havin g seen him a s an ol d man sellin g postcards of himself in military uniform at a Main z carnival.2 The 'unifor m worship ' satirize d i n Th e Captain o f Kôpenick was to lea d t o nationa l catastroph e twic e in Zuckmayer' s lifetime once i n a stampede to rally behind a gaudily beribboned Kaise r Wilhelm and a secon d time , mor e ominously , i n th e frenzie d respons e t o th e Voigt-like figur e o f Adolf Hitler. However prescien t Zuckmaye r may have bee n whe n h e wrot e th e pla y in 1931 , h e chos e t o presen t hi s ideas light-heartedl y rathe r tha n i n th e heavily allegorical and hysterica l style of the expressionist s of the previou s decade. That meant tha t not only the humour, dependin g fo r its effect o n a knowledg e o f Germa n characte r types , but als o th e narrativ e styl e was difficult t o translat e int o anothe r language . A s Zuckmaye r himsel f explained i n hi s prefac e t o th e Englis h adaptatio n produce d b y th e National Theatre of Britain in 1971 , 'th e composition o f the origina l play moves along tw o tracks: the stor y of the haples s man, slowl y waking up t o the us e of his wits, and th e stor y of the uniform' s slow degradation. An d i t begins - a warning signa l for the Germany of 1931 - wit h the birth an d the idolatr y of the Uniform , while the ma n lookin g for work is thrown ou t as a beggar.' 3 The slow-developing , almos t picaresqu e styl e of th e piec e seemed confusin g t o non-German s wh o di d no t kno w th e stor y o f th e inevitable masquerade . Luscombe's revisio n of the script, undertaken i n the spring of 1967, just after Jac k Winte r lef t th e company , wa s fairl y faithfu l t o th e original , although i t reduced th e length t o allow for the mim e sequences tha t were an invariabl e componen t o f an y TWP production . Notabl e i n th e tex t is the subtlet y of the humou r an d th e wide range o f tone, fro m the Dickensian sentimentalit y of the deat h o f the youn g girl to the harsh , Gorki-like

The Europea n Repertoir e 11 5 realism of the scene in the doss house. I n rehearsals, Luscomb e tende d t o mute th e sentimen t an d exaggerat e th e satire . H e als o focuse d rathe r heavily on th e injustice s suffere d b y Voigt, so that apart fro m th e centra l character ther e wer e few portraits o f any depth o r complexity . The sho w was regarded b y many critics as one o f the mos t interesting th e compan y had mounted , althoug h severa l confesse d t o bein g mystifie d i n man y places by the tone . To accommodate the eighteen scene s of the play, Nancy Jowsey created an ingeniou s playing area consisting of two semicircular platforms with a cagelike structur e in th e middl e of the uppe r one . Thi s geometrical uni t divided th e fron t playin g area fro m a rear spac e wher e propertie s wer e kept. It served in different ways as background fo r tavern o r jail. The bar s of the cag e could be removed t o serve as clubs or rifles. Basic costumes of plain gre y uniforms or blouse s and skirt s were altere d b y the additio n o f hats, cloaks, or other simple adornments. Th e all-powerfu l Captain's Uniform, in dazzling red, was shown to have a life o f its own by being mad e t o move about the stage without apparent support . As might b e expected , o f the tw o major critics , Herbert Whittake r was more sympatheti c t o the visual and kineti c approach o f the directo r an d designer. H e particularly admired th e way in which Luscombe had foun d remarkable physica l illustrations of action - a n officers ' club , fo r exam ple, i n which the member s solemnl y concentrate o n a game o f marbles, expressing themselve s only in grunts , whic h reveal bot h thei r succes s in the gam e an d thei r ran k i n relatio n t o th e othe r players . I n othe r sequences, th e compan y parade d t o th e accompanimen t o f recorde d marches, thereby capturing th e spiri t of German militaris m with ten me n and a phonograph. T o Whittaker, the vivi d nature o f these cameo s mad e Zuckmayer's verba l messag e almos t redundant . Nevertheless , whil e admiring th e actors ' abilit y t o transfor m themselve s instantly into man y different physica l types, he acknowledged that the concentration o n physical movement was at th e expens e o f speech. Th e voca l monotony of th e company palled after a time, but h e was willing to forgive it because o f th e exciting mime sequences. 4 Cohen, reiteratin g a frequent complaint, reminde d hi s readers tha t i t was 'a besetting weakness [of TWP] tha t the show s lacked intellectual substance commensurat e wit h their bustl e an d theatricalit y .. . [an d that ] al l too often the manner of the presentation turne d ou t to be the only justification.' To o frequentl y in th e past , h e complained , th e character s ha d emerged a s commodities an d object s rathe r tha n huma n beings . I n Th e Captain ofKopenick, however , in spite of its 'fascinations and frustration s in

116 Harlequi n in Hogtown general,' Cohe n though t h e sa w an importan t ste p forwar d in th e com pany's artistry . Here ther e wa s a successfu l blend o f what h e calle d a n 'expressionist approach' an d basi c narrative . He admire d th e 'disclosur e of the ambitions , interplay and psychologica l attitudes' of a succession of army and civi c officials . Like othe r critics , Cohe n commente d favourabl y o n th e mim e se quences, includin g one i n which 'a slo w motio n attac k by a soldier o n a down-and-outer become s the prelud e t o a grotesque, phantom-lik e ballet with th e variou s actors moving around a s though the y were mannequins, their arm s floppin g loosel y ahead o f them o r a t thei r sides. ' Bu t in Kapenick, unlik e i n som e othe r productions , h e fel t tha t th e 'kaleidoscopi c fusion o f sound, light and music , and ensembl e pose and posture ' served to reinforc e 'emotiona l an d socia l strength. ' Th e production , h e con cluded, was a 'statement, not a diversion with pretences.'5 Other critics who began t o discover TWP frequently found it difficult t o respond t o the ne w relationship the y experienced i n Luscombe's theatr e of th e physical , the verbal , and th e psychological . Overwhelmed b y th e theatricality of his productions, the y often fel t th e 'meaning ' o f th e play was obscured b y pretentious stylization . They complained abou t diction , or the 'superficiality ' o f the acting , or that too many things were happening at once so that it was difficult t o follow important speeches . Almost withou t exception , however , reviewer s foun d Kôpenick bot h challenging an d enjoyable . Osca r Rya n though t th e productio n illus trated thos e strength s which set Luscombe apart fro m all other director s working i n Canad a - 'hi s selectio n o f off-beat, provocative , meaningful and contemporar y scripts ; his imaginative and experimenta l staging ; his economy in th e us e of stage props , costume s and effects ; an d hi s actors ' conscientious performances.' 6 Another exampl e o f th e company' s abilit y t o moun t provocativ e pro ductions of European script s was the 196 9 staging of Jaroslav Hasek's The Good Soldier Schweik. Hasek's novel, an accoun t of th e adventure s of a wily Czech private in the Austro-Hungarian forces during the First World War, had beguile d audience s i n Europe in several stage adaptations, includin g ones b y Piscator an d Brecht . Luscombe himsel f had performe d i n a version o f th e wor k by Ewan MacColl . The stor y was relatively unknown in Canada, however , and Luscomb e though t th e Sovie t invasion of Czechoslovakia i n Augus t 196 8 provide d a n excellen t occasio n t o introduc e Schweik t o Canadia n audiences . H e decide d t o use an adaptatio n b y the Canadian writer Michael John Nimchuk. The origina l i s a sprawlin g picaresque nove l which follows it s unlikely hero throug h a serie s o f adventure s beginnin g i n Schweik' s Bohemian

The European Repertoir e 11 7 home town , passing throug h various parts of Central Europe, an d endin g at the front lines. Piscator had captured th e sweep of the novel by using conveyor belts t o mov e scenery across the stag e pas t marchin g soldiers. Th e tone of the productio n ha d been establishe d b y the projection o f cartoo n figures b y th e caricaturis t Geor g Gros z onto a scree n a t th e bac k o f th e stage. Lacking th e resource s o f a heavil y subsidized Europea n theatre , Lus combe an d Nanc y Jowsey devise d a translucen t backgroun d pane l o n which t o projec t angula r shapes , cartoo n locations , o r th e silhouette s of actors. On-stage, a small unit of vaguely ecclesiastical shape served various functions a s the actio n move d from rooming-hous e t o tavern to barracks. The actor s appeared i n white terry-cloth coveralls altered b y the addition of hats or other accessorie s - al l but Ray Whelan as Schweik played several roles. The pla y was greeted by the critics as one o f the most successful produc tions in the company' s nine-year history. Oscar Rya n though t th e produc tion an advance over past achievements. 'Climaxes are better defined , less ambiguous, more concise, ' h e wrote. 7 But it was Nathan Cohe n wh o was most fulsome in his appreciation. Havin g expressed hi s exasperation wit h the fac t tha t Toront o theatr e reflecte d almos t nothin g o f th e 'politica l and cultura l ferment going o n i n th e world,' 8 he welcomed thi s play. He had ofte n foun d th e politica l conten t o f Luscombe-Winte r production s naïve and strident , and th e ne w combination of Luscombe and Nimchuk seemed t o hi m bette r balanced . Luscombe' s handlin g o f hi s actors ha d become mor e efficien t an d cohesive , 'quit e a t varianc e wit h th e unfin ished, often crude air characteristic of his work hitherto.' He thought th e actors spok e clearl y and wit h understanding , an d h e welcome d a ne w note o f romanti c tenderness , eve n suggestin g tha t th e slapstic k veered over int o soft-heartednes s a t th e end , when Schweik , alone i n a pool of light, 'recites the names of all the people he met during the play, all gone now, casualties of war and th e follie s that go with it.' Indeed, if he had any quarrel wit h th e production , i t was that it was perhaps a littl e bland . H e found n o clarificatio n of political thought , no r anythin g to 'disturb , jar, or shock people.'9 Schweik played to enthusiastic houses for fou r weeks and the n wa s held over unti l 12 April. No doubt , a factor contributing t o th e play' s success was what Cohen called the 'amiable ' nature of its commentary on bureau cracy in and ou t o f uniform. But there was another reaso n fo r its popularity. Member s o f th e Toront o Czec h communit y flocke d t o th e production, an d th e compan y added a special Sunda y matinee fo r thei r benefit. Françoi s Klanfer remember s performin g at tha t matinee , strug-

118 Harlequi n i n Hogtow n gling t o sin g a Czec h folk-son g h e ha d learne d phonetically . A s h e entered, h e wa s conscious o f an eeri e silenc e and wondere d i f the audi ence was hostile. Suddenly, as he moved downstage, he realized that many of th e spectator s wer e openly weeping. The pla y became th e company' s biggest hit, the first to cover running costs from box-offic e receipts . In January 1971 , Luscomb e bega n rehearsal s for a new work by Munro Scott calle d Wu-Feng. Luscomb e ha d bee n intereste d i n Chin a sinc e th e early sixties, but no t al l the actor s shared hi s enthusiasm for Scott's treat ment o f th e subject , and severa l were openly hostile. One day , they confronted th e directo r an d aske d hi m t o dro p th e play . Luscomb e persuaded th e compan y t o le t hi m brin g i n th e playwrigh t to se e i f th e script coul d b e satisfactoril y revised. When Scot t refuse d t o rewrit e an d the actor s remained adaman t tha t the y did no t wan t to perform in it, he decided t o cancel the show , leaving the compan y without a play for thei r next production. 10 In desperation , the y gathere d i n th e foye r o f th e theatr e an d rea d scripts. Dian e Gran t brough t i n Shelley, th e Idealist, a wor k abou t th e English poet b y Ann Jellicoe. I t was neither political nor lik e anything the company had don e before , so when Luscomb e agree d t o stage it, several of the actors, including Phil Savath and Larr y Mollin, left, accusing him of selling ou t th e TW P principles . Th e remainin g member s o f th e grou p worked throug h what was one o f the shortes t but also , paradoxically, one of th e mos t pleasan t rehearsa l period s the y ha d ha d a t TWP . Nanc y Jowsey devised a simple setting consisting of a semicircle of seven latticework arches behind a white wrought-iron garden seat located i n the middle of the stage . The arche s served as entrances or , occasionally, as niches in whic h the actor s stoo d lik e statues waitin g t o enter . Th e performer s were i n perio d costumes , with th e exceptio n o f Ra y Whelan, who , a s a kind o f choru s figure , wor e a shor t peasan t smoc k (whic h h e hate d because he thought it looked lik e a dress).11 Several critics expressed surpris e tha t Luscombe could direct a work in which the actors spoke distinctly and quietl y and i n which there was virtually no singin g and dancing . In this production, the y found strong acting combined wit h th e touche s o f theatricalit y they ha d com e t o associat e with TWP. I n on e sequence , Suzett e Couture, playin g Shelley's first wife, wore a shaw l which becam e th e 'baby ' sh e carrie d i n he r arms . I n th e course o f a n argumen t wit h he r husband , th e 'baby ' unravelle d an d turned int o a wave , symbolizing the wate r i n whic h sh e committe d sui cide.12 A t th e en d o f th e play , th e dea d Shelle y run s i n slo w motio n towards the audience , crying , 'Come on,' while the other s follo w at a dis-

The Europea n Repertoir e 11 9 tance. Osca r Rya n called i t 'one of TWP's most satisfyin g productions,' 13 and Bria n Pear l o f Excalibur thought i t 'on e o f the mos t competen t an d well-produced show s of the year.' 14 As usual, however, Nathan Cohen' s comment s were th e mos t thought ful. Havin g expressed hi s disappointment wit h th e company's recent pro ductions, Th e Piper and Th e Hostage, he was, perhaps, please d t o be able t o reassert hi s fait h i n thei r talent . Th e subjec t o f Shelley, th e Idealist, 'th e position an d functio n o f women i n a male-oriented society, ' h e though t 'most unusua l fo r Toront o Worksho p Productions. ' Th e powe r o f th e performances, especiall y th e women's , h e though t impressive , an d h e found i t 'strange and exhilarating ' that you could hear th e text. 15 This was to b e th e las t complimen t th e compan y woul d eve r receiv e fro m thei r most rigorou s critic . Sixteen day s later, a t th e ag e o f forty-seven, Natha n Cohen die d while undergoing hear t surger y in a Toronto hospital. Cohen's deat h wa s to transfor m th e Toront o critica l scene. Throug h his flamboyan t manner, hi s magisteria l tone , hi s extensiv e exposur e o n television an d radi o a s well as in th e press , and hi s wide-ranging interests, Cohen ha d com e t o dominat e dram a criticis m i n th e city . Tha t domi nance ha d ha d mixe d results. In th e eleve n year s he worked for th e Star, he create d a n entertainmen t sectio n i n whic h discussion o f th e theatr e was as good a s it was anywhere in Nort h America , outsid e Ne w York an d Boston. Bu t much o f that discussio n was conducted i n a deliberately pro vocative style. Like Shaw before him , Cohen consciousl y created a public persona. Hi s affectatio n o f exoti c canes , cloaks , an d outrageou s pro nouncements was the visible manifestation of a naturally questioning an d combative mind. It was no accident tha t the titl e of his long-running radio and televisio n quiz program wa s Fighting Words. Fo r Cohen , languag e was a weapon , an d i n a n imperfec t worl d h e wa s not happ y unles s h e wa s fighting to make that world better . The proble m wit h Cohen's campaig n t o transform Canadian theatr e i n his own image was that it was doomed t o failure. In th e nam e o f integrity and hig h standards , h e attempte d t o la y down a prescriptiv e view of th e drama whic h bore n o relationshi p to the realitie s of the market-place . By condemning suc h popular hits as Brigadoon and Hair, he simpl y alienated their audience s withou t being able t o creat e a deman d fo r th e kin d of drama h e admired . Throughou t hi s career, h e calle d fo r th e creatio n o f an indigenou s Canadia n dram a an d fo r th e eliminatio n of th e colonia l attitudes inhibitin g its development. I n th e end , h e wa s not t o se e th e realization o f his dream. Hi s death cam e just a s the Toront o theatr e was beginning t o explode .

15 New Perspectives

When th e actor s reassemble d i n th e autum n t o begin rehearsal s fo r th e 1971-2 season, i t was to a theatre darkene d b y tragedy. During the sum mer, whil e swimmin g i n unfamilia r water s i n th e Caribbean , Joh n Faulkner had bee n caugh t i n an undertow and drowned . His death lef t a huge gap in the company. Not only would it be difficult t o replace hi m as a brilliantly imaginative lighting designer, but hi s steadying influence on the group would be lost. In stormy rehearsal periods, John had often pro vided an island of quiet strength. It was shocking to realize that that calm presence wa s gone. A memorial servic e and benefi t performanc e a t th e theatre brought togethe r member s of the Toronto theatr e communit y in a fina l celebratio n o f a kindl y an d independen t spirit . Musician s from Grossman's taver n performed , an d Milto n Acor n rea d a poe m h e ha d written for the occasion. Though unobserve d at the time , Faulkner's death signalle d the en d of a phase i n th e developmen t o f Toronto Workshop Productions. The er a of pionee r theatre , wit h its reliance on enthusias m and Rub e Goldber g ingenuity, wa s passin g a s th e company' s financia l responsibilitie s increased. T o th e pressure s of theatre ownershi p and subscriptio n plan ning (whic h had alread y changed th e company from wha t it had bee n a t 47 Fraser Avenue) were now added th e challeng e of competition fro m a group of new theatres just struggling into life . The earl y seventies saw an unprecedented upsurg e of theatrical activity in al l parts of the country , but particularl y in Toronto. The mos t notable cause of this sudden growt h was the demographi c chang e resultin g from the birt h o f th e so-calle d bab y boomers i n th e year s immediately following 1945 . The postwa r generation ha d grow n up i n a n environmen t very different fro m tha t of their parents. The art s had bee n elevate d to a posi-

New Perspectives 12 1 tion o f more importanc e an d dignit y in th e schoo l curriculum , and th e emergence o f institutions such a s the Stratfor d Festival , the Nationa l Ballet, an d th e Canadia n Oper a Company i n the 1950 s ha d provide d caree r models no t availabl e in the twentie s and thirties . Furthermore, th e youth culture o f the 1960 s put a strong emphasi s on creativit y (albeit of a rathe r self-indulgent variety ) an d stresse d th e importanc e o f livin g a lif e o f self fulfilment rathe r than on e dominate d b y a sense of duty. Equally important , however , wer e recen t politica l developments . I n 1971, faced with a dramatic increase in unemployment among young people ( a consequenc e o f th e postwa r generation' s beginnin g t o ente r th e labour market) , Ottawa established a summer work program euphemisti cally calle d Opportunitie s fo r Youth . The progra m prove d s o successful that i t was followed by a second scheme , th e Loca l Initiatives Program o r LIP, which provided employmen t assistance on a year-round basis . Those initiatives wer e operate d throug h Manpowe r offices , an d provide d sala ries for young people employed on locall y approved projects . A probably unforeseen consequenc e o f this sudden government munif icence wa s its effect o n th e art s i n Canada . Th e majorit y of the project s undertaken unde r th e progra m wer e in such area s a s construction, social action, and community development, but a significant numbe r were innovative enterprise s i n th e theatre . I n th e 1971- 2 seaso n alone , som e $2. 5 million i n ne w mone y wa s spen t o n theatr e groups , o f whic h a mer e $34,000 wen t to previousl y established companies. ' A particular anomaly of thi s ne w for m o f art s subsid y (n o doub t a consequenc e o f it s bein g administered a s an employmen t scheme) was the absenc e o f any aesthetic criteria for determining a group's eligibility for funding. Whereas th e ol d theatre companie s ha d ha d t o mee t fairl y rigorou s standard s o f profes sionalism in order to qualify fo r grants from the Canad a Council , no such restrictions existed i n th e ne w program. Th e resul t was a proliferation of shoestring theatr e operation s kep t alive by LIP grants and unemployment insurance benefits until 1975, when th e youth programs vanished as quixotically as they had appeared . The emergenc e o f so many new theatres i n Toronto , a cit y which ha d previously felt no shortag e of them, complicated tension s which had been building in the artistic community for some years. The tension s were most clearly evident in the sharpenin g oppositio n durin g the 1960 s between an ossifying 'establishment ' theatre an d a burgeoning alternativ e movement. Nathan Cohe n ha d spearheade d th e attac k o n th e stodgines s an d colo nial attitudes of Canada's cultura l czars, whether at the Crest , the Dominion Dram a Festival , or th e organization s that attempte d t o replace them .

122 Harlequi n in Hogtown In 1967 , fres h fro m a tri p to Europe, h e ha d commente d o n th e anoma lous position of the country's most prosperous English-speakin g metropo lis. Wherea s Canadia n citie s such a s Vancouver, Winnipeg, an d Halifa x enjoyed a thrivin g theatrical culture , Toronto remaine d artisticall y and architecturally impoverished . Lackin g adequat e venues , th e cit y ha d missed several of the tourin g attractions organized for the Centennial. 2 Meanwhile, the S t Lawrence Centre for th e Arts, Toronto's Centennial project, which was to hav e provided th e cit y with world-class theatre an d music facilities , remaine d mire d i n controvers y and delay . Stalled by disagreements an d diminishe d b y budget cut s throug h th e lat e 1960s , th e building tha t eventuall y opened i n 197 0 proved t o be a mer e shado w of the origina l concept . Cohen , citin g insipi d an d platitudinou s produc tions, dismissed its first season a s 'devoid of interest.' What he objected t o most, however, was the fac t tha t th e Centr e wa s not representativ e o f th e new Toronto. Its board o f governors, he maintained , included 'al l the old familiars fro m th e establishe d senio r cultura l group s i n th e cit y - sym phony, ballet, art gallery, Crest, Canadian Players , Theatre Toronto.' 3 He predicted tha t i f the Centr e followe d the polic y of the no w defunct establishment theatres an d directe d themselve s towards a Toronto society that had los t most of its influence durin g the war, it would suffer a fate similar to theirs. 4 If Cohe n wa s the mos t articulat e and effectiv e opponen t of Toronto's establishment theatre , h e wa s not th e onl y one . Durin g th e lat e 1960s , Toronto Worksho p Productions was merely the mos t successful o f a number o f companies attemptin g in differen t ways to provide alternativ e dramatic far e fo r Toront o audiences . I n Marc h 1969 , Tri o Productions , in association wit h Theatre Pass e Muraille, staged Rochell e Owens' s Futz a t the Central Library Theatre. I t was to cause one o f the more amusin g confrontations betwee n th e self-appointe d guardians of establishment morality and th e counter-culture radical s beginning t o storm the citadel. The pla y ha d alread y caused somethin g o f a sensatio n when firs t pre sented b y the L a Mama Experimental Theatre Club in New York and late r at th e Travers e Theatr e i n Edinburgh . By the tim e i t closed i n Toronto , the moralit y squad ha d issue d mor e tha n fou r hundre d summonse s t o actors, cre w members, producers , ushers , and eve n hat-chec k attendant s for takin g part in or associatin g with an obscen e performance . B y 15 May, all charges except thos e against the director an d th e producers ha d bee n dropped. Bu t th e Crow n doggedly presse d it s case agains t thes e 'offend ers,' and a trial date was set for 4 June. By October, a n initia l guilty verdict had bee n appealed , an d a n unrepentan t Theatr e Pass e Muraill e was pre-

New Perspectives 12 3 senting a second L a Mama script, the Tom O'Horga n productio n o f Paul Foster's To m Paine, which had appeare d i n Edinburg h alon g with Futz i n 1967. Another Toront o grou p whic h was beginning t o impor t som e o f th e new experimenta l work from Ne w York was Studio Lab . Originall y established by Ernest Schwarz as a children's theatre, Studio Lab had begu n t o cater t o mor e matur e audiences . I n Februar y 1969 , the y had produce d Michael McClure's The Beard, a fantasy seduction which had bee n labelle d obscene b y the Sa n Francisco police when presented ther e b y the Actor's Workshop. I n December , Schwar z and hi s company opened wha t was to be th e succè s de scandale o f the year - a local production o f Dionysus in 69, an experiment in ritual and nudit y originated by Richard Schechner' s recently formed Performanc e Group o f New York. Perhaps th e mos t vivid indicatio n o f ho w Toronto theatrica l taste was changing, however, was the arriva l at the Roya l Alex in December 196 9 of the rock musical Hair. With its celebration o f the youth culture and it s full frontal nudity , Hair played to enthusiastic or curious audiences for a total of twelv e months. B y the tim e th e Futz appea l wa s heard i n th e count y court o n 7 April 1970 , it was evident to Judge William Lyo n that community standards of tolerance had s o changed tha t confirmation of the lower court judgment coul d no t be justified. The catalys t for thi s sudde n transformatio n was the retur n t o Toronto of severa l youn g director s fres h fro m experienc e abroa d an d eage r t o exercise their talents in their nativ e country. Feeling themselves excluded from th e establishe d theatre s an d dedicate d t o differen t aestheti c aims, several o f thes e youn g artist s set u p theatre s o f thei r own . Within a few short years, four companies emerged: Theatr e Passe Muraille, founded i n 1968 b y Jim Garrard ; Factor y Theatre Lab , founded i n 197 0 by Ken Gass and Fran k Trotz; Tarragon Theatre , founded i n 197 1 by Bill Glassco; and Toronto Fre e Theatre , founde d i n 197 1 b y Tom Hendry , Marti n Kinch, John Palmer, and others. Though thes e companies came to be referred t o collectively a s the 'alternative ' theatres, 5 in fac t the y shared n o commo n program o r methodology . I n general , thei r inspiratio n cam e fro m New York and Europ e rathe r tha n England . They looked t o th e ne w directors of New York an d Polan d - O'Horgan , Julian Beck , Judith Melina , Jerzy Grotowski. They read th e international theatr e magazine s and 'modelle d their work after Tulane Drama Review descriptions of Off-off-Broadway an d Eastern Europe.' 6 This ne w movement in th e Toront o theatr e foun d it s voice in August 1970. Tha t month , severa l youn g directors , includin g Jim Plaxton , Jim

124 Harlequi n in Hogtow n Garrard, Marti n Kinch , John Palmer , Pau l Thompson, Ke n Gass , Henry Tarvainen, an d Marti n Brenzell, organized th e Festiva l of Undergroun d Theatre to showcase their work and tha t of some of the international the atre companie s the y looke d t o fo r inspiration . Among th e entrie s wer e Passe Muraille' s Ubu Raw, directed b y Pau l Thompson ; Ibsen' s A Doll's House, directe d b y John Palmer ; an d To m Eyen' s White Whore an d th e Bit Player, directed b y Martin Brenzell. But the greatest excitemen t was generated b y the appearance s o f suc h internationa l companie s a s the Brea d and Puppe t Theatr e fro m Ne w Yor k an d th e Théâtr e d e l a Grand e Panique fro m Paris . Conspicuousl y absent fro m th e festiva l wa s George Luscombe an d Toront o Workshop Productions . Increasingly , Luscombe was to fin d himsel f isolated, no t onl y from th e ne w young directors bu t also from a second generatio n o f critics. During th e previou s decade , dram a criticis m had bee n dominate d b y Nathan Cohe n an d Herber t Whittaker , writing in th e tw o major dailies , the Toronto Star and th e Globe and Mail. Both men wer e deeply knowledgeable, an d the y share d a passionat e convictio n tha t wha t the y di d wa s important. In that conviction, they seemed t o be supported b y their newspapers. Wit h Cohen's deat h an d Whittaker' s partial, and the n complete , retirement, however , all that changed. Th e writers who replaced th e olde r critics were seldo m a s erudite a s their predecessors , an d the y tended t o regard art s criticism as simply another branc h o f journalism, lik e foreign affairs o r sports writing. Their attitud e n o doubt reflecte d a change i n the editorial polic y o f th e paper s themselves . N o longe r di d art s criticis m enjoy an y particular prestige . Th e concep t o f drama a s an expressio n o f high human culture was gradually being replace d b y the notion o f theatre as entertainment. An individual who resisted th e tren d was Cohen's immediate successor, Urjo Kareda . Kared a ha d writte n occasional piece s fo r Cohe n sinc e a t least 1967 , whe n h e contribute d a sympathetic article o n Luscomb e an d the workin g methods o f TWP. Hi s recen t contribution s t o th e Star ha d been mostl y film reviews, but b y the fal l o f 197 1 he ha d assume d th e no t insignificant mantl e o f his former editor . Kareda' s approac h t o th e the atre was, like Cohen's, essentiall y that o f a spectator. Hi s enthusiasm fo r the art was boundless and hi s knowledge extensive, but hi s reviews tended to smell of the lam p and th e librar y rather tha n o f sweat and greasepaint . What Kareda brought tha t was new was the perspectiv e o f a younger generation. Wherea s Cohe n an d Whittake r looke d bac k t o th e thirtie s an d early forties as their formativ e period, Kared a was a product o f the sixties. He wa s in tun e wit h th e ne w bree d o f actor s an d director s jus t the n

New Perspectives 12 5 appearing in th e city . If anything, he identifie d even mor e strongl y than his predecessors wit h the ne w Canadian playwrights , and h e did muc h t o promote them i n his columns. Also affectin g th e critica l climat e i n Toront o durin g thi s tim e was the emergence of Canadian dram a a s a subject o f serious academi c enquiry. In th e previou s decade , discussion of Canadian play s had bee n confine d almost exclusively to the columns of the newspapers , but th e seventies saw a proliferatio n o f articles o n th e subjec t in periodical s an d learne d journals. This flurry of interest in a new area o f Canadian writing culminated in 197 4 with the creatio n o f the Canadian Theatre Review, ajournai devote d entirely to a subject that te n year s earlier coul d hardl y have been sai d t o exist. As th e foru m fo r seriou s discussio n o f Canadia n theatr e shifte d fro m the dail y pres s t o th e academi c journals , th e ton e o f tha t discussio n altered. Commen t o n th e subjec t becam e mor e literar y and theoretica l than i t ha d bee n hitherto . Writer s bega n t o tak e mor e interes t i n what might be calle d 'th e sociolog y of theatre' an d trie d t o relat e i t to large r patterns i n th e country' s cultura l development . I n a n articl e entitle d 'Creeping towar d a Culture ' i n th e firs t volum e o f Canadian Theatre Review, th e editor , Do n Rubin , gave a heavil y footnoted versio n o f th e notion tha t wa s coming t o dominat e account s o f Canadia n play-writing. Citing th e 188 9 theor y o f th e Frenc h literar y historia n Ferdinan d Bru netière tha t period s o f excellenc e i n th e dram a coincid e wit h moments when nation s ar e exalte d b y th e expressio n o f a collectiv e will , Rubi n argued that the sudde n appearanc e o f so many new Canadian playwrights was an expressio n o f a new national self-awarenes s brought abou t b y the country's participatio n i n th e Secon d Worl d Wa r an d furthere d b y th e Centennial celebrations o f 1967. I n conformance with thi s theory, Rubin tended t o dismiss as insignificant Canadian play s written before 196 7 an d to regar d a s quintessentially 'Canadian' plays that dealt with nationa l history and politics. His rather narrow interpretation - wha t might be called the 'set in Canada' a s opposed t o th e merel y 'mad e i n Canada ' doctrin e o f Canadia n drama - rapidl y became the accepted orthodox y amon g critics and public alike. Audiences began t o flock in substantial numbers to the new alternative theatres t o watch plays about generationa l conflic t in Newfoundland, the 183 7 rebellio n o f farmer s i n Uppe r Canada , o r blood-feud s amon g Irish settlers in nineteenth-century Ontario. Other development s als o contribute d t o a growing interest i n indigenous drama . Th e Playwrights ' Conference, hel d unde r th e aegi s o f th e

126 Harlequi n i n Hogtow n Canada Counci l in 1971 , recommende d tha t fundin g to theatre s shoul d be contingen t o n thei r includin g a certain numbe r o f Canadian play s in their seasons . Tha t recommendation , whil e not adopte d i n it s entirety, influenced Counci l policy, and theatre s fel t unde r increasin g pressur e t o produce origina l Canadia n script s and t o bring ne w playwrights into th e theatre. Th e followin g yea r saw the establishmen t of th e Floy d S. Chalmers Canadian Pla y Awards and th e creatio n o f the Toront o Drama Bench to adjudicat e it . To many , TWP seemed ou t o f ste p wit h thes e develop ments. It s 'Canadian' play s tende d no t t o b e regiona l o r historical , an d the theatr e ha d acquire d a reputation fo r bein g inhospitabl e t o writers. Luscombe's dealings with playwrights had bee n marke d b y tension, suspicion, and bitterness , and i n spite of repeated effort s h e ha d faile d to find another autho r wit h whom he coul d work as comfortably as he ha d wit h Jack Winter. It was becoming evident that if TWP was to compete successfully fo r a share of the limite d Toronto theatre audience , i t might have to modify it s strategy.

16

Old Wine in New Bottles: Ten Lost Years

As he move d t o adjust t o th e ne w Toronto theatre scen e i n th e earl y seventies, Luscomb e ha d difficult y adaptin g t o th e emergin g critica l orthodoxy. H e wa s suspicious of nationalism . As a Marxist , h e believe d tha t nations were shaped b y international force s and tha t socia l and politica l developments i n othe r countrie s ha d direc t relevanc e t o wha t was happening i n Canada . Indeed , i n certain cases , the operatio n o f such forces might b e mor e clearl y evident i n storie s abou t rura l Chin a o r allegorie s based o n American politics than in plays on Canadia n subjects . Nevertheless, it was obvious that TWP could no t g o on ignorin g th e growin g interest in Canadian materia l on the part o f local audiences . One o f his early efforts t o deal with a Canadian topi c straightforwardly (rather tha n indirectl y through allegor y or dramati c metaphor ) wa s his attempt t o moun t a new play by the poe t Milton Acorn. The projec t was first proposed i n 197 2 by Acorn and Cedri c Smith, who had bee n collaborating o n a late-nigh t sho w at th e Alexande r Stree t theatre. 1 Wit h hel p from th e Canad a Council , Luscombe ha d commissione d Acorn t o complete a dram a abou t th e exploitatio n o f farm workers in Princ e Edward Island t o be calle d Th e Road t o Charlottetown. On th e strengt h o f the com mission, Acorn went north t o work in seclusion, and durin g the summe r of 197 3 h e maile d bac k hi s pla y i n instalments . When th e fina l draf t arrived i n December , Luscomb e wa s not happ y with the secon d act , bu t lacking an alternative script, he began rehearsal s hopin g t o refashion th e play with the actors' help . During these rehearsals, Acorn watched the transformatio n of his work with a grim stoicism until he could endure it no longer. Finall y one morn ing h e appeare d i n th e foye r o f th e theatr e accompanie d b y a well dressed strange r who m Luscomb e too k t o be hi s lawyer, and demande d

128 Harlequi n in Hogtown to kno w i f further change s wer e bein g contemplated . Whe n Luscomb e muttered gruffl y tha t h e woul d mak e what alterations h e though t neces sary, Acorn handed hi m a n envelope, turned o n hi s heel, and walked out of th e theatr e withou t a word. Nonplussed, Luscombe opene d th e lette r to fin d tha t h e wa s threatened wit h lega l actio n i f the scrip t was altered any further . H e reacte d wit h hi s usual determination . Althoug h h e ha d no immediat e alternativ e t o Th e Road t o Charlottetown, h e informe d th e actors that rehearsals were suspended.2 This was not th e first time the compan y had ha d t o scramble for a lastminute replacemen t i n thei r program , bu t th e timin g o f th e curren t emergency coul d scarcel y hav e bee n mor e unfortunate . No t onl y ha d they suffere d losse s on th e tw o opening production s o f the season , Richard Thirdtime, a n adaptatio n o f Shakespeare' s Richard II I b y Steven Bush and Ric k McKenna , and Jea n Anouilh' s Thieves' Carnival, bu t the y ha d failed t o achieve any of the objective s they had spelle d ou t s o ambitiously to th e fundin g agencie s si x months earlier . I t was desperately importan t that the y come u p wit h a production tha t would vindicate their clai m to being the senio r alternative theatre i n the cit y and demonstrat e thei r pro fessed commitmen t to original Canadian drama . One day , having overcome his disappointment tha t th e Charlottetown play had bee n cancelled , Cedric Smith walked into th e theatr e t o convey to Luscomb e hi s enthusiasm abou t a work he ha d recentl y seen a t The atre Pass e Muraill e - a collectively create d productio n pu t togethe r th e summer befor e b y a group o f actors who had spen t severa l weeks investigating th e wor k and live s of farmer s in Clinton , Ontario. Th e piec e was called The Farm Show, and Smit h was excited about the way it captured th e lives o f ordinar y Canadians . H e though t tha t perhap s TW P coul d d o something similar , an d h e brough t wit h hi m a boo k h e believe d migh t form th e basi s for suc h a production . I t was an ora l histor y of th e 1930 s called Te n Lost Years. The recentl y publishe d boo k wa s a collectio n o f memorie s o f th e depression year s recorded o n tap e by the journalist Barr y Broadfoot during a fifteen-thousand-mile trip acros s th e country . Broadfoot, himsel f a child i n th e thirties , had wante d to discover what survivors of the perio d felt abou t tha t time , and th e volum e is a record o f his findings. In many ways, i t i s an imperfec t mirror o f th e decad e i t reflects. Individual speakers are never identified, so their comments cannot b e related t o a person ality o r a particula r history. Furthermore, th e recollection s ar e gathere d by them e rathe r tha n b y region o r year and for m a kind of disembodie d collage o f impression s devoid o f distinguishin g regional o r clas s charac-

Old Win e in Ne w Bottles: Ten Lost Years 12 9 teristics. The resul t is a generalized 'portrait ' of a period tha t i s necessarily backward-lookin g an d fo r tha t reaso n coloure d b y nostalgi a an d sentimentality. It was a mine o f dramatic material , but lackin g in many of the essentia l ingredients of drama. The compan y Luscomb e assemble d t o begi n wor k on th e ne w projec t was a heterogeneou s group . Si x of th e actors , includin g June an d Joh n Faulkner's son Peter , Cedri c Smith , François Klanfer, Pete r Millard , Ross Skene, an d Iri s Paabo , ha d worke d wit h Luscomb e i n th e past ; Dian e Douglass, Jackie Burroughs , and Richar d Payne were newcomers. As they began t o improvise scenes, it became eviden t that ther e was no consensus as to how the work should be organized or what material most deserved to be included . Fo r Luscombe , th e perio d wa s powerfull y evocative . As a child, he had watched young men rid e th e boxcars through th e Do n Valley close t o hi s home an d see n migran t workers try to slee p i n th e warm ovens at the Todmorden bric k works. He remembere d neighbour s out of work, an d a constan t fea r amon g hi s elder s o f bein g 'fired, ' a fat e h e didn't understan d bu t imagine d a s bein g completel y encircle d wit h flames. Th e member s o f the company , b y contrast, were product s o f th e fifties an d sixtie s who regarded th e depressio n a s ancient history. To giv e th e actor s a sens e o f th e period , Luscomb e lecture d o n th e social and economi c condition s o f the tim e (whic h man y of the perform ers foun d boring ) an d describe d th e 'give n circumstances ' of particular scenes. Thes e latte r demonstration s wer e particularl y vivid. 'W e would feel th e hea t an d hea r th e swingin g scree n doors, ' recalle d on e o f th e actors. 'Ther e wa s a parad e (Georg e woul d mim e th e marchin g o f th e band), but wha t was important, h e would say, was the littl e dog who wanders i n amon g th e marchers ' feet . An d a s h e spoke , George' s chunk y body would suddenly move like the dog.' 3 In the early days of rehearsal, the actors picked stories to be tried out in improvisation. Sometimes, they would devise routines to accompany lines spoken b y a single individual; at other times, they would dramatize a passage from th e book and presen t i t as a 'realistic' sketch or as part of a simulated radi o broadcast . Th e basi c configuration of the stag e grew out o f a series o f improvisations around a camp-fire in a hobo jungle. Since ther e were rarely any women i n th e hob o camps, th e actresse s got squeezed t o the periphery , wher e the y established differen t 'homes. ' Meanwhile , the actors playin g th e restles s an d migratin g worker s began mimin g riding the rods . Pete r Faulkne r pretended t o jump on a boxcar, an d th e com pany spent hour s developing what was to become on e o f the most theatrical sequences of the production .

130 Harlequi n in Hogtown At the outset , Cedric Smith served as dramaturge a s well as music director and composer . Bu t differences between him and Luscomb e soon gave rise to serious disagreements. Smith was a committed Marxist, but h e was also a folk-singe r with a folk-singer's attraction t o th e emotionall y melodramatic. Althoug h skilfu l i n turnin g ou t tunefu l burlesque s such a s a song of the Bennet t Buggy or a 'Depressed' square dance, Smith was also drawn t o th e 'hurtin ' vein , as in suc h lyric s a s 'Mam a neede d help , sh e didn't fee l to o strong , / An d all the children' s sadnes s it just seeme d so wrong.' Luscombe, however , wante d th e performer s t o exercis e emotiona l restraint i n thei r playing . He wa s convinced tha t to o muc h emotio n o n stage made the audience 'run from it,' and so, like Brecht and Littlewood, he sough t t o avoi d sentimentalit y in th e theatre . Hi s aim was to creat e a truer and deeper emotio n throug h contras t or anticlimax. An example of the kin d of moment h e cherishe d occur s near th e beginnin g of Te n Lost Years, wher e th e Quie t Woma n (Jacki e Burroughs ) recount s how , a s a result of the failur e of their generator , muc h of the far m wor k had t o be done without electricity. Her mothe r attempt s to console he r b y assuring her, 'It'l l all work out i n the end . You'll be a better woman for it.' Instead of concluding with the expected commen t tha t her mothe r wa s right, the Quiet Woman remarks acidly, 'God , I was never closer t o killing a perso n in m y life.' Th e laug h th e lin e got o n openin g night , brought on b y the audience's surprise d recognitio n o f the trut h o f the response , convinced Luscombe they had a hit on thei r hands . He als o recognize d tha t th e materia l ha d a certai n alienatio n alread y built in . The monologue s wer e th e recollection s of tough survivor s who were recounting the events of some forty years earlier. In re-creating their reminiscences, i t was important t o fin d a style which would conve y both the impressio n o f dramati c immediac y and th e effec t o f emotiona l dis tance. For example, the character rememberin g he r discover y of a neighbour wh o ha d committe d suicid e woul d no t g o throug h th e origina l emotions again, because she had already dealt with them. The actres s had to remember tha t she was playing not the girl who made th e discovery but the woman who remembered it . To bridge th e two times and t o create a more comple x theatrical effect , Luscombe trie d t o work on tw o levels. In that way, the detachmen t o f th e remembered pas t could by made more vivid by the intensity of the mimed 'present.' The speaker' s impassive account o f the crucifixio n of a railway policeman wa s juxtaposed wit h a silent search throug h a n imagine d railway-yard and th e horrifyin g discovery of the imaginar y body.

