Interviewee: Norman Johnson
Interviewer: Kiera Feldman
Date: July 11, 2006
Location: by telephone
Category: Theater/women's history
Length: 1:04:37
Word count: 8858
[00:00:02]
Kiera Feldman: Well to begin could you introduce yourself and give today's date and where you are?
[00:00:06]
Norman Johnson: Ok well I'm Norm Johnson and I'm in Ithaca, New York and today is August--I mean [laughing] yeah right, today is July 11, 2006.
[00:00:22]
KF: Great. And could you maybe give a little bit of your background about where you grew up and where you went to school?
[00:00:31]
NJ: Yup. Sure. I am actually a native Rhode Islander. I was born and raised in Wakefield. And I went to undergraduate school at the University of Rhode Island. Got a BFA in acting in 1973. Then i went to the University of Connecticut at scores [??] and got an MA focusing on directing. Then I for about 10 years performed, directed, started a couple theater companies. Ultimately in '84 started working on a PhD which I eventually got from the University of Oregon in 1989. And I for a while there taught at the Rhode School for the Deaf, and then I taught at the Community College of Rhode Island, and then I taught at Portland State University of Oregon, and from there I came to Ithaca College where I just finished my 16th year on the acting faculty.
[00:01:26]
KF: Great. And one more question, what did your parents do? What was your family like?
[00:01:32]
NJ: My father worked for the telephone system. In the beginning it was one bit AT and T and then he worked for the various divisions that it became along the way. There's no theater background in my family. Although I started going to the theater because once a year my father would get free tickets to the Warwick musical theater from the phone company. And that would be our big treat for the summer. He would take my brother and sister and I up there and we would--see at that time they pretty much did touring musicals with stars like uh oh gosh--I know I saw Micky Roony at one time in George M and uh, boy I can't even tell you who else I saw. But anyway that was my first exposure to theater. And then also Theater by the Sea down in Petunick, Rhode Island was 10 minutes from where we lived. And I went to some children's plays there. And uh my mother most of the time the three of us were growing up was a stay at home. And then later when we were in high school she did accounting for folks. Just keeps herself busy volunteering and she's one of those people that has a thousand projects going all the time and she's always busy with her friends. And she was a 4H leader, a girl scout leader, a cub scout leader--all those things that active parents do when they've got kids going through those organizations.
[00:03:05]
KF: Great. And um how did you get involved in the Rhode Island Feminist Theater?
[00:03:09]
NJ: I had just come back to Rhode Island from Connecticut. [laughs] I don't know how much backstory you want,
but on the last day of classes undergraduate school--I was married at the time--and um my then wife and I had twins on the last day of classes. And so we went to Connecticut and we did my grad program with these new babies. And uh by the time I was finished we both felt we wanted to be closer to family and we needed the--we both felt we needed the relief of having grandparents and aunts and uncles around, especially with two small kids.
[00:03:44]
NJ: So we came back and I was looking for theater projects. And uh right about the same time that I started teaching at the Rhode Island School for the Deaf--which was in January I think of '75 or 6--um this Rhode Island Feminist Theater--well I guess their ad was in the fall, now that I think of it. But um they posted an ad looking for a stage manager who had knowledge about running lights and could pretty much be the one person that wasn't on stage during their touring gigs. And at that time their performances were exclusively booked touring dates. Later on RIFT did have--rent--a theater space to produce their own performances. But we mostly did colleges and schools and things like that. So I was that person that took care of all that stuff, initially.
KF: Um and what years were you in the theater and in what capacities?
[00:04:43]
NJ: Well, I was initially hired as this stage manager, and I believe the years I was involved are '75-'76' season, '76'-'77 season, and '77-'78 season. And I may have like done a single project with them the following year, but it was those late '70s. And inititially I was hired as this stage manager all purpose deck hand. And what was the progression? Did that for O Women's Piece for over a year. And then we developed the Clowns of the Stars and Moon Circus and I was an actor in that. Then we did Anne Hutchinson: American Jezebel, which was a pretty big project because it had its stage iteration and then there were a number of grants that got written. And eventually it got made into a public television film, which I think is still archived in every library in Rode Island.
[00:05:50]
NJ: And initially American Jezebel was all women so I directed a phase of that. It was developed under Ada McAllister's hand. And she was in it so there was a period of time where I took over the direction of it. And then later on when it was made into a film for TV I became Will Hutchinson--Anne Hutchinson's husband [laughs]. So I was in it and there was a woman from Yale who came down who was a filmmaker who directed the film version of it. That...that's pretty much my resume with RIFT.
[00:06:36]
KF: And uh if people have never heard of RIFT, what should they know about it?
