Theatre Design & Technology - Summer 2012 - 11

subtext
by beeb salzer
gay
My wife says I shouldn't write this. She often says I write about
things I know nothing about-she keeps me honest. When I
talked to colleagues to get ideas about this, there were two reactions: heterosexuals warned me that it was dangerous, and
homosexuals had no such qualms.
I have several reasons for writing this. One is a recent
book, Art and Homosexuality: A History of Ideas, by Christopher Reed. Another is the prevalence of homosexuality in
the theatre that is so accepted that no one talks much about
it. Years ago, Stella Adler kidded Robert Brustein at Yale, saying "How can you have a theatre without Jews and homosexuals?" These days, we could add other minority groups. And then
there is the chasm in our society between political forces on the
right and left.
Reed's book is encyclopedic in covering history from the
Greeks to today. After the introduction that is rather opaque
with academic language, it settles down into a fascinating
story involving the famous and infamous. I will be quoting it
as I go along.

What is remarkable is that now, in a relatively
short time, the closet is close to empty.
Almost no one who works in theatre can be homophobic.
We celebrate talent from wherever it comes. Some of us growing up in the forties and fifties were mostly unaware that there
were closeted gays among us. One director told me that when
he was a kid in a small town, the likelihood that anyone was gay
was about as likely as someone having elephantiasis. Then he
went to college in San Francisco, and he said, "Oh my." What is
remarkable is that now, in a relatively short time, the closet is
close to empty. In our local elections in San Diego, two of the
four candidates for mayor are openly gay.
Stereotypes abounded. Years ago when I designed an
opera for a large company, there was the ritual, unknown
in theatre, for the director and designer to take the curtain
call on opening night. The director told me that he wished
I wouldn't do this because, "When you come out with your
beard, they'll think you are the director, and when I come
mincing out they'll think I'm the designer." Reed relates that
when the painter Robert Motherwell was drafted in the Second World War, the doctors examining recruits rejected him
because he was gay. The proof was that he was an artist and
he lived in Greenwich Village-this despite the fact that he

wasn't and was married. And now after a long time we no
longer have "don't ask, don't tell."
Another measure of progress is the number of homosexual characters in theatre, films, and television sit-coms
today. I was surprised that in 1972 the actor Vincent Shiavelli
played Peter Panama, a gay man on the short-lived series The
Corner Bar. That was unusual. Oh, by the way, the character
was a set designer. About the same time, Andy Warhol asked
a mutual friend why the painters Jasper Johns and Robert
Rauschenberg "cut me dead." The answer was, "You're too
swish, and that upsets them."
Being openly gay then was not only a social problem, it
was a legal one. Reed reports that in the 1950s "...in New
York City, laws against 'degenerate disorderly conduct' applied to anyone perceived as signaling homosexuality through
dress, hairstyle, deportment, or even topics of conversation
(two men were arrested on the evidence that they were discussing the opera.)"
The changes in attitudes have been relatively speedy, not
only about homophobia but also about civil rights and feminism. But, of course, none of these battles is completely won.
Yet signs of progress continue. In San Diego, formerly a conservative navy town, the city council voted unanimously to grant
a permit to erect a flagpole in what is known as a gay enclave,
a pole that would fly a rainbow flag. Some letter writers to the
local paper were outraged.
As much as movement goes in one direction, there
seems to be an equal stiffening of opposition. In Missouri,
Republican lawmakers sponsored a bill that "prohibits the
discussion of sexual orientation in public school instruction, material, or extracurricular activity except in scientific
instruction on human reproduction." The bill, as reported
in the Pocono Record, "would bar teachers from saying anything to combat intolerance toward GLTB students or teaching
anything that mentions gay people in history, current events,
art, or literature."
More serious blowbacks are seen around the world. In
Iran in 2011, three gays were executed. And in Uganda, there
is a second attempt being made to sentence homosexuals to
death. The history of the Ugandan law is disturbing because reports have it that it was encouraged by United States lawmakers
who have rooms at the C Street Center called the Family. These
most conservative of congressmen and senators have pulled
back and now deny they wanted Uganda to go quite that far.
We live in a Manichaean world. In our country, sides move
further apart. While some states now allow same sex marriage,
others like North Carolina passed a constitutional amendment
against it. We are either pro-life or pro-choice. We support
rules that either favor the rich or support the poor.
The theatre community is an accepting one. Characters on
stage are at best not labels or stereotypes. And we use empathy
to explore the human condition in all its variations. Our personal
lives are of little concern. It's what's on stage that counts. Audiences ask only one thing, "Show us how good you are." v

summer 2012

theatre design

& technology

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Theatre Design & Technology - Summer 2012