Old Win e in New Bottles: Te n Lost Years 13 1 Even mor e importan t tha n capturin g th e emotiona l trut h o f individual scenes wa s establishing an appropriat e tona l dynamic . One o f th e mos t important mean s t o tha t en d wa s the juxtapositio n o f contrastin g ele ments. Sometimes , opposin g views would be alternated , a s in favourable and unfavourabl e recollection s o f th e tre k t o Ottawa . Sometimes , th e music woul d provid e a n ironi c commen t o n th e lyrics , a s in th e squar e dance melody , in which jaunty rhythms accompany a description o f natural catastrophe: 'Go t no mone y in the till , / I f the dust don't get you the hoppers will.' Sometimes, a scene of violence would be juxtaposed wit h a sentimental ballad: at th e en d o f the first part o f the play , a n accoun t of the murde r o f a hobo i s interspersed wit h th e son g 'D o no t thin k about tomorrow, / Le t tomorrow come and go, / Tonigh t you're in a nice warm boxcar, / Saf e fro m al l the win d an d snow. ' I n othe r cases , th e mime d sequence would jar wit h th e spoke n words , as when a scene exposin g th e pitiful wages paid t o dressmakers is juxtaposed wit h a silent fashion show. Perhaps the most complex problem i n dealing with the diverse material of th e Broadfoo t book , however , was that o f devisin g a n overal l shape . Part way through rehearsals , Luscomb e invite d Jack Winte r t o hel p hi m give th e productio n intellectua l and emotiona l coherence. Pau l Thompson an d hi s actor s a t th e Theatr e Pass e Muraill e had create d Th e Farm Show as a kind of three-dimensional photo-albu m o f the Clinto n community. Alan Filewod describes ho w these dramati c 'snapshots ' constituted a subjective repor t o f th e actors ' encounter s ove r severa l week s with th e farmers o f th e area. 4 As visitors and guests , th e performer s coul d hardly be critical or unflattering. Their purpos e was to 'authenticate' the experi ence of that first audience and, by transforming it into art, enable the m to see value and significanc e in their lives that they might not otherwise have discerned. Ther e was no attemp t o n th e par t o f the actor s (al l of whom were outsiders) t o evaluate those live s or t o place them i n a larger social, economic, or political context. Winter and Luscomb e were interested i n doing something quite differ ent. They were not conten t simply to reproduce experience ; the y wanted to bring out th e hidde n law s governing that experience. A s Marxists, they were convinced that the depression wa s not a unique or isolated phenomenon bu t somethin g tha t wa s going t o happe n again . The y wante d th e audience t o understan d ho w Canadians ' attitude s ha d worke d agains t them i n the past and how nostalgia for a sentimentalized 1930s - a s in the American T V series Th e Wallons - wa s anti-revolutionary and marke d a return t o colonialism. In this respect, Winter and Luscomb e found themselves at odds with som e o f the performers , includin g Cedric Smith, who

132 Harlequi n in Hogtown wanted t o eulogize th e people' s suffering . Winte r and Luscomb e wante d to attack the system which they felt had cause d tha t suffering . One metho d b y which they did s o was to us e agitpro p techniques . A sequence entitle d 'Th e Poke r Game ' show s how men (an d women ) with capital pla y with huma n live s th e wa y gamblers pla y with cards. Anothe r method wa s to focus more strongl y than Broadfoo t had done on the political rebel s o f the period . T o do so , Winter and Luscomb e supplemente d the materia l i n Te n Lost Years wit h excerpt s fro m anothe r recentl y pub lished book, Michae l Horn's Th e Dirty Thirties. There they found account s of the exploitation o f garment workers by the T. Eaton Company, and several revealing quotations o f R.B. Bennett. While a left-wing politica l interpretation informe d th e play , the ton e of the socia l criticism was less strident than usua l in TWP productions. I t was also bette r integrate d wit h th e othe r element s i n th e work . Indeed , th e political messag e wa s s o mute d tha t som e critic s fel t th e pla y wa s a n endorsement o f the very blindness Luscombe thought h e was attacking. When i t finally opened on 5 February 1974 , Te n Lost Years was an instant success. Following a couple o f lacklustre seasons, some critic s had begu n to feel tha t TWP was more intereste d i n American tha n Canadia n politics and tha t Luscombe' s method s o f training an d styl e of direction wer e n o longer relevan t i n th e radicall y altered Toront o theatr e scene . Al l such reservations disappeared i n the wak e of the almos t unanimous praise fo r the ne w production . Urj o Kareda , wh o ha d bee n devastatin g in hi s dismissal o f Thieves' Carnival, acknowledge d th e brillianc e o f Luscombe' s style, which he called ' a kind of musical theatre [whic h is] funny, insinuating, [and ] touching. ' Lik e most o f th e critics , Kareda wa s deeply move d by th e 'spellbindin g huma n document ' an d th e experience s i t revealed , 'aching, immediate and heartbreaking. ' But he was also full o f admiration for th e way in which the documentar y material had bee n handled. 6 Other critics shared hi s enthusiasm for th e compan y as not onl y versatile but disciplined . Audrey Ashley of the Ottawa Citizen was struck by th e actors' abilit y to create a world out of simple materials - ' a piano, a chair, a bo x o r two , an d a fe w ramps.' 7 Some praise d thei r skil l i n mim e an d their ability to evoke a rich scen e on a n empt y stage; others , thei r skil l in creating a n environmen t tha t enable d th e audienc e t o fee l th e atmos phere o f familiar surroundings . Ten Lost Years re-established Luscomb e and hi s company as a powerfully creative force in Toronto theatre . I t seemed t o vindicate his emphasis o n actor trainin g and grou p work , since th e distinctiv e qualities o f the pro duction wer e a result of his efforts ove r th e pas t fourteen years . His selec-

Old Win e in New Bottles: Ten Lost Years 13 3 tion o f versatile performers an d hi s work in movement and improvisatio n were largely responsible for th e effect s achieved . But the productio n als o set him apar t fro m th e ne w alternative theatres . A s one criti c remarked , 'One of Luscombe's majo r achievements is his ability to make each piec e [of the production ] fi t togethe r smoothl y ... so that th e pla y flows along , never seemin g jagged o r uneven , unlik e muc h documentar y theatr e .. . that seem s to chuck all its cards into the ai r helter skelter.' 8 The productio n continue d t o attrac t enthusiasti c audiences through out th e spring , so it was decided t o cancel the res t of the seaso n an d ru n Ten Lost Years fo r a s long a s possible. Finally , i n lat e May, the hea t i n th e un-air-conditioned theatr e becam e unbearable , an d th e pla y closed afte r seventeen weeks . B y tha t time , plan s wer e alread y unde r wa y fo r a national tou r whic h would tak e th e compan y from Ottaw a t o Vancouver and back . In mid-September , th e compan y se t out, t o giv e seventy-seven performances i n forty-thre e centres, with an averag e attendanc e o f ove r 80 per cent . Everywhere, th e actor s wer e praise d fo r thei r versatilit y an d fo r thei r ability t o mak e th e perio d com e alive . Bu t mos t movin g t o audience s across th e countr y was that th e pla y deal t with actual human beings , th e people o f Canada who struggled throug h a painful decade . Althoug h Chicago '70 had als o treated documentary material and reproduce d th e words of livin g people , th e event s of th e Chicag o tria l ha d seeme d remot e t o most spectators , an d th e wild , carniva l style i n which they had bee n pre sented ha d alienate d audience s stil l further . What impresse d Lynn e van Luven o f th e Lethbridge Herald abou t Te n Lost Years was the experienc e o f seeing somethin g o n stag e whic h touche d he r directl y — 'Canadian his tory, Canadia n cultur e an d Canadia n though t .. . not Ibsen' s Norwa y or Shaw's Britain.'9

17 The Indignant Muse

The triump h o f Te n Lost Years represente d a vindication of Luscombe' s methods a t TWP. For while the immediat e inspiratio n for th e wor k ha d been Pau l Thompson's collectivel y created Farm Show, th e natur e o f th e final production gre w out o f more tha n a decade o f experimentation i n the forms of documentary theatr e o n th e par t of Luscombe, Winter, and the actor s o f TWP . Durin g th e earl y sixties , that experimentatio n ha d encouraged th e compan y t o explor e an d challeng e th e convention s of traditional narrative . Whether deconstructin g a n alread y existin g script (as in Th e Death o f Woyzeck) o r buildin g their ow n works on th e fragmen tary foundatio n o f other s (a s i n Th e Mechanic an d Th e Golem o f Venice), Luscombe and Winte r had trie d t o move away from 'Aristotelian ' or nar rative-based structure s towards more ope n forms . When th e compan y move d t o 1 2 Alexander Stree t an d inaugurate d subscription seasons , however , Luscomb e foun d i t difficul t t o fin d th e rehearsal tim e necessary to develop the kind of collaborative creations h e and Winte r had worke d on a t Fraser Avenue. Chicago '70 had bee n some thing o f an anomaly , sinc e th e collectio n o f th e documentar y evidenc e required littl e research an d th e actors had a strong response t o the material. Luscombe realize d tha t the creatio n o f dramas ou t o f documentar y material would normaly require time-consumin g research, and i n 1971 he invited Jack Winter to rejoin th e company. During th e fou r year s sinc e h e ha d lef t TWP , Winte r ha d pursue d a writing career , wit h mixe d results . Hi s origina l disagreemen t wit h Lus combe ha d bee n ove r the directio n i n which the compan y was moving in 1967, and Winte r left thinkin g that he coul d carry out his ideas better on his own . Effort s t o sel l his work to th e CB C and t o Theatr e Toronto in 1968 cam e t o nothing , bu t th e followin g year he se t up hi s own produc -

The Indignan t Muse 13 5 tion compan y and wrote and directed a show to open th e Studi o Theatre at th e Nationa l Arts Centre i n Ottawa . Party Da y was poorly received , an d for th e nex t tw o years Winte r wa s a regula r contributo r t o th e Brun o Gerussi sho w Gerussi! on CB C radio. I n 1971 , h e complete d a documen tary fil m se t i n Princ e Edwar d Island . Whe n Luscomb e ran g hi m i n November o f tha t year, h e wa s ready t o re-establis h hi s contact wit h th e legitimate theatre . Their firs t collaboratio n wa s a dramatizatio n o f Dickens' s Pickwick Papers entitle d M r Pickwick, undertaken a t short notic e when negotiation s between TWP and Caro l Bolt broke down and Luscomb e was left without a pla y for th e Christma s season. Th e wor k was a huge success . It was followed b y a productio n base d o n Mar k Twain's posthumousl y publishe d Letters from th e Earth, a series of radically sceptical comment s o n Christian ity which appealed t o Luscombe's and Winter' s anticlericalism. letters from the Earth was a novel and imaginativ e stage piec e which attracted consider able favourable comment i n the pres s not onl y in Toronto but i n Ottawa , where it appeared at the National Arts Centre . It wa s th e succes s o f Te n Lost Years, however , which consolidate d th e Luscombe-Winter partnership . Please d b y th e widesprea d popularit y o f the play , Luscombe an d Winte r remaine d unshake n i n thei r convictio n that dram a mus t d o mor e tha n promot e a comfortabl e nostalgia . The y wanted thei r theatr e t o startl e the audiences , t o shak e the m ou t o f complacent attitude s an d mak e the m realiz e tha t Canad a playe d a rol e i n a larger worl d an d ha d importan t internationa l responsibilities . Thi s fac t was brought home to the tw o men i n a particularly vivid way in April 1974. At a party organized fo r several Chilean refugees , they were electrified by stories o f Canada' s respons e t o th e overthro w o f th e democraticall y elected governmen t o f Salvado r Allende . No t onl y ha d Canad a recog nized wit h unseeml y hast e th e newl y establishe d militar y government under Genera l August o Pinochet , bu t i t had acte d wit h uncharacteristi c indifference t o the pligh t of Chileans seeking asylum in the country . Canada ha d gaine d a n internationa l reputatio n fo r it s hospitality to th e fugi tives fro m communis t regime s - i t ha d opene d it s door s t o 30,00 0 Hungarians i n th e fifties , 11,00 0 Czech s i n th e sixties , and som e 60,00 0 'boat people' i n the recent pas t - bu t refugee claimant s from Chil e were subjected t o detailed securit y screenings an d healt h investigation s which in th e en d kep t thei r numbe r belo w 2,000. ' T o Luscomb e an d Winter , here wa s further evidenc e o f Canada' s subservienc e t o America n inter ests, an d a vivid illustratio n o f the doubl e standar d i n it s refugee policy, which favoure d victim s o f leftis t persecutio n ove r peopl e fleein g fro m

136 Harlequi n in Hogtown regimes on the right. In September, i t was revealed that between 197 0 and 1973 the CI A had funnelle d some $8 million into Chile in an effort t o prevent Allende' s electio n an d the n t o weake n hi s government. 2 The y decided t o dramatiz e thes e issue s i n thei r openin g productio n o f th e 1974-5 season. Within a shor t time , Winte r ha d compile d a n impressiv e dossie r o f research materia l an d starte d t o work i t into a script, which he sardoni cally entitled Yo u Can't Ge t Here from There. T o convey the ide a o f cleanliness, whic h Luscomb e though t epitomize d Canadian s i n th e mind s of people i n th e Thir d World , Astri d Janson, wh o ha d replace d Nanc y Jowsey a s TWP's designer, devise d a n ingeniou s se t consisting o f a larg e cube ( a floo r an d tw o walls covered wit h white shag ru g an d tw o walls of transparent lucite) which could be opened to admit outsiders or closed t o act as a barrier. Th e effec t wa s of a room whic h shone lik e a huge display case or store window into which the Chilean refugees could peer, but only rarely penetrate . Rehearsals wen t s o smoothl y tha t th e nigh t befor e th e openin g Lus combe le t hi s cast go home early . A couple o f members o f the technica l crew remained behin d t o paint the stage floor one las t time, but the y too were abl e t o leav e the theatr e b y about tw o o'clock i n th e morning . Luscombe went to bed confident that the production woul d be a success, and slept s o soundl y tha t h e di d no t hea r th e phon e ringin g shortl y after three. About half an hou r later, h e was awakened by the soun d o f someone banging on his front door. He staggered ou t of bed, wrapped himsel f in hi s dressing-gown, and descende d th e stairs , to fin d Calvi n Butle r in a state o f high excitement . 'George, ' h e almos t shouted , 'th e theatre' s o n fire.' After dressin g hastily , Luscombe , hi s wife , Mona , an d Butle r drov e headlong throug h th e silent , snow y streets , t o fin d Alexande r Stree t a scene of noise and confusion . The polic e had close d of f Yonge and Alexander streets , and th e stil l burning buildin g was surrounded b y some seventeen fir e departmen t vehicle s and a crowd o f curious an d concerne d onlookers.3 Making their wa y through th e crowd , Butle r and Luscomb e located June Faulkner, who had been th e first company membe r th e fire department ha d bee n abl e t o reach afte r th e blaz e had bee n discovered . Together, the y watched in horrifie d disbelie f a s smoke poured in sickening profusion from th e building. It seemed tha t only a miracle could pre vent th e fir e fro m engulfin g the entir e theatre . Gradually , however, th e fire-fighters succeeded i n containing the blaze, and finally, as dawn began to break, they brought i t under control .

The Indignan t Muse 13 7 The fir e ha d starte d a t th e bac k o f th e theatr e an d ha d completel y destroyed th e dressing-rooms, th e costume workshop, the stage , the light ing equipment, an d al l the costume s and scener y for M r Pickwick as well as You Can't Ge t Here stored i n th e area . The hea t ha d melte d th e cover s of the seat s in th e auditoriu m an d severel y damaged th e equipmen t i n th e lighting and soun d booths. 4 It had als o affected th e roof . The shel l of the building, however, appeared t o be sound, and i t was just possible that the theatre coul d b e restore d withou t having to buil d fro m th e foundation up. What was still unknow n was the cost . Insuranc e would pay for som e o f the damage , bu t th e pre-productio n expense s o f Yo u Can't Ge t Here, estimated a t abou t $23,000 , were irrecoverable , an d th e sho w would have to be entirel y remounted. I n addition , the Christma s show was now in jeopardy: unless an alternativ e performing spac e coul d b e found , it would be necessary t o cance l M r Pickwick a s well. While everyone agreed tha t Tor onto Workshop Productions must not be allowed to die, it was unclear on the morning of 5 November just how its death coul d be prevented . During th e nex t hecti c week , Faulkne r got estimate s o n th e cos t o f rebuilding th e stag e an d auditoriu m an d replacin g los t equipment . Luscombe consulte d th e actor s t o se e if they would be willin g t o remai n o n rehearsal pa y until th e sho w could open , an d h e investigate d alternative staging possibilitie s for M r Pickwick. Meanwhile , suppor t fo r Luscomb e and th e theatr e flowed in from al l parts of the theatr e community . Leon Major o f th e S t Lawrenc e Centr e schedule d a benefi t performanc e o f Sheridan's Th e Rivals; th e performer s i n Clap Hands stage d a n extr a per formance o f the revu e i n a local supper club ; the Nationa l Ballet offere d workshop space; Robi n Phillips of the Stratfor d Festiva l organize d a campaign fo r contribution s within hi s compan y an d promise d th e receipt s from previe w performances o f Tw o Gentlemen o f Verona an d Th e Comedy o f Errors; Toronto Danc e Theatre gav e a benefi t concert wit h severa l guest stars; and th e Sha w Festival, the Firebal l Theatre, an d Toront o Free The atre al l offere d facilities . Overwhelme d b y thi s spontaneou s generosity , June Faulkne r reported t o Herber t Whittaker , 'Ever y singl e theatre ha s come forwar d with offer s o f assistance - excep t fo r the Roya l Alexandra and O'Keefe.' 5 Luscombe seeme d i n his element during the crisis . Never happier tha n when confrontin g adversity, he oversa w the retur n t o Toronto of Te n Lost Years, whic h opene d a t th e Bayvie w Playhous e o n 1 2 Decembe r fo r a three-week run ; h e cas t an d rehearse d M r Pickwick, whic h opene d five days later in the S t Lawrence Centre's Tow n Hall for fifte n performances;

138 Harlequi n in Hogtow n and h e re-rehearse d Yo u Can't Ge t Here, which opened o n 3 1 December , the anniversar y of the first performance i n the Alexander Stree t theatre . It wa s a displa y o f energ y an d resourcefulnes s whic h mad e thos e wh o could remembe r the m har k back to th e earl y days of TWP at Fraser Avenue, an d i t prompted Herber t Whittake r t o remar k tha t Luscomb e an d his company of actors were 'as much a Toronto treasure a s the Moore collection.'6 The genera l feelin g o f th e critic s wh o attende d th e openin g o f Yo u Can't Ge t Here from There was that onc e agai n Winte r an d Luscomb e ha d been betraye d b y their indignation int o an oversimplified theatrical pres entation o f the issues. The centra l stage image of the gleaming white cube inhabited b y actors i n antisepti c whit e costume s was so arrestin g tha t i t distracted from the meaning of the play . Slides of tanks in the street s or of political opponents bein g rounded u p in the soccer stadiu m did not ade quately convey the horro r outside th e steril e showcase . The proble m was compounded b y the doublin g of the roles of the Canadians and Chileans, which muted th e impact of the reported atrocities . A relate d proble m wa s the totall y unsympatheti c portraya l o f th e villains o f th e piece , Ambassado r Ros s and hi s wife. Here , th e critic s were divided betwee n thos e wh o fel t th e issue s involved were mad e cleare r b y the melodramati c characterization an d those , like Urjo Kareda , who were tempted t o 'ceas e trustin g even th e give n information' whe n confronte d with characte r portraya l s o simplistic. 7 Winter denie d tha t ther e wa s an element of caricature in the play. 'I see her a s a complete characterizatio n of an incomplet e personality, ' h e remarke d o f the portraya l o f Mrs Ross. In th e sam e interview , however, th e dramatis t revealed a surprisin g attitude toward s hi s public . 'I' m les s intereste d i n a specifi c audience, ' h e said, 'than in getting a general audienc e t o account for themselves.' 8 A number o f critics, especially those not sharin g Winter's politica l con victions, resented bein g lecture d a t and though t h e had failed to find suitable artisti c expression fo r his ideas. Even the normall y sympathetic Urj o Kareda wa s cool i n callin g th e pla y ' a thic k file-folde r o f researc h tha t [Winter] hasn't yet resolved into a dramatically viable form. There are too many snippet s o f incident that neve r buil d a narrativ e momentum , an d since th e onl y continuing characte r o f any interest at all is almost entirely repellent... the play's political arguments see m lopsided.' 9 After th e qualifie d success o f Yo u Can't Ge t Here from There, Luscomb e and Winte r turne d t o anothe r projec t the y ha d bee n contemplatin g fo r some tim e - a n investigatio n o f the relationshi p betwee n idealis m and commerce i n th e Olympi c Games. I t seeme d t o the m tha t th e Olympic s

The Indignan t Muse 13 9 were a perfect paradigm o f the wa y in which the achievement s of individuals were appropriated an d subverte d b y commercial an d politica l inter ests. Th e humbu g an d hypocris y which had marke d th e developmen t o f the events , especiall y in th e twentiet h century , were blatan t i n th e hyp e surrounding th e preparation s fo r th e 197 6 Montrea l Games , i n whic h there was already evidence of kickbacks, non-tendered contracts , and hor rendous cos t overruns. The persistenc e o f the organizer s and supporter s in maintainin g tha t the y were abov e politic s an d tha t th e Game s wer e instrumental i n eradicating th e difference s betwee n peoples an d nation s represented exactl y the kin d o f self-delusio n that th e tw o collaborator s delighted i n puncturing. As usual, it was Winter's job t o dig up the facts . He soon discovered tha t the Olympic s had neve r bee n th e unalloye d celebratio n o f mens sana in corpore sano tha t it s supporter s ha d idealisticall y maintained . Gree k ath letes, i t turne d out , ha d bee n hardl y les s mercenar y an d self-indulgent than Roma n gladiators. Indeed, th e spirit of the Games seemed t o Winter to b e summe d u p perfectl y i n th e mythica l account o f th e firs t chario t race a t Olympia, between Pelop s and Oenomau s fo r th e han d o f Hippo damia. Pelops won that contest not b y any superior skil l but b y sabotaging his opponent's chario t so that it crashed durin g the race, killing its driver. Luscombe had retaine d th e cor e o f the Te n Lost Years company, includ ing Iris Paabo, Ross Skene, Peter Millard , Grant Roll, Diane Douglass, and Rich Payne . These actor s ha d bee n playin g together no w for si x months and ha d develope d thei r ensembl e skill s t o a hig h degree . As the wor k proceeded, some of the actors felt that Winter's material was insufficiently dramatic an d bega n doin g researc h o f thei r own . The y discovere d William O . Johnson's 197 2 history o f the Olympics , All That Glitters Is Not Gold. The boo k provide d the m with a solid historical framework by means of which they could giv e the pla y some shape . They also watched films of the 197 2 Munic h Olympic s an d listene d t o comment s b y th e forme r Olympic athletes Bruce Kidd an d Abb y Hoffman, wh o had bee n brough t in t o make suggestions. 10 Astrid Janson designe d a brilliant setting reminiscent o f the propose d Montreal Olympi c stadium . I t consiste d o f a broa d whit e track o f white canvas which seemed to recede into th e distanc e toward s the bac k of the stage, where it swept up int o the air and arche d forwar d over the heads of the actors . O n eithe r sid e of this track, on th e re d floo r of the stage , were a few musical instruments.11 The actor s performed i n athletic outfits (running shoe s supplie d b y Adidas), with just thre e prop s - a bamboo pol e and tw o lengths of coloured nylo n rope.

140 Harlequi n i n Hogtown As usual, the play developed ou t of the creativ e tension betwee n th e bitterly ironi c an d ofte n proli x rhetori c o f Winter an d th e exuberan t an d playful mummer y o f th e performer s - al l moderate d b y Luscombe' s uncanny feeling for sound an d movement . It was not alway s easy to maintain a balance. Th e actor s ha d becom e master s o f witty pantomime. Fo r example, i n one routine , Ros s Skene portrayed a weightlifter, with Grant Roll an d Ric h Payne acting as the weights . After Skene's humiliatin g failure t o lif t th e bar , Diane Douglass walked out, glared a t the tw o 'weights,' picked u p th e bar , an d thre w it into th e audience . I n anothe r sequence , one o f the actor s bega n runnin g i n slo w motion, gradually increased hi s speed, an d ende d u p skippin g wit h th e rop e tha t marke d th e finishin g line. These improvisations combined bot h a genuine respec t for the skill of th e athlete s an d a def t irreverence , lik e circus clowns' duplicatio n o f the feat s of acrobats. Not al l th e hilarit y at tha t tim e wa s caused b y on-stage activities . Th e design for the promotional poste r turned out to be one of Théo Dimson's masterpieces. Dimson , a Toronto graphic designe r wh o had create d bril liantly original posters for the compan y for several years, had a genius for capturing th e spiri t of the productions . When tol d tha t th e ne w play was to be a n attac k on th e commercia l exploitatio n o f the Olympics , he pro duced a desig n featurin g a hug e Coca-Col a bottl e wit h a tin y muscle bound athlet e emergin g from it s mouth. On th e bottl e was the five-circl e Olympic symbo l instea d o f th e Coca-Col a trad e mark . Th e company' s delight wit h th e poste r wa s redoubled whe n the y received a lette r fro m Coca-Cola (Canada)' s genera l solicito r insistin g tha t th e desig n repre sented a n 'unauthorize d reproductio n o f th e trad e mar k bottle ' which would tend 't o distort and dilute the distinctiveness of such a trade mark. ' All offending posters, h e insisted , must be 'remove d and destroye d forthwith.'12 Luscombe greete d thi s information with huge guffaw s an d imme diately ordered wider distribution. Summer '76 opened o n 2 2 April 1975 , t o mixe d reviews . Urjo Kareda , Joseph Erdely i of th e Ottawa Citizen, and Herber t Whittaker al l had seri ous reservations about th e script . They called it, respectively, 'a confusing jumble o f Greek legen d an d history , incomprehensible anecdote s abou t early Olympians'; 13 'a poorly written semi-documentary'; 14 and ' a narroweyed, disapprovin g loo k a t th e Olympic s [which ] .. . bog s dow n i n it s righteous indignation.' 15 All objected t o the almos t total absence o f references to the Montreal Olympics but praised th e company and director fo r their skil l and imagination.

The Indignan t Mus e 14 1 The pla y ran fo r fou r weeks , attracting 1,64 7 spectator s t o twenty-fou r performances fo r an average attendanc e o f 23 per cent . While not a disaster, th e piec e ha d clearl y no t bee n th e hi t Luscomb e an d Winte r ha d hoped for . Tha t wa s especiall y disappointin g i n vie w o f thei r pla n t o include th e wor k in a nine-wee k tou r o f Europ e schedule d fo r th e sum mer o f 1976. Tentative plan s called for the mountin g of three Winter-Luscombe collaborations , bu t i n th e en d th e Europea n progra m ha d t o b e reduced t o just two productions, Te n Lost Years and Summer '76. The company' s destinatio n i n Londo n wa s th e Youn g Vi c Theatre , where i t opene d o n 3 Ma y 197 6 wit h a performanc e o f Te n Lost Years. Audiences were small, and the reception o f the play muted. The respons e to Summer '76, which opene d th e followin g week , was more positive , an d audiences bega n t o grow . Jeremy Kingsto n o f th e financial Times com pared th e compan y favourably t o Littlewood's Theatre Workshop, saying that TW P ha d kep t i n min d wha t its predecessor forgot , ' a fee l fo r con struction': 'Inventive , intelligen t an d carefull y paced , th e sho w i s from first t o las t a n arrestin g entertainment. ' Be n Dunca n o f th e BB C was equally positive ; T thin k tha t th e compan y ha s a techniqu e whic h I'v e never actuall y seen before, ' h e reported , ' a way of weaving together th e dialogue and th e songs and th e dancing [which ] produces a peculiar texture whic h i s .. . quite uniqu e .. . Ove r th e tw o evenings, the cumulativ e effect wa s very very strong, indeed.' 16 Following the final performance, Winter and Luscomb e emerged from the theatr e an d stoo d o n th e stree t contemplatin g th e marquee . Winte r had bee n dissatisfie d with hi s travel allowance an d wa s not goin g o n th e rest of the tour . Behind the m lay some fourteen years of intermittent and often storm y collaboration , a perio d o f share d triump h an d narrowl y avoided disaster. At the beginning, Winter, who was ten years Luscombe's junior, ha d bee n ver y much th e apprentice . Bu t fro m th e outse t thei r imaginations an d talent s ha d bee n s o complementary tha t bot h seeme d to work better i n collaboration tha n alone . I n th e end , Luscombe , who is grudging of his praise, recognized Winter's contribution: speaking of The Golem in 1989 , he said , 'All of a sudden, [par t way through th e rehearsals, ] it dawned on m e what he wanted ... what he was writing for, and I became a fa n o f his vision. Most of th e tim e I was bringing hi m int o m y vision of the play , but o n thi s occasion h e wa s bringing somethin g tha t was much better tha n wher e I though t w e were going.' Tha t evening , however , he said nothing. Many years later he remembered th e moment spatially : 'He was standing ther e with his wife just down there , an d I was standing her e

142 Harlequi n in Hogtown (I thin k Mona was back there). And h e said , "I'm going." I said, "Yeah." We'd just ru n ou t o f thing s t o say . We'd sai d i t all . There wa s nothing, nothing left t o say. I stood ther e an d looke d at him; he looked at me, an d we turned around an d walked away from eac h other. Didn't shake hands. Just turned around . Gone.' It was the end o f a chapter.

18

A Vintage Season

Luscombe returned t o Toronto fro m England in the summe r of 1976 to a troubled theatr e scene . Th e first wav e o f creative energy which had pro duced th e alternative theatre movemen t in the early 1970s seemed t o have spent itself . Factor y Theatre, Theatr e Pass e Muraille , Tarragon, an d Tor onto Free Theatre, th e theatres primarily responsible for creating an interest i n ne w Canadia n plays , were bein g challenge d b y a grou p o f mor e recent arrival s such as New Theatre (1971) , Open Circl e Theatre (1973) , and th e Phoeni x Theatr e (1975) . This developmen t increase d competi tion and was beginning to force all the theatre s t o re-examine and modif y their mandates. Artistically, they began t o retreat fro m a policy of producing onl y ne w play s or collectiv e creation s an d t o rel y mor e heavil y on scripts from the international repertoire. Th e change of direction was due to a new conservatism on th e part of the more successfu l companies , who found themselve s confrontin g highe r production s cost s an d dwindlin g financial resources. The LIP grants, which had contributed so substantially to the earl y success of the alternativ e theatres, were discontinued in 1975 , and th e Canada Counci l announced ne w budget restraints. 1 Not onl y th e economi c climat e bu t als o th e critica l atmospher e ha d changed dramaticall y b y 1977 . Herber t Whittake r ha d retire d fro m th e Globe i n 1975 , an d i n th e sam e yea r Urj o Kared a ha d lef t th e Star to become literar y advise r t o Robi n Phillip s at th e Stratfor d Festival . The new critic s did no t shar e thei r predecessors ' committe d enthusias m fo r the ne w Canadia n theatre , an d i n th e cas e o f Gin a Mallet , Kareda' s replacement a t the Star, they harboured a preference fo r th e kin d of slick commercial production s tha t wer e beyon d th e resource s o f th e alterna tive theatres . A s a result o f these changes , Toront o theatre s approache d the 1980 s with a sense of disorientation an d uneasiness.

144 Harlequi n in Hogtown As Luscomb e considere d th e developmen t o f TW P ove r thi s sam e period, h e realize d he was little closer to his dream o f a permanent com pany than h e ha d bee n i n 1959 . Determine d t o tr y once mor e t o realize that ambition, he submitted a request t o the various funding agencie s for what he called a 'fallow year' - a period during which he could devot e his full tim e to training a new company. The ide a was not without preceden t - th e Canada Counci l had supported Tarrago n Theatr e in 1975-6 during Bill Glassco' s absence o n a sabbatical - bu t th e notio n o f asking for government subsid y for training as opposed to production wa s novel. He estimated tha t his plan would cost some $75,000 . David Peacock, theatre office r a t the Canad a Council , prepare d TWP' s request for submission to the Septembe r 197 6 meeting bu t ha d consider able difficult y i n decidin g what he shoul d recommend. Hi s own staf f fel t the schem e wa s ill advised. I n a mem o t o Peacock , th e financ e officer , Thomas Bohdanetsky , pointed ou t tha t TWP had a n accumulate d defici t of $33,000 an d tha t withou t a line of credit a t th e bank , th e prospec t o f box-office revenues , or a board o f directors willing to rais e the necessar y funds, th e compan y would face a serious cash problem. 'T o plan o n a Fallow Year and, a t th e sam e time , add a high cost , non-revenue-generatin g program,' h e wrote , 'doe s no t see m reasonabl e th e wa y it i s currently planned. '2 Peacock ha d hi s ow n reservations . He fel t tha t givin g the compan y a total o f $75,00 0 fo r a non-producin g seaso n (reall y 'hal f a trainin g pro gramme an d hal f an extende d rehearsa l period' ) woul d lead th e theatr e community t o 'revolt ' an d othe r companie s t o as k for simila r treatment. He agreed , however , that Luscombe needed t o tak e tim e of f to revitaliz e himself. Suggestin g tha t th e trainin g period migh t b e reduce d i n scope , he recommende d th e compan y be grante d $45,000. 3 In hi s letter t o th e theatre i n October , Peacoc k cite d financia l restrain t an d sai d h e hope d that 'wit h budgetar y adjustment s you would be abl e t o achieve the objec tive of developing a new ensemble company.' Shocked and disappointe d b y what he considere d th e Council' s misunderstanding o f hi s project , Luscomb e determine d t o fin d additiona l financing elsewhere . Bu t he ha d reckone d withou t the quickenin g pace of Toronto's economi c development. While he had been focusing o n th e growth insid e the theatre , other s were more intereste d i n the neighbour hood surroundin g it . Located a s it was a few steps from on e o f Toronto's principal shoppin g streets , 1 2 Alexander Stree t ha d becom e a very valuable piece o f real estate . I f the fac t ha d escape d Luscombe' s attention, it had not gone unnotice d elsewhere.