[00:06:42]
NJ: Well the first thing to come out of my mouth would be that the work was a lot more--everybody in the theater was of the theater and they were interested in making really good theater. And there is this thing that keeps people away from um issue-oriented theater, and that's often the fact that um it's not done by actors and people who know their craft. And so what people didn't often expect was to see a really exciting, solid piece of theater when they came to RIFT. Um because a lot of people came because of the political orientation. And um we did things like we trained as a company often in downtime and um we put a lot of time and energy into production values. And when I hear myself saying that I suddenly realize that the first time I ever designed and built was all the costumes for Anne Hutchinson when it was initially on the stage for an all female cast.
KF: You said that RIFT was issue-oriented theater--what do you mean by that?
[00:07:52]
NJ: Well uh the topics that were chosen to be focused on--all the work was original. In the time that I was there--actually I do not know that RIFT ever did anything that was pre-written by anyone else. They developed everything from scratch. And it had to have some kind of feminist orientation. And--
KF: Uh--
NJ: Go ahead.
KF: So what made RIFT a feminist theater?
NJ: Um focusing on issues of--women's issues, I guess is the simple issue.
KF: Could you elaborate on what a women's issue is?
[00:08:37]
NJ: Uh anything to do with uh issues surrounding gender, um discrimination, or uh historical treatment of women. And when we talk about Anne Hutchinson--which was such a big project. It encompassed at least two year's of the whole company's energy. It was just looking at um...one, the overlook history. I mean we all know what the patriarchal history of the Puritan [inaudible] is..I guess that's a huge generalization, isn't it? But I mean, let's just put it this way. The patriarchal history of the Puritans is pretty well known. And there are very few people even in this day and age when I bring up Anne Hutchinson all they think of is the parkway down going Connecticut iinto New York. They have no idea who she was and what her significance was. So it was issues having to do with the imbalance of history, or women's place in history. Um women's place in politics. When I think of Clowns of the STars and Moons Circus, the aspect that was focused on there was um there are theorists who say that male storytelling tends to be linear and climax oriented and that female structure is much more, how should I say, horizontal, and uh so what was being explored there was that sense that it was the characters and the stories they had to tell was what gave the drama its interest as opposed to the pulsing drive toward the climactic moment in the traditional Aristoteliarn structure. And now I'm starting to sound like a professor [laughs]. But does that answer your question? Let's put it that way.
KF: Uh yeah, sure. I'll probably be getting back to that in various forms, but that's ok. So what would you say were RIFT's goals?
[00:10:45]
NJ: Uh to...create original theater was certainly one of RIFT's goals. And to create theater that had a sensibility which was uh--am I overusing the word feminist?
KF: No, no.
NJ: Female oriented.
[00:11:08]
KF: Ok. And for you personally, what would you say were your goals in RIFT?
[00:11:14]
NJ: Well initially I was excited to be able to find a theater company to work with coming back and I had not been aware of them when I left the state. And I guess that they were kind of just getting started about the time that I left, but when I came back I certainly became aware of them quite quickly. They had a pretty visible success with Persephone's Return, and uh so I knew about them through that. And to be able to work with the theater, and also-and I considered myself feminist oriented at the time, and still do.
[00:11:53]
NJ: So it was exciting to be able to get involved with a theater that had an alternate goal. And also really to tell you the truth, people who were interested in making original work. That's always been at the top of my list. And creating original work isn't necessarily a feminist characteristic but they were certainly committed to that.
KF: Alright so you said you considered and still consider yourself feminist oriented. So I have to ask what does that mean?
[00:12:27]
NJ: Um, politically sensitive and aware of gender imbalance and patriarchal structure. And trying to like practice a way of being socially and artistically that uh-at least as conscious of that if not providing an alternative pathway to that way of thinking. And making art, actually.
KF: So how did a man fit into the feminist theater?
[00:13:07]
NJ: Well, initially I fit in quite easily. Uh, you know, well the funny part was, sidebar. We would send all our press material ahead and I would say 80% of the time when we actually got to the site to do the performance and got the programs, I was Norma Johnson. And people just assumed feminist theater, it was a type, and so often people were surprised. The surprise was almost exclusively from the outside. On the inside it was a non-issue. I mean, they knew who I was, we were all very comfortable together, and we got to work.
[00:13:56]
NJ: And uh I think later-initially when we talked, what was it, about a week ago? We mentioned the period of time where the theater decided it needed to be an all women's theater for a period of time. I was part of those discussions and that transition. And I actually was advocating for it based on the things that were being said and also the tone of the times was, there was a certain sense of separatism necessary. And certainly some of the women in the theater were expressing their need to make theater with just women and it made sense. And um even though those were long, often difficult discussions, they were important ones. And I never at any time-and there was at least one other man in the theater at the time and I'm not sure if there were two others. I remember pretty clearly not feeling like I was being kicked out, but feeling like it was the thing that I had to do to be true to my beliefs and to be true to the beliefs of the collective and who was in it at that time.
