Books: Tynan on Theatre: Part III

Tynan on American Theatre           

Here I was expecting harsh criticisms of the cut-throat commercialism of American theatre. Some sort of diatribe against America’s theatre culture and how it compares when held up against English Theatre. But I didn’t take into account when Tynan was writing.

            The 1950’s was a golden age in American Theatre, when playwrights such as Tennessee Williams and Arthur Miller were hitting their stride and hitting it big. Once again, I was transported and mesmerized by these glimpses into the past, the first looks at today’s classics. And even a few musicals made it into the mix: Guys and Dolls, West Side Story, and even My Fair Lady (though he wasn’t too fond of that one).

            Aside from reviews, there is a piece of writing from 1954 entitled American Blues: The Plays of Arthur Miller and Tennessee Williams. Miller is referred ‘a man of action’ and ‘of the past,’ while Tennessee Williams is more ‘lyrical’ and ‘looking to the future’. By this comparison, it might appear that Williams is being held as the better, more advanced playwright, but I don’t think that is what Tynan is saying at all. He speaks about the similarities between the playwrights structure, but also the plays themselves. Each playwright has his own style of story, his own archetype and favorite themes that many of their plays seem to center around. I don’t often remember that these two were writing in the same era, so different their plays have always seemed to me. But in reading this detailed breakdown and comparison set before me by Tynan, suddenly my eyes feel opened in a new way to this lovely era of American Theatre.

            A comment that made laugh within this section was actually when Tynan quoted a friend of his, an American actress who, when seeing your average drawing room comedy set in the country remarked that (and I quote loosely) that ‘in American drama, the actors on stage are drinking tea meant to be whiskey, while the English actors are drinking tea on stage that in reality is whiskey.’ Make of it what you will, I found the remark rather brazen and all too funny, because at the time, it was probably true.

Then, in another comment, Tynan stole my heart once more, commenting on once cause that is particularly close to my heart: the very poor public funding of theatre that limits the American people from ready access to live theatre. In his preface to his writings on American Theatre, Tynan grieves from the starving talents, so full of life and vitality, being drained by the unsubsidized theatre. I am a firm believer in the necessity of the arts, and in particular, the theatre for cultural growth and a healthy quality of life for a nation’s citizens. But alas, this blog is not my soap-box, so I shall step down now.

All in all, I continue to learn how important it is to be informed about not just the subject matter, but the author behind it before one goes to see a play. Tynan seems to reveal to us so many amazing layers to each play he sees, because he can relate the playwright directly to the material and peal it back to reveal the playwright in a sharper light. It seems I will have a good deal of reading to do before the shows I see in the West End in the upcoming twelve months.

This is a shorter entry, yes, and I do apologize, but it isn’t a terribly long section, I did finish it in one sitting after all.

Next time in ‘Books,’ I shall discuss Tynan on European Theatre.