A Vintage Season 14 5 One individua l who ha d bee n watchin g the sit e was an enginee r fro m the Philippine s by the nam e o f Domingo Penaloza . Penaloza, a relatively small playe r i n th e Toront o developmen t game , ha d recentl y attracte d attention b y constructin g th e fancifu l Drago n Mal l i n th e city' s China town area , wel l awa y from th e theatr e district. 4 I n th e fal l o f 1976 , however, h e ha d take n ou t a n optio n t o purchas e tw o parcel s o f lan d o n Alexander an d Maitlan d streets, an d o n 8 November h e ha d applie d t o the Cit y o f Toront o Committe e o f Adjustmen t fo r a mino r varianc e t o allow hi m t o pu t u p thirty-fou r tow n house s o n th e site . Notic e of such applications is automatically sent t o residents in th e are a affected , s o on e morning Luscombe learned t o his stupefaction that his theatre wa s slated for demolition . Contacting his alderman, Allan Sparrow, Luscombe demanded to know if ther e wa s an y wa y h e coul d sav e th e building . A s i t happened , th e Penaloza developmen t als o conflicte d wit h a projec t dea r t o Alderma n Sparrow's hear t - th e provisio n o f adequate parklan d i n hi s ward. B y a remarkable strok e o f goo d fortune , th e Alexande r Stree t propert y ha d been considered a s parkland a s long ago as 1973, and th e Officia l Pla n for the Cit y still designated th e sit e as a potential parkette. With support fro m Aldermen Da n Hea p an d Willia m Kilbourn , Alla n Sparro w drafte d a request to the Committee of Adjustment tha t the Penaloza application for variance b e deferred. 5 Thi s argumen t wo n th e da y and pu t off , at leas t temporarily, the threa t t o TWP. Realizing tha t thei r repriev e wa s only temporary, however , Luscomb e and June Faulkner decide d the y would have to fight. As luck would hav e it, th e cit y councillors were facing an election , an d TW P resolved t o make its surviva l a n issu e in tha t contest . The y surveye d al l candidates , askin g them whethe r o r no t the y would suppor t th e acquisitio n of th e lan d b y the Cit y and promisin g to make the result s of their surve y available to th e media. Th e electio n returne d mos t o f th e alderme n wh o wer e sympa thetic to the theatre , but on 2 1 December Luscomb e receive d a registered letter fro m Fobasc o Limited , th e owner s o f th e building , notifyin g hi m that the y were exercisin g thei r righ t t o terminat e hi s leas e o n 2 9 June 1977.6 Meanwhile, a s a resul t of hi s rebuf f by the Committe e o f Adjustment, Penaloza had withdrawn his application and submitte d a reduced plan for twenty-six tow n house s whic h conforme d t o th e existin g by-law s an d therefore di d no t requir e a variance . Th e Plannin g Boar d informe d Penaloza that , i n vie w o f th e concer n expresse d b y ward alderme n an d members o f the community at large, it was incumbent on the m t o 'investi-

146 Harlequi n in Hogtown gate al l possible opportunitie s t o continue th e locatio n o f the theatr e i n the Core. ' One wa y to achieve this, they suggested, wa s for th e develope r to retai n th e theatr e o n it s present sit e and submi t a revise d residentia l proposal fo r th e remainin g are a utilizin g the maximu m densit y allowed. They hinte d tha t an y necessary amendments t o th e zonin g by-law o r th e Official Pla n could be considered. 7 When th e civi l servant s a t Cit y Hal l bega n discussion s with Penaloza , they discovere d tha t th e solutio n t o th e proble m woul d no t b e simple . The Park s Committee ha d a budget of $1 million for lan d acquisitio n in 1977, o f whic h approximatel y one-quarter ha d bee n earmarked . Pena loza's asking price for the property - $ 2 million, later reduced t o $1.6 million - wa s well beyond th e City's resources. Alderman John Bosley , whose family was in th e rea l estate business, finally saw a way out o f the impasse . He pointe d ou t t o th e develope r tha t th e by-law s governin g th e acquisition of parkland made provisio n for th e exchang e o f property fo r density rights. That mean t tha t i f Penaloza wa s willing t o buil d o n hal f th e lot , leaving the theatr e intac t and leasin g or giving the lan d t o the City , the n he woul d b e allowe d t o ad d th e ai r right s from th e lease d propert y t o those permitte d o n th e remainin g land . Tha t way , Bosley argued, everybody would win.8 As th e negotiation s proceede d behin d close d doors , Luscomb e an d Faulkner watched the eviction date get nearer and nearer. In a letter to the Executive Committee o f City Council on 2 May 1977, they stated tha t they had alread y committed themselves to a 1977-8 season an d were afraid the arts councils would not proces s thei r application s unless assured tha t th e company would have a theatre in which to perform. B y the middle of June, Luscombe and Faulkner had learned that, in exchange for extra density on half the site , Penaloza had agree d t o lease the theatr e t o TWP for a dollar a year, and the land beside the theatre to the City for the same amount. To protect hi s investment, however, Penaloza proposed tha t until all planning obstacles were removed an d a building permit issued, TWP would assume responsibility for all carrying costs on th e theatr e an d pa y $6,000 a mont h in rent . Whil e ecstati c abou t th e long-ter m prospect , Luscomb e an d Faulkner did not se e how they would be able to afford th e increase d cost s in the interim. They sent a telegram to City Council stating that they would be agreeabl e t o leasing the theatre , or eve n purchasing it at a reasonabl e price, but that any interim rise in their rent should reflect only an inflation ary increas e an d no t th e mor e tha n 30 0 per cen t ris e bein g proposed . Finally, on 22 June, Penaloza agreed t o extend th e theatre's leas e to June 1978 at $2,100 a month.9

A Vintage Season 14 7 The season tha t Luscombe and Faulkner had planned confident in the belief tha t the y woul d stil l hav e a theatr e i n whic h t o presen t i t was intended a s a celebration o f the company's first twent y years. Promoted a s the 'Champagn e Season, ' i t reflected many of June Faulkner' s program ming idea s a s well a s a perceptio n tha t th e theatr e wa s at a crossroads . Representing th e pas t wer e a numbe r o f production s embodyin g th e company's traditiona l aestheti c aim s and socialis t orientation: Le s Canadiens by Rick Salutin, The Komagata Mam Intidentby Sharo n Pollock , Nothing to Lose by David Fennario, and Westmount Blues by Rick Davidson were all original Canadian play s dealing with politica l themes, se t in Montreal or Vancouver . Th e Island b y Athol Fugar d wa s a powerfu l dram a abou t apartheid i n Sout h Africa . Bu t Th e Club, a musica l by Eve Merriam, an d two productions by the Lindsa y Kemp Company, Flowers and Salome, were altogether nove l for th e compan y and suggestiv e of ne w direction s th e theatre migh t follow i n th e future . Abov e all, the seaso n was designed t o re-establish TWP's position i n the Toronto alternative theatre scen e afte r a year's absence. The Champagn e Seaso n opene d o n 2 0 October 197 7 and prove d t o be one o f the mos t successfu l i n th e theatre' s history . The firs t production , Les Canadiens, traced th e histor y of the well-know n Montreal hockey team and se t it in the contex t of the evolvin g sense o f nationalism in th e province of Quebec. Salutin had originally written the piece on the suggestio n of th e Canadia n directo r Gu y Sprung, an d i t ha d playe d t o enthusiastic audiences a t th e Centau r Theatr e i n Montreal . Saluti n ha d bee n disap pointed wit h th e Montrea l production, however, and wa s anxious to have it don e i n Toronto . Luscomb e was attracted bot h b y the premis e o f th e script - tha t hocke y in Quebec ha d bee n a kind o f 'opiate' helpin g th e spectators forge t th e humiliation s of thei r defea t o n th e Plain s of Abraham - an d by the opportunities it provided fo r imaginative staging. Astrid Janson designe d a miniature rin k which jutted out int o th e the atre, necessitatin g the remova l of several seats. The rin k was surrounded by ramps and bleacher s that allowed the audience to spread righ t aroun d the action . I n th e highe r stand s a t th e back , she arrange d a numbe r o f life-sized puppe t hocke y fan s includin g a likenes s of Ric k Salutin . Sh e spent long hours experimenting to get a plastic surface rough enoug h no t to endanger th e skatin g actors bu t smoot h enoug h t o look like ice . Th e final resul t wa s a softl y shinin g white surface surrounded b y colourfull y dressed patron s whic h exactl y capture d th e feelin g o f th e Montrea l Forum. The actor s soo n gaine d confidenc e o n thei r roller-skates , but findin g

148 Harlequi n in Hogtow n the prope r shap e fo r th e pla y was more difficult . Seriou s disagreement developed betwee n Luscomb e an d Saluti n ove r th e ending . A n underlying theme was the idea that , with the election o f the Parti Québécois, pol itics had replace d hocke y as the majo r preoccupation o f the people. This notion ha d bee n suggeste d b y the Canadien s goaltende r Ke n Dryden' s description o f the atmospher e i n the Montrea l Forum on th e nigh t of 15 November 1976 , the nigh t of the PQ victory, when the fans had gon e wild as the electio n result s were poste d o n th e Scoreboard . Salutin wanted to suggest that hockey had serve d as a source of vicarious national pride, bu t that when it was no longe r neede d for tha t purpose afte r th e electio n o f the PQ , it reverted t o what it truly was -just a game. H e though t h e con veyed this idea b y having the pla y end wit h a group o f young boys practising on a neighbourhood rink . The imag e i s ambiguous, however, and i n Montreal it had suggeste d to Maureen Peterson o f the Ottawa Journal that, after a successfu l bi d fo r politica l power, sports victorie s seem lik e 'kids' stuff.'10 Luscomb e fel t tha t th e endin g wa s sentimental and lef t th e focu s on the game rather tha n on the political context. These difference s grew to a head o n th e mornin g befor e th e opening . Salutin arrived at the theatre to discover that Luscombe had made several changes without his approval. Enraged b y what he fel t ha d bee n unwar ranted interference , Saluti n storme d ou t o f th e rehearsa l an d int o th e theatre office , wher e h e sai d h e wante d t o cal l his lawye r to reques t a n injunction. Hearin g what he was up to , June Faulkne r rushed ou t o f her office exclaiming , 'If you get an injunctio n the theatr e wil l close forever. ' Using her considerabl e diplomatic skill, Faulkner managed t o get the two men togethe r an d hav e the m agre e o n wha t change s shoul d b e made . That evening , just befor e th e performance , Saluti n greeted Luscomb e in the lobby . 'Surely, ' h e sai d wearily, 'i t isn' t necessar y t o g o throug h thi s sort of thing every time in order t o produce a decent product.' Luscomb e eyed him quizzicall y and replied , 'I' m not sure I can agree with that.' 11 For Salutin , th e continua l exploratio n an d revisio n o f th e scrip t was soul-destroying agony ; for Luscombe , i t was a necessar y par t o f th e cre ative process . Saluti n attributes th e differenc e to Luscombe' s instinctual mode o f directing: 'He rarely knows what he wants and ha s to discover it as he goes along. Only gradually does he realize where he's going or what he should be doing.' 12 Opening nigh t o f Le s Canadiens proved t o b e mor e excitin g than anyone could have anticipated. The former Canadiens hero Maurice Richard had com e fro m Montrea l t o atten d th e performance . Whe n h e walked into th e theatr e h e sa w Conn Smythe , the forme r owne r o f the Toront o

A Vintage Seaso n 14 9 Maple Leafs , in th e audience . A s the spectator s gawked , th e tw o forme r hockey rivals greeted one anothe r lik e old friends. 13 The performanc e o n stage wa s hardly les s dramatic, callin g forth rarel y use d superlative s from the Toront o critics . Gin a Malle t applaude d 'th e livelies t acting i n Tor onto,'14 and McKenzi e Porter o f the Toronto Sun called th e pla y 'the bes t theatrical wor k ever written in English about Canada' s endemi c illness.' 15 Bryan Johnson, replacin g John Frase r a t th e Globe, later sai d i t was 'arguably the bes t production o f the mos t Canadian pla y ever written .. . far an d away th e mos t exuberant , excitin g hom e grow n produc t t o hi t Toront o this season.' 16 Pam Brighton's productio n o f Eve Merriam's Th e Club, a satirical attack on th e mal e chauvinism of a New York men's club with an all-femal e cast, proved s o successful that Faulkne r transferred th e theatre' s thir d produc tion t o another theatr e t o mak e room fo r a n extensio n o f the run . Tha t meant sh e could hol d ove r Th e Club at Alexander Stree t an d ru n th e Cen taur Theatr e productio n o f Davi d Fennario's Nothing to Lose at Toront o Free Theatre. Atho l Fugard's Th e Island had bee n planned a s a studio production. I n vie w of the succes s of Th e Club, which ran unti l mid-February, however, Th e Island coul d b e presente d i n th e Alexande r Stree t theatr e before th e arriva l o f th e Lindsa y Kem p Company , schedule d fo r earl y March. Directe d b y Calvin Butler, Th e Island to o prove d t o b e successful . Gina Mallet called i t a 'production tha t gleams with integrity from star t to finish,'17 an d Rober t Wallac e o f Toronto Theatre Review saw in i t evidenc e that 'ar t an d politic s d o mi x - no t onl y i n agit-pro p satir e an d epi c remove, but in intensely human interchange.' 18 Meanwhile, informatio n was beginning t o arrive about th e stagin g an d other requirement s o f the Lindsa y Kemp Company . Staf f member s wer e confronted b y request s fo r suc h item s a s dea d rats , a liv e pigeon , fou r kilos of confetti, a dozen bottle s of white body paint , and seemingl y endless quantitie s o f glitter . Kemp , wh o claime d t o b e descende d fro m th e Elizabethan clown Will Kemp, had traine d a s a painter an d designe r i n his native Bradford , England , befor e h e studie d danc e an d mime . H e ha d worked i n film , theatre , ballet , musicals , variety , cabaret, stri p bars , an d even th e circu s before foundin g his own company i n 1962 . Kemp's reputatio n ha d precede d him , an d o n th e openin g nigh t o f Flowers there wa s an atmospher e o f curiosit y and anticipatio n i n th e the atre. Th e audienc e consiste d partl y o f TW P regular s an d partl y o f a n entirely new group drawn from th e danc e an d homosexua l communities . Not surprisingly , many o f the theatre' s regula r patron s wer e mor e tha n mildly astonished b y what they saw taking place o n th e stage . Severa l were

150 Harlequi n i n Hogtow n deeply offended. One o f them was Dick Beddoes, the sport s columnist for the Globe and Mail. 'Cal l th e Lord' s Da y Alliance and th e Toront o Blu e Laws Brigade,' h e wrote , 'an d tel l 'e m t o knoc k of f campaigning agains t Sunday sport an d confron t a real threa t to our collective morals! Wake up Roy McMurtry in the provincia l Attorney-General' s lair! He thinks hockey is dirty, f r hewin's sake! Dirty - pronounce d dirt-tee-is the word for Flowers, a pantomine [sic] tha t has been playin g right under Censo r Sims ' blue nose u p ther e i n Toronto Workshop Productions.' 19 Oscar Ryan , a longtime TWP supporter, fel t almos t betrayed: ' I felt lik e a captive in th e the atre o f cruelty , assailed b y a n org y o f blindin g psychedeli c fury , rollin g clouds of smoke, pounding roc k music and raucou s organ chord s ... . Flowers is quite ou t o f character fo r TWP , a theatre lon g dedicate d t o plays of social concern. Kem p in a recent intervie w said, "What I really want to do is give people magic .. . a breath o f decadence, an d hop e their consciousness wil l b e expanded. " Bu t Flowers inspire s n o cleansin g o f th e soul , offers n o hop e a t al l - onl y decadence an d deat h .. . Are we back in th e Berlin o f th e Twenties , grubbing i n Doomsda y culture? Who need s thi s kind o f morality ? Who need s tha t typ e o f aesthetic ? Especiall y now.' 20 Most critics, however, were overwhelmed by the shee r theatricalit y of th e evening, whic h Kaspar s Dzeguz e o f th e Su n describe d a s 'nothin g les s than magic . Black magic, yes. Kinky magic, and magi c that upsets, revolts, scandalizes and intrigues , but magi c unlike any this reviewer can recall on the Toronto stage ever.' 21 Nor wer e th e critic s alone intrigued . Th e Toront o theatrica l commu nity turne d ou t i n force . Bil l Glassc o wen t t o eigh t performances ; th e dancer Rober t Desrosier s performe d i n th e secon d show , Salome; an d Peter Faulkner , who had buil t the set and was acting as technical director, was so impressed tha t he considere d joining the compan y for their Sout h American tour . 'Th e technical effects were just a minor par t of it,' he said later. 'Kem p i s like a composer wh o put s togethe r a serie s of note s tha t makes you weep. You don't know why the hel l you are weeping ; ther e i s no explanation . M y response wa s similar t o th e firs t tim e I sa w Georg e Luscombe's work.' 22 Faulkne r was not th e onl y one wh o mad e th e con nection betwee n Luscomb e an d Kemp . Diane Douglass also thought tha t Flowers was 'quintessentially George.'23 The secon d Kem p production, Salome, stirred th e sam e kind of contro versy. The conservativ e critics were even mor e raucousl y indignant. Dic k Beddoes though t th e pigeon th e best thing in the show. McKenzie Porter, who dismisse d th e productio n a s a 'sidesho w for th e titillatio n o f sexua l perverts,' considere d th e presenc e o f th e Englis h balle t dance r Anto n

A Vintage Season 15 1 Dolin i n such a troupe a 'great show business tragedy.'24 Three days after making tha t statement , th e experienc e stil l rankling , he returne d t o th e subject of homosexuality on th e stage , which he deplored as a 'reflectio n of th e decadenc e o f wester n societ y ... an d [responsibl e fo r the ] wide spread los s of respect fo r the martia l arts.'25 While not everyon e perceived Kemp' s influence in th e cit y t o be quit e so baleful, ther e wa s no questio n tha t th e company' s visi t had energize d the Toronto arts community. Kemp revealed ne w possibilities for the the atrical imaginatio n an d challenge d actor s and dancer s t o explore realm s which ha d bee n largel y ignored b y the 'revolution ' i n Canadia n drama . The visi t also affecte d TWP , but i n ways that were difficult t o recognize a t the time . As Luscombe an d June Faulkner at last were able t o catch thei r breath, the y looked bac k on what had bee n th e mos t successfu l seaso n i n the theatre' s history. Almost everything they had touche d ha d turne d t o gold. Luscombe's productio n o f Les Canadiens had wo n a Floyd S. Chalmers Canadia n Pla y Award ; al l thre e main-stag e attractions ha d playe d t o sell-out house s an d bee n hel d over ; th e theatr e ha d se t several records , including for number o f performances (21 4 main-stage and 4 4 studio, for an averag e 8 2 pe r cen t attendance ) an d tota l box-offic e revenu e ($267,000, o r 4 0 pe r cen t o f thei r budget) . TWP' s succes s would leav e them wit h a n accumulate d surplu s of som e $20,000 . Th e futur e looke d brighter tha n it had i n years.

19

Looking Backwar d

The yea r and a half following th e triump h of the Champagn e Seaso n was a period of disappointment and frustration. Like other Toronto arts orga nizations i n th e inflationar y 1980s , TW P face d financia l problem s brought o n b y rapidl y escalatin g cost s an d shrinkin g subsidies . I n th e spring o f 1978 , th e governmen t ha d cu t th e budget s o f th e CBC , th e national museums , an d th e Nationa l Fil m Boar d an d ha d pu t a virtua l freeze o n Canad a Counci l funding. 1 Thos e difficulties wer e compounde d by internal problems a t Toronto Workshop Productions . The theatre fire, the Europea n tour , an d th e fight with the develope r al l had take n thei r toll. Althoug h h e woul d no t admi t i t eve n t o himself , Luscomb e wa s beginning t o fee l th e effect s o f th e lon g struggl e fo r survival . Furthermore, th e large r battl e t o which h e ha d committe d hi s life - th e battl e against fascis m - seeme d n o longe r th e crusade i t once ha d been . Th e civil rights movement, the war in Vietnam, and othe r issue s that had kep t alive a passion fo r social justice an d racia l equality during th e 1970 s were being replace d i n youn g people' s consciousnes s by stories o f corporat e mergers an d rea l estat e development . Th e Ne w Left ideal s o f participa tory democracy an d persona l fulfilmen t seeme d t o leave no roo m fo r th e Old Lef t principle s of discipline and collectiv e responsibility. The cryin g voice of TWP had graduall y been surrounde d b y a wilderness. At the en d o f 1979, June Faulkner left th e compan y to take up th e posi tion o f administrativ e manager o f th e Sha w Festival. Faulkner's abilitie s had alway s complemente d Luscombe' s almos t perfectly , an d ove r th e years th e tw o had establishe d a n extremel y well integrate d styl e of man agement. Basically , Luscomb e ha d assume d responsibilit y for th e artisti c side o f th e theatre , whil e Faulkne r ha d take n car e o f administration , publicity, fund-raising , and mos t aspect s o f publi c relations . Durin g he r

Looking Backwar d 15 3 fifteen-year association wit h Luscombe , Faulkne r ha d becom e th e com pany's eye s and ears . Sh e ha d buil t up a n astonishingl y wide networ k o f contacts, no t only among theatr e personne l bu t also with civic and provin cial politicians. Her los s was to prove irreparable . Faulkner's departur e lef t Luscomb e eve n mor e isolate d tha n h e ha d been i n th e past . Although h e like d t o remark tha t h e coul d accomplis h everything h e wante d t o b y himself, and frequentl y sough t t o conve y an impression o f total self-sufficiency , i n fact Luscombe ha d relie d heavil y on those aroun d him , especiall y th e smal l cor e o f truste d colleague s tha t included Ton y Ferry , Jac k Winter , Nanc y Jowsey, an d Joh n an d Jun e Faulkner. I t wa s thes e colleague s wh o frequentl y alerte d Luscomb e t o international development s i n th e theatr e an d suggeste d way s i n which TWP might branch out . No w on hi s own, he found himsel f drawn back t o the subject s that had intereste d hi m as a young man. One o f these was the conflict in Spain i n the mid-1930s . The stor y of the Mackenzie-Papinea u Battalion of the Internationa l Brigade and th e experiences o f the me n who fought with it in Spain in 19369 had intrigue d Luscomb e fo r years. He ha d first learned o f the Spanis h civil war fro m Joan Littlewood , but i t was only during rehearsal s fo r Te n Lost Years tha t h e bega n t o trac k dow n reference s t o Canadia n participa tion i n th e conflict . About tha t time , h e discovere d tha t th e CB C pro ducer Ma c Reynold s ha d compile d a n ora l histor y o f th e perio d b y recording interview s with som e sixt y Mac-Pap veterans, and tha t the tape s of thos e interview s were lyin g forgotte n i n th e CB C archives. 2 With Reynolds's help , Luscombe began transcribin g the material, and h e use d i t as the basi s of improvisations during a workshop with actors i n June 1979 . One o f the thing s that attracte d Luscomb e t o the stor y was the discov ery of a personal connectio n t o the material . A barber o n Pap e Avenu e to whom he ha d bee n take n a s a child ha d bee n par t o f a recruiting ring for the Mackenzie-Papinea u Battalion . Becaus e th e Kin g governmen t ha d passed a law making volunteers liable t o imprisonment an d a $2,000 fine , Canadians wishin g to fight in Spain had t o be screened an d helpe d out of the countr y by an undergroun d network . Luscombe discovere d tha t on e of his neighbours o n Humewoo d Avenu e ha d bee n a doctor responsibl e for examinin g prospective recruits. " As he worked o n the materia l with Larry Cox, a TWP actor an d writer, it seemed t o Luscombe a s moving as the personal recollection s ou t o f which Ten Lost Years ha d bee n fashioned . H e bega n t o envisag e a n equivalen t success, possibl y with anothe r tou r an d eve n movi e rights . Th e problem , of course , wa s devisin g a framewor k t o giv e th e scattere d an d discon -

154 Harlequi n in Hogtown nected account s som e kin d o f coherence . H e decide d t o us e a recruit ment meetin g a s th e linkin g device . Astri d Janson designe d a simpl e setting of a table and fou r chairs in front of a backdrop constructe d ou t of stretched rubbe r band s o n whic h photos o f the civi l war and o f Picasso' s Guernica coul d b e projected . Th e elasticit y of th e materia l allowe d per formers t o ente r an d exi t throug h th e pictures . Th e actio n coul d thu s move freely bac k an d fort h from the meetin g hal l to the battl e fron t with the fou r actor s doublin g a s recruiter s an d a s th e participant s i n th e improvised scenes . Iri s Paabo, wh o ha d contribute d s o much t o Te n Lost Years an d man y subsequen t TW P productions , devise d a musica l scor e from song s of the period . The premièr e o f Th e Mac Paps took plac e on a freezing cold 3 1 January 1980. Twenty-eigh t veterans o f th e battalio n wer e i n th e opening-nigh t audience, an d th e performanc e raise d $1,40 0 t o assist them i n thei r peti tion t o Ottaw a t o repea l Mackenzi e King's 193 7 Foreig n Enlistmen t Act, under whic h the y were stil l labelle d a s criminals. During th e run , som e thousand patron s adde d thei r signature s t o th e appeal . I f th e pla y di d much to elicit sympathy for the men who had fough t against fascism more than fort y years previously, however, it was less successful i n winning over the Toront o critics . Gin a Mallet , somewhat uncharacteristically , hardly mentioned th e detail s of the performanc e a t all and devote d mos t of he r review to an attac k on what she considered t o be one-sided propaganda. 4 Rick Groen i n the Globe agreed wit h Mallet's contention tha t the work was more lik e a 'solem n pageant ' tha n a drama . Whil e h e foun d th e actin g 'first-rate' an d th e stagin g 'consistentl y imaginative, ' h e fel t th e separat e stories neve r reall y cohered o r develope d an y dramatic momentum. 5 As usual, several critics admired Luscombe' s distinctive and imaginativ e style (tables and chair s tha t becom e a sinkin g ship torpedoe d b y a U-boa t o r the mountain s across which the Canadian s are smuggle d int o Spain ) bu t felt unengage d b y the story . 'Sinc e th e actor s pla y so many roles,' wrot e Anton Wagner i n th e Varsity, 'i t is difficult t o identif y with any single character or t o empathize with his suffering.' 6 Gordon Vogt , a n occasiona l criti c on CBC , responded t o accusation s that the productio n wa s naively one-sided b y pointing ou t th e irony in th e performance. Fa r fro m presentin g a blinkere d vie w o f th e war , Vog t thought, th e productio n 'seriousl y questioned politica l idealism n o mat ter what flag it operated under ' and called into question 'th e efficacy - o r even th e possibilit y - o f heroism i n th e moder n world . H e cite d th e example o f th e juxtapositio n o f tw o scenes , on e i n whic h th e fascist s round u p a group of villagers and shoot them without trial and another i n

Looking Backward 15 5 which th e Mac-Paps , after a prolonged battle agains t enemy snipers, exe cute their prisoners, als o without trial. The singin g of the 'Internationale ' following thi s episode, whic h migh t easil y hav e bee n take n a s a sor t o f mindless flag-waving, Vog t took a s an ironi c comment, reinforce d b y the off-stage echoin g o f the son g in a minor key. Luscombe ha d pinne d grea t hope s on th e production, bu t afte r open ing night, houses dropped off and attendanc e hovered betwee n 60 and 70 during the week and climbed to about 150 on Saturday. Privately (an d no t so privately), people wer e beginning t o say that Luscombe and TW P were repeating themselves , that th e ol d formulas were boring , an d tha t ther e was a nee d fo r chang e an d revitalization . Man y fel t tha t Luscomb e was stuck i n th e past , unabl e t o grow. Unless he coul d fin d hel p t o generat e new artisti c input , thos e critic s feared, ther e wa s a rea l dange r tha t h e would kill the theatr e himself. The centra l problem , a s mos t observer s recognized , wa s Luscombe's complex personality. Charming yet suspicious, sensitive and overbearing , dogmatic and insecure , idealistic and ruthless , a genius incapable of great flexibility, Luscomb e had forged th e theatr e in his own image. During the late sixties, TWP's beaded and long-haired actor s seemed t o be part of the vibrant youth cultur e o f the tim e an d t o spea k directl y to tha t cultur e i n productions suc h a s Che, Mr Bones, and Chicago '70. In th e mid-seventies , however, thing s began t o change , an d th e creativ e energies o f the com pany seemed mor e an d mor e frequentl y t o have been directe d toward s a rather sentimenta l exploration o f the past. The ne w and changin g fac e of Toronto - whethe r reflectin g th e subcultur e o f drug s an d se x or th e establishment cultur e of real estat e an d conspicuous extravagance - was no longer mirrore d i n productions a t the Alexander Street theatre . In the autum n of 1982, Luscombe trie d once again to forge a collaborative work of art out o f the materia l of the past . The piece , t o be called The Wobbly, wa s a celebratio n o f th e creatio n an d brie f lif e o f th e Industria l Workers of the World, the 'On e Big Union.' The IW W had evolved in th e early par t o f th e centur y a s a resul t o f th e growin g exploitatio n o f unskilled labou r and th e reluctanc e o f the labou r movemen t at that time to unioniz e non-skille d workers . I t wa s formed i n 190 5 an d laste d onl y about fiftee n year s before i t collapsed a s a consequence o f the Re d scar e following th e Firs t World War. The stories , songs , an d heroe s o f thi s grass-root s win g of th e labou r movement ha d appeale d t o Luscomb e fo r years. The educationa l meth ods of the 'Wobblies' - musi c and street-corner theatric s - wer e the ones Luscombe himself had learned in the Co-operative Commonwealt h Youth

156 Harlequi n i n Hogtown Movement, an d th e Wobblies ' ideal s o f equality , their utopianism , an d their celebratio n o f th e disadvantage d an d downtrodde n ha d alway s moved hi m an d provide d a n outle t fo r hi s passion an d frustration . Th e 'mythology' o f th e earl y labou r movemen t wa s the motherlod e o f hi s imagination, an d th e value s it endorse d wer e th e one s tha t forme d th e foundation o f his work. The actua l writing of Th e Wobbly ha d take n several years. Luscombe ha d got the idea during a visit to an anarchist bookshop in Vancouver and ha d asked Ron Weihs, a former TWP actor the n livin g and writing in Vancouver, t o undertak e th e project. 8 B y 1982, after severa l delays, the pla y was ready t o go int o production. Durin g rehearsals, Luscomb e used th e writ ten tex t as a thread t o connect improvised scenes of work and confronta tion. Whe n th e pla y opened i n January 1983 , critica l response , a s usual, was split betwee n admiratio n fo r th e ingenuit y of th e stag e image s an d impatience wit h what many regarded a s a simplistic or naïv e view o f th e world. Ra y Conlogu e o f th e Globe wrote , 'Whe n th e worker s organiz e themselves int o complex , bu t powerfu l physica l tableaux , dramaticall y backlit and sidelit ; or when a group o f them fetchingly underline a speech by rhythmi c choreograph y behin d a piano ; o r whe n a lin e o f women steadily marc h towar d a n invisibl e line o f bayonets and collaps e convulsively without the soun d o f a shot bein g heard ; the n Luscombe' s gift fo r animating th e stag e an d choreographin g histor y is vindicated.'9 Particularly admire d wa s a sequenc e i n th e textil e mil l which, in th e word s of Karen Sprenge r o f th e Ryersonian, 'reveale d th e terro r o f a youn g girl forced t o learn how to operate dangerous machinery . She joins th e othe r four wome n i n a tightly choreographed mechanica l motion. Thei r han d movements, thei r zombie-lik e chanting , an d Alle n Booth' s poundin g music combin e wit h eeri e bac k lightin g to creat e a violently frightening yet passionately beautiful vignette.'10 But a numbe r o f critics, including even thos e sympatheti c to th e left wing bias of the theatre , were beginning t o question whether Luscombe's directorial styl e was not distractin g from th e political message of the work. According t o Bria n Burc h o f th e Toronto Clarion, Luscomb e an d Weih s wanted 'th e audience [to ] tak e home th e joy and hop e tha t is behind th e IWW and fin d a way to confront the worl d in a similar manner.' Instead , Burch reported, the spectators seemed 'mor e concerned with th e theatri cal techniques involved than i n the solutio n to the socia l problems bein g portrayed i n fron t of them.' 11 Moira Farr o f the Newspaper also expresse d uneasiness abou t th e weddin g o f a socia l messag e an d vaudeville . She found th e effec t simila r to that of a Pete Seege r concert , ' a littl e to o jolly

Looking Backward 15 7 and earnest. ' I n he r opinion , Th e Wobbly neede d 'more fire and les s showbiz razzle dazzle.'12 What impresse d man y commentator s wa s th e contras t betwee n th e world o f th e pla y and tha t o f th e street s outsid e th e theatre . Audienc e members, encouraged t o sing along with member s o f the cast , could no t help but b e struck by the iron y of the lyrics: In our hand s is placed a power greater than their hoarded gold; Greater than the migh t of armies, magnified a thousand-fold. We can bring to birth the ne w world from th e ashes of the old , For the Union makes us strong. As Conlogue remarked, Th e Wobbly wa s 'an evocation of a golden momen t when peopl e reall y did thin k like children.' Bu t it was a complex experi ence, on e tha t 'summon s u p no t onl y th e hope s an d idealis m o f ou r grandparents' day , but als o (an d inadvertently) the lassitud e and despai r of [ou r own].' 13 The Wobbly playe d t o 6 2 pe r cen t attendanc e fo r thre e weeks , afte r which it had t o be withdrawn because the theatre had been rente d t o Factory Theatr e fo r it s productio n o f George F . Walker' s Th e Art o f War. While not a success on th e orde r of Te n Lost Years, Th e Wobbly di d see m t o demonstrate tha t th e audienc e fo r Luscombe' s kin d o f theatr e ha d no t disappeared altogether . Wha t wa s needed, i n Luscombe' s opinion , was for th e theatr e t o remain true to its original mandate. A littl e les s tha n a yea r afte r productio n o f Th e Wobbly, Luscomb e returned t o anothe r subjec t that had bee n a par t o f hi s youth — government persecutio n o f th e left . Th e even t tha t ha d rekindle d hi s interes t was th e publicatio n o f Victo r Navasky's Naming Names, a histor y of th e activities of Senator Joseph McCarth y and th e Hous e Committe e o n Un American Activitie s i n th e earl y 1950s , durin g thei r investigatio n of th e loyalty of various American theatrical and fil m personalities . While it was true tha t certai n aspect s o f th e stor y seemed quintessentiall y American (can w e imagin e a Committe e o n Un-Canadia n Activities?), Luscomb e felt, th e pligh t o f artist s i n th e Unite d State s raise d issue s o f interes t beyond tha t country' s borders , an d h e aske d Larr y Co x t o wor k o n a script. To Cox , who was too young to remember th e events , a matter o f fasci nation i n Navasky' s accoun t wa s th e wa y i n whic h peopl e coul d b e destroyed withou t anyone's layin g a han d o n them . Instea d o f thumb screws, dripping taps , sleep deprivation , or othe r instrument s and meth -

158 Harlequi n i n Hogtow n ods of torture, th e Committe e wa s able t o us e forces in American societ y (as wel l a s in th e victim s themselves) t o lea d thos e bein g questione d t o betray themselves or their friends. 14 For 'witnesses' at the committee hear ings wer e no t charge d wit h an y crime , no r wer e the y threatene d wit h imprisonment. S o powerful wa s public opinio n tha t t o refus e t o cooper ate with the Committe e was to risk social ostracism an d los s of livelihood. Larry Parks , th e sta r o f Th e Jolson Story, afte r bein g describe d a s a n 'unfriendly' witnes s was 'blacklisted ' b y Hollywoo d producer s an d wa s hired fo r only three supporting role s between 195 1 and hi s death i n 1975 . While th e evil s of 'McCarthyism ' ha d ofte n bee n deal t with dramatically, notably i n Arthu r Miller' s play Th e Crucible, i t seeme d importan t t o Co x that that history not be forgotten . Luscombe to o wa s interested i n th e politic s of th e story , but a s always he wa s equally excited b y theatrical metaphors . I n Names, which opened in Octobe r 1983 , h e becam e fascinate d by images of disguis e and reflec tion. Wha t unit y the sho w had wa s provided b y the figur e o f Larry Parks, the ma n wh o i s slowly broken b y the pressur e o f th e investigation . Park s was bes t know n a t th e tim e fo r hi s impersonatio n o f A l Jolson, a Jewish entertainer wh o performe d i n blac k face . Rick McKenna, th e acto r play ing Parks , was on stag e throughout , sometime s answering questions from the senators , sometime s puttin g on make-u p or donnin g a black mask to lip-sync Jolson's vaudevill e songs. The member s o f the Committee sa t with their back s to th e audience , thei r face s visibl e only on tw o TV monitors, which recorde d thei r question s t o th e witnesses . The actor s (a s usual) played many roles, often doublin g as inquisitor and witness and thu s making a visual commen t abou t th e interrelationshi p between judge and victim. One o f the entertainer s wh o appeared befor e th e Committe e wa s the black basso Pau l Robeson. Instea d o f getting a black actor t o impersonat e the singer , Luscomb e ha d To m Butle r play the rol e withou t any attempt to disguise the colour of his skin. It seemed t o Luscombe tha t the contras t between the powerfu l impact of Robeson's word s spoken b y a white acto r and th e travest y of the blac k spiri t and musi c in th e A l Jolson imperson ation constitute d a wonderfully theatrica l juxtaposition . The majorit y o f the reviewers , however, failed t o see much beyon d th e politics an d coul d b e line d u p accordin g t o thei r ow n politica l persua sions. Gina Mallet dismissed th e sho w as 'particularly malignant li b think' and judged i t would have bee n mor e interestin g i f it ha d tol d th e stor y from th e congressmen' s side of the committe e table. Returning to her oftexpressed preferenc e fo r commercia l theatre , sh e concluded , 'There' s

Looking Backwar d 15 9 more foo d fo r though t i n a singl e speec h i n Equus than ther e i s in tw o hours of Names.' 15 Bob Pennington o f th e Su n would have preferred hi s politics straight , without th e distractio n o f incongruou s theatrica l images . 'Wha t coul d have bee n fascinatin g sequences wit h Ayn Rand an d Pau l Robeso n ar e senselessly interrupte d b y Parks , mouthin g Jolso n numbers , rompin g around th e audienc e an d dancin g wit h a dummy.' 16 Stewart Brown, who had bee n reviewin g TWP productions fo r the Hamilton Spectator for almos t twenty years, foun d thi s latest production deepl y moving . 'Despit e som e moments of lighter relief, Names remains a nightmare,' he wrote, 'abetted by Luscombe' s almos t surrealisti c us e o f mime , includin g McKenn a i n blackface or mask, mouthing Jolson songs . It is a harsh, bleak and unnerving piec e o f theatre - stron g medicin e - an d as such, not something you "enjoy".'17 Ra y Conlogue wa s one o f the fe w critics to displa y much inter est in the forma l characteristics of the production . H e describe d Names as a 'vaudeville ' and admire d Luscombe' s weaving together o f the testimony of variou s witnesses . 'Abou t onc e ever y tw o years lately, ' h e wrote , 'th e original talent bursts through.' 18 Audiences seemed generall y receptive, and the y grew steadily until th e theatre was doing 40 per cen t business , enough t o justify holdin g th e pro duction ove r fo r a week. I n announcin g th e extensio n t o 1 2 November, the staf f too k grea t deligh t i n diggin g ou t a derogator y commen t fro m Gina Mallet' s review - 'Bull y for Mr. Cox' - an d using it out of context as a plug.

20 New Blood

In th e earl y 1980s , th e tw o majo r fundin g agencie s bega n t o receiv e increasingly negative comments about th e work of George Luscomb e and TWP. The majorit y o f these comment s were incorporate d i n th e report s prepared b y the theatr e panel s whos e responsibilit y it was to asses s th e company's annua l gran t applications . The y reflecte d a growing sense o f disappointment an d frustratio n on th e par t o f th e pane l member s with what the y perceived t o b e a decline i n standard s an d a failure of vision. While acknowledging the significan t contributio n Luscomb e and hi s theatre ha d mad e i n the 1960 s and 1970s , the assessors began t o ask whether the tim e had no t com e for him to make way for new and younger talent . It was undoubtedly true that between 198 0 and 198 5 TWP began t o lose its distinctiveness and t o look mor e an d mor e lik e all the othe r Toront o theatres. Becaus e o f financial constraints, the exhaustio n of much of th e staff, an d a rapid turnove r of administrators, the theatr e had ha d t o abandon man y of its original ideals. It could n o longe r rel y entirely on actor s trained i n Luscombe' s methods , an d wor k o n original , collaboratively created production s ha d t o be carried ou t in unseemly haste. As a consequence, of the 3 4 productions presented i n those years, only 11 were original works, and 4 of those were revivals. Furthermore, onl y 3 ( The Wobbly, Names, an d Th e Medicine Show, a pla y about a travelling patent medicin e salesman) ha d been created ou t of documentary material ; the remainde r had bee n adapted fro m previously written plays. The company' s efforts t o find worthwhil e Canadia n script s als o ha d bee n disappointing . Hal f th e scripted show s produced durin g th e perio d wer e Canadian , bu t critical response t o all of them ha d bee n coo l o r hostile. As the compan y found itself squeeze d betwee n dwindlin g revenue an d risin g costs, i t had bee n forced t o fin d way s t o reduc e it s productio n expenses . Nearl y half th e

New Blood 16 1 productions mounte d durin g thos e fiv e season s were co-production s o r rentals. That mean t tha t the compan y could n o longe r stam p it s identity on eac h season , a s it increasingly los t control ove r wha t appeared o n it s stage. At first , th e criticis m o f Luscomb e an d th e theatr e wa s preface d b y expressions of genuine respec t an d admiration . 'Sinc e I began working in theatre Georg e Luscomb e ha s bee n a her o an d leading-ligh t fo r me, ' wrote one assessor . Another called him 'the most accomplished and exciting director i n the city, ' and yet another spok e o f him as a 'living national treasure.' Man y referred t o the 'distinguishe d service' of the company , to its long history or 'oddball status,' but fel t that it could no t go on living on the glories of the past . The questio n mark in most assessors' minds was whether Luscombe was merely in a fallow perio d o r whether h e ha d spen t hi s creative force an d was no w simpl y repeatin g himself . O n thi s poin t th e assessor s wer e divided. Those who felt he was still in a creative mode sai d that some TWP productions provide d mor e creativit y 'per squar e inch ' tha n th e produc tions o f almost an y other compan y in th e city . Som e assessors , however, recognized tha t the proble m wen t deeper tha n Luscombe' s abilitie s as a director. They commented o n th e poor quality of the script s produced i n recent year s an d th e inabilit y of th e compan y t o fin d ne w playwrights. Others mentione d th e crisi s wit h th e developer , whic h ha d interfere d with th e regula r operation s o f th e theatre . Since , a s on e assesso r observed, 'th e history of TWP is the autobiograph y of George Luscombe , the wanin g of the centra l figur e is of central concern. ' Luscombe' s isolation as the single animating spirit of the theatre ha d been intensified after the departure of June Faulkner, and man y assessors felt tha t the compan y was paying a price.1 As the council s began t o get conflictin g advice about th e theatre , the y were faced with increasingly difficult decisions . In theory , they disclaimed any wis h t o influenc e th e artisti c policie s o f th e organization s the y financed. An d ye t i t was impossible to disentangl e question s o f financia l responsibility (suc h a s a realisti c deb t reductio n plan ) fro m th e large r considerations o f repertoire an d attendance . Reluctan t t o appea r intru sive, the councils at first tried to ignore th e warnings. In preparin g hi s report fo r th e July 198 2 meeting , Willia m Lord, the atre office r fo r th e Ontari o Art s Council , foun d a ne w not e creepin g into th e comment s o f his advisers - a sens e o f impatience o r eve n out right hostility . 'Ther e i s no energ y o r profil e a t th e theatre, ' wrot e on e assessor. 'Georg e ha s not change d o r grow n - hi s work is passé. Some -

162 Harlequi n in Hogtown thing mus t b e don e t o shak e hi m up. ' Anothe r confessed : ' I d o no t respect wha t is happening a t TWP - Luscomb e i s not challengin g himself o r other s with whom he i s working. There i s no growt h or revitaliza tion i n th e theatre . Th e ol d formula s ar e boring. ' On e consultan t thought i t wa s 'essentia l tha t Georg e realiz e h e need s hel p and , espe cially, new artistic input.'2 As the liaiso n between th e adviser s and th e Arts Council, Lord was in a particularly delicate position. H e kne w tha t hi s recommendation carrie d considerable weigh t wit h bus y member s wh o relie d primaril y o n th e memoranda h e prepared in deciding how they would vote. Since it would be impossibl e t o circulat e th e complet e consultants ' reports , Lor d included a large r tha n usua l numbe r o f excerpts fro m thos e document s for th e Council's guidance. In his memo for the July meeting, he omitte d most of the negativ e comments, and th e fe w he di d includ e he burie d in the middle of much more supportive remarks. His own recommendation , a modes t increas e fro m $81,00 0 t o $85,000 , wa s accepted b y the Council with th e provis o tha t Lor d conve y to th e theatr e th e Council' s concer n and arrang e fo r a meetin g t o discus s that concer n wit h Luscomb e an d members o f his board. The requeste d meetin g too k plac e i n Septembe r 1982 , and whil e th e atmosphere wa s congenial, it soon becam e eviden t that the two sides were talking at cross purposes. Lor d an d Walter Pitman, the executiv e director of th e Art s Council , wer e quit e properl y concerne d tha t th e taxpayers ' money with which they had bee n entruste d b e spen t t o bes t advantage . That mean t guardin g agains t giving money t o organization s which were poorly or irresponsibl y managed. Th e TW P business manager an d mem bers of the TW P board, for thei r part, were all too conscious of the para dox tha t i t take s mone y t o mak e money . I n respons e t o Counci l suggestions that they hire a person t o engage i n audienc e development , TWP could sa y only that the y were i n th e proces s o f looking for on e bu t that the y ha d n o provisio n i n thei r budge t fo r a n adequat e salary . The reason the y coul d no t affor d experience d hel p i n thi s area , the y explained, wa s that the y had bee n tol d b y the fundin g organization s to cut bac k on a budget whic h the y felt wa s already pared t o th e bone . T o meet th e reques t tha t the y submi t revise d spendin g estimates , they ha d cut th e numbe r o f productions and juggled th e figures of projected reve nue. But both side s recognized th e futilit y o f the exercise . The meetin g betwee n th e Arts Council representatives and thei r TWP 'clients' brok e u p wit h expression s o f confidenc e an d renewe d resolve . But in spite o f the great mutua l respect the y had for one another, neithe r