KF: Um, so, to back up just a little bit, what were you reading at the time?
[00:15:16]
NJ: What was I reading at the time? Whoa, ok [laughing]. Boy, hm, going back a ways here. What was I reading at the time? Well first thing that comes to my mind is-I'm not sure I'm going to be able to give you an author's name but the Kin of Ata, or Wait You was a piece that I read at the time we were doing O Women's piece because the women who were in it had read that. And uh…boy. This has no relevance to feminism but I was always reading Tom Robbins. Although Cowgirls might have been right around that period of time. And uh…I suppose I should say Even Cowgirls Get the Blues for the reference of this archive. Boy I'm not good at remembering what I was reading at a given period of time, goodness gracious. Sorry…I have to dig out that box of books from that era I guess.
KF: That's alright. Well just feel free to jump in if anything comes back to mind. But one more question before going back to the separatism issue. So what would you say were some of the major cultural or political events that influenced you around the time of your involvement with RIFT?
[00:16:50]
NJ: Well, um, [laughs], most significantly, and in my mind this was very connected-I came out as a gay man at that period of time. And this was what two years into a marriage and two children. And that was 90% of that, and um part of that whole shift for me was feeling like-at least I personally and at the time I really felt strongly that everybody should be living as truthfully as they possibly could, as opposed to wearing masks and playing roles in society. Sometimes more than often than not got myself in trouble for saying exactly what I felt like needed to be said and doing what needed to be done in my opinion as opposed to what was more socially acceptable. And so there was that and at the time, I felt like feminism was gaining some momentum and I was just more interested in supporting women and where they were going politically and what they were attempting to do politically and artistically than I was with uh men. And that was the long and the short of it.
KF: So how did coming out influence your idea of feminism?
[00:18:20]
NJ: Well, I mean, you know all these years later, I kind of look back and say, reckoning with my sexuality and my personal place in what would become my political uh avenue if you will have to do with feminism, I think at that age I might have been a little bit confused about what exactly it was. But it was alternative, it was anti-patriarchy, and uh yeah those were the primary ones to tell you the truth.
KF: Um and so to go back to the separatism issue that you mentioned a few minutes ago, what was separatism?
[00:19:14]
NJ: It was actually in the most extreme iteration, living exclusive of interaction with men. And uh and it was creating as many venues or forums as one could possibly could that were run by, organized, and organized by women as opposed to mixed gender, regardless of sexual orientation. And it was late 70s, early 80s, I'm not so sure of that do we want to call it a movement, that that idea really became that dominant. But it was certainly a topic of discussion and certainly a lot of people paid attention to that and thought their way through it at least. And it certainly was a period of time where a number of female collectives and well it was the period of time where RIFT decided it needed to actually become exclusively female for a period of time. I do not know if RIFT ever had men again after that after they became an all female theater. Are you aware of that in your discussions with folks?
KF: Um it doesn't look like it, but that's just more of a preliminary guess.
NJ: Right, yes.
KF: So why did you think separatism was needed?
[00:20:51]
NJ: Because the women in the theater at the time, the majority of them, well I guess I would say that they actually all came to that conclusion or we wouldn't have gone that route. Because we also always made collective decisions rather than voting so it had to be consensus rather than 5-3. Because they felt so strongly about it. And I also just being younger and more idealistic at the time, always had a sense that to be truly feminist it had to be of women. No matter how sympathetic a man could be, the line was drawn there.
KF: And um what role would you say sexuality played in RIFT?
[00:21:41]
NJ: Hm. Eh…boy. I think that it was pretty minor. I'm just thinking back through the pieces and in terms of the pieces, um there was to my knowledge, and again I'm not sure if there might have been something that happened later on, but I feel like I kept up with them even after I was an active part of it. It was never about sexuality. It was much more about women's experience, lesbian or straight. And there was no period of time that I'm aware of where it was exclusively a lesbian theater. So um there were always straight women and gay women in the company-during my period of time, and afterwards as far as I can recall.
KF: Um let's see, well I'm not-going back to the separatism issue, I'm not quite sure I understand you about why it was decided it needed to be an all women's theater. Maybe if you could elaborate a little bit more.
