Leta passed the word to me about Arthur Miller's death.
His works were a fundamental of my dramatic education. My high-school copy
of Death of a Salesman
has painstaking notes that record how a scrim works. Our field trip to a
professional company in Cincinnati
was to see, along with Sheridan's The Rivals, The Crucible.
From my high school's production of the same play I learned what a walk-on
role was all about: my classmate Vince was razzed mercilessly because his
entire part consisted of, "The Governor has arrived."
It seems a bit strange that Arthur Miller, suddenly, is part of the past.
Some of Miller's later works I
have found less engaging. Arena Stage's recent All My Sons was acted well.
The New York Times has an extensive archive of coverage: read it now before it disappears behind a PPV wall).
Miller wrote a brief polemic for the
Times in 2003:
Is a lively, contentious, reflective theater beyond our reach, our
imaginations? Are the powers who reign over this theater of the bottom line
aware that there are some really interesting—even
entertaining—things to talk about on the stage and that they ought to
be encouraged? Even if at times they require more than two or four people in
the cast? A new Crucible could not be produced on Broadway today, nor
a Death of a Salesman, either. Nor, for that matter, a
Streetcar. Too many people. Is this situation satisfactory for what
purports to be the main stage of the richest country in human history?
posted:
1:53:11 PM
|