New Blood 16 3 Walter Pitman nor Georg e Luscomb e was free t o do exactly as he pleased . Both wer e caugh t u p i n large r movement s which were t o brin g th e two men int o collision. Similar problem s wer e beginnin g t o develo p betwee n TW P an d th e Canada Counci l in Ottawa. The ne w head o f the Theatre Section, Rober t Spickler, seeme d les s responsiv e tha n hi s predecessor s t o Luscombe' s enthusiastic descriptions of work accomplished and optimisti c projections of future success . In announcin g a grant o f $125,000 fo r th e 1983- 4 season (th e same amoun t TW P had receive d for the las t two years), Spickler referred t o th e clarit y of Luscombe's persona l visio n and hi s determina tion t o establish a Canadian theatre . Bu t he also commented o n th e 'seri ous challenges ' facin g TWP . 'Ove r th e nex t season, ' h e wen t on , 'members o f th e Canad a Counci l wil l requir e evidenc e tha t Toront o Workshop Productions' plac e is being restored with the public and i n th e artistic community.' 3 During th e followin g tw o years, th e tensio n betwee n TW P an d th e councils continue d unabated . Th e adviser s o f bot h fundin g agencie s regarded th e theatr e a s moribund. Fo r most o f them , th e proble m ha d become on e o f artistic renewal. 'Like man y Artistic Directors in Toronto (and, presumabl y elsewhere),' wrote one, 'Georg e is not muc h intereste d in other people's work and doesn' t hav e a knack for sharing power . And yet that's exactly what must happen i f a strong company is to develop and the theatr e i s to grow. Not only does this mean injectin g new blood int o the performin g cor e - "th e youn g company " which George say s i s now being prepare d - bu t there mus t be a willingness to share powe r a t the top. Georg e must develop a n ongoin g creativ e association with a team of peers: veteran actors , yes, but especially writers and directors . '4 By the sprin g of 1985 , Luscomb e coul d se e that i t would be impossibl e to resist the pressure s on hi m much longer . H e had himsel f come t o th e conclusion tha t h e woul d soo n hav e t o ste p down , an d ha d reporte d as much i n hi s latest applicatio n t o th e Canad a Council . But since his contemplated retiremen t woul d involv e handing ove r wha t was literally hi s life's work , he wa s understandably anxious t o ensur e tha t i t went to th e right person. On 4 June 1985, h e asked his board o f directors to create a new position on th e theatr e staf f t o facilitate th e anticipate d transferra l of power fro m himself t o a successor . I t wa s his suggestio n tha t a residen t directo r b e hired fo r a period of one year , after which, if things worked out satisfactorily, th e individua l named shoul d b e give n ful l authorit y as artistic director. Th e candidat e h e propose d wa s Robert Rooney , a youn g English-

164 Harlequi n in Hogtown born directo r who had produce d successfu l show s at TWP in the previou s two seasons. Although boar d member s wer e familia r wit h Rooney' s wor k an d respected Luscombe' s opinion , severa l o f the m wer e surprise d b y hi s choice of an 'hei r apparent.' They were not alone . Man y members o f th e Toronto theatr e communit y also foun d i t mor e tha n mildl y surprisin g that, havin g spent a lifetime railing against colonialism in th e Canadia n theatre, Luscomb e shoul d brin g i n a virtual outside r an d a n Englishman to carr y o n th e tradition s o f th e theatr e h e ha d created . I t wa s not a s though ther e were no alternatives. Over th e years, a surprising number of TWP actors , includin g Ray Whelan, Dian e Grant , Geoffre y Read , Pete r McConnell, Pete r Faulkner , Jeff Braunstein , Phil Savath, Barry Wasman, Michael Ayoub , Steven Bush , Rick McKenna , and Maj a Ardai , ha d blos somed unde r Luscombe's guidance onl y to depart to found companies of their own. It seemed, o n th e fac e o f it, that almost any one o f these actor s might have been a more logical successor than a man whose only connection with th e compan y had bee n as a visiting director . If Luscombe's selection of Rooney seemed sudden , even quixotic, it was in fac t a decisio n tha t ha d bee n som e tw o years in th e making . The tw o men ha d first met i n the autum n of 1983, when, along with R.H. Thompson, Roone y had droppe d int o th e Alexander Stree t theatr e wit h a joint proposal. Th e tw o had spen t th e summe r in the actin g company at Stratford, where Rooney had introduce d Thompso n t o a play about racis m in South Afric a calle d Th e Jail Diary o f Albie Sachs. When th e thre e me n me t in Luscombe' s office, the y found the y shared man y enthusiasms. Thomp son an d Luscomb e ha d worke d togethe r o n Th e Mac Paps an d greatl y respected on e another . Roone y a t firs t wa s overshadowed b y th e rang y and ebullien t Thompson . Soft-spoke n an d diffiden t i n manner , th e Englishman presente d a rathe r blan d exterior , bu t i n conversatio n h e revealed a passionate concer n fo r social justice, to which Luscombe natu rally responded . Luscomb e wa s also delighte d t o fin d that , lik e himself, Rooney ha d bee n traine d i n th e Laba n metho d an d tha t h e ha d eve n taught fo r a tim e wit h Lis a Ullmann , the woma n responsibl e fo r gettin g Laban out o f Nazi Germany.' 1 Rooney's sense of social outrage ha d bee n nourishe d b y the experienc e of workin g fo r a wir e servic e monitorin g new s storie s comin g ou t o f Africa. H e ha d bee n appalle d b y the injustice s occurring in former British colonies an d especiall y incense d b y th e atrocitie s o f th e Sout h Africa n policy of apartheid. B y the mid-1970s , he ha d foun d th e growin g conservatism of Britain increasingly uncongenial, and i n 197 5 he fle d th e coun -

New Bloo d 16 5 try t o launc h a career a s actor an d freelanc e directo r i n Canada . S o far, that caree r ha d take n hi m t o th e Banf f Playwrights ' Colony as a visiting director, t o Broc k University , wher e h e ha d spen t fou r year s as residen t director, an d t o a stint as actor at the Stratford Festival, where he ha d me t R.H. Thompson. Luscombe wa s not i n th e habi t o f spelling out hi s reasons fo r makin g the decision s he did , but i n choosin g Rober t Roone y to succee d hi m h e was undoubtedl y motivate d b y tw o conflictin g concerns . O n th e on e hand, h e wa s determined tha t TWP should continue it s left-wing, sociall y committed stance . He had watched as one afte r another o f the alternative Toronto theatres , launched i n th e earl y seventies with muc h socia l idealism and revolutionar y rhetoric, had abandone d it s early political commitment t o drif t int o safe r ideologica l waters . It was important no t onl y for the continuity of TWP but for the health of the Toronto theatre scene , he felt, tha t ther e b e a t leas t one troup e i n th e cit y to ac t a s a gadfly i n th e complacent 1980s . Rooney shared tha t conviction. On th e othe r hand , h e ha d t o thin k of his own position. He was in n o mood t o retire altogether , s o he would have t o find a way to retain a toehold i n th e theatr e h e ha d founded . A t thirty-five , Roone y wa s Lus combe's junio r b y a quarte r o f a century . I t i s possibl e Luscomb e fel t more comfortabl e dealin g wit h a younge r perso n tha n wit h someon e closer t o hi s ow n age . Fo r mos t o f hi s career , h e ha d dominate d thos e around hi m rathe r lik e a proletaria n Kin g Lear , an d i t ma y be tha t h e shared wit h Lea r a reluctanc e t o give up al l vestiges o f authority with hi s crown. By choosing a successor whom he migh t be able t o influence, who was politicall y committed bu t unintereste d i n acto r training , he migh t ensure a division of labour whic h would free hi m fro m som e o f the tire some aspect s o f theatr e administratio n an d allo w hi m t o d o wha t h e enjoyed an d di d best - wor k with actor s i n the developmen t o f original scripts.

21 Board Games

The designatio n of Robert Rooney as resident director marke d th e culmination o f a struggl e betwee n Luscomb e an d hi s boar d o f director s tha t had bee n goin g o n fo r a number of years. Through th e 1960 s and 1970s , Luscombe ha d successfull y resiste d al l suggestions tha t h e enlarg e th e theatre's toke n boar d o r gran t i t an y real power . I n 1980 , however , th e theatre's financia l positio n ha d becom e s o precarious tha t th e Ontari o Arts Counci l grew alarmed. Studyin g the theatre' s mid-seaso n repor t in that year , William Lord, th e Council' s theatr e officer , learne d tha t box office revenu e wa s wel l belo w projection s (amountin g t o jus t ove r $25,000, includin g subscriptio n sales) , tha t fund-raisin g was down, an d that receipt s fro m rental s wer e practicall y non-existent . Th e theatre' s total earned revenu e for the perio d wa s less than 24 per cen t of expenses, and th e mos t optimistic forecast indicated that, by the en d o f the 1980- 1 season, TW P woul d b e facin g a $48,00 0 shortfal l o n to p o f a n alread y accumulated deficit of $86,000. 1 Not surprisingly , Lor d contemplate d thes e figure s wit h som e dismay. Council polic y specified that gran t mone y could no t b e use d t o pa y off company debts, an d sinc e TW P had allowe d itsel f to fal l s o far int o th e red, i t was imperative that it now devise a strategy for recovery. In a meeting with Luscomb e and hi s new business manager, Jack Merigold , Lord emphasized tha t i t was important fo r TW P to pu t i n plac e a reasonabl e deficit reduction plan duly authorized and approve d by a properly constituted board of directors. For hi s part , Luscomb e ha d ever y reaso n t o b e suspiciou s of boards. Nevertheless, it was becoming evident TWP would not b e allowed to continue as it had i n the past . So with considerabl e apprehension Luscomb e invited a numbe r o f friends o f th e compan y to atten d a meetin g i n th e

Board Game s 16 7 theatre. Afte r som e discussio n o f th e financia l problem s facin g TWP , those gathere d agree d t o form a new board o f directors. I t included Derrick Kersha w o f th e origina l TW P advisor y board, To m Patterson , th e founder o f the Stratfor d Festival, Richard Ballantine , a Toronto businessman, Jerry White, an accountan t wit h Thorne Riddell, Karl Jaffary, a lawyer an d forme r cit y alderman , Georg e an d Mon a Luscombe , an d Jac k Merigold. I n th e followin g weeks, they recruited Kar l Stevens, a n archi tect, and Sherril l Cheda , th e executiv e director o f the Canadia n Periodi cal Publishers ' Association , t o joi n the m an d electe d Kar l Jaffar y a s chairman. This ne w boar d approache d th e challenge s facin g th e theatr e wit h enthusiasm bu t fo r the mos t part with little understanding o f what would be require d o f them . Th e tas k ahea d wa s daunting. Th e ne w auditors , appointed b y Jerry White as treasurer, determine d tha t th e theatre' s defi cit in September 198 1 was $97,000 'giv e or take a thousand,' which did no t include a bank loan of $111,000 and a number o f unpaid bills. 2 In analysing their rather precarious position, Jaffary an d th e board decided tha t it had thre e majo r tasks , eac h o f which would require substantia l funding. The mos t immediate was to devise a deficit reductio n pla n tha t would satisfy th e art s councils ; the secon d wa s to obtai n th e dee d fo r th e theatre ; and th e thir d was to address the problem o f the theatre's dwindling popularity. Several of the boar d member s were convinced that a major obstacl e t o developing audience s was the theatr e itself . The Alexande r Stree t build ing was gloomy, decorated i n the dar k re d an d blac k colours o f the Com munist party, and it s orange-covered bleacher s har d an d uncomfortable . The backstag e facilities were cramped, an d th e auditoriu m wa s unusable during the hot summer months. The er a of warehouse theatre s and thei r attendant discomfor t was ending. I t wa s typical of th e tim e tha t th e S t Lawrence Centre fo r the Arts, built in the sixtie s as a 'people place,' ha d embarked o n a n extensiv e renovation o f it s two theatres t o brin g the m more int o line with contemporary standard s of comfort and elegance . Another problem troublin g the board wa s the siz e of the theatre. While it was true tha t th e compan y had conducte d th e successfu l Champagn e Season i n it s three-hundred-sea t spac e an d tha t fo r tw o years the y ha d come nowher e clos e t o fillin g th e seat s available , the boar d fel t tha t a larger, an d especiall y a mor e comfortable , theatr e wa s essential i f they were t o produc e th e extr a earne d revenu e the y s o badly needed. I n th e autumn o f 1981, therefore , th e boar d submitte d a deficit reduction pla n to the Ontario Arts Council and, in anticipation o f obtaining th e dee d fo r

168 Harlequi n in Hogtown the theatr e earl y in 1982 , began formulating plans for a $1 million capital fund-raising driv e to renovate the building. Soon, however, the compan y found itself in a frustrating bind. I t could not legitimately embark on a fund-raising campaign t o renovate a theatre it did no t own . At the sam e time, however, it was reluctant to compromise such a campaig n b y approaching th e sam e potentia l donors fo r smaller sums. That mean t tha t th e theatre' s effort s t o find operating fund s were being hamstrung by plans for an ambitious (but continually delayed) capital campaign. It was becoming increasingly important to settle the ownership question as soon a s possible. Since the apparen t resolutio n o f the theatre' s conflict with Penaloza in July 1977 , several new developments had undermine d th e sens e o f security temporarily afforded by that resolution. Following the proposed compromise (whereb y Penaloza had agree d t o rent half the Alexander Street property t o th e Cit y in exchange fo r a n increas e in th e allowabl e density on th e othe r half) , Penaloz a had encountere d financial problems which prevented hi m from fulfillin g hi s part of the agreement. When he allowed his optio n o n th e propert y t o lapse , 1 2 Alexander Stree t reverte d onc e again t o it s owner , th e developmen t compan y Fobasco . Fobasc o deter mined t o proceed with its own development plans. In th e sprin g of 1979 , it arrange d a meetin g wit h Luscomb e an d Jaffary, a t tha t tim e th e the atre's lawyer . The landlor d wanted vacant possession of the propert y at a time i n th e nea r futur e which would be convenien t for TWP. Instea d of being crestfalle n (a s the agen t n o doub t expected) , Luscomb e bridle d with righteou s indignation . Eye s flashing , h e insiste d tha t 1 2 Alexander Street wa s not jus t an y building t o b e traded , vacated , o r demolished . Whether th e landlor d like d i t or not , his property housed a theatre, an d such a facility was a spiritual resource t o be preserve d an d cherished . Jaffary remember s Luscomb e a s being a t hi s mos t passionat e and defian t during th e meeting, 3 but n o amoun t o f eloquence coul d alte r th e facts . And the fact s were that TWP didn't have a legal leg to stand on . In th e month s following, Jaffary trie d to persuade Fobasc o t o settle for development o n onl y half the propert y and negotiate d a purchase pric e of $100,00 0 fo r th e theatr e an d th e lan d beneat h it . The succes s of th e proposed compromis e depende d o n Luscombe' s bein g abl e t o raise th e needed mone y from th e provinc e and o n Fobasco' s working out a development pla n tha t would mee t wit h th e approva l of th e City . Whe n thi s twofold objec t ha d no t bee n achieve d b y July 1980 , Fobasc o decide d i t wished t o develo p th e whol e sit e within the existin g zoning restrictions and agai n threatene d th e compan y with eviction.4 His back seemingly up

Board Game s 16 9 against the wall, Luscombe called an emergency meeting at the theatre. I t was attended b y about a hundred supporters , wh o pledged themselve s to work for th e surviva l of TWP. On 2 0 August 1980, a delegation including Luscombe, Jaffary, an d sev eral other prominent supporters of the theatre appeared before th e Executive Committe e o f Cit y Council . Followin g the meeting , th e Counci l informed th e commissione r of planning that 'i t [viewed ] the retentio n o f the theatr e a s an overridin g plannin g objectiv e for th e site. ' Finally , i n October, afte r furthe r negotiation s betwee n Jaffary , Fobasco , an d th e City, the Counci l approved th e constructio n of a fifteen-storey, 145-apartment buildin g o n th e nort h hal f o f th e Alexande r Stree t propert y i n exchange fo r the transfe r of the lan d unde r th e theatr e t o TWP when all Planning Departmen t approva l ha d bee n secured. 5 For it s part, th e the atre agree d t o pay a lump sum of $100,000 t o cover ren t arrears , renovations and repairs to the building, and the deed. Several years were to pass, however, before th e theatr e finally acquired the dee d fo r the building . On 1 4 August 1984, the necessar y $100,000 was provided b y the newl y named Ministr y o f Citizenship and Cultur e i n th e form of a 'repayable grant' on condition tha t the theatre agre e to take out a mortgage i n the nam e of the Ministry. The followin g day the titl e to th e theatre wa s officially conveye d to th e theatre . I t looked a t las t as thoug h the important fund-raising could proceed. Instead, the boar d becam e increasingl y embroiled i n details of theatr e administration whic h brough t i t int o conflic t with th e artisti c director . After on e acrimoniou s meetin g i n Kar l Jaffary's hom e i n lat e 1984 , th e board decided t o set up a long-range planning committee t o consider the question of a successor to George Luscombe . At a lunch in January 1985 , Gordon Floyd , acting o n behal f o f th e board , offere d Luscomb e a contract a s artisti c directo r emeritu s at a graduall y diminishin g salar y tha t would ceas e altogether a t th e en d o f three years . At that meeting , Floyd restated hi s opinion tha t ultimat e responsibility for runnin g th e theatr e (including makin g th e selectio n o f Luscombe' s successor ) wa s i n th e hands of the board. Luscomb e found that claim utterly unacceptable. H e maintained tha t th e histor y of TWP was unique an d tha t a s founder h e should hav e a different relationshi p to his board fro m that of other artistic directors to theirs. In the end, he refused to sign the contract. It wa s in a n atmospher e o f mutua l suspicio n an d hostility , therefore , that Luscombe presented hi s plans for the 1985- 6 season. They called for five previousl y scripte d production s (o f whic h Rober t Roone y would direct two) and a new work to be based o n th e lif e an d musi c of Jelly Roll

170 Harlequi n i n Hogtown Morton. Th e propose d production s include d Jack an d His Master b y th e Czech autho r Mila n Kundera ; Woza Albert, abou t apartheid , t o b e pre sented b y th e Marke t Theatr e o f Johannesburg ; Traitors b y Stephe n Sewell; Th e Struggle of the Dogs and th e Black, a second pla y about apartheid ; and a co-productio n of Julius Caesar. I n submittin g this schedule t o th e board i n Marc h 1985 , Luscomb e reporte d tha t h e intende d t o emplo y Robert Rooney as 'resident director' until his own resignation too k effec t 'at the completio n o f this season.' At that time, he would recommend t o the board o f directors tha t they accept Rooney as the ne w artistic director ofTWP. The propose d progra m precipitate d a confrontatio n tha t ha d bee n brewing most of the year. The administrativ e manager, Catherine McKeehan, refuse d to sig n th e applicatio n o n th e ground s that she was leaving before the 1985-6 season and could not in good conscience commit herself to it . Gordo n Floyd , as acting chairman, also refused to sign the application. He objected to the fact that the decisions had been made without any discussion by the board, an d he had little confidence in the proposed bud get, which, he felt , thoug h no t exactl y dishonest was not base d o n reality . He concluded tha t the differences between the board an d Luscombe had now reached a point where he could no longer serve a useful purpose, and he decided t o resign. 7 In a letter to Luscombe, he wrote: Despite ou r man y meetings an d conversation s sinc e November , despit e ou r com mon desir e t o se e TWP continu e a s a uniqu e an d importan t forc e i n Canadia n theatre, w e have bee n unabl e t o agree on som e fundamenta l matters . I t seems t o me tha t there is virtually no prospec t o f resolving our basi c differences of opinion . I believe tha t i t is time for a transition at TWP, t o bring ne w energy and ne w vision to the fulfilmen t o f the theatre' s artistic mandate, t o build a stronger bas e o f audience support, an d t o establish mor e effective administrative , marketing and fundraising operations . I believ e tha t thi s transitio n ca n onl y b e achieve d unde r th e leadership o f a new Artistic Director wh o is supported by an experienced and pro fessional Genera l Manager , an d a n expanded , revitalized Board o f Directors.8

Floyd did not wish to be part o f a board whic h seemed t o be used only 'to legitimize a n operatio n i n which they have n o voice , where the y are sel dom consulted , an d which is entirely controlled b y the founder.' Within a few days , Luscombe received a similar letter o f resignation from Kar l Jaffary. When, i n mid-Apri l 1985, Luscomb e hear d fro m th e Canad a Counci l that they would not consider th e theatre's applicatio n without a signature

Board Game s 17 1 from th e chairma n o f the board , h e sough t clarification of his legal position fro m hi s old friend Norman Endicott , a long-time theatre supporte r and th e son of the Communist and peac e activis t James Endicott. Consulting th e informatio n filed with th e Companie s Branch, Endicott reporte d that, i n hi s opinion, Luscomb e ha d ampl e authorit y t o call a meeting o f the director s an d t o fil l th e existin g vacancies. 9 Accordingly , on 1 May Luscombe convene d a meetin g i n th e theatr e t o constitut e yet anothe r board of directors. Th e officer s electe d a t that time included George Lus combe a s presiden t an d artisti c director, Jerry Whit e a s chairman , an d Mona Luscombe as secretary. The member s at large were Tom Patterson, Karl Stevens , an d Michae l Lyons from th e previou s boar d an d Norma n Endicott, the publishe r Carolin e Walker, the theatr e criti c Gordon Vogt , and th e actor Douglas Campbell as new appointments. An important item of business was the introductio n an d approva l o f a ne w by-la w providing for th e general managemen t o f the corporation. Unde r it s terms, all management decision s were t o b e mad e b y the president , excep t i n th e cas e when th e artisti c director wa s a perso n othe r tha n th e president , whe n artistic matter s would b e lef t i n th e hand s o f th e artisti c director. 10 As in the past , Luscomb e prudentl y secure d signe d letter s of resignation fro m all ne w members , thereb y re-establishin g th e line s o f authorit y a s h e wanted them . Among th e first actions o f this new board were the approva l o f Rober t Rooney a s resident directo r an d th e submissio n of a new applicatio n t o the Canad a Council . At th e en d o f June 1985 , th e compan y heard tha t their gran t woul d be reduce d b y $30,000 from th e previou s year's level. This bombshel l wa s accompanie d b y a lette r fro m Ann a Stratton , th e Council's theatre officer , warnin g that th e Council' s decision t o cut back its suppor t reflecte d it s very seriou s concern s regardin g th e artisti c and organizational vitalit y o f th e company . Sh e reporte d tha t assessment s of the wor k of TWP ha d bee n increasingl y critical i n recen t years , and tha t the Counci l had conclude d 'tha t the previous level of support awarded t o Toronto Worksho p Production s wa s no t commensurat e wit h th e returns.'11 The new s from the Ontari o Arts Council in July 1985 was not muc h bet ter. Althoug h th e communicatio n fro m th e chairman , Donal d McGib bon, wa s somewha t friendlie r i n tone , it s underlyin g messag e wa s th e same: Th e reductio n i n th e 1985/8 6 gran t [b y $6,000] an d th e condi tions attache d reflec t th e concern s expresse d b y Council' s advisors.' 12 Feeling a littl e lik e th e victim s o f anonymou s informers , Luscomb e an d Rooney were doubl y confounded . Not onl y woul d they nee d t o rethink

172 Harlequi n i n Hogtow n their origina l plan s i n a n attemp t t o cu t mor e tha n $36,00 0 fro m thei r budget, bu t the y would have to come u p with a season t o please th e face less judges o n th e councils ' theatr e panel s i n whos e hand s thei r ver y future no w lay. They decide d t o ope n thei r 1985- 6 seaso n wit h a ne w pla y from th e Soviet Unio n whic h Luscomb e ha d brough t bac k fro m a recen t visi t there. Th e work , by Edward Radzinsky, was entitled Theatre i n th e Time of Nero an d Seneca, and i t would, they felt sure , make a significan t splas h i n the rather quie t waters of Toronto theatre . The y overestimated thei r pub lic. Reviews were lukewar m and audience s apathetic, an d th e pla y had t o be take n off two weeks early. If their opening sho w had no t caused th e stir they had hoped for, thei r second mor e tha n mad e u p fo r it . Ghetto by the Israel i playwright Joshua Sobol dealt with Jewish collaboration i n the Nazi-occupied ghetto o f Vilna during th e Secon d Worl d War . I t ha d bee n brough t t o th e company' s attention b y Marion Andre, the artistic director o f Theatre Plus , who ha d received i t from th e Montrea l director Alexandr e Hausvater. Rooney an d Luscombe ha d bee n immediatel y struck by the play , although the y real ized they would run substantia l risks in producing it. Quite apar t from th e challenging natur e o f the subjec t matter , ther e wer e seriou s administra tive difficulties t o be overcome . The firs t wa s finding a suitabl e director. Bot h Luscomb e an d Roone y felt i t was essential that th e pla y be stage d b y someone full y familia r with the nuance s of Jewish life. Fortunately, Hausvater, himself a Jew, was available an d willin g to direc t th e production . Ther e wa s no denyin g tha t Sobol's subjec t was unsettling an d hi s treatment o f it provocative. Se t in the Vilna ghetto i n 194 2 just ten day s before th e massacre o f all but abou t six hundre d o f th e inhabitants , th e pla y examine s th e relationshi p between a young S S officer, a Jewish chie f of polic e responsibl e fo r la w and order in the ghetto, an d a group o f performers. The Naz i officer pro fesses admiratio n for Jewish culture, including the forbidde n musi c from Broadway shows, which he persuades the Jewish musicians to play for him. In the context o f the bleak moral choices forced on the Jews by their Nazi persecutors, song s suc h a s 'I Want to B e Happy' an d 'Swanee ' provid e a grotesque musica l comment. Hoping t o ameliorate th e fate o f some o f his compatriots, th e Jewish polic e chie f collaborate s i n th e selectio n o f victims to be executed b y the Nazis. AJewish profiteer points to the 'produc tive' job s h e ha s create d b y helpin g th e Germa n wa r effort . Th e performers themselve s must choos e defianc e an d deat h o r accommoda tion an d survival .

Board Games 17 3 Sobol was a journalist for a left-wing Israel i newspape r an d a graduat e in philosoph y fro m th e Sorbonne . A s a schoolboy i n Israel , he ha d boy cotted histor y classes that dealt with the holocaus t because o f his outrag e that there ha d been s o few acts of resistance. Later, in Germany, however, he cam e t o realiz e tha t th e questio n o f collaboration wa s not s o simple. How would he have behaved, he wondered, if he had ha d th e misfortune to b e caugh t u p i n th e Naz i tyranny? H e cam e t o believ e that , fa r fro m being a n ac t o f cowardice , survival i s the ultimat e form o f huma n resis tance. The pla y he wrot e to explor e thes e idea s i s deeply disturbing , raisin g painful question s abou t th e natur e o f communit y and cultur e an d th e price paid in the struggle to stay alive. Intending his work primarily for an Israeli audience , Sobo l wante d t o poin t ou t th e evi l effect s o f Zionism, which h e though t wer e inconsisten t with Judaism a s h e understoo d it . Believing that 'wha t the German s have done to us explains what has happened t o us as Israelis,' h e suggeste d tha t th e victim s might be playe d by Palestinian actor s an d th e Nazi s b y Israelis . I n spit e o f it s provocativ e nature, th e origina l Haifa productio n ha d playe d to receptive audience s and complimentar y reviews . Mos t critics recognize d tha t th e pla y was a tribute to the spiri t of resistance and surviva l in the fac e o f annihilation. Understandably, perhaps , Toront o audiences , bein g les s intimately involved with the issues , responded t o the pla y somewhat differently. Several commentator s seeme d reluctan t t o accep t it s disturbin g vie w o f human nature . Sale m Alaton of th e Globe thought th e wor k 'bruised th e memory o f recen t event s i n German-occupie d Europe , no t leas t b y explaining itsel f to o carefully ' an d thereb y makin g th e proceeding s dull.13 Marianne Ackerman, a visiting Montreal critic, however, called th e play 'one of thé few Holocaust-based drama s which goes beyond indicting the guilt y an d complacent , and actuall y draws the entir e publi c int o th e story. Ghetto addresse s a universa l mora l question . I t i s no t exclusive . Hausvater ha s changed Sobol' s ending , keepin g Gen s [th e polic e chief] alive to mourn th e dead , his lone prayin g image on e o f the production' s most powerful . It i s a superb , engrossin g evenin g o f theatre.' 14 In man y ways, Ghetto was a perfec t exampl e o f th e kin d o f politicall y concerned , artistically darin g theatr e tha t Luscomb e ha d bee n tryin g to establish i n Toronto for almost three decades. Ironically, it was to mark the beginnin g of the en d o f his company.

22 Catastrophe Averte d

At first , th e loomin g cloud s wen t unnoticed . Indeed , prospect s looke d bright a s attendance a t Ghetto hovered aroun d 5 1 per cent , a significan t improvement ove r recen t productions . Par t wa y through th e ru n o f th e play, however, as unforeseen bills continued to come in, it became appar ent that the theatr e was in serious financial trouble. With some $50,000 in accounts payable, the company was informed that it had come to the en d of its $200,000 line of credit a t the bank . Lacking any other reserves , th e management wa s unable to meet it s payroll and wa s forced t o lay off half of th e theatre' s te n employees . To mak e matters worse, since th e com pany was some six months behind in its bookkeeping and therefor e could not prepar e financia l statements , the mone y still du e i n payment s fro m the federal and provincia l arts councils might not be forthcoming. As the true natur e o f th e situatio n bega n t o daw n o n him , Luscombe pu t hi s pride i n hi s pocke t an d appeale d t o th e directo r o f th e Ontari o Art s Council for advice and assistance. Walter Pitman , formerl y the presiden t o f Ryerson Polytechnical Institute and befor e tha t a New Democratic member of the provincia l legislature, ha d bee n a long-tim e supporte r o f TW P o n bot h aestheti c an d ideological grounds. H e listene d sympathetically to Luscombe's litan y of misfortunes an d responde d wit h thre e ver y practica l initiatives . H e arranged t o release th e secon d instalmen t of the Counci l grant t o cover the bank overdraft; he proposed that th e Council hire a firm to write up the company' s books; an d h e too k i t upon himsel f to arrange a meeting with th e othe r fundin g agencie s t o conside r ho w they might collectively assist TWP to turn around it s current position.1 At a hastil y calle d meetin g o f th e boar d o f director s i n earl y January 1986, Luscomb e reporte d hi s conversation wit h Pitman an d announce d

Catastrophe Averte d 17 5 that a meetin g with th e fundin g agencies ha d bee n se t up fo r late r tha t month. H e stresse d tha t i t wa s important fo r th e boar d t o prepar e a strong positio n pape r fo r tha t meetin g t o avoi d being pu t o n th e defen sive b y the Counci l officers . H e offere d t o work with the theatr e staf f t o draft a proposal an d t o bring that proposal t o a board meeting before th e end o f the month. ^ Following hi s meetin g wit h th e board , Luscomb e approache d Gerr y Eldred, a theatre consultant , for advice on ho w the compan y might overcome it s problems . H e stresse d tha t h e ha d n o intentio n o f alterin g TWP's artistic policy or moving from their current location and expresse d his convictio n tha t th e mai n reaso n fo r dwindlin g audience suppor t was the siz e of th e theatre . Eldre d propose d conductin g a six-wee k study to determine th e feasibilit y o f raising $2 million to retire th e theatre' s deb t and t o renovat e an d enlarg e 1 2 Alexander Street . H e anticipate d tha t three-quarters o f that sum would come from federal , provincial, and Metropolitan Toront o agencie s an d tha t th e remainin g $500,00 0 coul d b e raised throug h a public campaign. Eldre d would not himsel f be involved in an y direct fund-raising , but h e woul d propose a n administrativ e structure t o wor k closel y wit h Luscombe , th e boar d o f directors , an d a n unspecified fund-raisin g team and othe r interested parties . The proposal s wer e brought t o a meeting o f the TWP board on 2 1 January, where, afte r some discussio n of the nee d for such a study, they were approved. Luscomb e sai d tha t a n eve n mor e desirabl e solutio n t o thei r problems would be the construction of a six-hundred-seat theatre at a cost of $3 million, and i t was agreed tha t this possibility would be raise d a t th e meeting. Meanwhile, the Ontario Arts Council had decide d t o conduct a study of its own and ha d engage d th e art s consultant Graeme Pag e t o carry it out. On 2 3 January 1986 , th e da y before th e schedule d meetin g wit h th e the atre, Pag e delivere d hi s assessment of th e situation . He emphasize d tha t TWP's mos t serious challenge was to generate som e cash flow. Just t o continue it s present leve l of productions an d t o pa y the carryin g costs of th e growing deb t (withou t contributing t o th e defici t or th e mortgage) , h e warned, the compan y would need revenues o f close t o $600,000. Further more, th e company's position would not b e substantially improved even if the Ministr y of Citizenshi p an d Cultur e wer e t o forgiv e th e mortgage , since such a move would contribute nothing t o current income. Page pre dicted tha t unles s there wa s an improvemen t i n th e situation , th e ban k would 'pull the plug,' possibly insisting on the sale of the building. To this sorry state of affairs , Pag e sa w only three possibl e solutions : the compan y

176 Harlequi n in Hogtown could sel l the buildin g to a financially sound theatr e wit h a provision tha t TWP share th e spac e over a three-to-five-year period ; i t could undertak e a massive fund-raising effort; o r i t could sel l the buildin g outright. 3 Glancing over these sombre conclusions, Pitman foresaw a difficult sessio n with the theatr e th e following day. On th e afternoo n o f 2 4 January, nearl y twenty concerne d individual s gathered i n th e comfortabl e boardroo m a t th e Ontari o Art s Council' s offices o n Bloo r Street . Althoug h th e ton e wa s cordial an d Chairma n Walter Pitma n reassure d th e TW P representatives that everyon e presen t really care d abou t th e theatre' s situation , th e atmospher e wa s on e o f mutual suspicion. For his part, Luscomb e knew that the ban k was threatening to call in its loan, a move that would force him into bankruptcy and destroy the theatr e h e ha d devote d hi s life to . He was not prepare d t o let that happe n withou t a fight. For their part , th e representative s fro m th e funding agencie s share d a certai n scepticism . Whil e admirin g Lus combe's pioneerin g achievements , tenacity, and undoubte d talent , they were beginnin g t o questio n hi s ability t o deal realisticall y with the finan cial crisi s no w facin g him. Nevertheless , they ha d com e t o th e meetin g with open minds , ready to have their doubts allayed. Luscombe began th e company's formal presentation by reading from a prepared statement. He attributed what he called 'the most serious financial crisis in th e theatre' s history ' t o three factors: the refusa l o f the ban k to extend furthe r credit without collateral security, chronic underfundin g from th e art s councils , and a declin e i n audienc e support . Thi s last , h e argued, was a consequence les s of programming tha n o f the conditio n o f the building . Th e uncomfortabl e benche s an d black-painte d wall s con veyed th e impressio n o f a theatre stil l living in th e 1960 s rather than on e that had move d with the times . In fact, Luscombe argued, TWP could stil l play an importan t rol e i n th e Toront o theatr e scen e an d provid e a focus for like-minde d men an d wome n whos e concerns fo r humanity' s plight had le d the m t o see k solution s in th e theatre . Th e prerequisit e fo r th e kind o f renaissance h e envisaged , Luscombe was convinced, was the con struction o f a new, six-hundred-seat theatre mor e congenia l to audiences in the prosperous nineties.4 He found it ironic that the very thing the company had fought so long to achieve - ownershi p of their ow n theatre - wa s no w their mai n prob lem. Not only was the buildin g deteriorating faste r than the y could affor d to repai r it , bu t th e ver y by-la w whic h the Cit y ha d passe d t o ensur e it s continued us e as a theatre limite d its commercial value. Although the the atre's audito r ha d assesse d th e propert y at $1.2 million, the ban k consid -

Catastrophe Averte d 17 7 ered th e buildin g a s worthles s an d th e lan d a s wort h n o mor e tha n $500,000. Tha t mean t tha t th e ban k wa s unwilling to increas e th e the atre's line of credit withou t some kin d of security, preferably in th e for m of a mortgage o n th e property . Luscomb e was unwilling t o provid e such security for fear that the theatr e migh t some day fall int o the hand s of the bank and b e lost to the theatr e community. Luscombe's intention , h e informe d th e Council , a s h e prepare d t o relinquish th e artisti c leadership o f th e company , was to se e i t properl y settled i n its home. T o tha t end, he asked the councils to support th e theatre through a reduced 1986- 7 season, plans for which would be submitted by April. He also asked that they support th e proposed feasibility study by Gerr y Eldre d an d mak e a specia l arrangemen t s o tha t th e theatr e would be allowed to remain ope n for the balanc e of the curren t season . The representative s o f th e fundin g agencies listene d politel y but wit h mixed feelings of amazement and incredulity . It seemed t o man y that, in his preoccupation wit h the building , Luscombe ha d los t sight of the rea l issues at stake. I n hi s presentation, h e ha d mad e n o mentio n o f just ho w the presen t theatr e boar d (whic h had s o far shown no abilit y in that direction) woul d be abl e t o rais e thei r shar e o f the cos t of a new theatre. No r did h e addres s th e questio n o f cas h flo w pose d b y Graeme Page . Ther e was no mentio n o f what steps might be take n t o strengthe n th e administration o f th e company , no r wa s the matte r o f th e transfe r o f powe r discussed. Luscomb e referre d indirectl y to hi s eventua l replacemen t bu t gave n o indicatio n o f when suc h a chang e o f direction migh t tak e plac e or how it would be carried out . In th e ensuin g discussion , several o f thes e issue s were raised . Pitma n noted hi s concer n abou t linkin g discussion o f th e managemen t o f th e building wit h discussio n o f th e operatio n o f th e theatre . H e wondere d whether sortin g ou t th e problem s o f on e woul d necessaril y resolve th e problems o f th e othe r an d suggeste d tha t declin e i n audienc e suppor t might no t b e relate d t o th e conditio n o f the theatre . Othe r representa tives wondered i f the compan y had considere d alternativ e solutions, such as sellin g th e buildin g o r rentin g i t t o others . Th e TW P representative s were adaman t tha t sellin g the theatr e would simply aggravate thei r situation sinc e it would deprive them of their capital. In response t o a proposal that to p priority should be the employmen t of a competent genera l man ager, TWP replied tha t they had n o money to hire one . Pitman an d others expressed concer n abou t th e structur e of the board and it s relationshi p t o th e administration . The y hope d th e urgentl y required fund-raisin g could b e don e b y an a d ho c body , from which sev-

178 Harlequi n i n Hogtow n eral ne w board member s migh t b e chose n afte r th e campaig n ha d bee n successful. Aske d when he woul d step aside , Luscomb e refuse d t o give a definite answer . Rooney explained tha t his appointment as resident direc tor was for a year only, to see if he would get along with the curren t artistic director. Luscomb e suggeste d tha t h e woul d retire a s artistic director 'this year ' bu t adde d tha t h e didn' t mak e th e decisions . Th e meetin g finally broke u p with universal expressions o f goodwill but with unspoken fears and suspicion s on both sides . In privat e discussions following th e departur e o f th e TW P delegation , the representative s of the fundin g agencies were mor e forthright . I t was evident t o thos e presen t tha t whateve r h e migh t say , Luscombe wa s in effective contro l o f th e theatr e an d tha t th e boar d wa s virtually inopera tive. Afte r discussin g severa l options , the y agree d tha t a joint respons e should b e drafted an d conveye d to the theatre th e following week. The attemp t t o arrive at the wording of such a response i n the day s following revealed profound disagreemen t amon g th e representatives abou t the continuin g relevanc e o f TWP' s kin d o f theatre . A n openin g para graph statin g tha t 'al l level s of governmen t continu e t o believ e i n th e artistic mandat e promote d b y TWP ... are convince d of the valu e of what TWP wants to accomplish artistically, support the sociall y relevant theatr e TWP wishes to produce , an d believ e ther e i s a larg e audienc e fo r TW P productions in Toronto an d Canada ' was debated an d finally rejected. I t was replace d i n th e fina l documen t b y a much mor e qualifie d endorse ment: 'Al l level s of government recogniz e th e importanc e o f th e artisti c mandate promote d b y TWP and th e contributio n o f Georg e Luscomb e and TWP to the developmen t of Canadian theatre.' The documen t the n wen t on t o list a number o f concerns an d require ments. I t underline d tha t th e fundin g cut s suffere d b y th e theatr e reflected a perception tha t TWP had deteriorate d i n it s ability to fulfil it s own mandat e - a deterioration demonstrate d b y a diminishing audience and a n absence o f ongoing communit y support. Th e caus e of the deterio ration, i t suggested , was , first, the failur e o f th e compan y t o evolv e ade quate board, management , and administrative structures, and second, th e diversion o f resources and attentio n awa y from artisti c objectives towards the managemen t an d developmen t o f th e theatr e property . I t furthe r stressed tha t th e recen t discussion s had faile d t o demonstrat e tha t TWP had addresse d an y of these problems . To assist the theatr e i n working out realistic solutions, the Ontario Arts Council offered t o pa y for a ten-week study by a consultancy team which would analyse the situatio n and recommen d alternativ e courses of action

