 |
Spotlight On...
Jacob Richmond
and Michael Kessler on Small Returns
 The Epicure Café on Queen St. has fed a lot of Toronto theatre people.
Particularly the ones from Theatre
Passe Muraille, that 30-year-old
theatre that has constantly pushed for innovative, Canadian drama.
The Passe Muraille
space and its history is mythical enough to have produced at least
two plays about TPM productions, like Michael Healey’s 1999 play The
Drawer Boy, Carole Corbeil’s In the Wings,
as well as the upcoming Rochdale Project. So it makes sense that
I’m
meeting director Michael Kessler and playwright Jacob Richmond
here to talk about their latest
play together at TPM, Small Returns, featuring Jordan Pettle,
Deborah Hay, Randy
Hughson, Tom Barnett, John Cleland and Rosemary Dunsmore.
As I
sit down with them, it’s clear that these guys have chemistry.
Michael directed Jacob’s first play The Qualities of Zero in
2001 at the Tarragon with Jack in the Black Theatre, and then Matthew
Edison’s
The Domino Heart in 2003. Currently, Jacob’s play Legoland is
being performed at the MET Theatre in Los Angeles. Small Returns is
their second show together, and after a first run at the Monument
National in Montreal -- directed
by Jacob’s father Brian Richmond -- the duo are joining forces
again to bring their particular style of theatre to a Toronto stage.
Food is ordered, and the drilling begins.
I ask Jacob and Michael
what Small Returns is about. After a bit of discussion,
Michael starts to explain.“I’d say it’s
the story of a guy who’s struggling with what’s real and what’s
not real. He’s been smacked on the head with a telephone, and it sort
of sends him spiralling on a journey to realize what’s important,
and what’s worth fighting for.” Jacob pipes up with a bit more
of the structure of the piece: “It combines, within the context, a
lot of theatrical vocabulary, there’s a puppet show, a wrestling match
-- well, I’m not going to give it all away…”
He takes a moment to
laugh. “But, you know, people speak in rhyme -- I’d
say it’s really about fragmentation of perception. And, at the same
time, it’s a political allegory. One character is a right-wing archetype,
the other more of a leftist, and they’re both trying to rip each other’s
throats out. Still, they’re both after the same thing, that is, some
old-lady’s prosthetic leg.”
Michael adds that it’s basically about a guy named Point Five, and
his two co-workers at the collection agency, Roddy and Nate, and
how they’re
competing on the hottest day of the year to repossess the prosthetic
leg of an old lady.
I find myself wondering where the play stemmed
from. Jacob
illustrates how it all began. “When I was about 19 years old, I lived
in a house with a bunch of debt-collectors. It was a pretty miserable
little house. And, I worked for a couple of weeks as a debt-collector.
And that
was a real -- kind of like, you know, one of the fringe benefits
was wanting to take your own life. That was part of the job description.” “It
started off as a two-hander, quite naturalistic. But over the course
of the years, I wanted to explore pure theatricality, and see how
that worked with the piece.” Well, now that the play has been thoroughly
explicated, and how it was derived -- it’s time to talk about their
theatrical relationship.
“I think we complement each other well as writer and director,” says
Michael. “We both fight for different things, and then meet in the middle.” Jacob
adds that Michael grounds him in his writing. “I had introduced two characters
name Kraft Dinner and Tang, and then the Grim Reaper. I had to get rid of them
because, y’know. We weren’t gonna pay them six-hundred dollars
a week! Michael helps me see that type of stuff”. They pause to laugh
over the rejected characters. I ask Michael if he feels that he brings a sort
of dramaturgical
eye to looking at the script, as well as directing. “Oh definitely, I
really like that aspect. It all goes together – I think that half of
the process is the collaboration between playwright and director. They have
to be able to
work well together.” I guess sort of like Kraft Dinner and Tang.
I ask
Jacob what initially drew him to playwrighting. “Poets and philosophers
spit at us, but the fact is -- I’m drawn to theatre. I think in
dialogue.” “It’s
also in his blood. He was raised in a theatre family,” Michael adds. “My
parents wanted anything but another theatre artist in the family. I think
they were really hoping for an accountant.” Which brings me to my next
question.
I ask Jacob and Michael what is most important, or rather what
drives them in their work. “I think on a certain level, we strive
for social commentary.” says
Jacob, “I have written hard political pieces, but right now I’m
more interested in producing allegories. I like starting with characters.” Michael
remarks that Small Returns began as more of a social thing,
but has evolved to express current politics. “It’s important
for it to be now.” Jacob
puts it simply, “I’m interested in the metaphysical. My writing
is satirical, but still, at the end of the day, we fall in love -- we
get married. It’s not just about who’s Liberal and who’s
Conservative. I think I’m more concerned with how we all perceive
each other as people, and I suppose trying to see both sides of the coin.”
So,
as I leave the Epicure after talking to these two hilarious and energetic
guys, I can’t help but feel ridiculously excited for Small
Returns.
I’m
also happy that they’re bringing their own unique brand of theatre
to a Toronto stage, so that others can experience the humour and intelligence
that
I encountered today. That was fun.
Back to top |
|