[00:22:53]
NJ: Well, um, as a mixed group, we were-and again, when a company is making pieces from scratch in the ensemble form, which was also popular at the time. And actually the model for RIFT was the Open Theater and the Megan Terry [sp] worked with the Open Theater in terms of directors and writers watching actors improvise around ideas and then organizing those ideas into scripts and so on. And so the work that was being made was made by men and women. And they wanted the voice producing what they were putting before the public to be stronger, more strongly oriented to the female side. And that's about as clearly as I can remember the threads that kind of wove through those debates at the time. And it wasn't about women in the theater wanting the men to not be there. It was more about this is the work we're making. We're saying we're a feminist theater, and at this point in time feminism-the idea of a male feminist was [sigh] how should I say, a little more uh out there or unaccepted than it is now. I think a male feminist isn't such a unique thing in 2006. but at the time it was almost uh polar concept-how can a man be a feminist? I mean that question was certainly asked more than a couple times of any of us that were involved in the company.
KF: So um, one straight male member told me that he left RIFT in 1975 because he said um and this is a quote, 'I was not going to be in a theater group where the basic message of the plays would be that heterosexuality was fundamentally sick.' Um so do you agree that that was the message of the plays or is there any…?
[00:25:04]
NJ: [laughs] boy. I wonder what play that refers to, or plays [laughing]. I'm a little surprised to hear that. That heterosexuality is fundamentally sick, is that what you just said?
KF: mmhm.
[00:25:17]
NJ: Boy, hm. Interesting. That's kind of a strong perspective. And I'm thinking immediately, that's kind of just after Persephone's Return. Boy, and I don't recall that piece being that at all. But we all have our way of slanting history, or seeing things, so I mean, hm. I'm surprised-let's put it this way, for the record I'm surprised to hear that. And I never felt like that that was part of the agenda of the theater.
KF: Why do you think someone might have felt like that?
[00:25:56]
NJ: Well, I mean, again, [laughs], I'll wonder, I'll speculate that perhaps it was the issues that this person had. I mean I feel like it's really easy if one goes into any type of group with your own insecurities or issues or agenda to uh develop a perspective of it based on things that you're seeing that may or may not be actually the case. I'm surprised-I seriously doubt that was ever an articulated uh goal of the theater, or ever articulated as part of the agenda. I can't dispute that it's what someone personally felt as the result of being involved in the group. But yeah, I think that's as far as I'll go on the record on that.
KF: Ok. And um, let's see, another quote. This is from another magazine-a newspaper I guess called Fresh Fruit.
NJ: Oh ok, I remember Fresh Fruit, yep.
KF: Let's see, in 1975 it said that members of RIFT are not crusaders for separatism or lesbianism. So, um do you agree with that, or how do you respond?
[00:27:18]
NJ: Um, yes I would agree with that. And that was certainly earlier than the period of time where we made our split. Anne Hutchinson was-in fact there were more men in the group when Anne Hutchinson was put together than it had ever been. It was after that period of time when the separation issue came up. So that would have been at least '77, '78. So certainly that period of time, that seems completely true and appropriate by my recollection, let's put it that way.
KF: Ok. And uh let's see, we've been talking about this all along, but just to say it explicitly and more broadly, how would you say RIFT changed over the course of your time there?
[00:28:08]
NJ: Hm. Well, I…to tell you the truth I think it actually became more oriented toward making stronger theater, which I said earlier was always a goal and it was something that they always focused on. But oriented toward that, and I do think the whole Anne Hutchinson project, which was huge and took up such a long period of time, for some people eclipsed the initial goal of the theater. And I guess we have to say-well I guess Persephone was more myth than anything else, so this was the only piece of real history that the theater dealt with while I was involved with them. And I think people wanted to get back to work that was more reflective and was actually happening socio-politically at the moment that that all started to come apart. Let's say the late '70s there. And there was a lot happening at that period of time. It was a pretty dynamic public dialogue. And yeah they wanted to go back that way. I do remember one of the first things they did after the whole Anne Hutchinson project was over was get back to the clown show that had been kind of a hallmark of the theater. It was something that there was always a version of it in the repertoire and it was something they could do on a relatively short notice and in smaller venues, kind of like a festival thing. They went back to that and that was the first, if I believe let's put it this way because it's all…pulling the cobwebs out of my brain here, but I believe that was the first thing they focused on when the men left to get the feminist clowns back on their feet. Because I remember seeing a performance of that at a women's art collective. So I mean have I answered your question or have I really drifted this time?
KF: [laughs] No, you answered my question. You said there was a pretty dynamic public dialogue at that time. What did you mean by that?
[00:30:27]
NJ: well, uh I think that I may call kind of like the almost golden age of the feminist movement in the late 20th century was probably that era of the late 70s, early 80s. Um there was a…I think it went from being kind of radical fringe um notion to much more mainstream. I mean it [laughing] you could tell me if I'm way off base but uh I think by the time we got into the mid-80s, feminism was something that everyone was aware of. And it was no longer such a scary word, let's put it that way. There was a period of time where a feminist was a you know a very butch lesbian who was the type of woman who basically people who knew nothing about them were afraid of. Or at least, how should I say, emotionally afraid of. And uh
[00:31:36]
NJ: You know, legislation I think-again I would have to look at the history books, but it seems most of the social and political changes happened in the 80s as a result of the ground work that happened in the 70s, and actually started in the 60s.