Catastrophe Averte d 17 9 for th e theatr e t o consider. As an incentive, the Council specified that the release o f any further funds t o TWP would be dependent o n th e finding s and recommendation s o f th e consultants . Followin g th e completio n o f such a study, it was expected tha t TWP would provide a balanced operat ing budget for the remainder of the season, a plan t o eliminate the deficit in five years, a realistic program fo r 1986-7 , an d a n administrativ e structure which would ensure sound fisca l an d operationa l management . Th e Council also expressed it s willingness, subject to the creatio n o f a board/ management structur e capable of exercising the necessary public stewardship, t o recommend tha t th e Ministr y of Citizenship and Cultur e forgive its $100,000 mortgage . Finally , th e Counci l mad e clea r tha t th e variou s government agencie s were unanimous in thei r oppositio n t o an y capital expansion o f the theatre , an d i t refused the reques t t o underwrite a feasibility study of such expansion. The complete d documen t wa s hand-delivered to Luscombe on 2 8 January.3 The theatre' s respons e wa s uncharacteristically prompt. A t a press con ference calle d tha t very afternoon, Robert Roone y rea d from a prepare d release announcin g the planned appointmen t o f a consultancy team an d TWP's commitment to strengthen thei r board of directors. Th e following day, Luscombe wrote to Walter Pitman formally requesting th e service s of the consultant s and acceptin g th e term s o f the proposal . Tw o days later, however, at a meeting of the theatre' s board , th e first item of business was the election , by the five members i n attendance , o f a new slate of board officers. The y consisted o f George Luscombe , president , Larr y Cox (no t previously o n th e board) , vice-president , Norma n Endicott , chairman , Tom Patterson , vice-chairman , Carolin e Walker , treasurer , an d Mon a Luscombe, secretary. Followin g discussion of the Council' s response, th e board passe d three motions. Norma n Endicot t suggested considerin g the creation o f a holdin g compan y wit h th e sam e executiv e a s TWP which would assum e ownershi p o f the theatr e an d responsibilit y for it s renovation. Carolin e Walker proposed tha t TW P investigate the possibilit y of a 'proper loa n agreement ' wit h a bank o r credi t union. Larr y Cox moved that a committe e b e struc k to recrui t additiona l boar d members . Susa n Puff, th e theatre' s publicit y director, then describe d plan s for a fund-raising drive to collect $10,000 to tide the theatr e ove r the next few months.6 Using th e sloga n 2 8 Days t o Sav e 28 Years th e theatr e announce d it s campaign t o the press on 5 February and at the same tim e sent out letters to supporters wit h the admonition The Door s at 12 Alexander Stree t Must Not B e Closed!!! A separate cop y was addressed t o Walter Pitma n a t th e Ontario Art s Council, with a persona l not e fro m Susa n Puf f suggestin g

180 Harlequi n i n Hogtow n that h e migh t wan t i t for hi s files. Pitman was furious. Far from demon strating th e theatre' s initiativ e an d responsibility , a s Puf f n o doub t intended tha t i t should, th e lette r simpl y confirmed Pitman' s worst fears that th e organizatio n wa s bound o n a cours e o f self-destruction. Instead of addressin g th e company' s long-ter m problems , th e propose d drive , hastily planned withou t consultation wit h the Council, would simply jeopardize attempts t o raise the much large r amounts needed b y the company in the immediate future. Furthermore, Pitma n had als o learned tha t TWP had entere d int o direc t negotiation s with the Canadian Imperia l Bank of Commerce concernin g a n increas e i n it s line o f credi t an d wa s thereby limiting what the Counci l coul d d o t o obtai n mor e advantageou s financial arrangement s fo r th e company . H e ha d als o hear d tha t Luscomb e was already looking for a new general manager , befor e an y decisions ha d been take n abou t th e mos t desirable for m o f administrative structure for the theatre . For about twenty-fou r hours, Pitma n considered imposin g strict limitations o n TW P t o ensur e tha t n o furthe r action s affectin g th e lega l o r financial statu s of the compan y would b e take n befor e th e repor t o f th e consultants had been received . I n th e end , however , he relented , feeling that little would be gained b y such adversarial tactics. But it was beginning to dawn on hi m tha t saving Toronto Workshop Production s was going t o be a more frustratin g operation tha n h e had originally imagined. Negotiations betwee n th e theatr e an d Graem e Pag e wer e complete d fairly rapidly, and Pag e was able to begin hi s investigation of the compan y in mid-February . B y the en d o f th e month , h e ha d reporte d a s follows : 'Everyone involved with the compan y is totally overwhelmed by the crisi s and n o one i s able t o see a way out. The fundraisin g drive toward $10,00 0 had bee n fairl y successful , bu t th e mone y ha s been use d t o pa y salaries without making any headway in th e lon g lis t of payables. Board an d staf f relations ar e strained , an d an y attempt b y directors t o tak e a har d lin e position ha s me t wit h considerabl e resistance . Th e compan y ha s bee n operating withou t any financial management o r sense of fiscal controls.'7 Page als o reporte d tha t peopl e who had bee n associate d wit h TWP in the pas t were very supportive o f the organization , bu t tha t som e o f the m questioned whethe r Rober t Roone y ha d th e necessar y experienc e t o assume th e responsibilitie s of artistic director. Th e sam e peopl e fel t tha t the board should exercis e some influence in the selection of a new artistic director, but , Pag e found , the staf f and director s coul d not agre e o n how they should d o so. The Pag e repor t was completed o n 3 0 April 1986, an d th e TW P board

Catastrophe Averted 18 1 gathered t o conside r it s recommendations . Th e mos t far-reachin g o f these concerne d th e function s of the boar d o f directors and th e creatio n of a board o f trustees . Pag e conclude d tha t th e theatre' s financia l crisi s had develope d fro m ' a lack of understanding by the Boar d o f Directors as to what controls are suitable ... for proper decision-making ... The presen t Directors have inherited a system whereby the management and decisionmaking were left t o the Artistic Director [wit h th e Boar d bein g aske d to ] approve decision s or to accept budget s and plan s which have been drawn up without its participation.'8 Page als o implied that the board was in violation o f th e la w covering th e board s o f non-profit organization s in tha t several o f th e director s wer e employe d b y TWP . I t wa s important , h e maintained, sinc e public mone y was involved, that th e boar d shoul d no t appear t o be self-serving. Hoping hi s remark s would provid e a guide fo r futur e members , Pag e went o n t o describ e wha t he considere d th e appropriat e function s of a board. Artistic an d managemen t decisions , he recommended , shoul d b e left t o hired professionals , while the boar d shoul d act as a senior manage ment tea m t o oversee th e progres s o f the compan y an d accep t responsi bility for the allocation of public funds. T o tha t end, th e board should b e involved i n discussion s of overall policy, planning, budgets, fund-raising , and promotion . In recommendin g a radical restructuring of the theatre , Page was dealing with that aspect of the proble m whic h seemed mos t tractable. Clearly, there ha d bee n majo r weaknesses in th e theatre' s administratio n which had contribute d t o th e company' s misfortunes . The appointmen t o f a new artisti c director an d genera l manager , th e renewa l o f th e boar d o f directors, and th e establishment of working committees t o deal with fund raising, audienc e development , finance , an d s o on woul d g o a lon g way towards ensurin g better fiscal control an d responsibility . But such measures could d o nothing to address th e more profound malaise of the orga nization. For th e unspoke n trut h was that th e spiri t had gon e ou t o f th e theatre. I t remained t o be seen i f administrative changes could revive that spirit. Members o f th e Ontari o Art s Council meetin g i n July ha d t o wrestl e with their own doubts. Both th e consultant s and th e officer s o f the Coun cil were inclined to be supportive o f a company which had contribute d so much t o th e theatrica l lif e o f th e province . Nevertheless , several o f th e council's advisers wondered whether it wasn't too late to save the theatre . 'There is little in this application,' wrote one, '(fro m th e continuin g structure of the board, t o the choice of plays) t o indicate a renewed vision, or a

182 Harlequi n in Hogtown revitalized sens e o f direction.' 9 Others fel t tha t it was desirable t o retai n the theatr e buildin g at 1 2 Alexander Stree t as an invaluable performance space. I n th e end , the Counci l decided t o award the compan y a preliminary gran t o f $20,00 0 an d t o defe r consideratio n o f th e balanc e o f th e request unti l th e Octobe r meeting , at which time i t would have furthe r information o n the current status of the board, plans for the implementation of the Page report, the new general manager, the 1986-7 budget, and fund-raising an d defici t reduction proposals. 10 By October, th e compan y could report tha t the y had move d some distance toward s satisfyin g th e criticism s o f th e variou s funding organizations. Th e boar d ha d bee n enlarge d b y th e additio n o f thre e ne w members; i t ha d se t u p a subcommitte e t o revie w th e theatre' s by-laws ; and i t had approve d a drastically reduced but financially manageable season. Furthermore, some progress had already been made on reducing the company's debt. The ne w plans for 1986-7 involved renting the theatre to the Sha w Festival for tw o productions (Breaking th e Silence and B Movie, the Play b y Tom Wood ) i n November and January, bringing in a productio n of the Marke t Theatre o f Johannesburg entitle d Woza Albert in December, mounting a productio n o f Ke n Mitchell' s one-man pla y about Norman Bethune, Gone th e Burning Sun, in April , an d producin g Georg e Luscombe's long-delayed Mr Jelly Roll'm May. In addition, with help from th e Department o f External Affairs, th e compan y proposed t o tak e th e pla y about Bethune to China. Those move s won th e theatr e a reprieve . Th e Ontari o Art s Council granted $85,000 , an d th e Toront o an d Metr o council s confirmed thei r support. As 1986 drew to a close, it seemed tha t the worst of the crisi s was past.

23 Harlequin in Hogtown

The emergenc y meeting with the Ontari o Art s Council had dramatically underlined th e importanc e o f revitalizin g the artisti c direction o f TWP. By March 1986, therefore, th e compan y had worke d out a n arrangemen t whereby Rober t Roone y woul d tak e ove r a s artisti c directo r i n July, a t which tim e Luscombe would become th e theatre' s artisti c director emeri tus at a slightly reduced salary . The pla n calle d fo r the tw o men t o share administrative duties, with Roone y taking responsibility for th e choic e o f repertoire an d th e formulatio n of artistic policy and Luscomb e concen trating o n teachin g an d directin g th e occasiona l production . Luscomb e would retain hi s position a s president o f the board . The boar d hope d t o forestal l publi c discussio n o f th e change s unti l they too k effect . Whe n Rober t Cre w learned o f th e plan s an d reporte d them i n th e Star, however, the director s reluctantly called a press conference t o confirm that Luscombe ha d a t las t agreed t o relinquish his hold on th e rein s o f powe r a t TWP . Understandably, perhaps , th e pres s showed les s interest i n th e ne w incumben t tha n i n th e long-embattle d Luscombe, whos e tenur e a t las t appeare d t o b e comin g t o a n end . Describing hi s actio n a s 'movin g aside ' rathe r tha n retiring , Luscomb e told reporter s tha t h e woul d continue t o direc t a s well a s fund-raise and organize th e theatre' s archives . 'I'm no t sur e I know how t o retir e from the theatre,' he said . 'Someone would have to teach me.' 1 Like s o man y o f Luscombe' s pronouncements , th e word s ha d a n ambiguous rin g t o them . Observer s critica l of TW P predicted tha t th e moves wer e merel y cosmeti c an d tha t th e ne w artisti c directo r woul d prove t o be nothin g bu t a puppet i n th e la p of the maste r ventriloquist. Luscombe ha d evade d pas t effort s t o replace him , an d ther e wa s little in his comment s t o suggest tha t h e ha d los t any of his proprietary attitudes

184 Harlequi n in Hogtown and autocrati c ways. I f the theatr e wa s to b e saved , such critics argued, it would requir e a completel y new artistic vision. It remaine d t o b e see n if Rooney ha d suc h a vision, an d i f he did , whether i t would be allowe d to prevail. Away fro m th e publi c spotlight , th e transfe r o f authorit y proceede d more smoothl y tha n migh t hav e bee n predicted . Luscomb e installe d a second des k i n th e crampe d upstair s office , an d th e tw o men crowde d into th e tin y spac e t o grappl e wit h thei r ne w duties . Free d fo r th e firs t time i n mor e tha n twenty-fiv e year s fro m th e burde n o f administration, Luscombe bega n t o devot e mos t o f hi s attentio n t o th e creatio n o f th e much delayed M r Jelly Roll, now scheduled for production i n the sprin g of 1987. Luscombe's interest in the Creol e pianis t 'Jelly Roll' Morton was part of his long-standing fascination with what might b e describe d a s the radica l fringe o f th e entertainmen t world . Inspired b y the Marxis t aesthetics o f Littlewood an d MacCol l an d th e experiment s o f Meyerhol d an d Vakhtangov, Luscomb e wa s drawn t o th e cultura l 'outsiders, ' th e artisti cally disestablished, the wandering performers an d minstrel s who live in a precarious world of their own somewhere between privilege and disgrace . For Luscombe , there was something almos t mythic about thes e 'license d jesters' — clowns, musicians , or professiona l athlete s — whom h e cele brated i n pla y after play . They constitute d fo r hi m a kin d o f archetype , the embodimen t o f an undyin g human quality . It was this quality that h e and Nanc y Jowsey had trie d t o captur e i n th e theatre' s log o - th e half clown, half-harlequin figure that served for more tha n twent y years as the signature o f Toronto Worksho p Productions . I n it s association wit h th e circus an d commedi a dell'arte , th e log o recall s the traditio n o f slapstick and pantomim e s o important t o the aestheti c o f TWP. The disconnecte d head wit h th e conica l cap, falling of f or bein g lifte d int o place, suggests a repudiation o f reaso n an d languag e - associate d wit h th e min d - i n favour o f impulses rooted in the body . Or i t may intend a sense o f incompletion - th e clow n i n the ac t of putting himsel f together . Whateve r its symbolic connotation , th e desig n wa s a reminde r o f th e non-politica l dimensions of the company . The inspiratio n fo r th e logo , o f course , ha d bee n th e company' s first hit, He y Rube!, in whic h s o man y of Luscombe' s idea s ha d com e t o frui tion. Indeed , tha t play , revive d i n 1966 , i n 1972 , an d agai n i n 1984 , ha d become somethin g o f a touchston e fo r th e theatre . I t wa s usefu l a s a means o f takin g Luscombe and hi s actors bac k to thei r roots , bu t i t also served as a kind of litmus test of Toronto's current attitud e t o its residen t

Harlequin in Hogtown 18 5 radical clowns. The first revival of the pla y had bee n hel d a t 47 Fraser Avenue i n November 1966 , after performances in Stratford in the Theatre-in the-Park. There , i t ha d bee n introduce d int o th e repertoir e b y a ne w group o f actors, most of whom were unfamiliar with th e origina l produc tion. The proces s o f revival proved t o be very different from that involved in the origina l creation. For this second company , Hey Rube! was, not a n expressio n o f immediate personal experienc e bu t simpl y anothe r scrip t t o be learned . Instea d o f treating i t tha t way , however, Luscomb e encourage d hi s ne w actor s t o develop ne w characters an d business . But h e seeme d satisfie d only with what ha d bee n don e before . No t surprisingly , his attitud e resulte d i n unhappiness o n bot h sides . Th e actor s fel t the y wer e bein g restricted , while Luscombe grew impatient with th e slo w pace o f the work. 3 Nathan Cohe n though t th e reviva l les s successful tha n th e origina l pro duction sinc e th e line s improvised b y different actor s were inappropriat e in the mouth s of new performers. He was also more consciou s of the inadequacies o f the script , which 'had no t seeme d s o crucial [i n th e original production] becaus e of the shee r prima l force an d animatio n of the pro ceedings an d .. . because th e sho w seemed t o b e th e inceptio n o f something genuinely progressive in our theatre.' 4 When th e compan y came t o d o th e pla y agai n i n 1972 , thei r circumstances, and thos e o f the Toronto theatre i n general, ha d change d drasti cally. Productions such as Dionysus in 69at the Studi o Lab, David French' s Leaving Home a t Tarragon , an d Th e Farm Show at Theatr e Pass e Muraille had create d a new theatrical climate in th e city . The reappearanc e o f Hey Rube! marked th e beginnin g of a new relationship between TWP and Tor onto audiences. Herbert Whittaker , who had champione d Luscombe in the early sixties, thought th e sho w 'bigger , flashie r an d mor e appealin g tha n ever.' 5 Joseph Erdelyi , the criti c for th e Peterborough Examiner, who ha d als o seen the firs t production i n 1961 , thought i t 'just as exhilarating as it was when it was first presented.'6 Both critics enjoyed th e exuberan t mixtur e of circus turns and backstag e scenes and fel t that plot was as unnecessary as in a real circus. But there wer e new voices beginning t o be hear d amon g th e theatrical reviewers. Don Rubin, a recent arriva l from th e Unite d States and soo n t o become edito r o f th e Canadian Theatre Review, ha d no t see n th e earlie r production bu t wa s able t o pronounc e tha t TW P ha d travelle d onl y a small distance in th e years since 1961. While admitting that Luscombe was an imaginativ e director an d tha t hi s company was getting stronger eac h

186 Harlequi n in Hogtown season, he found 'the sameness of Luscombe's work ... rather depressing. ' He noted that th e 1972- 3 TWP season would include other revivals (bot h Pickwick an d Schweik ha d bee n announced ) an d implie d tha t thi s backward-looking stanc e wa s at odd s wit h tha t o f othe r theatre s acros s th e country, who were looking ahead. Lik e Feste, TWP was beginning t o find its antics out o f favour. It wa s more tha n a decad e befor e th e ol d retaine r wa s brought bac k into servic e once more , i n 1984 . At that time , th e theatr e wa s struggling with a growin g defici t an d fightin g t o attrac t audience s t o it s shows . Rehearsals ra n throug h Octobe r an d Novembe r an d wer e a vivi d reminder o f how much things had changed . Th e cas t itself was a mélang e of old and new . Peter McConnel l and Dougla s Livingston returne d t o recreate role s they had first played in the 196 6 revival. Jeff Braunstein, Pete r Millard, an d Ros s Skene , al l veterans o f th e 197 2 production , ha d bee n recruited t o play the thre e clowns, Moss, Charlie, and Pandro . Th e newe r members o f th e company , however , had n o persona l knowledg e o f th e production's history , an d on e o f th e younges t o f them , Luscombe' s daughter Nadine , had no t eve n been bor n whe n the pla y had it s first success. The differen t generations als o came t o th e rehearsal s wit h very differ ent preconceptions . Braunstein , Millard , an d Sken e ha d becom e s o attuned t o Luscombe' s wa y of workin g tha t the y coul d modulat e thei r performances i n rhyth m o r adjus t the m i n spac e almos t instinctively . McConnell and Livingsto n remembered th e day s of struggle a t 47 Fraser Avenue an d understoo d ho w closely the experience s o f the beleaguere d Wagnerian circu s troupe corresponde d t o Luscombe's ow n story. But th e younger actor s ha d non e o f tha t experienc e t o dra w on . Thei r model s were films and television , and th e olde r actor s fel t the y never learne d t o invest th e admittedl y stereotypica l role s wit h an y emotiona l truth . Th e result was a mechanica l alternation o f soap oper a an d circu s acts rathe r than th e mor e subtl e juxtaposition that had bee n achieve d in earlier pro ductions. There were also ways in which the conten t of the pla y seemed jarring to the younger actors. In the original production, Joan Maroney asjosie had given expression t o the performers' feelin g of desperation an d frustratio n in a song that began 'Rap e me and ravish me.' But what had seemed inno cent enough i n the early 1960s was intolerable t o the more awar e actresses of the 1980s . Mar y Durkan refused t o sing the song , and Luscomb e recog nized tha t sh e was right t o object t o a latent anti-feminis m which he ha d not see n i n the work before.

Harlequin i n Hogtown 18 7 The pla y opene d o n 2 9 Novembe r 1984 , an d th e respons e o f th e younger critic s now writing for th e Toront o dailie s was mixed. Matthew Fraser o f th e Globe fel t tha t i t ha d los t non e o f it s magic, and calle d i t a 'wonderful orchestratio n o f all the chaoti c elements tha t make circuses so strangely fascinating.' 8 Bu t Henr y Mietkiewic z o f th e Star was more tem perate in his enthusiasm. 'A kindly old grandfather o f a play,' he called it, which w e allo w 't o babbl e awa y becaus e o f ou r feeling s o f affectio n an d gratitude fo r wha t i t accomplishe d a s a pioneer. ' Whil e acknowledging that th e work contained hal f a dozen hilariou s and breathtakin g acts , he felt that , without the divertin g circu s acts, 'th e stor y collapses into pur e melodrama.'9 Somethin g o f th e sam e ambivalenc e wa s reflected i n th e attendance figures, which reached onl y 35 per cent . If Hey Rube! had ru n lik e a leitmotif throug h th e company' s history, it was also the grandfathe r o f a number of other TWP productions celebrating th e margina l lif e o f talente d rogue s an d vagabonds . Summer '76 explored th e worl d o f Olympi c athletes; Th e Medicine Show dug int o th e tradition o f th e travellin g patent medicin e salesman ; Les Canadiens deal t with professiona l hockey. But one grou p Luscomb e kept returning t o was the doubl y disadvantage d populatio n o f blac k entertainers. I n M r Bones, he ha d pai d tribut e t o th e minstrels . I n 1980 , h e discovere d a n entirel y new are a o f dramatic interes t i n th e activitie s of itineran t blac k baseball teams. In the autumn of 1979, Luscombe chance d t o hear an interview on Don Harron's CB C morning radi o show . The gues t wa s a Canadian write r by the nam e o f John Crai g who described hi s remarkable experience s dur ing a summe r i n th e 1940 s when h e ha d disguise d himsel f i n orde r t o travel wit h a blac k basebal l tea m calle d th e Colore d All-Stars . He ha d recently turne d thos e experience s int o a book, Chappie an d Me, and Lus combe though t th e materia l migh t b e adapte d fo r th e stage . Wha t attracted hi m t o th e stor y was the wa y in whic h th e blac k athlete s ha d developed a critica l perspectiv e o n th e whit e societ y which condemne d them t o lif e o n th e margins . Clearl y superior t o th e team s the y encoun tered i n th e smal l town s of western Canad a an d th e Unite d States , they nevertheless ha d t o disguis e thei r abilit y with humou r t o avoi d givin g offence t o thei r employer-opponents . The y di d s o throug h a serie s o f comic turns called 'reams. ' In one o f these, th e first-base player, pretend ing to be watching something in the sky , would stand o n th e bas e with hi s back t o th e pitcher , apparentl y ignorin g th e game . Th e pitche r woul d then thro w inside to force th e batte r t o ground t o third. At the coun t of seven, th e firs t basema n woul d pu t hi s han d behin d hi s back , an d th e

188 Harlequi n in Hogtown third baseman woul d throw out th e runner b y hitting the open mitt. This routine seemed t o Luscombe t o sum up exactl y the mixtur e of apparen t insouciance and wariness that characterized th e blacks, and he decided t o call the stage version of the story Ain 't Lookin ' after that particular 'ream. ' As h e ha d don e wit h othe r adaptation s o f novels , Luscombe go t hi s actors to improvise various scenes - th e conversations on the bus, the disagreement wit h the ga s station attendant , th e white boy's encounter with a racist white girl. To these plot incidents, he added music of the period an imitatio n o f the Inkspot s - an d a numbe r o f pantomime scene s of warming up an d playin g ball. He invite d John Crai g to attend rehearsal s and giv e suggestions a s t o ho w th e player s shoul d mov e an d wea r thei r uniforms. Terry Gunvordahl designed a simple setting consisting of a few baseball posters, an electric piano, and a set of drums. Much of the actio n took place in the 'bus, ' a number o f suitcases on which the players sat and mimed th e joggling, monotonou s journey. The sound s of the bu s as well as the sudde n prairi e storms were suggested b y the on-stage musicians. The productio n opene d o n 2 9 Ma y 1980, whe n th e critic s fro m th e major paper s wer e i n Niagara-on-the-Lak e reviewin g the Sha w Festival. Caught short-handed, th e Globe and th e Star assigned thei r sports writers to cover the show . Both Victor Paddy and Kevi n Bolan d were entranced . Paddy found th e work 'innovativ e an d moving,' 10 and Bolan d called th e play ' a littl e gem abou t th e blac k diamond.' 11 Critic s fro m th e smalle r papers wer e eve n mor e enthusiastic . Gordo n Vog t gav e th e fulles t an d most thoughtfu l account o f the production . 'Excep t for Luscombe' s two previous production s [Refugees an d Th e Mac Paps},' h e reported , 'ther e has bee n nothin g withi n hailin g distanc e o f i t fo r imagination , intelli gence, warmth and a shrewd sense o f what the stag e can render u p t o an artist who approache s i t with an ope n ey e ... It i s closer t o fil m tha n an y stage show I've ever seen.' 12 Elsewhere, he describe d th e climacti c chase, in whic h 'th e tea m i n thei r (imagined ) bu s i s pursue d b y a grou p o f (imagined) lout s i n thei r (imagined ) ca r aroun d imagine d curves , over imagined hills and acros s imagined fields.' The dénouemen t o f the scen e 'in whic h th e tea m draw s togethe r i n a dar k field , tensel y awaitin g an attack, and silentl y passes out basebal l bats, brought audience s to peaks of excitement and fea r ... that would be an achievement in any medium.'13 While h e wa s working on Ai n 't Lookin \ Luscombe becam e attracte d t o the idea of doing a show to celebrate on e of the early black jazz musicians. At first he ha d considere d th e caree r o f Fats Waller, but afte r th e appear ance in Toronto of the musica l production Ain't Misbehavin'he turne d his attention t o the lesser-know n Ferdinand 'Jell y Roll' Morton. As the finan -

Harlequin in Hogtown 18 9 cial crisi s o f th e theatr e deepened , however , Luscomb e becam e side tracked, an d onl y i n 198 7 wa s h e abl e t o settl e dow n t o develo p th e production. This tim e th e materia l h e worke d fro m was less dramatic. I t consiste d primarily o f a n anecdota l biography , Mister Jelly Roll, compile d b y th e noted historia n o f American musi c Alan Lomax fro m hour s o f recollec tions recorde d i n th e musi c auditorium o f the Librar y of Congress. Ric h as thi s sourc e materia l was , however , Luscomb e soo n foun d i t di d no t lend itself easily to adaptation. The publishe d interviews capture th e flamboyance o f the raconteu r an d somethin g of his penchant fo r self-aggrandizement. But there i s little of the inne r life o f the ma n behin d th e public figure, th e Creol e Ferdinan d La Menthe, who was driven out o f his home by his grandmother whe n she discovered tha t he ha d bee n playin g piano in th e Ne w Orleans 'tenderloin ' distric t an d wh o change d hi s nam e t o Morton s o that he wouldn't be identified as a 'Frenchy.' Nor i s there a stron g narrativ e line i n th e lif e o f thi s wandering min strel/composer wh o travelle d th e 'barrellhouse ' circui t i n th e souther n United States. In developing his vision of Jelly Roll as a musical innovator, therefore, Luscomb e found it difficult t o reconcile the talente d an d origi nal geniu s wit h th e mor e mundan e Ferdinan d Morton . Awa y fro m th e piano stool , Jelly Rol l was unexceptional - a small-time pimp, co n man , and poo l shark , who live d his lif e o n th e borderlin e o f th e la w without much concer n fo r th e right s or feeling s of others. H e was a hard ma n t o admire, but when he sat down to the piano, he seemed t o give voice to all the joy and yearnings of the dispossessed . Another difficult y Luscomb e faced in working on th e sho w was the casting. H e manage d t o gathe r togethe r a talente d grou p o f black perform ers, bu t mos t o f them wer e more familia r wit h musica l productions tha n with th e legitimat e theatre . The y ha d littl e experience i n movemen t o r improvisation and foun d it difficult t o bring t o the work the kind of imaginative creativity and inventio n which Luscombe depende d on . Force d t o capitalize on his cast's strengths, he and Larry Cox, whom he had brough t in t o assist with the script , put mor e an d mor e emphasi s on th e musi c at the expens e o f th e dramati c story . I n th e end , th e sho w was little more than a serie s o f Jelly Roll' s songs , wit h minima l dramatizatio n o f th e events that lay behind th e compositio n o f those songs . As rehearsals progressed, i t became eviden t that the sho w was not working. I n th e day s before th e opening , Luscomb e wa s uncharacteristically upset.14 Sensin g th e atmospher e o f apprehensio n an d feelin g tha t thi s might b e Luscombe' s las t sho w with TWP , th e staf f member s di d thei r

190 Harlequi n in Hogtown best t o mak e th e productio n succeed . Sensed, bu t unexpressed , wa s the awareness tha t if Mr Jelly Roll failed, i t would not onl y jeopardize th e cur rent seaso n bu t seriousl y undermine th e argumen t tha t ther e wa s still an audience for the kin d of work Luscombe had pioneere d an d developed . The productio n opene d Thursday , 30 April 1987, and playe d to a nearcapacity hous e i n whic h 24 6 ticket s were complimentary . Th e review s were lukewarm . Ray Conlogue fel t tha t Luscomb e was still without equal 'when i t comes t o a fond funky stagin g idea,' bu t tha t the scrip t lacked a point o f vie w o r an y specia l passion. 15 Subsequent performance s wer e poorly attended, with box-offic e figure s sinkin g to 1 4 per cen t of capacity, the lowes t of the season . It seeme d indee d tha t th e ol d magi c n o longe r worked . Toronto ha d changed an d wit h i t th e expectation s o f th e audiences . N o longe r Tor onto th e Goo d o r Hogtown , the cit y was eager to establish itself as 'world class.' Perhaps the TWP aesthetic seemed to o naïve; certainly, its idealistic socialism was out o f fashion. Whatever the reason, by the criteri a that now held swa y M r Jelly Roll was a failure. It was a bitter disappointmen t t o Luscombe and t o all those who, like him, had hoped that the company might still recapture somethin g of its past glory.

24

Final Act

By the end o f the 1986- 7 season, the situatio n seemed marginall y less desperate. Although M r Jelly Roll had faile d to attrac t th e audienc e the y ha d hoped for , the company' s overal l financial position ha d improved . With the hel p o f a stabilizatio n grant o f $109,48 9 fro m th e Ontari o govern ment, TW P ha d manage d t o reduc e it s defici t (no t includin g th e $100,000 mortgag e t o th e Ministr y o f Citizenshi p an d Culture ) fro m $235,000 t o $85,000 . Bu t thei r ow n fund-raisin g efforts ha d bee n disap pointing. O f th e $38,00 0 targete d fro m corporations , foundations , individuals, and specia l projects, th e boar d ha d manage d t o collect less than $6,000. Attempt s t o fin d corporat e sponsorship s fo r futur e production s had prove d futile , an d a planne d fund-raisin g concert b y th e pianis t Anton Kuert i had ha d t o be cancelled . I n spit e of the incom e showin g in their books , th e hars h realit y was that th e compan y coul d no t mee t it s payroll. I n a n effor t t o kee p th e theatr e afloat , th e recentl y appointe d business manager, Pa m Rogers, approached th e ban k for $10,000, only to be tol d tha t an y loa n woul d hav e t o b e guarantee d b y members o f th e board an d repai d i n three weeks. To wrestl e wit h thes e problems , th e boar d vote d t o restructur e itsel f along th e line s suggested b y Graeme Page . Chairma n Norma n Endicot t stepped down , and Pamel a Hampso n wa s elected t o replace hi m fo r th e summer. A nominating committe e consistin g o f th e educatio n adminis trator Florenc e Silver , Robert Rooney , an d Pamel a Hampso n se t out t o find ne w boar d member s wit h th e requisit e politica l an d financia l con nections. At a stormy annual general meetin g o n 1 5 September 1987 , this nominating committee informe d th e Luscombes and Larr y Cox that they were not bein g put forwar d for re-election. On 5 February 1988 , th e ne w board me t t o discus s a worsening situa-

192 Harlequi n in Hogtown tion. Revenue s from th e tw o opening productions o f the 1987- 8 season, Ralph Burdman's Tête à Tête and th e musica l Rap Master Ronnie, had faile d to reach thei r budgeted projections , an d TWP was facing imminent bankruptcy unles s revenue coul d b e increase d an d cost s drastically curtailed. They agreed t o cancel the last production o f the season . That settled, the discussion turne d t o the questio n o f Luscombe's position a s artistic director emeritus . Ther e wa s general agreemen t tha t th e theatr e coul d no t afford t o pa y salaries to tw o artistic directors. Whil e it was true tha t Luscombe ha d founde d th e compan y and contribute d enormousl y t o its success, it was also true that his present position was without precedent i n th e country. Directors with similar close connections to the theatre s the y had run suc h a s Bil l Glassco , Paul Thompson , Marti n Kinch , an d Ke n Gas s had no t bee n give n retainers at the en d o f their tenure . I t was unreasonable, the members argued, for Luscombe to expect t o be pensioned of f by an organization that was itself virtually bankrupt. After lengthy discussion, the boar d member s decide d t o discontinu e Luscombe' s salary . The y agreed t o arrang e a meetin g wit h him t o delive r a lette r o f dismissal to take effect i n eight weeks. 1 Meanwhile, Robert Rooney was in the midst of rehearsals for his second production of the season and at the same time drawing up his preliminary proposals for a 1988-9 program. I n thes e plans , he forecas t earned reve nue o f $320,00 0 (significantl y highe r tha n th e compan y ha d eve r collected), governmen t grant s o f $210,00 0 (includin g Canad a Counci l support a t previou s levels) , an d privat e secto r fund-raisin g o f $81,000 . Even a t thes e optimisti c levels of subsidy , Rooney predicted a defici t of more tha n $55,000 . Whe n th e boar d looke d a t th e figures , the y were appalled b y wha t seeme d t o the m irresponsibl e planning , an d aske d Rooney to submit a new proposal reflectin g a more realisti c budget t o be considered at a subsequent meeting. By the en d o f February, the financia l situatio n had deteriorate d t o th e point where the board wa s forced t o approach th e bank for further operating funds. Thi s time they agreed t o supply collateral, and th e chairma n and treasure r dre w u p a seale d undertakin g t o provid e th e ban k wit h a second mortgag e fo r $250,000 , t o b e execute d an d registere d a s soon a s reasonably possibl e but n o late r tha n 3 0 April 1988 . By mid-April, how ever, th e operatin g defici t fo r th e seaso n wa s almost five times the antici pated $32,00 0 shortfall, an d littl e or no money was being raised privately. Oppressed b y their inabilit y to pr y funds ou t o f the privat e sector , th e board came increasingly to believe that the company's problems could be solved only by selling the TW P property t o a developer i n exchange fo r a

Final Act 19 3 promise t o includ e a theatr e i n an y building erecte d o n th e site . While such a scheme seeme d attractiv e i n the shor t ru n i n tha t i t would enabl e the boar d to pay off its existing debts an d mak e a fresh star t in new quarters, it failed t o addres s th e long-ter m structura l difficulties. I t was beginning t o appear unlikel y that th e compan y would ever obtai n th e privat e support necessar y for it s continued surviva l unles s it change d it s artistic direction. Accordingly , the boar d decide d t o as k fo r Rooney' s resigna tion, citing the 'financia l situatio n of the theatre, ' an d a t the sam e meeting authorized To m Patterso n t o negotiate wit h the celebrate d Canadia n actress Frances Hyland in the hope s that sh e might be persuade d t o take his place. With th e closin g o f th e las t schedule d productio n o f th e season , th e Market Theatre of Johannesburg's Bopha, on 2 6 June 1988 , th e board was forced t o shu t th e theatr e an d la y off all staff . Withou t either artisti c o r administrative personnel, th e director s no w faced two alternatives. Either they coul d win d u p th e compan y an d dispos e o f an y asset s remaining after payin g thei r debts , o r the y could attemp t t o carr y on th e busines s themselves. Although few of the board members had bee n associate d with TWP for mor e tha n a couple o f years, most had develope d a sense of loyalty to the organizatio n an d fel t the y should do thei r best to keep it alive. To achiev e thei r objective , the y hoped t o appoin t a n artisti c director whose ability and visio n would persuade th e funding agencies t o suppor t the organizatio n a t previou s levels , an d t o parla y their rapidl y decaying physical asset into a larger an d mor e attractiv e performing space . To that end, the y authorized a subcommittee to study a development plan for the 12 Alexander Stree t sit e which the y had receive d fro m th e Georg e an d Helen Var i Foundation . Th e schem e calle d fo r a n immediat e contribu tion o f $300,000 t o th e theatre , whic h would enable i t to pa y off its debts and leave a little to spare. The builder , George Vari, would then negotiat e a rezonin g o f th e propert y wit h Cit y Hal l t o allo w the constructio n o f a condominium an d theatr e development . I f successful , Var i woul d tur n the ne w auditorium over to TWP, and th e $300,00 0 would be considere d the purchas e pric e o f th e property ; i f not, th e develope r woul d write off the initia l payment to TWP as a charitable donation . I n thei r enthusiasm for th e project , its sponsors estimate d tha t it could be completed b y January 199 0 and tha t TWP would be able t o mount it s 1990-1 season i n new quarters. On 2 9 June, Florenc e Silver , acting a s pro-tem chairma n o f th e TW P board, calle d a press conference t o announce th e deal , for which she said an agreemen t i n principl e ha d bee n signe d tha t morning . Sh e mad e i t

194 Harlequi n in Hogtow n clear to reporters tha t there migh t be some changes in the theatre's political orientation , whic h she acknowledge d migh t have been to o leftis t i n the past . Pa m Roger s agree d tha t TW P ha d becom e a 'politica l foru m rather tha n a theatr e company ' bu t tol d Rober t Penningto n o f the Su n they intended t o stay on th e 'cuttin g edge' in social relevance.2 In th e twenty-fou r hour s followin g th e pres s conference , however, it emerged tha t Georg e Vari , wh o ha d no t bee n a t th e meeting , ha d a slightly differen t interpretatio n o f th e propose d agreement . H e stresse d that while he hope d th e dea l woul d go through, 'neithe r mysel f no r th e theatre compan y ha s signe d anythin g yet. ' Furthermore , h e differe d slightly in his vision of the theatre' s future . Vari had bee n bor n i n Hungary and ha d emigrate d to Canada i n 1956 , after th e Hungaria n uprising . Now chairman of the Paris-base d Sefri Con struction International , on e o f th e larges t hote l builder s an d owner s in the world, he ha d establishe d the Georg e an d Hele n Var i Foundation t o endow projects related t o improving the quality of life. He confirmed that the theatr e auditorium in the ne w building would be named afte r hi s wife and tha t the Foundatio n woul d appoint eigh t o f the fiftee n member s of the newl y formed theatre board. In response t o queries by Robert Crew of the Star, he stresse d tha t he an d hi s wife were 'out of all polities' and tha t their main interes t was in using the ne w theatre t o contribute to cultural exchange betwee n Canada and Franc e by mounting plays in both English and French. 3 Stun g b y thi s publi c disagreemen t an d b y th e outrag e expressed b y man y in th e theatr e communit y that contro l o f TW P was being turned ove r t o a developer, th e boar d brok e of f negotiations with Vari and resolve d in future t o be mor e circumspec t about announcing its plans. If th e attemp t t o secure a n adequat e performin g space ha d ru n int o a snag, effort s t o recrui t a ne w artisti c director wer e mor e fruitful . O n 2 1 July 1988 , th e boar d announce d th e appointmen t of Leon Pownall , a veteran mainstrea m actor wh o ha d appeare d a t al l the majo r festival s (th e Stratford, the Shaw, and the Charlottetown) and had founded the Shakespeare Festiva l i n Nanaimo , British Columbia. In makin g the announce ment, the board expresse d confidenc e that the appointment woul d mark the beginnin g o f a ne w lif e fo r th e theatre . Pownal l himself prudently admitted tha t h e neede d tim e t o tal k to people an d asses s th e situatio n before commentin g extensively . Nevertheless, he tol d Rober t Cre w tha t he accepte d TWP' s mandate wit h the realizatio n tha t h e was 'inheriting one of Canada's great theatrical traditions.'4 Pownall's introduction t o his new job wa s to prove somethin g of a bap-

Final Act 19 5 tism by fire. Incensed b y the prospec t tha t 1 2 Alexander Street migh t fal l into the hands of a developer, supporters o f TWP who had participated i n the long , eight-yea r struggl e t o sav e th e buildin g wer e galvanize d int o action. Under the leadership of Ken Gass, a group o f Luscombe associates formed th e 'Committe e of Concern,' which included th e acto r Tom Butler, th e playwrigh t Rick Salutin, Walter Pitman, Herbert Whittaker , and a number o f long-time TWP actors an d friends . Thi s group fel t tha t som e effort shoul d b e mad e t o prevent the boar d o f directors from betrayin g a twenty-eight-year histor y of anti-establishmen t theatre. The y propose d a mid-July meetin g wit h th e board , trustees , an d newl y appointe d artisti c director t o secur e a firmer commitment tha t th e theatre' s origina l mandate woul d b e respected . Whe n th e boar d refuse d t o dea l wit h wha t i t considered littl e more tha n a pressur e grou p inten t on reinstatin g th e former artisti c director, the Committe e resorted t o direct action. On a humid evening in late July, a small group of TWP supporters gathered outsid e 1 2 Alexander Street i n th e hop e of confronting member s of the boar d wit h thei r question s an d gettin g th e reassuranc e the y hoped for. When they learned tha t the board not only refused to meet with them but denie d the m acces s t o th e theatre , th e grou p resolve d t o conduc t their protes t o n th e theatr e steps . Afte r speeche s b y Pitman, Luscombe, Salutin, an d other s deplorin g th e high-hande d behaviou r o f th e boar d and trustees , th e assemble d protester s vote d t o empowe r a smal l executive committe e t o procee d a s i t sa w fit to pressur e th e curren t manage ment of the theatre no t t o abandon it s traditional mandate. Finding himsel f i n th e middl e o f a controvers y he barel y understoo d and unde r pressur e t o come u p with a program tha t would satisfy a s many of th e intereste d partie s a s possible , Pownal l suggeste d fou r work s Edward Albee' s Who's Afraid o f Virginia Woolf?, Peace o n Earth, Stand U p Shakespeare, an d a 30th Anniversary Gala to consist of excerpts from som e of the mor e successfu l TW P plays of the past . The first agency to consider his proposa l wa s the Toront o Art s Council, who i n lat e August rejecte d the applicatio n and cancelle d th e grant the y had tentativel y approved fo r the 1988- 9 Robert Rooney season.5 Meanwhile, Luscomb e an d hi s supporter s wer e makin g thei r ow n plans. After du e notificatio n of the 13 4 individuals who had bough t memberships in TWP in the previous season, the Committee of Concern calle d an annua l genera l meetin g a t th e Metropolita n Toront o Referenc e Library. Ther e the y elected thei r ow n boar d o f directors , consistin g of Larry Co x a s president, Georg e Luscomb e a s vice-president, the actres s Sandi Ros s a s secretary-treasurer, and To m Butler , Mona Luscombe, th e

196 Harlequi n i n Hogtown dancer an d choreographe r Dann y Grossman, Ken Gass, and th e theatr e administrator Robin Breon. Wasting no tim e in asserting its authority, this rival boar d wrot e t o Lil y Munro , th e ministe r of culture , with copies t o officers o f the recently renamed Ministry of Culture and Communication s and th e Ontario Arts Council, requesting a meeting t o discuss their plans to reopen the theatre. 6 In a more daring assertion o f their newl y proclaimed prerogatives , th e group mad e a dawn raid on 1 2 Alexander Street, where they changed th e locks and lai d claim to the building. Arriving for work later that morning, Leon Pownal l was forced to summon the police to gain access to his office . To his chagrin, the police officers refused to arbitrate between the two sides and lef t th e ne w artistic director shu t ou t o f his theatre. Late r tha t afternoon, however, the trustees were able to demonstrate thei r legal responsi bility for th e propert y an d wer e allowe d to chang e th e lock s once again , thereby barring al l contending parties and taking control o f the building. In thes e chaotic conditions, without either salary or office space , Leo n Pownall an d Pa m Roger s attempte d t o reformulat e a n approac h t o th e Ontario Art s Council. Pownall described th e previou s ninety days as 'the most tangled an d disquietin g theatrical scen e I have ever experienced. A scene that include s a mandate tha t drew 30% attendance las t season, th e misguided concerns of an ad hoc committe e fuele d b y bitterness and hysteria, the opportunism of eager developers , and a fiscal cancer tha t has all but consume d TWP's morale, it s artistic vision and it s very raison d'être.' Possibly reflectin g Pownall' s reactio n t o th e event s o f th e pas t thre e months, th e ne w proposal too k a mor e critica l attitude t o th e theatre' s past. 'Le t us realize,' i t asserted, 'TWP' s left-wing mandat e a s practised i n the pas t ha s los t it s appeal i n th e marketplac e an d box-offic e revenu e decreased t o a debilitating level.'7 The submissio n wen t o n t o maintai n tha t TWP' s programmin g ha d become 'insula r an d exclusiv e to th e poin t o f elitism, ' ha d los t contac t with th e communit y at large , an d seeme d t o b e informe d b y no polic y beyond tha t of simply 'puttin g on plays. ' Asking the Counci l to dissociate him an d th e ne w management fro m th e 'ol d concep t o f TWP,' Pownall requested tha t the y conside r a ne w an d broade r concep t o f th e com pany's activities. Pownall promised a modification of what he though t was generally perceive d a s th e 'hysterica l left-win g mandate ' o f th e theatre . Times hav e changed, ' h e asserted , an d th e expectation s o f audience s 'have bee n raise d abov e dust y political cabal s whose mer e elitis m mak e them attractive. ' Th e ne w TWP mandate, h e promised , woul d interpre t rather than preach.

Final Act 19 7 Pownall's interpretive season consiste d o f three plays which he fel t con fident woul d 'breath e ne w lif e int o ou r mandat e an d a t th e sam e tim e have specifi c appea l i n th e marke t place. ' Th e work s h e propose d included Conquest o f th e South Pole by Manfre d Farge , a stud y of unem ployed youth in Britain, to be directe d b y Derek Goldby; The Day They Shot John Lennon by James Mclure ; and A Warm Wind i n China, a study of homo sexual lov e devastate d b y AID S whic h h e fel t woul d b e marketabl e because o f TWP's location i n th e hear t o f Toronto's gay community. He also planne d t o hos t politica l meeting s an d neighbourhoo d seminar s in the theatre i n order to regenerate it s presence i n the area . By the tim e the Ontario Arts Council met to consider thi s latest application fro m TW P i n January 1989 , th e ne w theatre officer , Timoth y Leary, had heard muc h disquieting news. Both the Canada Counci l and the Tor onto Art s Counci l ha d rejecte d th e theatre' s applications , an d Metro' s action wa s conditional o n th e decisio n o f the Ontari o Art s Council. But the mos t disturbin g informatio n wa s that communicate d b y a pane l o f consultants Lear y ha d assemble d t o advis e hi m o n th e situation . Thi s group o f thirtee n theatr e professional s ha d gathere d i n th e Counci l offices o n 2 3 January to assess the TW P proposal . Many o f th e consultant s fel t tha t TW P ha d bee n a pioneerin g an d energizing forc e i n th e cit y an d resente d th e presen t management' s rather cavalie r dismissal of tha t history . Even those wh o fel t les s strongly about th e tradition s of the compan y agreed tha t th e presen t applicatio n showed n o distinctiv e vision and seemed , o n th e contrary , t o hav e bee n thrown togethe r withou t understanding o r sympath y for what TWP had stood for . The conclusio n of th e discussio n wa s a recommendation tha t the theatre's reques t for funding be denied. 8 News o f th e Council' s decisio n fel l lik e a thunderbol t o n th e belea guered board . It seemed t o most of the members tha t they had exhauste d their options . Th e theatre' s debt s were growing at an alarmin g rate , having bee n increase d b y some $226,00 0 i n th e previou s year alone . Whil e the director s wer e not personall y liable for these debts, th e majorit y fel t a commitment t o do what they could t o wind up th e affair s o f the compan y in a s dignified and responsibl e a fashion as possible. I f they had faile d in their effort s t o negotiate a new theatre fo r themselves , the n a t least they could guarante e tha t th e pric e the y received fo r th e 1 2 Alexander Stree t property would cover their outstanding bills. By earl y May, however, having failed t o persuad e th e Ministr y of Culture an d Communication s t o underwrite them , th e boar d was faced with imminent catastrophe . Severa l o f th e theatre' s creditor s ha d serve d col -

198 Harlequi n in Hogtow n lection notices ; Georg e Luscomb e ha d launche d a $200,00 0 lawsuit , claiming wrongful dismissal; and th e Bank of Commerce had given notice that it intended t o sue to recover its loan. At an emergency meeting on 10 May in the office s o f the Ministr y attended b y several of the funding agencies, Florenc e Silve r outlined th e scop e o f th e theatre' s problems . Sh e estimated tha t th e curren t liabilitie s of the compan y amounted t o som e $470,000 an d state d tha t th e boar d wa s seeking a way to ensur e tha t th e building would be use d fo r non-profit , socially responsibl e theatr e without leavin g an y o f th e director s liable . I t wa s agreed tha t ever y effor t would b e mad e t o persuad e th e Cit y t o pa y th e company' s debt s an d acquire the building with assistance from the Ministr y and Metro . A meeting was scheduled fo r 3 0 May to discuss how that could be accomplishe d and how the building might best be operated . As representatives o f the Toront o Arts Council attempted t o persuad e the Cit y o f th e importanc e o f acquirin g th e 1 2 Alexander Stree t sit e t o provide badly needed performing space for the man y alternative theatres operating i n Toronto, the TW P board suddenl y received offer s fro m two individuals interested i n purchasing the building as a commercial theatre. The first of these offers, fro m Ozona Realty , stipulated that the purchase r would 'i f possible afte r Closin g ... co-operate o n a reasonable efforts basis to make the Buildin g available to non-profit companies if this is in accordance wit h it s operation s o f th e Building.' 9 Th e second , fro m Willia m Scoular o f Prominen t Feature s Inc. , was a letter of intent only, i n which the writer declared hi s intention 'to make the theatr e availabl e for renta l or lease to the Toronto Theatre Community and t o have the facilit y in use for th e productio n o f live professional theatre. '10 When thes e windfal l bid s were discussed at a hastil y called meetin g o n 23 May, members of the boar d wer e in favour o f accepting the offe r fro m Ozona. However , th e tw o trustee s present , Simo n Waegemaeker s an d Anna Stratto n (replacin g Patric k Shepherd), pointe d ou t tha t the offer' s commitment t o providin g spac e for th e non-profi t theatr e companie s in the cit y was so loosely worded a s to be totall y ineffective, an d argue d tha t it would be preferabl e t o wait to consider what the Cit y might offer. Nor man Endicott replied somewhat caustically that the sum mentioned a t the 10 Ma y meetin g ha d bee n onl y $250,000 , an d tha t a furthe r su m o f $30,000 from Metro, promised fo r running expenses, ha d no t been forthcoming. He insisted that no commitment had been mad e at that meeting and tha t accordingly TWP should be free t o accept the best offer t o come along. When th e vote was taken, the boar d member s approved th e sal e of the building , bu t the y wer e oppose d b y Waegemaeker s an d Stratton .

Final Act 19 9 Since th e trus t agreemen t specifie d tha t th e buildin g coul d no t b e sol d without the unanimous consent of the trustees , the meeting adjourned i n a stalemate. 11 In th e followin g months , th e boar d attempte d unsuccessfull y to hav e the trus t agreement se t aside, an d whe n thi s strategy failed, they capitalized o n th e riva l interest o f the tw o developers t o initiat e a bidding war , which resulte d i n th e offe r t o purchas e bein g raise d b y Scoula r t o $650,000. B y this time, feelings were running high o n al l sides. The trust ees an d representative s o f th e theatr e communit y fel t ver y strongly tha t because o f its history and becaus e i t had bee n virtuall y given to th e com pany b y tw o levels of government , th e theatr e shoul d b e considere d a public trust to be operated fo r the benefit of the community at large. Th e theatre board ha d no such notion. Judging fro m their behaviour and pro nouncements, it appeared t o outsiders that th e director s considere d th e theatre thei r propert y t o dispos e o f a s the y wished . No t onl y di d the y refuse t o acknowledg e any moral obligatio n t o th e Cit y o r th e Ministry , but the y insiste d tha t $650,00 0 represente d th e fai r market-valu e of th e building. Thwarted b y the cour t rulin g disallowin g them t o vary th e trus t agree ment, Endicott wrote to the trustee s demanding tha t the y consent t o th e sale of the building to William Scoular or face a lawsuit for breach o f fiduciary trust . Finally, i n an atmospher e o f considerable rancour , th e boar d and trustee s gathered t o consider th e competing offer s - $500,00 0 fro m the Cit y and $650,00 0 fro m Willia m Scoular. After som e discussion , dur ing which it was pointed ou t tha t TWP could sig n back the City' s offer a t a higher figure , th e boar d member s vote d t o accep t th e Scoula r bi d bu t were again opposed by the trustees. Speaking to Ray Conlogue th e nex t day, Norman Endicot t maintained the board' s righ t t o 'accep t th e bes t offe r fo r th e propert y t o whic h i t holds th e title. ' Th e City' s offer , h e declared , 'wasn' t sufficientl y hig h t o pay th e debt s - an d th e Boar d woul d b e compelle d t o declar e bank ruptcy.' He stated in the same interview that the Scoular offer would leave a surplu s o f abou t $100,00 0 an d tha t th e boar d ha d fel t a dut y t o 'ge t money t o pu t o n mor e play s i f we could.' 12 Whil e i t wa s tru e tha t th e actual liabilitie s of th e theatr e wer e difficul t t o determin e becaus e o f a number o f outstandin g lawsuits , i t appeared t o man y outsiders tha t th e board had cease d t o regard itsel f as a guardian o f the traditio n an d spiri t of Toronto Workshop Production s an d ha d starte d t o ac t like any other commercial producer . In th e impass e caused by the disagreemen t betwee n the boar d an d th e

200 Harlequi n i n Hogtown trustees, Endicott decided t o appeal directl y to the mayor. He set out th e history of the board's negotiations and a breakdown of the financial situation, arguing that TWP would be unable to settle with Luscombe unless it received mor e tha n $500,00 0 fo r th e building . H e eve n suggeste d tha t members o f the boar d woul d be mor e tha n happ y to resign i n favou r o f directors appointed b y the Cit y if the Cit y wished to assume responsibility for th e theatre . The mayo r promised t o try to find additional funds. A few weeks later , th e Cit y an d Metr o togethe r mad e a n offe r o f $655,000 , which, under pressure from th e trustees, the board finally accepted. In th e end , th e sal e o f th e buildin g wa s something o f a n anticlimax . Perhaps the process had gone on too long. Efforts t o cure the invalid during it s protracted fina l illnes s ha d ofte n bee n unseemly , marred first by disagreements about the remed y and the n b y quarrels over the will. Even now, thos e wh o mourne d th e deat h o f TWP did s o with mixe d feelings. Like an ol d soldier , the theatr e ha d survive d forgotten battles only t o be rewarded by neglect and derision. Now it was the turn of a younger generation t o take u p th e challenge s o f the future , inspire d bu t unfettere d by the past.

25

Curtain-Call

With th e collaps e o f TWP and th e sal e o f th e Alexande r Stree t theatre , George Luscomb e contemplate d th e wreckag e o f nearl y thirt y years of struggle an d effort . H e mad e a reasonable financia l settlemen t wit h th e board ove r hi s dismissal an d too k u p a teachin g positio n i n th e dram a department a t th e Universit y of Guelph, but hi s active life i n th e theatr e effectively cam e t o an end. Fro m th e beginning , h e ha d committe d himself wholeheartedly to a particular vision. Now, without company or working space, he fel t that further pursuit of that vision was impossible. After a lifetime i n th e mos t ephemera l o f th e arts , Luscomb e migh t wel l hav e wondered wha t he ha d lef t behind . The questio n i s not eas y to answer. When Luscomb e returned t o Tor onto i n 1956 , it was to a city still Edwardian in many of its tastes. Theatre s catered to , and wer e supported by , the university-educate d middle class, and thei r repertoir e reflecte d th e interest s an d prejudice s o f tha t audi ence. Canadian directors drew their inspiratio n from English rather tha n European source s an d though t o f Toronto a s a distan t satellite o f Lon don's West End. Luscombe hope d to challenge thos e attitudes , and fro m his basemen t theatr e a t 4 7 Fraser Avenu e h e launche d th e mos t thor oughgoing theatrica l revolution ever conducted i n the city . During the first decade - 195 9 to 1969 - Luscomb e began b y attacking the tw o cornerstones o f current theatrica l practic e - text-base d perfor mance and prosceniu m staging. To start with, he experimente d wit h ways of developin g play s fro m actors ' improvisations . Drawin g o n hi s ow n working-class backgroun d an d passionat e commitmen t t o socialism , he stimulated hi s actor s t o tak e a mor e radica l perspectiv e o n socia l questions. A t th e sam e time , h e introduce d a movement-base d metho d o f training in an effor t t o promote an acting style distinct from th e drawing-

202 Harlequi n in Hogtown room realis m then prevailing on Toronto stages. The resul t was a series of revolutionary productions which demonstrated tha t drama could provide a forum for vigorous political debate . During thi s decade , h e als o brok e ou t o f th e traditiona l prosceniu m arch. Startin g with He y Rube!, h e attempte d t o brin g th e audienc e int o closer proximit y to th e actor s i n a n effor t t o shatte r th e socia l barriers implicit in proscenium theatres. Both at 47 Fraser Avenue and, later, at 12 Alexander Street, he pushe d th e performer s forward onto an open stage , where the y would b e mor e intimatel y involved wit h th e spectators . B y 1969, wit h radicall y inventive production s suc h a s Chicago '70 an d M r Bones, Luscombe had establishe d TWP as the mos t innovative and success ful theatr e compan y in th e city . That positio n o f pre-eminenc e wa s to b e challenge d durin g th e nex t ten year s - 196 9 to 1979 - a s a steadily growing number o f younger direc tors with similar radical ideas established thei r own theatre companies in Toronto. I n man y respects, thes e ne w small theatres ha d muc h i n com mon wit h TWP. Most saw themselves as opposed t o the values of the dom inant class and dedicate d t o th e subversio n or transformatio n of society. They al l drew their inspiratio n from a commo n source , the ric h vein of theatrical idea s originating i n revolutionar y Russia an d German y in th e early par t o f th e century . Bu t the y mine d thos e idea s i n ver y differen t ways. Luscombe felt h e was part of a continuous tradition stretchin g back through Joa n Littlewoo d t o Brecht , Vakhtangov , Meyerhold , an d ulti mately Stanislavski. It was a tradition rooted in Marxist ideology and dedicated t o revolutionar y social change . Hi s younge r contemporaries , b y contrast, identified more closel y with theorist s such as Antonin Artaud o r directors suc h a s Jerzy Grotowski , Peter Brook , o r Richar d Schechner . These me n tende d t o adap t o r modif y th e idea s the y inherited an d t o place mor e emphasi s on th e individua l tha n o n society . Their produc tions sought t o involve and transfor m the spectator a s a necessary precondition of any social revolution. During th e secon d decad e o f it s existence, therefore, TW P faced sev eral challenges. Foremost among these was the need to mount a progra m that coul d compet e wit h th e ne w Canadian play s being discovere d an d presented b y the other alternativ e theatres. Pressure d to mount a regular season in their new quarters, Luscombe and hi s actors could not devote as much tim e as in the pas t to the creatio n of new works and wer e forced t o fall bac k on th e establishe d repertoire . Instea d o f programming contem porary play s from Britain' s exciting Royal Court Theatr e o r th e vita l offoff-Broadway scen e in New York, however, Luscombe turned t o the lesser -

Curtain-Call 20 3 known plays of continental Europe such as The Captain ofKôpenick, Gunte r Grass's Flood, an d Th e Good Soldier Schweik. This comparativel y exotic rep ertoire prove d les s allurin g t o youn g Toront o audience s tha n th e unashamedly nationalistic plays of TWP's rivals. When TW P di d creat e origina l play s such a s Te n Lost Years o r Summer '76, their method s differe d fro m those o f other companie s who employe d a process that came to be known as 'collective creation.' Productions such as Pau l Thompson's Th e Farm Show or 1837: The Farmers' Revolt sought t o engage th e spectator s emotionall y in th e persona l live s of th e character s portrayed. Luscomb e favoure d a more extravagantl y theatrical approach . Instead o f 'mythologizing ' individuals, Luscombe's actor s looke d fo r th e general significanc e of historical event s an d the n trie d t o communicat e that significanc e in arresting theatrica l images . 'Ou r job,' Luscomb e tol d his actors, is 'to draw the raw material of the theatr e fro m the community, interpreting i t in our ow n way and givin g it back to the community , not as real lif e bu t lik e an imag e i n a purposely distorte d mirror. ' T o tha t end , he focuse d o n th e socia l rathe r tha n th e personal , emphasize d genera l laws rather tha n individua l psychology, and tried to prevent the spectator s from becomin g emotionall y involve d i n th e dramati c situatio n t o th e point wher e the y coul d n o longe r se e i t dispassionately . I n man y cases , these technique s prove d puzzlin g o r distractin g t o audiences , wh o seemed t o prefer mor e conventiona l stage realism. Another challeng e wa s that whereas Luscomb e i n th e 1960 s ha d bee n virtually alon e i n hi s pionee r work , h e no w foun d himsel f jostling fo r room i n a n increasingl y crowded theatrica l environment . Luscomb e fel t somewhat uncomfortabl e betwee n th e ol d an d th e new , no t altogethe r easy wit h either . Whil e TW P could certainl y no t b e calle d a n establish ment theatre , neithe r wa s it part o f th e bras h ne w wave. It continue d t o maintain a high profil e with successful productions suc h a s Te n Lost Years and Le s Canadiens, but a s the decad e drew to a close ther e wa s a growing sense tha t the compan y was beginning t o show its age. This perceptio n intensifie d durin g th e theatre' s thir d decade , fro m 1979 t o 1989 . Thos e wer e year s o f growin g financia l an d administrativ e problems whic h drained mor e and mor e of Luscombe's energ y away from the creativ e side o f th e theatre . Th e perio d wa s also on e o f increasingly ostentatious entertainment , whic h wa s to culminat e a t th e en d o f th e 1980s i n a passio n fo r extravagantl y renovated theatre s an d lavis h mega musicals. I n thi s ne w er a o f conspicuou s consumption , th e ideolog y o f TWP seemed increasingl y out o f date. And unlik e som e o f hi s competi tors, Luscomb e seeme d unwillin g or unabl e t o compromis e hi s ideals .

204 Harlequi n i n Hogtow n Instead o f moving with the time s and adaptin g its message t o new circumstances, TWP seemed t o adopt a siege mentality and t o confront its opponents with a stony inflexibility. The resul t was a gradual declin e of quality and influenc e a s theatrical taste s i n th e cit y move d o n t o other politica l issues - suc h as race and gender - o r to more glitz y promotion an d packaging. By the tim e the theatr e finally closed in 1989 , it seemed t o have lost almost all its original relevance . The proble m wit h attempting t o sum up th e importance o f TWP is that what started a s a clear and distinc t movemen t became inextricabl y entangled wit h subsequen t development s i n th e city . The questio n o f identify ing 'influences' i n such a public art as theatre i s notoriously difficult sinc e theatrical idea s ar e literall y 'i n th e air, ' wher e actors , designers , play wrights, an d director s inhal e the m a s the y breathe. Suc h idea s ar e no t confined t o a single countr y but flow freely acros s internationa l border s with th e movemen t o f news , pictures , an d theatr e practitioners . Th e period o f TWP's existence - 195 9 to 1989 - wa s one of almost indiscriminate experimentation , wit h directors an d writer s borrowing magpie-lik e from whatever bright sources attracted thei r notice. Attemptin g to analyse this confusin g fermen t o f idea s an d practice s i s rathe r lik e tryin g t o describe th e effec t o f a singl e colou r o n th e desig n o f a n Easte r eg g dipped int o a mixture of pigments floating on water. The parado x a t the hear t o f the TW P story is that while Luscombe was admired a s a director , revere d a s a teacher , an d listene d t o a s a kin d of fire-eyed prophet, h e was not imitated. His productions wer e praised, bu t he was not asked to direct at other theatres . Luscombe' s mod e o f combining text , movement, music, and lightin g — closer in some ways to opera o r musical theatr e tha n t o dram a — was at odd s wit h th e style s being devel oped b y th e ne w theatres . An d unlik e thos e ne w theatres , whic h were actively promoting th e publicatio n o f new plays, Luscomb e continue d t o keep hi s works out o f the publi c realm . Becaus e o f this, and becaus e th e performances themselve s were not passe d o n t o other director s an d per formers (a s ballet s ar e transmitte d fro m compan y t o company) , th e pieces disappeared an d th e performance traditio n was lost. At one level , then, th e TW P legacy is minimal, consisting of a few published plays , a collection o f yellowing newspaper reviews , and th e fast-fad ing memorie s o f th e origina l spectators . A t a deepe r level , however , Luscombe's contributio n ha s bee n immense . No t onl y di d hi s achieve ments a t 47 Fraser Avenue in the 1960 s break trai l for all those wh o cam e after, bu t his burning idealism and indomitabl e determinatio n hav e bee n a source o f inspiration for a whole generation o f actors an d artisti c direc-

Curtain-Call 20 5 tors. Luscomb e was one o f the first and mos t articulate defenders o f th e need fo r a n indigenou s drama, an d work s such a s He y Rube!, Before Compiègne, and M r Bones (t o nam e onl y the mos t successfu l Canadia n works produced by TWP in the 1960s ) provide d concrete evidenc e o f the viabil ity o f suc h drama . I n mor e direc t ways , hi s teachin g ha s influence d numerous actors , writers, and director s who continue to work in theatr e in Canada an d abroad . In th e autum n o f 1989 , however , it was the physica l legacy of Toronto Workshop Production s - th e strategically located theatr e o n Alexander Street - tha t mos t concerne d individual s 'in th e business.' Th e building represented a much-needed ne w venue for Toronto's many homeless theatre companies , an d ther e wa s concern i n th e theatr e communit y that i t be retaine d fo r use by the non-profi t sector. To assis t it in running its new acquisition, Cit y Hal l decide d t o loo k fo r a n independent , non-profi t operator. It approached th e Toronto Arts Council and th e Toronto The atre Alliance , who recommende d th e establishmen t of a selectio n com mittee mad e u p o f a cross-section o f politicians, arts administrators, an d artists. City administrators welcomed the suggestion , but unti l a manage r could b e found , the y face d a difficul t decision . Shoul d the y inves t th e money necessary to bring the theatre up to acceptable building code standards s o that i t could b e rented t o performing groups i n the interim ? Or should the y limi t a n alread y substantia l investment an d authoriz e only those repair s essentia l to preven t further deterioratio n o f th e premises? Several employees of the City' s Real Estate Department visited the theatr e to assess the situation. They foun d th e buildin g little more tha n a derelic t shell. Plaste r was loose i n severa l areas , an d larg e patche s o f th e offic e ceilin g ha d col lapsed. Floor coverings had bee n ruine d by water from a leaky roof- carpets wer e sodden , tile s detache d an d heavin g - an d everywher e was a smell of damp an d encroachin g mould. Old costumes hung i n no appar ent orde r i n the basement; theatrica l equipment and discarde d piece s of scenery cluttered the stage ; filing cabinets filled with administrative documents, photographs , an d promotiona l materia l sa t abandone d i n th e office; mai l ha d bee n pushe d throug h th e fron t doo r an d la y scattered and uncollected . O n th e nort h wal l o f th e lobby , mounte d behin d a curved arch whic h looked lik e a proscenium but was actually the entranc e to the auditorium , was a huge photographic collag e of early TWP productions. In almost life-sized reproduction , fantastically arrayed clowns, musicians, an d entertainer s gaze d ou t a t departe d audiences . Thei r face s seemed a curious mixture of love and contempt ; their eye s were intense,

206 Harlequi n in Hogtown their bodie s froze n i n gesture s o f mut e supplicatio n o r command , thei r mouths grotesquely shape d i n unheard speec h o r song . I n th e di m light, they looke d lik e spirit s waiting for som e spel l t o releas e the m int o th e lobby and th e darkenin g city beyond. The Cit y inspector s conclude d tha t majo r renovation s woul d b e impractical, an d the y decide d t o d o th e minimu m to protec t th e City' s investment fro m weathe r an d vandals . Ove r th e cours e o f severa l days, City workmen repaired th e worst of the damage t o the exterior, fixed the roof, seale d crack s in th e walls , and secure d th e buildin g against trespassers an d vagrants . One o f thei r las t acts was to boar d u p th e hug e plate glass windows facing ont o Alexande r Street, thereb y plungin g th e lobb y into darkness . That done , the y gathered u p thei r tools , locke d th e fron t door, and departed, leaving the theatr e t o its ghosts.

Epilogue

Those ghost s were t o remai n undisturbe d fo r almos t fou r years . During the month s following th e sal e of 1 2 Alexander Street , th e selectio n com mittee solicite d proposal s fro m individual s and organization s intereste d in restorin g an d runnin g th e theatre . Response s trickle d i n durin g th e winter, an d i n th e lat e summe r o f 199 0 th e committe e sa t down t o con sider th e options . I t finall y narrowe d it s choice t o tw o radically differen t candidates. Th e firs t wa s a consortiu m o f thirtee n alternativ e Toronto theatres calling itself The Edg e and including , among others , Buddie s in Bad Times and Nativ e Eart h Performing Arts. The secon d wa s a produc ers group calle d simpl y th e Alexande r Stree t Theatr e Projec t an d mad e up o f the theatr e manage r Catherin e McKeehan , th e technica l directo r Fred Mendelson , the designe r Bil l Fleming , th e impresari o Mar k Hammond, an d th e forme r hea d o f th e Ontari o Art s Counci l Christophe r Wootten. Several member s o f th e committe e though t th e firs t group' s submis sion was by far th e mor e adventurous . I f the purpos e o f the searc h com mittee wa s to fin d a n organizatio n abl e t o carr y on th e ground-breakin g tradition o f George Luscombe , then a group callin g itself The Edge - t o indicate its position on the artistic spectrum - seeme d th e logical choice . Other member s argued tha t some of the groups associated with The Edg e were to o controversial , certain element s o f th e Toront o publi c havin g already demonstrated thei r hostilit y to th e ga y orientation o f Buddies in Bad Times . Th e nominatio n o f Th e Edge , the y maintained , migh t b e seen a s unnecessarily provocative and b e difficul t t o sell to City Council. Not surprisingly , th e selectio n committe e wa s spli t almos t evenl y between thos e wh o favoure d turnin g th e theatr e ove r t o th e grou p o f young artisti c directors an d thos e wh o fel t i t should b e entruste d t o th e

208 Harlequi n in Hogtown more experienced administrators . In the end, they voted by a narrow margin t o suppor t th e les s risky choice, an d o n 1 October 199 0 the y recom mended tha t th e Alexande r Stree t Theatr e Projec t b e name d a s th e operating agent . The Cit y not only accepted th e recommendation bu t set aside a sum of just ove r $1 million fo r th e ne w operators, wit h the hop e that their contribution woul d be matched b y an equal su m from th e provincial and federa l governments. Funding fro m th e province , however , was not approve d unti l December 1991 , by which time four o f the five members of the Alexander Street Theatre Project had lef t Toronto . Th e selectio n committe e the n notified Christopher Wootte n tha t hi s organizatio n woul d hav e t o reconstitut e itself or lose its funding. Accordingly, a new group was formed, consisting of Christopher Wootten an d Fre d Mendelso n of the origina l project, Sky Gilbert and Ti m Jones fro m Buddie s in Bad Times, and thre e representa tives o f th e Toront o theatr e community , Anne Mari e MacDonald, Jane Marsland, an d Pau l Thompson . Thi s grou p submitte d a ne w proposal , which was approved b y the selectio n committe e in Novembe r 1992 , an d which incorporate d mos t o f th e objective s of th e origina l submissio n by The Edge . It called for the Alexander Stree t Theatre Project to supervise the renovatio n o f the building , after which Buddie s in Ba d Times would assume complet e responsibilit y for th e runnin g of the theatre . Thi s proposal was approved b y City Council in February 1993 . Plans calling for the complete transformation of the former TWP premises were drawn up by the Alexander Street Theatre Projec t and th e architect Marti n Liefhebber , an d constructio n bega n earl y i n 1994 . Th e existing stage an d seatin g were removed, th e interio r gutted, an d a large area beneath th e auditorium excavated to make room for dressing-rooms, offices, an d washrooms . The spac e on th e mai n level was divided t o make room fo r two performing areas - a cabaret-style space a t the front an d a larger studio theatre fo r regular production s behind it . The entranc e was relocated fro m th e fron t o f the buildin g to provide access from th e sid e through th e adjoinin g city parkette . I n Octobe r 1994 , th e first audience passed throug h tha t entrance. A new chapter ha d begun.

Chronology

1959-60 Tony Ferry founds Theatre Centre an d organize s a summer school with the help of George Luscombe , Powys Thomas, an d Carl o Mazzone. In September, several students persuade Luscomb e t o start evening classes in actin g at 47 Fraser Avenue . The group , no w called Workshop Produc tions, stages a double bil l of Garcia Lorca' s Th e Love of Don Perlimplin and Belisa in the Garden and Chekhov' s Th e Boor from 1 4 to 1 9 December. Th e new company enlarges its basement theatr e t o seat sixty and produce s a second evenin g of one-act plays consisting of Chekhov's Th e Marriage Proposaland Le n Peterson' s Burlap Bags, from 6 to 2 1 May. 1960-1 During the summer, Luscombe conducts classes at 47 Fraser Avenue, and he and Ferry organize a two-week training session in Haliburton, Ontario. Back in Toronto the group receive s notification that it must vacate the Frase r Avenue premises by 20 November. They begin improvisations on circus themes, which culminate in the productio n of He y Rube! (6 February to 17 March). Ferry leaves the company. In June, Workshop Productions merges with th e Arts Theatre Club , and Luscomb e becomes artisti c director. 1961-2 At a second two-wee k summer session in Haliburton, Luscomb e an d Jack Winter start work on a n adaptation o f Aristophanes' Lysistrata. Work continues on th e production throug h th e autumn, and i t is finally presented under th e titl e And They'll Make Peace (28 December t o 3 February). Th e amalgamation with the Arts Theatre Clu b dissolves. Winter and Luscombe submit plans for a drama program t o York University.

210 Chronolog y 1962-3 Luscombe and a group o f his actors form Theatre 3 5 to tour Haliburto n during th e summe r with productions o f Chekhov's Th e Boor and Th e Marriage Proposal and a n adaptatio n o f a Pirandello play by Winter called The Evil Eye. Toront o Workshop Productions is incorporated unde r letter s patent on 1 0 August. The thre e one-ac t plays are presented a t 47 Fraser Avenue from 1 3 September t o 6 October. Luscomb e receives a personal award of $4,000 from th e Canad a Council . Ibsen's When We Dead Awaken opens on 8 November for three weeks. Woyzeck open s on 2 9 March and runs until 30 May. Luscombe and Winte r submit designs for the Burton Auditorium to York University. Luscombe conducts a workshop in Atikokan, Ontario . 1963-4 In September, th e compan y receives a $3,600 grant from the Canad a Council, and Luscomb e launches his first professional company. Their first production i s Winter's Before Compiègne (1 3 December t o 1 2 January). The compan y receives its first grant from the Ontario Art s Council. The City of Toronto Committee o n Park s and Recreatio n turn s down a request by the compan y to perform i n the park s during the summer . Before Compiègne opens at the Colonnad e Theatr e ( 3 to 30 April). 1964-5 The compan y performs Before Compiègne and Th e Mechanic at the University of Waterloo an d i n Stratford (2 7 July to 3 August). In mid-August, they receive $10,000 fro m th e Canad a Council, and Luscomb e puts his company on year-long contracts. They receive their first grant from Metro Toronto. The grou p rehears e John Herbert's adaptatio n of Woyzeck bu t decide t o abandon i t for their own version of the play , which they present as TheDeath of Woyzeck ( 9 January t o 1 1 April). 1965-6 The first Theatre-in-the-Park season a t Stratford run s from 2 7 July to 8 August with outdoor performances of Before Compiègne and Th e Mechanic. On 1 4 October, the compan y opens its Toronto season with The Mechanic, which runs until 28 February. CBC radio broadcast s a performance of Before Compiègne on 1 December. Negotiation s for a New York run o f The Mechanicbegun i n the summe r finally fal l through . Mos t of the member s of the compan y leave to find work elsewhere. 1966-7 At its second Stratfor d season , the compan y presents Hey Rube!, Before

Chronology 21 1 Compiégne, Th e Mechanic, an d Th e New Show (15July to 14August) . I n August, they give two performances in Nathan Phillip s Square. Th e Can ada Counci l informs the compan y that future suppor t wil l depend o n their reaching a wider audience, and the y begin t o search for large r premises. They enter into negotiations with Eas t York to become th e resident company at a proposed Todmorden theatre. They mount a revival of Hey Rube! (22 November to 22 January) at 47 Fraser Avenue. In March , th e company tours to Queen's University and th e Universit y of Western Ontario. Th e Golem of Venice opens o n 1 7 March and run s to 2 3 April. Th e company plays at Expo 6 7 for a week (28 April t o 4 May), after whic h Brooky Robins and Jack Winter leave the company. Luscombe hires June Faulkner as business manager. 1967-8 The company' s six-week Stratford season ( 1 July to 1 3 August) includes Hey Rube!, Th e Mechanic, and Luscombe' s adaptatio n o f Zuckmayer's Th e Captain ofKôpenick. I n August, Luscombe announces plans to move to larger premise s downtown. Tony Ferry rejoins the company . Th e Captain of Kôpenick open s on 8 November for a six-week run, to 2 3 December. O n New Year's Eve, the compan y presents a preview of Gentlemen Be Seated in its new theatre a t 1 2 Alexander Street. The officia l openin g i s delayed until 1 0 January, after whic h th e sho w runs until 11 February. The company begins a regular repertor y seaso n wit h productions of Ben Jonson's The Alchemist (1 5 February to 3 March), Ewan MacColl' s The Travellers ( \ to 1 1 May), and Norma n Kline's Faces (2 8 May to 27July) . 1968-9 In August, the company appears a t the Internationa l Theatre Festival at Brandéis University in Boston. Their fal l seaso n begin s with Gunte r Grass's Flood ( 5 November t o 7 December) an d continue s with Mario Fratti's Ch e Guevara (1 7 December t o ISJanuary) , Michae l John Nim chuk's adaptation of Jaroslav Hasek's Th e Good Soldier Schweik (2 5 February to 1 2 April), and th e collectivel y created M r Bones (22 April to 9 June). The theatr e the n close s for the summer.

1969-70

Luscombe directs Faces in Ne w York, which plays one performance , on 1 6 September. Th e compan y presents Che and M r Bones at the Venic e Biennale (2 5 to 2 8 September). After a tour t o th e Universit y of Western Ontario an d Broc k University, the compan y opens Shakespeare's The Tempest (2 5 November t o 1 4 December). It is followed b y Carol Bolt's Daganawida (1 3 to 3 1 January) and b y Chicago '70 (10 March to 9 May).