KF: So what um, what role do you think RIFT played in that kind of move in feminism from the radical fringe as you said to much more mainstream?
[00:32:04]
NJ: Um, well I think, I keep talking about Anne Hutchinson. I think that production and that piece of work makes a good illustration of that. They-right, it was a period of time where people were able to see that in making that piece. I'll back up for a second. Persephone's Return was much more uh politically oriented or issue oriented in terms of feminism and what is feminism and certainly O Women's Piece was perhaps the most politically oriented if that's the right word. And suddenly we were doing something that a lot of people were interested, and people who paid absolutely no attention. So there's this thing about-and in Rhode Island this was very important because you may or may not know that Anne Hutchinson actually was the first settler of Quidnick Island where Newport and Portsmouth are and so on.
[00:33:08]
NJ: And so that uh Roger Williams invited her to come to Rhode Island when she was cast out of the Bay Colony. So in Rhode Island there were a lot of people who knew nothing about feminism and didn't even pay attention, or happy to notice an article in the paper now and then, who were interested in the history. So we were able to uh get an audience that didn't already wasn't already, how should I say, interested in issues of feminism or supporting in that, but were interested in theater or more specifically history. And in so doing they got to see that we weren't running around doing all the things people thought of the clich� of feminist activists. They were making real theater. And then we ended up making this film for television. And that, well, I mean, that there was no agenda other than telling the story of this woman who was really important and had been completely overlooked. And I think that happened in other places.
[00:34:32]
NJ: I'm not going to be able to give you any titles off the top of my head, but it seemed like the 80s was the period of time when we started looking at a lot of women who had been significant in many ways, politically, historically, that weren't in the history books and had just been overlooked. I think that was a lot less threatening to people who were threatened by the idea of feminism.
KF: What were the discussions like after the performances of Anne Hutchinson?
[00:35:03]
NJ: Um, well, you know, they [laughing], one of my pet peeves is talkbacks and I'm still involved with them even as recently as this past weekend. I had to conduct three of them. And they range from the audience member who wants to tell you what you should have done theatrically, which um doesn't become very exciting in a talkback forum. And that was often a strong dynamic-I don't know if anyone has ever invented a system for sidestepping that. And um you know it was mostly just questions. My memory of the Anne Hutchinson stuff was mostly just questions. And also questioning what was fiction, because some of the things in her stories don't, you know, 'I've never heard of this, why have I never heard of this, how could this possibly be true.' Seemed fictitious. And so there was not so much I'm challenging you, this is a lie. But is this really true or have you taken dramatic license here to make it more interesting theater?
[00:36:15]
NJ: And they were pretty benign. I don't remember any heat in the Anne Hutchinson talkbacks to tell you the truth. Do other people actually remember?
KF: I haven't found any.
NJ: Yeah. [laughs]. Ok. I just don't…it was an eye opener for a lot of people, and like I said, I had been raised in Rhode Island and I feel like I was pretty aware of the history of the state and the bay colony and you know growing up with pilgrim this and that everywhere. I mean it's really kind of strange that I had no idea who she was.
KF: Actually, um, that's not quite true-I was looking through, there's a RIFT archive at Brown's John Hay library and I found like a booklet that recorded audience responses during the talkbacks of Anne Hutchinson and there was one night at maybe you remember this, at Bryant College. Where apparently, they were all students and faculty in the audience, and apparently they were very challenging and like demanded that all the women in the play-it said that their sexualities were attacked and all the women in the play were asked like how they identified. Do you remember that?
NJ: Uh I don't but keep talking but you never know when the nickel drops on things like that. Bryant College. Huh. And that the audience was challenging the sexuality of the characters portrayed in Anne Hutchinson? Or the actors?
KF: The actors.
NJ: Huh. Boy…I don't, but I'm fascinated by that. I would be real interested in having a look at that. Is that something that's online? Not that I'm challenging you I'm just really really curious to just like stir up that part of my memory. Huh. I honestly don't remember, can't seem to get any of that to come back.
KF: Ok. So in addition to what's fiction, what's nonfiction, what other kinds of questions did the audience members ask after performances?
[00:38:39]
NJ: I also remember them just asking technical questions about research and where we got this from and how we went about that. And um, that was pretty common avenue of questioning. That you know there's nothing else that really sticks out there.
KF: So what was the uh reason behind having talkbacks?
[00:39:12]
NJ: Well it was part of the structure, part of the whole mission of the theater was not just entertainment but dialogue and education. And so that was always part of the RIFT structure to have talkbacks with the public afterwards.