212 Chronolog y The compan y then takes Chicago '70 to New York (1 5 May to 14June) , after which the play returns to Toronto, to the St Lawrence Centre for th e Arts for a week beginning 22 June. 1970-1 Following appearances a t the Internationa l Festival of Theatre Art s in Wolfville, Nov a Scotia, the company returns to Toronto. Thei r seaso n includes Nancy Jowsey's The Piper (2 4 November to 1 3 December), Brendan Behan' s Th e Hostage, directed b y Geoffrey Rea d (1 9 January to 2 February), Annjellicoe's Shelley, th e Idealist ( 9 March to 4 April), an d Dürrenmatt's Th e Visit o f an Ol d Lady (2 0 April to 9 May). 1971-2 During the summer , John Faulkner dies in a drowning accident in the Caribbean. Th e seaso n open s with Brecht's Arturo Ui (9 November t o 4 December) .Jack Winter returns to help with a collaborative adaptation of Dickens's Pickwick Papers. The productio n open s as Mr Pickwick on 2 3 December an d run s until 23 January. It is followed by Rick Salutin's Fanshen (15 February to 5 March) and a revival of Mr Bones (30 March to 23 April). In April, the compan y signs a new five-year leas e for their theatre at double th e rent. The final production o f the season i s Len Peterson' s The Workingman (2 5 May to 25 June). The theatr e close s for eight weeks during the summer. 1972-3 An almost entirely new acting company opens TWP's season with a revival of He y Rube! (7 December t o 1 4 January). Gogol's Th e Inspector General runs from 2 5 January to 1 8 February and i s followed b y Arthur Kopit's Indians, directed b y Barry Wasman (15 to 31 March), and a collaborative adaptation o f Mark Twain's Letters from th e Earth by Winter and th e com pany ( 3 to 1 9 May). The fina l sho w of the seaso n i s a revival of Th e Good SoldierSchweik (1 2 to 30June). 1973-4 After performance s of He y Rube!in Wolfville, Nov a Scotia ( 8 to 1 5 July), Luscombe conducts workshops in Prince Edward Island. Back in Tor onto, h e create s tw o companies that will perform simultaneously in Tor onto an d Ottawa . The first presents a n adaptation o f Shakespeare' s Richard ///by Steven Bush and Ric k McKenna called Richard Thirdtime (2 3 October to 1 0 November) a t 1 2 Alexander Street and the n perform s

Chronology 21 3 Letters from th e Earth at the Nationa l Arts Centre i n Ottawa (1 3 November to 2 December). Meanwhile, the second, a young company under Pete r Faulkner, stages Jean Anouilh's Thieves' Carnival (22 November to 9 December) i n Toronto. The productio n i s designed b y Astridjanson, who replaces NancyJowse y as the company' s designer. Afte r a perfor mance of Letters from th e Earth at Queen's University, the first company returns to Alexander Street, where it remounts Richard Thirdtime (1 8 December t o 12January) . Rehearsals for Milto n Acorn's Road t o Charlottetown are abandoned, an d th e compan y begins work on a n adaptation of Ten Lost Years by Barry Broadfoot. Th e ne w collaborative productio n opens o n 5 February and run s until 28 May. 1974^5 On 1 6 September, th e western Canadian tou r of Te n Lost Years gets unde r way with a performance i n Hamilton, Ontario. Th e tour , which takes the company to Vancouver and back , lasts until 30 November. The Toront o season open s with From the Boyne to Batoche by Steven Bush and Ric k McKenna, directed b y Steven Bush (1 7 September t o 6 October). On 5 November, fire destroys much of the interio r of the theatr e at 1 2 Alexander Street. Man y of the theatres in Toronto contribute to a rebuilding fund. I n mid-December, the tourin g company returns and perform s Ten Lost Years at the Bayvie w Playhouse (12 December t o 4 January). The regu lar company mounts a revival of Mr Pickwick at the Tow n Hall, St Lawrence Centre (1 7 to 28 December). On th e las t day of the year , 12 Alexander Street reopens wit h a production o f Winter's You Can '( Ge t Here from There (3 1 December t o 25 January). The CB C presents a television version of Te n Lost Years ( 2 February). To conclud e the seaso n th e com pany mounts a revival of Th e Captain ofKopenick (2 5 February to 22 March) an d a work written by Winter and th e compan y entitled Summer '76 (22 April to 1 7 May). In June, Faulkne r and Luscomb e go to England to make arrangements fo r a European tour . 1975-6 In th e summer , the compan y gives performances of Te n Lost Years at th e St Lawrence Centre (2 1 August to 6 September) prio r t o embarking on an eastern Canadian tour , which takes it to thirty-nine cities and last s until 18 November. In October, th e theatr e play s host to an Open Circle Theatre production o f Rod Langley' s Grey Owl, directed b y Ray Whelan (3 0 October t o 1 5 November). It is followed by Len Peterson' s Women i n the Attic, directed b y Frank Norris (2 0 November to 6 December). A seasonal

214 Chronolog y production o f Dickens's A Christmas Carol adapted and directe d b y François Klanfer play s from 26 December t o 4 January. Th e fina l produc tion o f th e seaso n i s a revival of Th e Golem of Venice (1 0 to 2 1 February). During the spring , the grou p undertake s a European tou r o f Te n Lost Years and Summer '76 (3 May to 3 July), during which Winter leaves th e company. 1976-7 On it s return t o Toronto, TWP gives several performances of Summer '76 at the S t Lawrence Centre ( 2 to 7 August). Luscombe applie s to the Can ada Counci l for support for a 'sabbatical' year to train a new company. On 2 1 December, th e theatr e receive s notification that it must vacate the premises by 29 June. Faulkner and Luscomb e organiz e political and pres s opposition t o the pla n to develop th e Alexander Street site . Without pro ductions of its own, TWP rents its facilities t o a number o f outside compa nies. Visiting attractions includ e Centaur Theatre of Montreal' s production o f David Fennario's O n the Job (2 0 September t o 2 October), the five-wee k Toronto Dance Festival beginning on 1 6 November, a remounting o f Tarragon Theatre' s production o f Michel Tremblay' s Hosanna (1 3 January to 20 February), a revival of David Freeman's Creeps (6 March to 2 April), and tw o Theatre Compact bills , Easter, by August Strindberg (1 1 to 30 April), and Orators, a triple bill of Hands by Yuli Daniel, Swan Songby Chekhov, and Roundersby Michae l Brodribb ( 9 to 20 May). In June, a compromise worke d out between th e developer an d th e City of Toronto Planning Department ensures th e surviva l of the theatre . George Luscomb e wins the Toronto Drama Bench Award for Distinguished Contributio n t o Canadian Theatre . 1977-8 The 'Champagn e Season' opens with Rick Salutin's Les Canadiens (20 October t o 19 November). It is followed by a studio production o f Sharon Pollock's Th e Komagata Ma m Incident, directe d b y Alex Dmitriev, at Factory Lab (2 2 to 30 October) an d Ev e Merriam's The Club, directed b y Pam Brighton, at the Alexander Street theatr e ( 1 December t o 1 4 February). The compan y sponsors th e visi t of the Centau r Theatre productio n o f David Fennario's Nothing to Lose at Toronto Free Theatre fro m 1 7 January to 5 February. Calvin Butler directs a production o f Athol Fugard's Th e Island a t 1 2 Alexander Street (2 8 February t o 1 8 March). Two Lindsay Kemp productions, Flowers (28 March to 1 5 April) an d Salome (19 April to 7 May), prove s o successful tha t the compan y extends th e ru n of Flowers

Chronology 21 5 (12 May to 1 0 June). A studio production o f Rick Davidson's Westmount Blues, directed b y Milo Ringham, is staged at Toronto Free Theatre (25 April to 7 May). 1978-9 On 2 December, Luscombe receives an honorary degre e from Yor k University. Shortly thereafter, he open s his first production in more tha n a year - Esmeralda, an adaptation by Andrew Piotrowski of Victor Hugo's The Hunchback o f Notre Dame, which runs from 1 4 December to 6 January. It is followed by Brecht's Stjoan o f the Stockyards, directe d by Pam Brighton (14 February to 3 March). In April, Tarragon Theatr e rents space at Alexander Stree t to remount its successful productio n o f David French's Jitters (28 April to 2 June). Luscombe begins work on Th e Mac, Paps. 1979-80 In September, the theatr e i s rented ou t t o Ann Mortife e for her produc tion of Journey t o Kairos (1 9 to 3 0 September), following which TWP, in a co-production with Co-opera, presents Raymond and Beverl y Pannell's Refugees, directe d b y Luscombe (1 8 October to 3 November). A second rental production, Théâtre san s Fil's Tales from th e Smokehouse, fills the theatre from 1 3 to 1 7 November, after which TWP stages Michael Hastings's Carnival War a Go Hot, directed b y Pam Brighto n ( 1 to 2 9 December). June Faulkner leaves the company to join the Shaw Festival. Eric Donkin's one-man show Sarah Binks plays from 1 5 to 1 9 January, after which Luscombe's production o f Th e Mac Paps, with a script by Luscombe and Larry Cox from Mac Reynolds's interviews, runs from 31 January to 1 5 March. The Video Cabaret production o f Michael Hollingsworth's adaptation of George Orwell' s 1984 plays from 2 7 March to 26 April. The fina l produc tion of the seaso n i s Ain't Lookin', Luscombe's adaptation o f John Craig's novel Chappie an d Me, which runs from 1 May to 1 9 July. 1980-1 During the summer , the owners of the theatr e infor m TWP that they will have to vacate 12 Alexander Street. On 1 2 August, about a hundred supporters meet at the theatre and pledg e t o work for the survival of the company. A delegation o f prominent theatre supporter s appears befor e th e Executive Committee of City Council. In October, Counci l approves th e construction of a fifteen-storey apartment building in exchange for th e transfer o f land to TWP. The theatr e agree s t o pay $100,000 in rent arrears and renovations.

216 Chronolog y The new rent is set at $1,800 a month. In September, TWP brings in the Centaur Theatre productio n o f Athol Fugard's Lesson from Aloes (4 September t o 4 October) an d follow s it up wit h a revival of Ain't Lookin' (7 October t o 1 November). Susan Cox's one-woman show Valentine Browne (12 November to 1 3 December) close s early, forcing TWP to stage th e hastily mounted Holiday Show for eleven performances in December. A production o f Luscombe's adaptation o f Walter Hasenclever's Christopher Columbus (8 January to 4 February) draws poorly, as does a visiting production of Eduardo Manet's Madame Strass (5 February to 7 March). Th e Ontario Arts Council requests that the theatre prepar e a debt reductio n plan approved b y a properly constituted board o f directors. On 9 March, Mac Paps and Ain't Lookin' wi n Chalmers Awards, and o n 1 6 March Luscombe wins the Cit y of Toronto Awar d of Merit. In April, the company revives Te n Lost Years ( 2 April to 1 2 June) a s its contribution to the Toronto Theatre Festiva l (1 1 to 31 May). 1981-2 On 1 9 August, the company establishes a new board o f directors with Karl Jaffary a s chairman. They draw up defici t reduction an d fund-raising plans. The seaso n opens with Walter Bruno's Shouting for Joy, directe d by Luscombe (1 5 October t o 1 November), and i t is followed by a revival of Mr Pickwick (2 6 November to 3 January). A production o f Joey by Rick Salutin an d actor s of the Risin g Tide Theatre play s in the theatr e fro m 1 1 to 31 January. TWP's third production i s Brendan Behan's Richard's Cork Leg (25 February to 21 March). The theatr e establishe s a series of late-night shows to increase its revenue. During the spring, three outsid e productions rent the theatre - Theatr e Pass e Muraille's Crackwalker by Judith Thompson ( 1 to 2 5 April), Jeremy Brett's production o f Th e Tempest (1 2 May to 6June), and Tom Kneebone's one-man show (8 to 20June). The final productio n o f the seaso n is Betty-Jean Wylie's A Place on Earth, directed by Luscombe (29June to 1 1 July). 1982-3 Ken Gass directs the openin g show of the ne w season, How I Got That Story by Amlin Gray (14 October t o 21 November). A one-man show by Eric Donkin, Charles Dennis's Altman's Last Stand, produced an d directe d by John Banks, runs from 1 4 December to 2 January, after which Luscombe's production of Ron Weihs' s The Wobbly (2 0 January to 1 3 February) holds the stage. The boar d o f directors appoints Marguerite Knisely as administrative manager. Factory Theatre La b rents the theatr e to stage George F.

Chronology 21 7 Walker's Th e Art of War (23 February to 20 March). In th e spring , Luscombe stages Female Parts by Dario Fo and Franc a Rame ( 8 April to 15 May). On 2 7 May, Jaffary step s down as chairman o f the boar d and i s replaced by Jerry White. 1983-4 After severa l delays, Larry Cox's Names opens o n 2 0 October and plays until 6 November. It is followed by a revival of Th e Wobbly (1 5 November t o 3 December) an d th e clow n show Mon with Ian Wallace ( 6 to 1 8 December). Robert Roone y directs Davi d Edgar's The Jail Diary ofAlbie Sachs (2 9 December t o 5 February). Luscombe and Ros s Skene produce Th e Medicine Show (14 February to 1 1 March), during which Knisely resigns. Cathe rine McKeeha n become s th e new general manager . I n March, a musical about a South American songwriter, Victor Jara Alive, is staged b y Ken Gass (20 March to 1 5 April). It is followed by a revival of Ain 't Lookin ' (24 April to 27 May). In June, the compan y takes this production t o the International Theatre Festiva l in Quebec City. On 1 5 August, the company finally secures th e deed for the theatre an d th e lan d on which it stands with the help o f an interest-fre e loa n o f $100,000 fro m th e Ministr y of Citizenship and Culture . 1984-5 During the summer , Ntozake Shange's Fo r Coloured Girls, directed b y Charles Gray, runs from 4 July to 30 September. Th e TW P season open s with S : Portrait of a Spy by Rick Salutin and Ia n Adams , directed b y Ken Livingston, which runs from 1 8 October to 1 1 November. Under pressur e from McKeehan , Mona Luscombe resign s as administrator. The Canad a Council warns the board tha t it intends t o cut back the theatre' s grant . McKeehan announces that she plans to resign in February. Gordon Floyd, Jaffary, an d Luscomb e ar e named t o a long-range plannin g committee. A third revival of Hey Rube! runs from 29 November to 23 December. Robert Rooney returns t o direct Raymond Briggs's When th e Wind Blows (10 January to 4 February). The Prairi e Theatre Exchang e production o f Wendy Lill's Fighting Days plays in th e theatr e fro m 1 4 February to 1 0 March. McKeehan and Floy d refuse to sign Luscombe's applicatio n t o the Can ada Council. Floyd and Jaffary resig n fro m the board. TWP co-produces Gabriel Emanuel's Einstein with Theatre Nepes h (2 1 March to 28 April). Marcia Muldoon replaces McKeeha n as general manager . Luscomb e travels to Russia as a guest of the Soviet government. On hi s return, he directs Larry Cox's Last Hero (17 May to 9 June). Luscombe convenes a new

218 Chronolog y board o f directors, which approves the appointment o f Rooney as resident director . The theatre' s Canad a Counci l grant i s reduced fro m $125,000 to $95,000 . 1985-6 The seaso n opens with Rooney's production o f Edward Radzinsky's Theatre in th e Time of Nero and Seneca (2 4 September t o 2 0 October), which is followed by Alexandre Hausvater's staging of Joshua Sobol' s Ghetto (7 to 30 November). Luscombe appeals t o the Ontari o Art s Council for finan cial assistance, and i n early January a meeting between th e Counci l and the theatr e i s arranged. Th e Counci l offers t o pay for a management study by Graeme Pag e and expresse s its opposition t o any plans for expan sion o f the theatre . In early February, the TW P board appoint s new offi cers and launche s a fund-raising drive . The theatr e i s rented ou t fo r a production o f Shakespeare's/M&'Ms Caesar (6 February to 23 March). Th e board appoint s Roone y as the new artistic director beginning 1 July. The Market Theatre of Johannesburg's productio n of Asinimali plays from 2 7 May to 1 June, an d Jim Clarkso n and Gordo n Floyd' s production o f the musical Nunsense moves into the Alexander Street theatr e o n 2 9 April and runs until 1 8 October. On 1 5 May, the Pag e repor t recommend s th e creation o f a board o f trustees to supervise the finance s of the company . In June, th e Canad a Council rejects TWP's grant application. 1986-7 On 1 3 August, a board o f trustees is established and a trust agreemen t signed. A revised application to the Canad a Counci l secures a $25,000 project grant. The Sha w Festival production o f Breaking the Silence runs at the theatr e fro m 2 5 October to 30 November. It is followed b y the Market Theatre o f Johannesburg's productio n o f Woza Albert ( 4 December t o 11 January). A second Sha w Festival production, B Movie, th e Play, runs from 17january to 1 5 March, and afte r tha t Robert Rooney's first production as artistic director, Ke n Mitchell's Gone the Burning Sun, moves into the theatre from 1 9 April to 26 March and the n o n t o China, where it tours fro m 23 April to 2 0 May. The seaso n end s with Mr Jelly Rollby Luscomb e an d Larry Cox (3 0 April to 24 May). The Charlottetow n Festival production o f Pump Boys and Dinettes runs in the theatr e fro m 9 June to 5 July. 1987-8 At a specially called general meetin g on 1 5 September, Luscombe , his wife, Mona , and Larr y Cox are dropped from the board . After a rental

Chronology 21 9 production o f Buddies i n Ba d Times' Th e Postman Rings Once (30 September to 25 October), the regular TWP season gets under way with Rooney's production o f Ralph Burdman' s Tête à Tête (10 November to 2 0 December). The musica l Rap Master Ronnie opens o n 5 January an d run s to 14 February. During the run, the board fires Luscombe. Rooney' s second production o f the season , Something in the Air, runs from 23 February to 27 March. A co-production, Pushing Forty ( 5 April to 8 May), and th e National Theatre Schoo l productio n o f Mark Blitzstein's The Cradle Will Rock (1 0 to 1 4 May) fill the theatr e unti l mid-May. They are followe d by the Marke t Theatre of Johannesburg's Bopha (1 7 May to 26 June), follow ing which the theatr e cease s operations an d dismisse s the staff . 1988-9 In June, Florenc e Silve r takes over as chairman o f the board an d enter s into negotiations with the develope r Georg e Var i in an effor t t o secure a new theatre fo r the company . On 2 1 July, the board announces th e appointment o f Leon Pownal l as artistic director. A group o f Luscombe supporters callin g themselves the 'Committe e of Concern' challenge the authority of the board an d o n 31 September occup y the theatre. Effort s t o sell the theatr e t o a developer fail , an d when the Canad a Counci l rejects the theatre' s applicatio n in early November, the board appeal s to th e Ministry of Culture and Communication s (formerly Citizenshi p and Cul ture). Unable to operate the theatre , th e board finall y votes to sell it to a developer, bu t o n 2 4 May the sal e is blocked by the boar d o f trustees. Negotiations with the Ontari o Art s Council, the Ministr y of Culture an d Communications, and th e Toronto Arts Council finally result in the City's purchasing th e buildin g at 1 2 Alexander Street on 2 6 September.

This page intentionally left blank

Notes

Abbreviations Globe - Globe and Mail Slar — Toronto Star Sun - Toronto Sun Telegram- Toronto Telegram Tribune- Canadian Tribune CCA - Toront o Workshop Production s files in thé Canada Counci l Archives, National Archive s of Canada JWP - Jac k Winter Papers , William Ready Division o f Archives and Researc h Collections, McMaste r Universit y Library OACA- Toronto Workshop Production s file s i n thé Ontario Arts Council Archives, Archives of Ontari o TWPA - Toront o Workshop Production s Archives , McLaughlin Librar)' , University of Guelph PREFACE 1 Do n Rubin , 'Sleepy Tunes in Toronto,' Canadian Theatre Review 20 (Fal l 1978) , 93 2 Deni s W.Johnston, U p the Mainstream: Th e Rise oj Toronto's Alternative Theatres (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1991) , 22 3 Ala n Filewod , Collective Encounters: Documentary Theatre i n English Ganada (Tor onto: University of Toronto Press, 1987) , 78 PROLOGUE 1 Joan Ferry , 'Experience s of a Pioneer i n Canadian Experimenta l Theatre,' Theatre History i n Canada 8, no. 1 (Spring 1987) , 6 3

222 Note s to pages 3-31 2 Joa n Maroney Ferry, interview, 23 Apr. 198 8 3 Ferry , 'Expériences,' 64 4 Deni s Braithwaite, 'New Theatre Group,' Star, 21 Mar. 195 9 5 Ton y Ferry , 'Stratford: Demoralized , Misadventure , Blunder,' Star, 27June 1959 6 Davi d Peddie, 'Stratfor d Festiva l Criticism "Blunder,"' Star, 4 July 1959 , p . 27 CHAPTER 1

1 Detail s of Luscombe's early life ar e draw n fro m interviews held wit h hi m i n July 198 7 and fro m the manuscrip t of an unpublishe d intervie w by Don Rubin in Luscombe' s possession . Al l quotations not otherwis e attributed ar e fro m these sources . 2 Tru e Davidson, Th e Golden Years o f East York (Toronto : Centennial Colleg e Press, 1976) , 81 CHAPTER 2

1 Georg e Luscombe, interview, 23July 198 7 2 Detail s of the histor y of Theatre Worksho p ar e fro m Howar d Goorney , Th e Theatre Workshop Story (London : Eyr e Methuen, 1981) , and Howar d Goorne y and Ewa n MacColl , eds, Agit-prop t o Theatre Workshop: Political Playscripts, 193050 (Manchester: University of Manchester Press, 1986) . 3 Georg e Luscombe, interview , 23July 198 7 4 Ibid . 5 Ibid . CHAPTER 3

1 Rudolp h Laban , The Mastery o f Movement, 4t h ed . (Estover , Plymouth: Macdonald an d Evans , 1980) , 87 2 Laban , Mastery, 1 7 3 Ton y Ferry , '"Don't Think" Director, Students Test Acting Ways and Means, ' Star, 18Jun e 196 0 4 Quote d ABC, 2 Dec. 197 8 5 Georg e Luscombe, interview , 20 Jan. 198 8 6 'Ope n Lette r fro m You r Artistic Director,' Arts Theatre Club Newsletter (May 1961),TWPA 7 Georg e Luscombe, interview, 20Jan. 198 8 8 Ton y Moffat-Lynch, interview , 6 Apr. 198 8

Notes to pages 31-47 223 9 Georg e Luscombe, interview, 21 Jan. 198 8 CHAPTER 4 1 Natha n Cohen, 'Theatr e in the Universities, ' Star, 9Jan. 196 0 2 Natha n Cohen, 'Reachin g a Play's Core,' Star, 1 7 May 1960 3 Ton y Moffat-Lynch , interview , 6 Apr. 198 8 4 Natha n Cohen , 'Stereophoni c Sound an d "Lysistrata," ' Star, 29 Dec. 196 1 5 Herber t Whittaker , 'Luscombe' s Merit Shines in Play,' Globe, 29 Dec. 196 1 6 Cohen , 'Stereophoni c Sound' 7 Jack Winter , 'An Experienc e o f Group Theatre,' Star, 27 Jan. 196 2 8 Georg e Luscombe, interview , 21 Jan. 198 8 9 Lette r from George Luscomb e t o the Canad a Council , May 1962, TWPA 10 Dougla s Livingston, interview, 25 Apr. 198 8 11 Jerr y Wasserman, 'Buchne r i n Canada : Woyzech and th e Developmen t of English-Canadian Theatre,' Theatre History i n Canada 8, no. 2 (Fal l 1987) , 185 12 Georg e Luscombe, interview, 3 Feb. 198 8 13 Lette r from Georg e Luscombe t o the Canad a Council , 19 Apr. 1963 , TWPA 14 Natha n Cohen, ' A Remarkable Achievement,' Star, 17 Apr. 196 3 CHAPTER 5

1 Nikola i Gorchakov, Th e Vakhtangov School of Stage Art (Moscow , n.d.), 11 8 2 Willia m Kuhlke, 'Vakhtangov and th e American Theatre of the 1960's, ' in E.T. Kirby, éd., Total Theatre (Ne w York, 1969) , 15 7 3 Joan Marone y Ferry, interview, 4 Apr. 198 8 4 Georg e Luscombe, interview , 10 Feb. 198 8 5 Herber t Whittaker , interview, 2 May 1988 6 Ferry , 'Experiences,' 65 7 Natha n Cohen , 'Tota l Theatre,''Star, 1 3 Feb. 196 1 8 Ibid . 9 Herber t Whittaker , 'Success Is Scored b y Workshop Actors,' Globe, 13 Feb. 196 1 10 Ton y Ferry, '"Hey Rube" Pai d Peanuts , but Create d Bi g Impact,' Star, 18 Mar. 1961 11 Jac k Winter, 'Music and "Th e Mechanic," ' JWP 12 Georg e Luscombe, interview , 20 Jan. 198 8 13 Herber t Whittaker , 'A Bouncy Hilarious Happenin g Happens, ' Globe, 1 Aug. 1964 14 Ronal d Evans, 'Mechanic Brings Back Bounce,' Telegram, 15 Oct. 196 5

224 Note s to pages 47-6 7 15 Herber t Whittaker , 'Comic Business Is a Monkey Wrench,' Globe, 1 3 Oct. 196 5 16 Natha n Cohen , 'Muc h t o Admire i n "Mechanic," ' Star, 16 Oct. 196 5 CHAPTER 6 1 Herber t Whittaker , 'Luscombe' s Basement Worksho p Take s Off with a Poetic , Bawdy Joan o f Arc,' Globe, 1 4 Dec. 196 3 2 Ronal d Evans , [no title] , Telegram, 1 4 Dec. 196 3 3 Natha n Cohen , '"Before Compiegne," ' Star, 19 Dec. 196 3 4 Ibid . 5 Ronal d Evans , 'The Theatre,' Telegram, 4 Apr. 196 4 6 Marti n Stone, 'Intimat e Theatres Preferable t o Obsession wit h Hugeness,' Tribune, 4 Apr. 196 4 7 Ralp h Hicklin , 'Knockabouts Enliven an Unsaintl y Joan,' Globe, 4 Apr. 196 4 8 Kem p Thompson, K-WRecord, 2 1 July 196 4 9 Natha n Cohen , 'Int o the Depths, ' Star, 1 5 Oct. 196 4 CHAPTER 7 1 TW P brie f t o th e Canad a Council, May 1962, TWPA 2 Minute s of the Canad a Counci l meeting , August 1962 , CCA 3 Minute s of the Canad a Counci l meeting , Augus t 1963 , CCA 4 June Faulkner, interview, 27 Oct. 199 2 5 Cedri c Smith , interview, 31 Jan. 198 9 6 Jun e Faulkner, interview, 27 June 198 8 7 Natha n Cohen , ' A Cause fo r Hope,' Star, 24Jan. 196 3 8 Minute s of the Canad a Counci l meeting, 1 7 Aug. 1964 , CCA 9 Lette r fro m Georg e Luscombe to Larry McCance, Actors' Equity , 25 June 1964, TWPA 10 TW P application t o the Canad a Council , 2 9 June 1965 , TWPA 11 Lette r from Pete r Dwyer to Brook y Robins, 1 Sept. 1965 , TWP A 12 Lette r fro m th e Ontari o Arts Council t o TWP, 2 9 Sept. 1965 , TWP A CHAPTER 8 1 Georg e Luscombe, interview , 3 Feb. 198 8 2 Lette r fro m Brook y Robins to Pete r Dwyer , 10 Mar. 1965 , TWP A 3 Ronal d Evans , 'The Theatre,' Telegram, 13Jan . 196 5 4 Natha n Cohen , 'Ne w Version o f "Woyzeck " Artificial, Talky,' Star, 13 Jan. 196 5 5 Do n Bell , 'Woyzeck Far fro m Original, ' Montreal Gazette, 1 3 Jan. 196 5

Notes to pages 67-84 22 5 6 Herber t Whittaker, 'Luscombe's Theatre Continues Evolution,' Globe, 1 3 Jan. 1965 7 Georg e Luscombe, quoted i n ABC, 2 Dec. 197 8 8 France s Walsh, interview, 29 June 198 8 9 Edwar d Sanders, interview, 26 May 1988 10 TW P brief to th e Canad a Council , April 1967, TWPA 11 Mil o Ringham Gold, interview , 1 7 May 198 8 12 France s Walsh, interview, 29 June 198 8 13 Natha n Cohen, '"Popular " and "Commercial " Aren't Always the Same, ' Star, 25 July 196 6 14 Herber t Whittaker , 'Golem of Venice Tries Too Hard, ' Globe, 3 Apr. 1967 CHAPTER 9 1 Cohen , '"Popular " and "commercial" ' 2 TW P press release, ISJul y 1965 , TWPA 3 Victori a Mitchell, interview, 22June 198 8 4 Le n Doncheff , interview , 5 May 1988 5 Lette r from Victo r Policy to George Luscombe, 1 2 Dec. 1966 , TWPA 6 June Faulkner, interview, 27June 198 8 7 Pete r McConnell, interview, 8 July 198 8 8 Arthu r Zeldin, '"He y Rube" Was a Triumph i n the Bi g City Hall Square,' Star, 22 Aug. 196 6 9 Lette r fro m Pete r Dwye r to Brooky Robins, 15 Sept. 1966 , TWPA 10 Georg e Luscombe , interview, 11 Feb. 198 8 11 Lette r from Jun e Faulkner to Peter Dwyer , 7 Sept. 1967 , TWPA 12 Georg e Luscombe , interview, 1 1 Feb. 198 8 13 Natha n Cohen, 'A Musical Cyrano Set with Christophe r Plummer,' Star, 31 Mar. 196 7 CHAPTER 1 O

1 Dian e Grant and Geoffre y Saville-Read , interview, 20Jan. 198 9 2 Note s to Gentlemen Be Seated, JWP 3 Erwi n Piscator , The Political Theatre (London : Eyre Methuen, 1980 [1929]) , 207 4 Pete r Faulkner, interview, 1 8 May 1988 5 Dian e Grant and Geoffre y Saville-Read , interview, 20Jan. 198 9 6 Jim McPherson , 'A New Play, a New Author, a New Theatre - a Triumph,' Telf.gram, 1 1 Jan. 196 8 7 Marti n Stone, Tribune, 1 1 Jan. 1968

226 Note s to pages 84-99 8 Calvi n Butler, interview, 8 Aug. 198 8 9 Herber t Whittaker, 'Mr . Bones - Smashin g Documentary,' Globe, 23 Apr. 196 9 10 Ralp h Hicklin , 'Mr. Bones Outclasse s Thaw,' Telegram, 23 Apr. 196 9 11 Natha n Cohen , 'Mr . Bones a Fine Closer fo r Toronto Workshop,' Star, 23 Apr. 1969 12 Natha n Cohen , 'Toront o Workshop Compan y Rates Special Attention, ' Star, 15 May 196 9 13 Natha n Cohen , 'Brigh t Faces Invite s a Comparison wit h Feiffer,' Star, 29 May 1968 CHAPTER 1 1 1 Natha n Cohen , ' A Disappointing Turn,' Star, 1 5 Sept. 196 5 2 Lette r fro m Chery l Crawford t o Dr Robert Crawford , 1 8 Aug. 1966 , TWP A 3 June Faulkner, interview, 27 June 198 8 4 NancyJowse y Lewis, interview, 27 Nov. 198 8 5 Georg e Luscombe, interview , 11 Feb. 198 8 6 Herber t Whittaker, 'Fac e to Face with a Funny Play,' Globe, 29 May 196 8 7 Natha n Cohen , 'Brigh t Faces Invite s a Comparison wit h Feiffer, ' Star, 29 May 1968 8 Le n Doncheff , interview, 5 May 198 8 9 June Faulkner, interview, 27June 198 8 10 Lette r fro m Natha n Cohen , 3 1 July 1969 , TWP A 11 Natha n Cohen , 'Wha t Will Succes s Do to George Luscombe's Theatre Dream?' Star, 13 Sept. 196 9 12 Natha n Cohen , 'Kline' s Play Faces Flop s in Ne w York,' Star, 17 Sept. 196 9 13 Georg e Luscombe, interview, 18 Feb. 198 8 CHAPTER 1 2 1 Correspondence , TWPA 2 Calvi n Butler, interview, 8 Aug. 198 8 3 Mil o Ringham Gold, interview , 17 May 198 8 4 Do n Rubin , 'Mr. Fratti's Sure Mr . Luscombe Ca n Mak e Che Live, ' Star, 16 Dec. 1968 5 Faulkner-Fratt i correspondence , TWPA 6 Lette r fro m George Luscombe t o Mari o Fratti, 27 Aug. 1968 , TWP A 7 Mari o Fratti, '"Che Guevara" in New York,' New Theatre Magazine 12 , no. 2 (May 1972), 2 8 Calvi n Butler, interview, 8 Aug. 198 8

Notes to pages 100-1 1 22 7 9 Natha n Cohen , 'Cedric Smith a s Che Appears Her e Tonight despit e Dru g Charge,' Star, 14Jan . 196 9 10 Georg e Luscombe, interview , 16 Feb. 198 8 11 Ji m McPherson , 'Entertainment,' Telegram, 1 9 Dec. 196 8 12 Herber t Whittaker, 'Mario Fratti Hero-worship s Ch e Guevara, ' Globe, 1 9 Dec. 1968 13 Do n Rubin , 'A Lack of Focus, That's the Troubl e with th e Ch e Play, ' Star, 18 Dec. 196 8 14 Natha n Cohen , 'Che , the Bes t Play Locally in a Year,' Star, 31 Dec. 196 8 15 Georg e Luscombe, interview , 1 8 Feb. 198 8 16 Natha n Cohen, T n Venice There Is Drama i n th e Streets, ' Star, 27 Sept. 1969 17 Calvi n Butler, interview, 8 Aug. 198 8 18 Repor t of the Canadia n consu l general, Mar y Lynn Reid , 7 Oct. 1969 , TWPA 19 Ibid . CHAPTER 1 3 1 Davi d Farber, Chicago '68 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press , 1988) , 23 2 2 Ibid. , 229 3 Ibid. , 206 4 Ibid. , 205 5 Georg e Luscombe, interview, 29 Mar. 198 8 6 Steve n Bush , interview, 9 Aug. 198 8 7 Dian e Grant, interview, 20Jan. 198 9 8 Quote d by Herbert Whittaker in 'Chicag o 70: A Winner Wooed,' Globe, 4 Apr. 1970 9 Ric k McKenna, interview, 26June 198 8 10 Marti n Stone, 'Chicag o "Lynch" Trial o n Toront o Stage,' Tribune, 18 Mar. 1970 11 Sand y Naiman, 'Press Conference,' Seneca, 1 9 Mar. 197 0 12 Whittaker , 'Chicag o 70: A Winner Wooed' 13 Herber t Whittaker , 'Chicago 70: Well Matched Absurdities,' Globe, \ 1 Mar. 1970 14 Jim McPherson , 'A One-sided View of Chicago 7 trial,' Telegram, 1 1 Mar. 1970 15 Pau l Levine, 'Theatre Chronicle: Chicag o 70,' Canadian Forum 1 5 (July-Aug. 1970), 174-6 16 Natha n Cohen , 'Chicag o 70 Goes of f Track,' Star, 1 1 Mar . 1970

228 Note s to pages 111-2 3 17 Cliv e Barnes , 'Stage: "Chicago 70 " at th e Martinique, ' Ne w York Times, 26 May 1970 18 Marti n Washburn, 'Theatre : Chicage '70, ' Village Voice, 1 1 June 197 0 19 Jac k Kroll, 'Americ a Hurra h ...? ' Newsweek, 8 June 1970 , p . 90 20 Calvi n Butler, interview, 8 Aug. 198 8 CHAPTER 1 4 1 Natha n Cohen, ' A Look a t Theatre in Toronto: The Pac e Setter s Fal l Behind,' Star, 5 Dec. 197 0 2 Joh n Mortimer , Introduction, The Captain of Kopenick (London : Methuen , 1971), n.p. 3 Car l Zuckmayer, Preface, Th e Captain o f Kopenick (London : Methuen , 1971) , n.p. 4 Herber t Whittaker , 'Captain o f Kopenick I s a Tour de Force, ' Globe, 9 Nov. 1967 5 Natha n Cohen, 'Fittin g Finale to Frase r Ave . Theatre,' Star, 9 Nov. 196 7 6 Marti n Stone, ' A Fascinating Play,' Tribune, 27 Nov. 196 7 7 Marti n Stone, 'Spiri t of Schweik Captured,' Tribune, 5 Mar. 196 9 8 Natha n Cohen , 'Theatr e in '68 Lacked Socia l Ferment, ' Star, 28 Dec. 196 8 9 Natha n Cohen , 'Two Folklore Pieces : Schwei k Passes Muster, ' Star, 28 Feb . 1969 10 Maj a Ardal , interview , 1 1 July 198 8 11 Jef f Braunstein , interview , 25 May 198 8 12 Suzett e Couture, interview , 1 9 Jan. 198 9 13 Marti n Stone , Tribune, 17 Mar. 1971 14 Bria n Pearl, Excalibur, 25 Mar. 197 1 15 Natha n Cohen, 'Toront o Workshop Show s Capacities Aren't Limited, ' Star, 10 Mar. 1971 CHAPTER 1 5 1 Pete r Hay , 'Cultural Politics, ' Canadian Theatre Review 2 (Sprin g 1974) , 10 2 Natha n Cohen , Star, 31 Mar. 196 7 3 Natha n Cohen , 'St . Lawrence Centre Say s It's "You r Place" bu t I s It Really?' Star, 2 May 197 0 4 Natha n Cohen , 'Regret , Not Panic , Is in Order over New Centre,' Star, 1 Mar. 1970 5 Se e Johnston , U p the Mainstream, fo r th e histor y of thi s movement . 6 Ke n Gass , Introduction , Factory La b Anthology, ed. Conni e Brissende n (Vancou ver: Talonbooks, 1974) , 7

Notes to pages 125-4 1 22 9 7 Do n Rubin,'Creepin g toward a Culture,' Canadian Theatre Review 1 (Winter 1974), 6 CHAPTERl6

1 Cedri c Smith, interview, 31 Jan. 198 9 2 Georg e Luscombe, interview , 5 Apr. 198 8 3 Gran t Roll , interview, 29June 198 8 4 Filewod , Collective Encounters, 49 5 Ibid. , 22, 183 6 Urj o Kareda, 'Te n Los t Year s Beautiful Theatre,' Star, 7 Feb. 197 4 7 Audre y Ashley, 'Moving Account o f Lost Years,' Ottawa Citizen, 9 Mar. 197 4 8 Davi d McCaughna, 'Te n (Rousing ) Los t Years,' Star, 1 Mar. 197 4 9 Lynn e van Luven, 'Ten Los t Years Was Pure Gold,' LeMmdge Herald, 8 Nov. 1974 CHAPTER 1 7

1 'Shrinkin g Refugee Rights, ' Globe, 12 May 1989, p . A7 2 'On e Year Later: Absolute Order, ' Time, 23 Sept. 1974 , pp. 36-7 3 Roge r Keene, 'Fir e at TWP,' Scene Changes 2, no. 1 1 (Dec. 1974) , 12-1 3 4 Urj o Kareda, 'Toront o Workshop Lose s More i n Fire Than Jus t a Theatre,' Star, 6 Nov. 197 4 5 Herber t Whittaker, 'Emergin g from Ashe s Toronto Workshop Bac k on Three Fronts,' Globe, 30 Nov. 197 4 6 Herber t Whittaker, 'Retur n o f Ten Los t Years and TW P Both Stirrin g Events,' Globe, 1 3 Dec. 197 4 7 Urj o Kareda, 'Theatr e Rises from Ashes with a n Elegan t Setting,' Star, 1 Jan. 1975 8 'Event s in Chile Held Up t o Clear Glas s Window,' Varsity, 17Jan . 1975 , 5 9 Kareda , 'Theatr e Rises from Ashes ' 10 Dian e Douglass , interview , 12July 198 8 11 Ros s Skene, interview , 26 Aug. 198 8 12 Lette r fro m Edwar d A . Christie to TWP, 8 May 1975, TWPA 13 Urj o Kareda, 'Olympi c Drama Flexe s It s Muscles on th e Wron g Topic, ' Star, 25 Apr. 197 5 14 Josep h Erdelyi , 'New Play by Winter Lacks Force, Finesse,' Ottawa Citizen, 28 Apr. 197 5 15 Herber t Whittaker, 'Summe r '7 6 More Socia l Trac t Tha n Drama, ' Globe, 25 Apr. 197 5 16 Be n Duncan , BBC , 11 May 1976, transcript , TWP A

230 Note s t o pages 143-5 3 CHAPTER 1 8 1 Se e Johnston, U p the Mainstream, fo r a discussio n o f thi s change. 2 Agend a o f the Canad a Counci l meeting , 2 1 Sept. 1976 , CCA 3 Ibid . 4 Karljaffary , interview , 23 Aug. 198 8 5 Lette r fro m Alla n Sparrow t o Committe e o f Adjustment, 3 0 Nov. 1976 , TWPA 6 Copie s of City of Toronto documents relatin g t o the company' s lon g struggl e with th e developer s are include d i n the TW P archives. 7 Lette r fro m Cit y of Toronto Plannin g Department t o Doming o Penaloza , 1 8 Jan. 1977 , TWPA 8 Repor t o f the Park s Priorit y Committee meeting , 2 Feb. 1977 , Cit y of Toronto Archives. 9 Lette r fro m Doming o Penaloz a tojun e Faulkner , 22June 1977 , TWPA 10 Mauree n Peterson , Ottawa Journal, 14 Feb. 197 7 11 Ric k Salutin , interview, 17 Sept. 198 7 12 Ibid . 13 Le n Doncheff , interview , 5 May 198 8 14 Gin a Mallet , 'Les Canadiens a Rousin g Opening,' Star, 21 Oct. 197 7 15 McKenzi e Porter, 'Les Canadiens Scores for Nationa l Unity, ' Sun, 2 5 Oct. 197 7 16 Brya n Johnson,'This Year's Winners and Sinners, ' Globe, 1 3 Ma y 197 8 17 Gin a Mallet , 'Playwright Shows Ho w Apartheid Drive s Souls Apart,' Star, 1 Mar. 1978 18 Rober t Wallace, 'Abla/. e with Soul, ' Toronto Theatre Review, May 197 8 19 Dic k Beddoes, 'Flowers: A Dirty Word," Globe, 1 7 Apr. 197 8 20 Marti n Stone, 'Genet Bega t Kemp , Kem p Bega t What?' Tribune, 1 0 Apr. 197 8 21 Kaspar s Dzeguze , 'Flowers : Garish, Gaudy , Fetid , Funny , and Unforgettable, ' Sun, 3 0 Mar. 1978 22 Pete r Faulkner , interview, 18 May 198 8 23 Dian e Douglass , interview , 12Jul y 198 8 24 McKenzi e Porter , Sun, 2 5 Apr. 197 8 25 McKenzi e Porter , [n o title] , Sun, 2 8 Apr. 197 8 CHAPTER 1 9 1 Do n Rubin , Introduction, Canada o n Stage, ¡978 (Toronto: York University, 1979), 7 2 Adèl e Freedman , 'The Mac-Pap s Ente r Ne w Theatre of War,' Globe, 26Jan. 1980 3 Georg e Luscombe, interview, 23June 198 8

Notes to pages 154-7 0 23 1 4 Gin a Mallet , 'At Least I t Wasn't a Funeral,' Star, 1 Feb. 198 0 5 Ric k Groen, 'Onl y Some of the Mac-Paps ' Part s Good,' Globe, 1 Feb. 198 0 6 Anto n Wagner , 'Mac Paps Hit an d Miss, ' Varsity, 8 Feb. 198 0 7 Gordo n Vogt, 'Th e Politics of Entertainment: Georg e Luscomb e and TWP, ' in Davi d Helwig, éd., Th e Human Elements, 2d ser. ([Ottawa: ] Oberon , 1981) , 148-9 8 Georg e Luscombe, interview, 28 June 198 8 9 Ra y Conlogue, 'Thi s Idealistic Wobbly Sees Things To o Simply, ' Globe, 21 Jan. 1983 10 Kare n Sprenger , Ryersonian, 28Jan. 198 3 11 Bria n Burch , 'Tools from th e Pas t for Ou r Timi d Times, ' Toronto Clarion, 12 Feb. 198 3 12 Moir a Farr , Newspaper, 26Jan . 198 3 13 Conlogue , 'This Idealistic Wobbly' 14 Larr y Gox, interview, 12 July 198 8 15 Gin a Mallet , 'A Walk on th e Dar k Sid e o f Lib-think,' Star, 23 Oct. 198 3 16 Bo b Pennington , Sun, 2 3 Oct. 198 3 17 Stewar t Brown, 'Pla y on Witc h Hun t Make s for Unnervin g Theatre,' Hamilton Spectator, 2 1 Oct. 198 3 18 Ra y Conlogue, 'Luscombe' s Talent Surface s i n Names, ' Globe, 26 Oct. 198 3 CHAPTER 2 0 1 Consultants ' reports , 1981-2 , OACA 2 Ibid . 3 Lette r fro m Rober t Spickle r to George Luscombe, 3 0 June 1983 , TWP A 4 Consultants ' reports , 1984 , OAC A 5 Rober t Rooney , interview, 14 Apr. 199 1 CHAPTER 2 1

1 Interi m repor t from TW P to William Lord, 14Jan . 1981 , TWPA 2 Lette r from Jack Merigold t o Linda Sword , Canada Council , 23 Sept. 1981 , TWPA 3 Kar l Jaffary, interview , 23 Aug. 198 8 4 Toront o City Council Minutes, 1980 , 02-9963 , Cit y of'Toronto Archive s 5 Toront o City Council Minutes , 1 Oct. 1980 , Cit y of Toronto Archives 6 Catherin e McKeehan , interview , 15July 198 8 7 Mem o fro m Gordo n Floy d t o William Lord, Mar . 1985 , OAC A 8 Lette r from Gordo n Floy d t o George Luscombe , 2 2 Mar. 1985 , TWP A