KF: Ok, and on a slightly, going back a little bit on the same vain as radical fringe versus more mainstream that you were talking about, um there was a quote in the Brown Daily Herald by RIFT's founder in 1973 that said um, 'One half of me is still ready to talk about radical rhetoric but the other half wants to pause a second and see the movement as one for everybody.' Um so which, uh which direction do you think RIFT went?
[00:40:03]
NJ: B, one for everybody [laughs]. I mean there were moments when I think O Women's Piece was the piece where they veered toward that radical iteration. But ultimately I think that it became much more accessible as a theater for everyone. And like I say often surprising people. I mean, yeah, often to people's surprise.
KF: How did it become one for everybody?
[00:40:35]
NJ: In the type of material that they focused on and produced. And the…how should I say, the-I really think that the issues were more humanist issues than feminist issues, ultimately, at the end there. Um, and uh politics, boy, O Women's Piece is that last piece that I recall had any political overtones. Current political overtones. Obviously we can't talk about Anne Hutchinson without those political overtones, but no, there was never really uh got into the ideas and the ideology of what side shall we call the radical fringe, whether it was left or right.
KF: So what uh, what do you mean, what's the difference between humanist issues and feminist issues?
[00:41:39]
NJ: Uh having to do basically with just the experience of being alive in this time, or at any time. Or maybe I should have used the word social as opposed to humanist. But, exclusive of sexual of orientation and exclusive of gender orientation. Just being, the experience of being a human being in this society.
KF: And so O Women's Piece as the last play with overt feminist issues?
NJ: I would say that. Is that reflected in the written archives anywhere?
KF: Well, I'm not sure. What do you mean by overt feminist issues?
[00:42:29]
NJ: Well, the whole premise of the piece was a car ride back from a conference that the four women who did it were in. And it actually, parts of this piece actually took place with the four of them hypothetically in the car having this intense discussion about things that had happened at the conference and ideas that had been batted around. And for instance it was called O Women's Piece because in the script, ultimately they went through and every pronoun was replaced with 'o.' And so there was no his, her, him, he, she. Every pronoun was o. And uh you know, proceeding on the idea of what it would be like if our language were genderless and moving on to other ideas. And also they, in that piece each of the four women became um had a character that they played in the course of the evening that was a classic female archetype.
[00:43:40]
NJ: And uh…there was you know, actually at that time a lot of talk about the archetypes and what they've become and why they were what they were. And uh, yeah. Some of the ideas-there was actually discussion in the in-car sections about feminist separatism and a genderless society and the bias that various people bring to discussions of gender and yeah. So I feel like I'm rambling a little bit here, but that's…like I say as political as they got. And they weren't really even advocating. They were discussing and exploring the ideas of it without saying this should be. Of course that's kind of in terms of feminist writing structure sort of anti-feminist to say this is what it should be, this is what it has to be, and these are the rules. It's a much more open uh structure. They were attempting to engage as much of that play as they could in making that piece.
KF: So I take it you would not agree with the Boston Phoenix in 1975 called RIFT's plays "didactic"?
NJ: That one was probably pretty didactic to a number of audiences. Yeah.
KF: How so?
[00:45:18]
NJ: Well again, all of the discussion they had of all these ideas. And I think a piece can be didactic without saying you should do this and you should do that. I mean, that, and there was a lot of information and lots of uh theses being flung around in O Women's Piece. Yeah, Persephone's Return was probably that but 1975 they were probably responding to O Women's Piece, which I remember an in Cambridge and in Boston.
KF: So what theses were in O Women's Piece.
NJ: That there is a possibility of eliminating all gender reference in our language and in our modes of communication. They did not suggest how, in fact they actually argued the impracticality of such a thing. But uh yeah…it's a, are you familiar with My Dinner with Andre?
KF: Well why don't you explain it for the purpose of the recording.
[00:46:36]
NJ: Ok. Well the film with Wallace Shawn and Andre Gregory is these two men having dinner and the entire film takes place at the table with them having this intense discussion. And as engaging as it is, I would have to say it stands out as the hallmark of probably one of the more didactic films made in the last 30 years. And I think that O Women's Piece was didactic in that same sense. The ideas might have been stimulating and exciting and uh finding them in a theatrical forum is probably a great way to bring them to the public, but I'm not surprised to hear a theater critic say that it was didactic.
[00:47:15]
NJ: And as a fan of Brecht, I don't find didacticism in the theater to be a problem myself [laughing].
KF: [laughs]. Alright, so, going back a little bit um, let's see. Well maybe if we could revisit why you personally felt that you as a man should not be in the feminist theater?