232 Note s to pages 171-8 8 9 Lette r from Norma n Endicott to George Luscombe , 1 5 Apr. 1985 , TWP A 10 Minute s of the TW P board o f directors meeting, 1 May 1985, TWPA 11 Lette r fro m Ann a Stratton to George Luscombe, 2 6 June 1985 , TWPA 12 Lette r fro m Donal d McGibbon to Jerr y White, 19 July 1985 , TWPA 13 Sale m Alaton, 'Ghetto Is Flawed but I t Asks Some Usefu l Questions, ' Globe, 9 Nov. 198 5 14 Mariann e Ackerman, 'Ambitious Ghetto a Play That Tackles Universal Questions,' Montreal Gazette, 1 9 Nov. 1985 CHAPTER 2 2 1 Unsen t letter fro m Walte r Pitman to George Luscombe, 1 2 Feb. 1986 , OACA 2 Minute s of the TW P board o f directors meeting, Jan. 1986 , TWPA 3 Mem o from Graem e Pag e t o Walter Pitman, 23 Jan. 1986 , TWPA 4 Georg e Luscombe, 'Proposal to the Fundin g Agencies, and th e Provinc e of Ontario,' 2 4 Jan. 1986 , TWPA 5 Lette r from Walter Pitman to George Luscombe , 28Jan. 1986 , TWPA 6 Minute s of the TW P board o f directors meeting, 31 Jan. 1986 , TWPA 7 Repor t fro m Graem e Pag e to Anna Stratton e t al., 3 Mar. 1986 , TWPA 8 Graem e Page , Report t o the Ontari o Arts Gouncil, 30 Apr. 1986 , 3-5, TWPA 9 Consultants ' reports, 1986 , OAGA 10 Minute s of the Ontari o Art s Council meeting, July 1986 , OACA CHAPTER 2 3 1 Rober t Crew, 'Toronto Workshop's Luscombe Say s He's Just "Movin g Aside,"' Star, 2 7 May 198 6 2 France s Walsh, interview, 29 June 198 8 3 Pete r McConnell, interview, 8 July 198 8 4 Natha n Cohen, 'Total Theatre? Yes It Is - Bu t Some New Text Wouldn't Hurt,' Star, 26 Nov. 196 6 5 Herber t Whittaker , 'He y Rube! Back Bigger, More Appealing Than Ever, ' Globe, 8 Dec. 197 2 6 Josep h Erdelyi , 'Workshop's Hey Rube! Is Still a Hit,' Peterborough Examiner, 8 Dec. 197 2 7 Do n Rubin , CBC, 1 1 Dec. 1972 8 Matthe w Fraser, Globe, 1 Dec. 198 4 9 Henr y Mietkiewicz, 'He y Rube a Dazzler but It' s Barely Theatre,' Star, 30 Nov. 1984 10 Victo r Paddy, 'Baseball Pla y Is Well Worth Catching,' Globe, 30 May 198 0

Notes t o pages 188-99 23 3 11 Kevi n Boland, 'Ain' t Lookin ' Hit s Home Run, ' Star, 30 May 198 0 12 Gordo n Vogt , CBC Stereo Morning, 3 0 May 198 0 13 Gordo n Vogt,'The Politic s of Entertainment,' 15 5 14 Susa n Puff , interview , 7 Feb. 198 9 15 Ra y Conlogue, 'Jaz z Lose s Its Sparkl e i n Miste r Jelly Roll, ' Globe, 1 May 198 7 CHAPTER 2 4 1 Minute s of the TW P board of directors meeting, 5 Feb. 1988 , TWP A 2 Rober t Pennington , Sun, 30Jun e 198 8 3 Rober t Crew, 'Theatre , Developer Diffe r o n It s Future,' Slar, 30June 198 8 4 Rober t Crew, 'Leo n Pownal l Named Workshop' s Director, ' Star, 21 July 1988 5 Ann e Bermonte , interview , 7June 199 1 6 To m Butler , interview , 4June 1991 7 Lette r from Leo n Pownal l to th e Ontari o Arts Council, 1 7 Dec. 1988 , TWP A 8 Note s fro m th e consultants ' meeting , 2 3 Jan. 1989 , OAC A 9 Agreemen t o f Purchase an d Sale , 4 , TWPA 10 Lette r from Willia m Secular t o TWP, 2 3 May 1989, TWP A 11 Minute s of the TW P board o f directors meeting, 23 May 1989, TWP A 12 Ra y Conlogue, 'Toronto Workshop Theatre Board Reject s Bailout Offer fro m Toronto,' Globe, 16Jul y 198 9

This page intentionally left blank

Index

Ackerman, Marianne, 17 3 Acorn, Milton , 120, 127-8, 213 acting, 20 , 25, 34, 57-8, 10 2 102 Actors' Equity , 59, 62 Actors' Workshop Workshop,, 12 3 Adalian, Yvonne, 60, 66, 90 Adams, Ian, 21 7 Adilman, Sid, 95 Ain't Lookiri, ix, 187-8, 215-17 Alaton, Salem, 17 3 Albee, Edward, 195 Albert, Will, 59 Alchemist, The, 23, 91, 21 1 Alexander Street Project, 207- 8 Alexander Stree t theatre: theatre: desig designn of , 76-7, programming at , 91, 134 ; fire at, 136-7 ; developers and, 144-6; décor of, 167 ; disadvantages of , 176; sale of, 192-6, of,, 192-6 , 198-200 198-200;; closing of 205; rebuildin g of of,, 208 Alice in Wonderland, 10 9 All That Glitters Is Not Gold, 13 9 Allende, Salvador , 135- 6 Alleyn, Edward, 4 5 Altman's Last Stand, 21 6 American Hamburger League, The, 94 And They' 11 Make Peace, 29-30, 35-7, 50, 53, 209

Andre, Marion , 172 Anouilh, Jean, 128,21 3 Ardai, Ardal, Maja, Maja , 16 4 Aristophanes, 29 , 36, 209 Armitage, Barbara , 3 1 Art Galler y of Toronto, 9 Art of The, 157, 157, 21 7 o f War, War, The, Artaud, Antonin Antonin,, 49, 202 Arts Theatre Club, 28-30, 35, 209 Arturo Ui, 212 Ashley, Audrey, 13 2 Asinimali, 2188 Asinimali, 21 Auschwitz, 38, 71 Avon Theatre, 73 Ayoub, Michael, 16 1644 B Movie, the Play, \82, 218 Ballantine, Richard, 167 Banff Playwrights ' Colony, 165 Banks, John, 216 Barnes, Clive , 1 11 Basile, Jean, 78 Bayview Playhouse, 78 78,, 137 , 21 3 Beard, The, 123 Beatles, 10 0 Beattie, Eleanor, 31,5 9 Beck, Julian, 12 3 Beddoes, Dick, 150-1

236 Inde x Before Compiègne, 50-6, 59-62 , 64, 69, 73, 205, 210 Beggs, James, 59 Behan, Brendan , 113 , 212, 216 Bell, Don, 67 Bellamy, Edward, 1 0 Bennett, R.B., 132 Bergman, Ingmar , 67 Berliner Ensemble, 4 Bethune, Norman, 182 Black Panthers, 107- 8 Blitzstein, Mark, 219 Blue Angel, The, 114 Bobcaygeon, Ontario , 3 1 Bohdanetsky, Thomas, 14 4 Boland, Kevin , 188 Bolt, Carol, 105 , 135,21 1 Boor, The, 31, 33-4, 209-1 0 Booth, Allen , 156 Booth, John Wilkes , 83 Bopha, 193 , 21 9 Boschulte, Jack, 97, 99, 108 Bosley, John, 146 Braithwaite, Denis, 4 Brandéis University , 93, 98, 100 , 2 1 1 Braunstein, Jeff, 164 , 186 Bread and Puppe t Theatre , 124 Breaking th e Silence, 182 , 21 8

Brecht, Bertolt, 29 , 33, 56, 78, 106, 110, 116 , 130,202 , 212, 215 Brenzell, Martin, 124 Breon, Robin, 196 Brett, Jeremy, 216 Briggs, Raymond, 217 Brighton, Pam, 149 , 214-15 Broadfoot, Barry , 128-32, 213 Brock University , 21 1 Brodribb, Michael , 214 Broker, Lee : se e Perkins, Larry Brook, Peter , 202 Brown, Stewart, 159

Brunetière, Ferdinand , 12 5 Bruno, Walter, 216 Buchner, Georg , 37, 65, 69 Buddies in Bad Times, 207-8, 219 Burbage, Richard, 45 Burch, Brian, 156 Burdman, Ralph, 192 , 219 Burlap Bags, 13, 49, 209 Burroughs, Jackie, 129-3 0 Burton Auditorium , 210 Bury, John, 22 Bush, Steven, 97, 108-10, 128, 164 , 212-13 Butler, Calvin, 84-5, 95, 97, 103 , 110 , 112, 136 , 149,21 4 Butler, Tom, 158 , 195 Cafe L a Mama, 49, 93, 122 Gaffe Gino , 49 Caldwell, Ben, 85- 6 Campbell, Douglas, 171 Canada Council, 29, 30, 31, 50, 57-8 , 60-3, 69, 76, 121 , 126, 127 . 143-4, 152, 163 , 170-1 , 192 , 197 , 210-11, 214,217-19 Canadian Broadcastin g Corporation , 11, 13,25 , 134 , 152-4 , 187,210 , 213 Canadian Imperial Ban k o f Commerce, 180 , 19 8 Canadian Nationa l Exhibition , 4 Canadian Oper a Company, 61 , 121 Canadian Players , 76, 78, 122 Canadian plays , 5, 33, 49, 125-6, 147 , 160, 205 Canadian Theatre Review, 125, 18 5 Canadian Theatr e School, 12 Captain o f Kiipenick, The, 114-16, 203 , 211,213 Carew, Jan, 82- 5 Carnival Wa r a G o Hot, 215

Index 23 7 Carrington, Carol , 11 0 Castro, Fidel , 98 CBC: see Canadian Broadcastin g Cor poration CCF: see Co-operative Commonwealt h Federation Centaur Theatre , 147 , 214, 216 Centennial Commission, 77 , 122 , 125 Central Librar y Theatre, 29, 78, 122 Central Schoo l o f Speech an d Drama , 3 Chalmers Awards : see Floyd S. Chalmers Canadian Pla y Awards Chappie an d Me , 187,21 5 Charlottetown Festival , 218 Che Guevara, 96-104, 113 , 155 , 21 1 Cheda, Sherrill, 167 Chekhov, Anton, 23, 31, 33-4, 40, 49, 56,209-10,214 Chester Publi c School, 7 Chicago '70, 105-13, 132 , 134 , 155 , 202, 211-12 Chinese opera , 54 Christmas Carol, A, 21 4 Christopher Columbus, 216 Circle in the Squar e Theatre , 8 9 Citizenship and Culture , Ministry of: see Ministry of Citizenship and Cul ture City of Toronto: see Toronto, Cit y of City of Toronto Award of Merit, 216 Civic Square Theatre, 50, 57, 61 civil rights movement, 81 , 152 Civil War, American, 81, 85- 6 Clap Hands, 13 7 Clark, Austin, 82 Clark, Ramsey, 107 Clarkson, James, 218 Clement, David, 90 Club, The, 147, 149, 21 4

Coca-Cola, 14 0 Cohen, Alexander , 88- 9 Cohen, Nathan, 34, 35, 36, 39, 43, 47 8, 52-4, 55-6 , 61 , 67, 70, 72-3, 78 , 86-7,92-4, 101-2, 110-11 , 113 , 115 17, 119 , 121-2 , 124 , 185 collaborative creation , 23 , 27, 40, 41, 45, 65, 68-9, 92, 129 , 188 collective creation, ix , 203 Colonnade Theatre, 54 , 60-1, 76, 78, 210 Columbia University , 98 Comedy o f Errors, The, 137 commedia dell'arte , 5 , 21, 44—6 , 54 Committee of Concern, 195 , 219 communism, 10 , 98, 103 Conlogue, Ray, 156-7, 159 , 190 , 199 Connection, The, 44 Conquest o f th e South Pole, 19 7 Cooper, George, 24 Co-opera, 21 5 Co-operative Commonwealt h Federa tion, 7, 8 Co-operative Commonwealt h Youth Movement, 10 , 11, 22, 15 5 Corbett, Harry, 23-4 Couture, Suzette , 1 18 Coward, Noel , 1 1 Cox, Larry , 153, 157 , 179 , 189 , 191 , 195,215,217-18 Cox, Susan , 216 Crackwalker, 21 6 Cradle Will Rock, The, 219 Craig, John, 187-8,215 Crampton, Esme, 4 Crawford, Cheryl , 90 Creeps, 21 4 Crest Theatre, 25, 44, 56, 61, 78, 121 2 Crew, Robert, 183 , 19 4 Crucible, The, 158

238 Inde x Culture an d Communications , Minis try of: see Ministry of Culture an d Communications Daganawida, 105 , 21 1 Danforth Technica l Institute , 9 Daniel, Yuli, 214 Davidson, Rick , 147, 215 Davis, Rennie, 10 8 Day They Shot John Lennon , The ,197 Death o/Woyzeck, The, 62, 66-7, 134 , 210 Dellinger, David, 108 Democratic Nationa l Convention , 97 , 107 Dennis, Charles , 21 6 Department o f External Affairs , 18 2 Desrosiers, Robert , 150 Dimson, Théo, 140 Dionysus i n 69, 110, 123 , 18 5 directors, boar d of, Toronto Workshop Productions, 163-4 , 166-73 , 174-5, 197-200 , 216 Dirty Thirties, The, 132 Dixon, Mel, 84, 97, 110 Dmitriev, Alex, 214 Doll's House, A, 12 4 Dominion Dram a Festival , 77, 121 Don Valley , 6-7, 9-10 , Doncheff, Len , 59 , 70, 74, 90, 92 Donkin, Eric, 215-16 Douglas, Géraldine , 5 9 Douglass, Diane , 129 , 139-40 , 150 Drainie, John, 1 1 Drummer Boy, The, 78 Dryden, Ken, 148 Duncan, Ben, 141 Durkan, Mary, 186 Dürrenmatt, Friedrich, 212 Dwyer, Peter, 57 , 60- 3 Dzeguze, Kaspars, 150

East York (district of Toronto, Ontario), 6-7, 211 East York Collegiate, 9 East York Workers, 7- 8 Easter, 214 Eaton Company , T. , 13 2 Ecstasy of Rita Joe, The, 77 Edgar, David , 217 Edge, The , 207 Edinburgh Festival , 18, 23 Einstein, 217 Eldred, Gerry, 175 , 17 7 Elizabethan theatre , 17 Emanuel, Gabriel , 21 7 Encore, 3 Endicott, James, 171 Endicott, Norman , 171 , 179 , 191 , 198 200 Enemy o f the Peopk, An , 2 9 Erdelyi, Joseph, 140 , 185 Esmeralda, 21 5 Evans, Ronald, 46 , 52, 54-5, 66-7 Evil Eye, The, 31,50, 210 External Affairs , Departmen t of : see Department o f External Affair s Faces, 92-5, 21 1 Factory Theatre, 123 , 143 , 157 , 214 , 216 Fanshen, 212 Fantasticks, The, 56 Farge, Manfred, 197 Farm Show, The, 128, 131 , 134 , 185 , 20 3 Farr, Moira , 156 Faulkner, John, 59, 76-7, 96-7, 100 , 120, 21 2 Faulkner, June, 59, 74-6, 88, 92-3, 96 , 98, 101 , 136-7 , 145-53, 161 , 211 , 213-15 Faulkner, Peter , 110 , 129 , 150 , 164 , 213 Female Parts, 217

Index 23 9 Fenelon Falls , Ontario, 31 Fennario, David, 147 , 149, 214 Ferry, Joan Maroney , 3 , 59, 186 Ferry, Tony, 3-5, 35, 42, 49-50, 57 , 82, 209,211 Festival of Underground Theatre , 124 Fighting Days, 217 Filewod, Alan, 131 Fireball Theatre, 137 First World War, 116 Fleming, Bill , 20 7 Flood, 203, 211 Flowers, 147, 149-50, 214 Floyd, Gordon, 169-70, 217-18 Floyd S . Chalmers Canadia n Pla y Awards, 126 , 151, 216 Flying Doctor, The, 20 Fo, Dario, 21 7 Fobasco Limited, 145 , 168-9 For Coloured Girls, 21 7 Foreign Enlistmen t Act, 1937, 154 Fortune and Men 's Eyes, 6 5 Foster, Paul, 12 3 Fraser.John, 149 Fraser, Matthew , 187 Fraser Avenue theatre , 4-5 , 26-9, 34, 40-1,73,75-6 Fratti, Mario, 96, 98-103, 21 1 Freeman, David, 214 French, David , 185 , 215 Froines,John, 108 From th e Boyne to Batoche, 213 Fugard, Athol, 147 , 149, 214, 216 Fumed Oak, 11 Futz, 122- 3 Galileo, 78 Garcia Lorca , Federico, 28, 209 Garrardjim, 123- 4 Gass, Ken , 123-4, 192 , 195-6, 216 , 217 Gelberjack, 44

Gentlemen Be Seated, 80-5, 21 1 Gerussi, Bruno , 13 5 Ghetto, 172-4,218 Gilbert, Sky, 20 8 Ginsberg, Allan , 1 1 1 Glasgow, Scotland, 18-2 1 Glass Menagerie, The, 56 Glassco, Bill , 123 , 144, 150, 192 Gogol, Nikolai Vasilyevich, 212 Goldby, Derek , 19 7 Goldoni, Carlo , 5 Golem of Venice, The, 70-2, 80, 91, 134, 141,211,214 Gone the Burning Sun, 182, 218 Good Soldier Schweik, The, \16-18, 186, 203,211-12 Grant, Diane , 92, 109-10 , 118 , 164 Grass, Gunter , 203 , 211 Gray, Amlin, 216 Gray, Charles, 21 7 Great Scholar Wu, The, 2 9 Grey Owl, 21 3 Groen, Rick, 154 Grossman, Danny , 196 Grosz, Georg , 11 7 Grotowski, ferzy , 123,20 2 Guevara, Che : see Ch e Guevara Gunvordahl, Terry , 18 8 Hair, 93, 110 , 119 , 123 Haliburton, Ontario, 30-1 , 209-1 0 Hall, Willis, 44 Hamlet, 1 1 Hammond, Mark , 207 Hampson, Pamela , 19 1 Hands, 21 4 Harron, Don, 187 Hasek, Jaroslav, 116,21 1 Hasenclever, Walter, 216 Hastings, Michael , 215 Hatt-Cook,Joe, 59

240 Inde x Hausvatcr, Alexandre, 172 , 218 Hayden, Tom, 10 8 Heap, Dan , 14 5 Hendry, Tom, 12 3 Henry, Ann, 77 Herbert, John , 65- 6 Hey Rube!, 41-4, 53-6, 64 , 66, 70, 74, 75, 91, 102 , 110 , 184-7 , 202, 205 , 209,211-12,217 Hicklin, Ralph , 55, 85 High Park , 5 Hiroshima, 71 Hitler, Adolf, 51, 11 4 H o f f m a n , Abbie , 107 , 111-12 Hoffman, Abby , 139 Hoffman, Julius J., 108 Holiday Show, 2 1 6 Holiday Theatre, 78 Hollingsworth, Michael , 215 holocaust, 71 , 17 3 Horn, Michael, 132 Hosanna, 214 Hostage, The, 113, 119 , 21 2 House Committe e o n Un-America n Activities, 15 7 House of Hambourg, 4 4 How I Got Thai Story, 216 Hugo, Victor , 215 Hunchback o f Noire Dame, The, 215 Hunter, Basya , 29 Hydro Theatre, 78 Hyland, Frances, 19 3 Ibsen, Henrik , 29 , 124,21 0 Iceman Gomelh, The, 29 Imaginary Invalid, The, 22-3. Se e als o Le malade imaginaire Indians, 21 2 Industrial Worker s of the World , 155-6 Inspector General, The, 212

International Brigade : se e MackenziePapineau Battalio n International Festiva l of Theatre Arts (Wolfville, N.S.) , 111 , 112,21 2 International Theatre Festival (Que bec City) , 217 Island, The, 147, 149,21 4 Jack an d His Master, 17 0 Jaffary, Karl , 167-70, 216-17 Jail Diary o f Albie Sachs, The, 164, 21 7 James, Jimmy, 15-17, 28, 41 Janson, Astrid, 136 , 139 , 147 , 154 , 21 3 Jarvis Collegiate, 1 1 Jellicoe, Ann, 118,21 2 Jitters, 215 Joan o f Arc, 50 Joey, 216 Johnny Noble, 2 0 Johnson, Bryan, 149 Johnson, William O., 139 Jolson, AI, 158- 9 Jolson Story, The, 158 Jones, Tim, 208 Jonson, Ben, 23, 91,211 Journey t o Kairos, 215 Jowsey, John, 59 Jowsey, Nancv, 46, 59, 66, 70, 73-4, 92 , 100-1, 109 , 113 , 115 , 117 , 118 , 136 , 184,212-13 Judaism, 17 3 Julius Caesar, 170, 21 8 Jupiter Theatre , 41 Kareda, Urjo, 124 , 132 , 138 , 140 , 14 3 Kelly, Edward, 55 , 60, 90 Kemp, Lindsay , 147 , 149-51 , 214 Kennedy,John F , 82 Kennedy, Robert, 97- 8 Kershaw, Derrick, 167 Kidd, Bruce, 13 9

Index 24 1 Kilbourn, William, 145 Kinch, Martin, 123-4 , 192 King, Marti n Luther , 97 , 107 King, Philip, 1 5 King, William Lyo n Mackenzie , 153, 154 Kingston, Jeremy , 14 1 Klanfer, François, 97, 1 10, 117, 129, 214 Kline, Norman, 92-3, 21 1 Kneebone, Tom, 21 6 Knisely, Marguerite, 216-1 7 Komagata Maru Incident, The, 147, 214 Kopit, Arthur, 21 2 Kroll.Jack, 11 2 Kuerti, Anton , 19 1 Kundera, Milan, 170 Kunstler, William, 108 Laban, Rudolph, 20, 26-7, 38, 64, 97, 164 La Mama Experimenta l Theatr e Club : see Cafe L a Mam a La Menthe, Ferdinand : se e Morton, Jelly Roll L'amour médecin, 44, 6 9 Langham, Michael, 74 Langley, Rod, 213 Last Hero, 2 1 7 Lawler, Ray , 56 Lawrence, Jim, 11 0 Leary, Timothy, 19 7 Leaving Home, 185 Le malade imaginaire, 56 Les Canadiens, ix, 147-9, 151, 187, 203, 214 Lesson from Aloes, 216 Letters from the Earth, 135 , 212-13 Levine, Paul , 11 0 Lewis, Nancy: se e Jowsey, Nancy Libin, Paul, 89 , 111 License, The, 50

Liefhebber, Martin , 20 8 Lili, Wendy, 21 7 Lincoln, Abraham , 81- 7 LIP grants: see Local Initiative s Program Littlewooci,* ,JJoan, 18-235 , —28î ,Ï 33, ) 73, ' — 103, 130, 141, 153, 184,202 Living Theatre, 105 Livingston, Douglas , 31 , 38, 74, 90, 18 6 Livingston, Ken, 21 7 Livingston, Sonja , 59 , 90 Local Initiative s Program, 121, 143 logo, Toronto Workshop Productions , 184 Lomax, Alan, 189 Long, the Short, an d th e Tall, The, 44 Lorca, Federico García: see García Lorca, Federico Lord, William, 161-2, 166 Love of Don Perlimplin and Belisa in thé Garden, The, 28, 20 9 Lovell, James, 17-1 8 Lulu Street, 77 Luscombe, Ann, 6 Luscombe, Edward, 6 , 8-10 Luscombe, George: and Theatre Centre, 4-6, 25 ; early lif e of , 6-13; and Midland Repertor y Theatre , 14—17 ; and Theatr e Workshop, 18-24 , 27; and improvisation , 23 , 27, 40, 41, 45, 65, 68-9, 92 , 129 , 188 ; and Work shop Productions, 26-32; and teach ing, 26-7 ; and th e 'efforts, ' 26 , 38, 97; and Art s Theatre Club, 28-30 ; and Theatre 35, 30-1; and Canadia n plays, 41-6, 50-6, 65, 70-1, 80-7 , 96-8, 105-13 , 128-33 , 136-8 , 154-9 ; and Canadia n playwrights , 65-6, 82-5, 116-18 , 126, 156, 187; legacy of, 201- 5 Luscombe, Jack, 6, 8-11

242 Inde x l.uscombe, Kaye, 6, 13 Luscombe, Mona, 74, 136, 167, 171 , 179, 195,217-1 8 Luscombe, Nadine , 186 Lyon, William, 123 Lyons, Michael, 171 Lysislrala, 29-30 3 5 50 , 209 Mac Paps, The, 154-5 , 164 , 215-16 MacColl, Ewan, 18-22, 29, 73, 91, 1 16, 184,211 MacDonald, Anne Marie , 208 Mackenzie-Papineau Battalion , 153, 154 Madame Strass, 216

Major, Leon , 13 6 Mallet, Gina, 143, 149, 154, 158-9 Manchester, England , 17 , 1 8 Manet, Eduardo, 21 6 Manitoba Theatre Centre, 77, 78 Mann, Ted, 89, 1 1 1 Marceau, Marcel, 4 Market Theatre o f Johannesburg, 170, 182, 193 , 218-19 Maroney, Joan: se.e Ferry, Joan Maroney Marriage Proposal, The, 31, 34, 49, 209 10 Marshall, Ann, 11 , 1 4 Marsland, Jane, 208 Martinique Theatre, 111-1 2 Marx, Karl, 7, 1 0 Mazzone, Carlo, 4-5, 209 McCarthy, Joseph, 15 7 McClure, Michael, 123 McConnell, Peter, 90, 164 , 186 McGibbon, Donald, 171 McKeehan, Catherine, 170 , 207, 217 McKenna, Rick, 110, 128 , 158-9, 164, 212-13 McLeod, Marian, 31

Mclure, James, 197 McPherson,Jim, 84, 101, 110 Mechanic, The, 44-6, 61, 64, 69, 73, 74, 88-90, 134,210-1 1 Medicine Show, The, 160, 187 , 217

Melinajudith, 12 3 Mendelson, Fred , 207-8

Merchant o f Venice, The, 69

Merigold.Jack, 166- 7 Merriam, Eve, 147, 149, 214 Metro Toronto: see Toronto, Metropol itan, Municipalit y of Meyerhold, Vsevolod, 19 , 33, 40, 72, 184, 20 2 Meyers, Don, 45 , 55, 60, 90 Midland Repertor y Theatre , 14-1 7 Mietkiewicz, Henry, 18 7 Millard, Peter, 129 , 139, 186 Miller, Arthur, 91, 15 8 Minden, Ontario , 3 1 Ministry of Citizenship and Culture , 169, 175 , 179, 191, 217. See also Ministry of Culture and Communica tions Ministry of Culture an d Communica tions, 196-9, 219. Seealso Ministry of Citizenship and Cultur e Mitchell, John, 107 Mitchell, Ken, 182,218 Mitchell, Victoria, 60 , 66-7, 90 Mobilization t o End th e Wa r in Vietnam (Mobe) , 107- 8 Moffat-Lynch, Tony , 31, 34, 41, 59 Molière, 20, 22, 44-5, 56, 69 Mollin, Larry, 118 Mortifee, Ann, 215 Morton, Jelly Roll, 169-70, 188- 9 Moscow Art Theatre, 1 9 3 3 4 0 Mr Boms, 85-7, 96-8, 102, 110, 155, 202,205,211 Mr Jelly Roll, 182, 184, 188-91, 21 8

Index 24 3 Mr Pickwick, 135 , 137 , 186 , 212 , 213, 216 Muldoon, Marcia , 217 Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto : see Toronto, Metropolitan , Municipality of Munro, Lily , 19 6 Murphy, Arthur, 7 7 Naiman, Sandy, 11 0 Names, 158-9,160,21 7 Naming Names, 157 Nathan Phillip s Square , 75 , 211 National Arts Centre, 135 , 21 3 National Ballet of Canada, 44 , 61, 121, 137 National Fil m Board, 15 2 National Theatre of Britain, 114 National Theatre School, 4 , 219 Native Earth Performin g Arts , 207 naturalism, 1 9 Navasky, Victor, 157 Nazism, 17 3 Neptune Theatre , 56, 69, 77, 78, 90 New Left , 97 , 113 , 15 2 New Pla y Society, 1 1 New Show, The: see Golem of Venice, Th e New Theatre, 143 Nimchuk, Michael John, 82, 116-17, 211 Nion, 217 Nixon, Richard, 97 , 107 Norris, Frank, 213 Nothing t o Lose, 147, 149 , 21 4 Nunsense, 218 Odets, Clifford, 4 O'Horgan, Tom, 93 , 123 O'Keefe Centre , 44, 61, 77 Olympic Games, 1 39 On th e Job, 21 4

O'Neill, Eugene , 4 , 29 Ontario Arts Council, 60 , 62, 63, 90, 161-2, 166-7, 171 , 174-83 , 196-7 , 210, 216 , 218-19 Open Circl e Theatre, 143 , 213 open stage , 37 , 41 Oppenheimer,J. Robert, 7 1 Opportunities fo r Youth , 121 Orators, 21 4 Orwell, George, 215 Owens, Rochelle , 122 Ozona Realty, 198 Paabo, Iris, 129 , 139 , 15 4 Paddy, Victor, 188 Page, Graeme , 175, 177 , 180 , 218 ; report on Toronto Workshop Pro ductions, 180-1 , 191,21 8 Palmer, John, 123- 4 Pannell, Raymond an d Beverly , 215 pantomime, 5 Parks, Larry , 158- 9 Parliament Street Library , 3 Parti Québécois, 148 Party Day, 13 5 Patterson, Tom , 167 , 171 , 179 , 19 3 Payne, Richard, 129, 139-4 0 Peace on Earth, 19 5 Peacock, David , 144 Pearl, Brian , 11 9 Peddie, David, 5 Peddie, Frank , 5 Penaloza, Domingo , 145-6 , 168 Pennington, Bob, 159 , 19 4 People's Repertory Theatre , 1 1-13 Performance Group , 12 3 Perkins, Larry, 59, 60, 66, 90, 99-100 Peterson, Len , 13 , 49, 82, 209, 212-1 3 Peterson, Maureen, 14 8 Phillips, Robin, 137 , 14 3 Phoenix Theatre , 143

244 Inde x Picasso, Pablo , 15 4 Pinochet, Augusto, 135 Piotrowski, Andrew, 215 Piper, The, 119, 21 2 Pirandello, Luigi , 31, 50, 210 Piscator, Erwin , 33, 81-2, 116-1 7 Pitman, Walter, 162-3 , 174 , 176-80, 195 Place on Earth, A, 216 Plaxtonjim, 123 Playboy o f th e Western World, The, 77 Policy, Victor, 73-5 Pollock, Sharon , 147 , 214 Poor Alex Theatre, 78 Porter, McKenzie, 149, 150-1 Postman Rings Once, The, 219 Pownall, Léon, 194-7, 219 Prairie Theatr e Exchange, 21 7 Province o f Ontario Council fo r th e Arts: se e Ontario Arts Counci l Puff, Susan , 17 9 Pump Boys and Dinettes, 218 Pushing Forty, 219 Queen's University, 211, 213 Quetico Centre, 59 Radzinsky, Edward, 172 , 217 Raffles, Gerry , 2 1 Rame, Franca , 21 7 Ramparts, 10 8 Rand, Ayn, 159 Rap Master Ronnie, 192, 219 Rattigan, Terence, 14 RCMP: see Royal Canadian Mounte d Police Read, Geoffrey , 90 , 113 , 164, 211 Red Barn Theatre , 56 Refugees, 21 4 Reynolds, Mac , 153, 215 Richard, Maurice , 14 8

Richard II, 2 3 Richard 111, 128, 212 Richard Thirdtime, 128 , 212-13 Richard's Cork I^eg, 216 Ringham, Milo, 70, 90, 99, 214 Rising Tide Theatre, 216 Rivals, The, 137 Road t o Charlottetown, The, 127-8, 21 3 Robeson, Paul , 158-9 Robins, Brooky , 59-60, 73 , 89-90, 21 1 Robinson, Gerald , 7 6 Rockefeller Foundation , 9 0 Rogers, Pam , 191, 193, 196 Roll, Grant, 139-4 0 Rooney, Robert, 163-6, 169-72, 17880, 183-4 , 191-3 , 195 , 217-19 Ross, Sandi, 19 5 Rounders, 214 Royal Alex: se e Royal Alexandra Theatre Royal Alexandra Theatre , 10 , 44, 61, 77, 86, 123 Royal Canadian Mounte d Police , 10 Royal Conservatory o f Music, 1 1-12, 12,21 Royal Court Theatre, 202 Rubin, Don, 101, 125, 185 Rubin, Jerry, 107 , 112 Ryan, Oscar, 55 , 84, 1 10, 1 16, 1 17, 1 19, 150 Ryerson Polytechnica l Institute , 174 Ryga, George, 77 S: Portrait of a Spy, 21 7 Salome, 147, 150-1,214 Salutin, Rick , 147-8, 195, 212, 214, 216-17 Sanders, Edward , 60 , 90 Sarah Binks, 215 Savath, Phil , 118, 164 Schechner, Richard, 123 , 202

Index 24 5 Schwarz, Ernest, 123 Scott, Munro , 11 8 Scoular, William, 198- 9 Scale, Bobby, 108, 111 See How They Run, 15 Seeger, Peter, 15 6 Servant of Two Masters, A, 5 Sewell, Stephen, 17 0 Shakespeare, William , 17, 20-1, 25, 45,70, 105, 128,211-12,218 Shange, Ntozake, 217 Shaw, George Bernard, 10 , 16, 49, 50, 119 Shaw Festival, 61, 137 , 152, 182, 188, 194,215,218 Shelley, the Idealist, 118-19 , 21 2 Shepherd, Patrick , 198 Sheridan, Richard, 137 Shouting for Joy, 21 6 Sibbald, Tony, 92 Sign o f the Cross, The, 1 6 Silver, Florence, 191 , 193, 198, 219 Skene, Ross, 129, 139-40, 186, 217 Sleeping Bag, The, 77 Smith, Cedric, 97, 100 , 102, 103-4, 105, 127-3 1 Smythe, Conn, 14 8 Sobol, Joshua, 172-3,21 8 socialism, 11 , 18 socialist realism, 19 Something in th e Air, 219 Spanish civi l war, 153 Sparrow, Allan, 145 Sperdakos, George , 4 4 Spickler, Robert, 163 Sprenger, Karen , 156 Spring Thaw, 86, 11 0 Sprung, Guy , 147 Stjoan o f the Stockyards, 21 5 St Lawrence Centr e for the Arts , 78,

122, 136-7 , 167,211,213-14

Stand U p Shakespeare, 1 95 Stanislavski, Konstantin, 11, 15 , 19, 20, 27, 33, 40, 202 Steambath, The, 61, 6 2 Sterndale Bennett , E.G., 1 1-12 Stevens, Karl, 167, 17 1 Stevens, Thaddeus, 82- 6 Stone, Martin : iff Ryan , Oscar Stratford Eas t (district of London , England), 21, 22, 23 Stratford Festival , 4-5, 25, 61, 74, 90, 121, 137 , 143, 165, 167, 194 Stratford parks : iccTheatre-in-the-Par k Stratton, Anna, 171 , 198 Strindberg, August, 214 Struggle of the Dogs and the Black, The, 170 Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), 10 7 Studio Children's Theatre, 91 Studio La b Theatre, 123 , 185 Summer of the Seventeenth Doll, The, 56 Summer '76 , 139-41 , 187 , 203, 213-14 Swan Song, 21 4 Sweeney Todd, 1 6 Tairov, Alexander, 19 Tales from th e Smokehouse, 21 5 Tarragon Theatre , 123 , 143-4, 185, 214-15 Tarvainen, Henry, 124 Telegram Award , 56 Tempest, The, 105 , 211, 216 Ten Lost Years, ix , 128-33 , 135 , 137, 141, 153 , 157, 203, 213-14, 216 Terry, Megan, 93 Tête à Tête, 192, 219 Theatre Centre, 4-6 , 209 Theatre Compact, 214 Théâtre de l a Grande Panique , 124 Théâtre du Nouvea u Monde, 56 , 78

246 Inde x Theatre in the Time of Nero and Seneca, 172,218 Theatre Nepesh , 21 7 Theatre Passe Muraille, ix, 122-4, 128, 143, 185,21 6 Theatre Plus , 172 Theatre Royal , Angel Lane , 21 Theatre san s Fil, 215 Theatre 35, 30-1,57, 210 Theatre Toronto, 78, 87, 122, 13 4 Theatre Workshop, 18-24, 29, 90, 141 Theatre-in-the-Park, 46, 69-70, 73-5 , 88,90, 185,21 0 Thieves' Carnival, 128, 132, 213 Thomas, Gwen , 60 Thomas, Powys , 4, 209 Thompson, Judith , 216 Thompson, Kemp , 55 Thompson, Paul , 124 , 131, 134, 192 , 203, 208 Thompson, R.H. , 164-5 Three Sisters, 5 6 Threepenny Opera, The, 56 Time of Your Ufe, The, 1 1 Todmorden: see East York Todmorden theatre , 21 1 Tom Paine, 1 23 Toronto, City of, 198-9; city council, 86, 146, 207-8; Committee o f Adjustment, 145 ; Official Pla n fo r the, 145-6 ; Planning Department, 145, 169 , 214; Executiv e Committee, 146 , 169, 215; Committee o n Parks and Recreation , 146 , 210; Real Estat e Department, 20 5 Toronto, Metropolitan, Municipality of, 60, 182,21 0 Toron to Arts Council, 182, 195, 197-8, 205,219 Toronto Arts Foundation, 78 Toronto Children's Theatre, 9 1

Toronto Dance Theatre , 91, 137 Toronto Drama Bench , 126, 21 4 Toronto Free Theatre, 123, 137, 143 , 149, 214-15 Toronto Industrial Leaseholds Ltd , 4, 41-2 Toronto Maple Leafs, 149 Toronto Repertory Ensemble , 91 Toronto Theatre Alliance, 205 Toronto Theatre Festival, 216 Town Hall, St Lawrence Centre for th e Arts, 213 Traitors, 17 0 Travellers, The, 18,91,21 1 Traverse Theatre , 93, 122 Tremblay, Michel , 214 Trio Productions, 12 2 Trotz, Frank , 123 trustees, boar d of, Toronto Workshop Productions, 181 , 196, 218-19 Tucker, Sylvia , 92 Twain, Mark, 135, 212 Twelfth Night, 20-1 Two Gentlemen of Verona, 13 7 UbuRaw, 124 Ullmann, Lisa, 164 Uncle Vanya, 2 3 University of Toronto, 10 University of Waterloo, 45 , 55, 210 University of Western Ontario , 211 Uranium 235, 20 Vakhtangov, Evgeni, 19, 33, 40, 72, 184,202 Valentine Browne, 21 6 Vancouver Playhouse, 77 Vari, George, 193-4 , 219 Vari Foundation , Georg e and Helen , 193, 19 4 Venice Biennale, 87 , 96, 21 1

Index 24 7 Victor Jara Alive, 217 Video Cabaret, 215 Vietnam, wa r in, 68, 80, 97, 107 , 152 View from th e Bridge, A, 9 1 Village Voice, 11 2 Visit o f an Ol d Lady, The, 21 2 Vogt, Gordon, 154-5, 171, 188 Voigt, Wilhelm, 114 , 115 Waegemaekers, Simon, 19 8 Wagner, Anton, 15 4 Walker, Caroline , 171 , 179 Walker, George R, 157, 217 Wallace, Ian , 217 Wallace, Robert , 149 Waller, Fats, 18 8 Walsh, Frances, 90, 92 Walsh, Neil, 110 Walton, Mar y Jess, 90 Warm Wind i n China, A, 19 7 Washburn, Martin, 11 2 Wasman, Barry , 164, 212 Weber, Carl , 4 Webster, Hugh , 82 Weihs, Ron, 156,216 Weiner, Lee , 108 West, Wilson, 59 Westmount Blues, 147, 215 Whelan, Ray, 92, 110 , 117, 118, 164 , 213 When the Wind Blows, 217 When We Dead Awaken, 2 1 0 White, Jerry, 167 , 171,217 White Whore and the Bit Player, 1 24

Whittaker, Herbert, 36, 43-4, 46-7, 52, 67,71,85,93, 101, 110, 115, 124 , 137-8, 140 , 143, 185, 195 Who's Afraid of Viginia Woolf?, 19 5 Wieland, Joyce, 30, 35 Williams, Clifford, 7 8 Williams, Tennessee, 56 Winkfield, Gregson , 90 Winter, Jack, 35-6, 45-58, 61-71, 81 2, 89, 114, 126, 131, 134-42, 209-14 Witt, Peter, 88-9, 9 3 Wobbly, The, 155-7, 160 , 216-17 Women i n th e Attic, 213 Wood, Tom, 18 2 Wootten, Christopher, 207- 8 Workingman, The, 212 World o f Woyzeck, The, 65-6 Woyzeck, 37-9 , 53-4, 62 , 69, 210. See also Death of Woyzeck, The, and World of Woyzeck, The Woza Albert, 170, 182,218 Wu-Feng, 11 8 Wylie, Betty-Jean, 21 6 Yippies, 10 7 York University, 209-10, 215 You Can't Ce t Here from There, 136-8, 213 Young Men' s Christian Association , 7 Young Vic Theatre, 141 Zeldin, Arthur, 7 5 Zionism, 17 3 Zuckmayer, Carl, 11 4