[00:47:40]
NJ: I had come over a period of time to believe-it was pretty simple-to believe that in order for the theater to be truly feminist, based on what I was hearing, the discussions I was in-I was privy to a lot of discussions hanging out with that group and also in terms of the talkbacks-[interruption from calling card automated voice]. Felt like there was a certain-
KF: --Can I cut you off and actually call you back? I just heard that my calling card is almost out. I have a different one, hold on.
NJ: Alright.
KF: I apologize.
NJ: [later] Hello?
KF: Ok, we're back. Sorry about that.
NJ: That's alright.
KF: Well we've been going for about 50 minutes, so maybe about 10 more minutes if that's alright. Um, but so, to revisit what we were talking about before the calling card gave me much less minutes than I paid for [laughs], so again, so why did you personally feel like you should not be in the feminist theater towards the end as a man?
[00:48:48]
NJ: Because I was a man and I felt like uh the time had come where in order for a lot of things being said by a number of the women in the group to actually be honored, it had to be theater done by women.
KF: What kinds of things were they saying?
[00:49:11]
NJ: Well there was the [sigh]. Can we do it-what does it say to the public, what does it say to the, well the public, I'll leave it at that-when the Rhode Island Feminist Theater produces a play that is directed by a man? Is that direction-one can be very sympathetic, but one can never really live in the skin of a woman. Um, same thing, the question of why are we doing pieces that are so dependent on the men in the stories or the characters when our interest lies elsewhere. And again I think that may have come up over the whole Anne Hutchinson thing because, as much as it was the story of Anne Hutchinson, the men were the primary-it was her against literally every man in the bay colony who had any kind of political power at the time.
[00:50:19]
KF: So um there was that and you know um, why do, why does a women's collective need men? Why do they need the input, the energy, the ideas of men when we're attempting to explore at this point in time, what is the experience of a woman in the theater, the experience of a woman as an actor, as a writer, as a collective making theater. This is what basically the man-woman model is what it has always been. So it was time for RIFT to have that uh experience of what it is for women to make the theater amongst themselves for themselves. And I supported that idea. I thought it made sense. My na�ve notion of what feminism was was that it was for women only, initially. I learned real quickly that that was not the case and had a very different-I learned a lot, let's put it this way, during that period of time that I was involved. But um it was just time for the theater to find out what it was like for the collective to be completely of women. There isn't a lot more to it that I can recall than that. Um and as I might have said when we initially talked, it wasn't a-it did not feel like to me like the men were being kicked out. And nobody ever said you have to go. The question was always, is this what the theater, is this where the theater is headed, is this where we need to be next? Is this what we need to focus on, is this what we need to find out, is this what we need to explore?
[00:52:10]
NJ: And it wasn't easy to answer, and there were certainly moments where I felt like-certainly for myself, people didn't want me to go away. And that was reassuring, but that was like a whole lot more how should I say personal than political. In the big picture that was important. I can easily imagine myself saying I wish I could give you a direct quote from the period, but that is not longer possible. But I imagine myself saying that I felt like I had to go in order for them to realize fully what they were becoming.
KF: So did that mean that at that time that men had no place in feminism?
[00:53:01]
NJ: No, not at all. It was just that very small collective of artists continuing on the path of growth and exploration. Because RIFT was always changing. I don't think RIFT was-it changed more than any collective I've been involved with, let's put it that way. Both in terms of personnel and in terms of the material that they did. And every new piece brought new people and ideas and…no, at least for myself it had nothing to do with the big picture.
KF: Ok, and how would you characterize RIFT's relationship to a broader feminist movement?
[00:53:50]
NJ: Well, you know, my bias, thinking back, is that I think that they were-it was a very always a politically, socially aware group of people and I think that they were very much a part of the social dialogue of the times. I think it was a pretty sensitive mirror of what was happening on a broader level at the time, is my memory of it. I have a feeling I'm going to be going online tonight doing a little google snooping of RIFT's history more than I ever thought about doing in a long time, just based on your questions. Because I hadn't thought about a lot of this stuff in years and years to tell you the truth.
KF: Um so, throughout the time of your involvement with RIFT, where uh, where were your two kids and your former wife?
[00:54:55]
NJ: Well [laughs], actually we were all still living together. We tried to do that ideal of a couple who were no longer a couple remaining in a family unit in order to raise the kids. And so much so that my former wife and both of my kids appeared in the film version of Anne Hutchinson: American Jezebel. As the kids like to remind me almost every time I visit with them. None of them went into the theater but that was certainly their big moment on the screen, if you will. I think they were 3 or 4 at the time.
KF: So what was it like all of you staying together?
[00:55:40]
NJ: um, ultimately, that model has a lot of flaws in it in that both of us were interested in pursuing relationships. And I personally, had a really difficult time living in a household with another relationship kind of coming and going, or other relationships plural coming and going around me. And I think that my dynamic in that whole thing was equally out of balance and ultimately we realized that we couldn't do that. I'm not sure I know-personally I wish I knew somebody who had managed to make that model work but I have not encountered them, let me put it that way. I certainly have talked to a number of people who thought they could do exactly what I described trying to do. But I ended up just until the kids were like 14 years old I lived 10 minutes away and that was a whole lot more productive and positive experience to be separate as opposed to two people trying to have their relationships and also trying to-we weren't good enough hippies, I guess you might say [laughing]. My bias of the hippie ideal at the time was like everybody can live together and find a way of working cooperatively, and it just didn't work out for us personally.
KF: So why did you want to stay together and live cooperatively?
[00:57:16]
NJ: Um well first of all we were living on this farm down in southern Rhode Island with 8 or 9 of our closest friends [laughing] so it was a pretty large living situation. Although each family had its own personal space we still were kind of doing the 70s cooperative farm experience. And so in a way it felt like our situation would support that. And every individual who was there was certainly supportive of what we were trying to do. But yeah, there was a lot more to it than just that.
KF: So when did you decide that that wasn't going to work?
[00:58:08]
NJ: Oh…hm. It was about a year and a half into, maybe 2 years into that. We had actually initially had a period of being separate and we felt like we wanted to be back together again for the sake of raising the kids. And we thought that this cooperative farm situation would be exactly the right way to do that rather than living off in a house or apartment by ourselves alones. A lot of wonderful things happened as a result of living there and so on, but we also realized that we weren't the individuals who could make that work.
KF: What did the RIFT members think of that arrangement?
[00:59:00]
NJ: Well that's a good question. I probably could only speak for Ada [McAllister]. I mean they were all very open, they were um, they were open and supportive of my ex-wife and they always seemed very interested in the kids and the kids always seemed to be welcomed to be around. At that stage of the time the kids knew all the people in the company. It was very comfortable. Yeah. Again, I may be forgetting details, but Ada certainly remains really fond of my kids who are now 33 years old.
KF: Great. And ok, one question I forgot to ask earlier, a bit perhaps unrelated but, you were talking-on the issue of the separatism, so I think you had mentioned female separatism and I think also lesbian separatism. Um how are those related to each other?
[01:00:11]
NJ: Boy I think that I might just have been getting a little careless with definition there. I never saw that there were two movements. I mean, I think I've always perceived it as lesbian separatism. Um, and quite honestly I'm not aware…of female separatist movement that wasn't lesbian based. Or at least I'm not aware of it so I couldn't speak to that.
KF: So even though RIFT became all women's theater, like a mixture of straight women and lesbians?
NJ: uh huh.
KF: So how were there straight women in a lesbian separatist oriented group?
[01:00:59]
NJ: Boy that is, my mind's going in a knot now. …Boy all I can say is that, in terms of the dialogue that led to that movement, that certainly was a part of the dialogue in terms of how it all panned out in the end. I don't really know. Not copping out, I just don't have any-not really privy to how it all worked after I left.
KF: Ok. Um, and you know, kind of a closing question, so what would you say were some of your biggest successes in RIFT?
[01:01:53]
NJ: Hm. Well I really, just in terms of fun in the theater, I actually always really enjoyed when they were doing any version of the Clowns of the Stars and Moons Circus. I liked that work and I really took to the process. And actually I still use aspects of the process in my teaching. Uh, so there was that, and um when I think back on RIFT, it's probably pretty evident just from this conversation, my most prominent and clear memories are the whole period of time where we did various versions of Anne Hutchinson. Um the research of that, the development of that as a stage piece, the conversion of that to a different stage piece, and then ultimately the conversion of that into a film. And uh, everything from the process of just making a piece from scratch to writing the grants that enabled us to raise money to make the film. And yeah. And I kind of like the idea that there's this serious piece of Rhode Island history that's now available that pretty much wasn't there, in terms of the whole library system. I kind of like that. I talk about that actually with my kids occasionally too.
KF: Well great. Uh anything you would like to add?
[01:03:44]
NJ: Boy not off the top of my head. But I'll be very curious as to-when will this archive be available? A lot of the discussion and the questions kind of stirred my interest and I feel like I want to be able to have answers to the things that I really couldn't speak to. I'm curious.
KF: Um, it'll be on the website which I can email to you probably about mid-August [2006] because we need to be able to-
NJ: Oh, soon.
KF:--yeah because we're giving all of the transcripts and audio files in one big batch to the Brown media people to upload in one big batch in a little under a month.
NJ: Ok.
KF: Yeah. Actually can I get your [email]-actually I should probably stop the recording, but thank you so much for your time.
NJ: Certainly, my pleasure.