Profile by Brad Balfour<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Play: \u201cJack was Kind\u201d
Cast: Tracy Thorne
Where: W. Scott McLucas Studio Stage, Irish Repertory Theatre
Address: 132 West 22nd Street, New York, NY 10011
Run: 11-17 to 12-18-22<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Sometimes, the best play is the simplest one \u2014 with a minimal set, ordinary costuming and little action. Everything is in the words and vocal expression. Maybe there\u2019s a little embellishment through the lighting and sound design. But in making a production this way the focus for the audience is entirely on the words or what they suggest.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
So the Irish Rep has given such a work the go. The in-person World Premiere of Tracy Thorne\u2019s \u201cJack Was Kind\u201d is now being presented by the venerable theater institution. This one-woman show had premiered on Zoom in October 2020 at All For One Theater (Michael Wolk, Artistic Director, and Nicholas A. Cotz, Executive & Producing Director). It was directed by Cotz, and produced in association with Jami Floyd.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cJack Was Kind\u201d previewed on the W. Scott McLucas Studio Stage on November 9, the opening night took place on the 17th, and it continues for a limited run through December 18, 2022. Again it has been directed by Cotz, with scenic design by David Esler (\u201crogerandtom\u201d), costume design by Haydee Zelideth (\u201cHouse Plant\u201d) and lighting design by Kate McGee (\u201cI\u2019m Revolting\u201d).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In this intimate, 70-minute monologue, a privileged woman defends and explores her role in her husband\u2019s illicit behavior. \u201cJack Was Kind\u201d gives an imagined, painfully human backstory to an actual American event that has affected the country. This intimate confessional examines long-seated issues of privilege and capitulation which is at the core of America, as well as being part and parcel of our current and explosive political traumas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Thorne\u2019s plays have been produced\/workshopped\/developed in New York and around the country at Manhattan Class Company, The Cherry Lane, SohoRep, Rattlestick, The Lark, Page 73, WP Theater and New Georges \u2013 to name a few. Her plays have also appeared on the Kilroys list and she has been a finalist for numerous awards, including the Susan Glaspell Award and Leah Ryan\u2019s FEWW. This 40-something is a recipient of the Elizabeth George commission from South Coast Rep and has been a member of the SohoRep Writer\/Director Lab, Page 73’s Interstate 73, as well as a playwriting fellow at The Lark. Her work is published by Concord and DPS. Thorne has also written screenplays and several TV pilots.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Though Thorne de-emphasizes it now, she\u2019s worked as an actor in New York and London, collaborating with directors such as Matthew Warchus, Phyllida Lloyd, Anna Deavere Smith, Tony Kushner. And, she\u2019s appeared in movies and on TV. She now lives in Harlem with her family.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: Did you think of your acting as a passage to your playwriting? Or did the playwriting naturally emerge out of the acting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: Well, are you ready for this? I don\u2019t really act anymore. I did not write this for myself to perform. I haven\u2019t acted in a very long time. I didn\u2019t write \u201cJack was Kind\u201d for myself, I wrote it for other actors to perform. I always say I\u2019m not an actor. However, when I wrote \u201cJack was Kind\u201d it was literally \u2014 this is true \u2014 it was like dense prose on a page. I thought, if I send this to a literary office, they\u2019re just going to look at that and go \u201cI\u2019m not reading now.\u201d Because you know, plays look different on the page.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: So it\u2019s not written as a stage play where you go, \u201cThen she said\u2026\u201c<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: Exactly. It just looked like a novel or something, and I didn\u2019t think to reformat it. So I asked my agent, \u201cPlease don\u2019t send me around. Please ask theaters if I can come and read it to them. He looked at me like, \u201cAre you insane?\u201d And I said, \u201cJust please do it.\u201d I know a lot of them said, \u201cNo way are we going to have her come and read it to us.\u201d But then a few of them said, \u201cYeah, sure, she can come and read it to us.\u201d When I did that for a small theatre called All for One, which just does solo works, they were interested in it. And then the pandemic happened so everything shut down.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I didn\u2019t know All for One well at all. I\u2019d spent a total of 70 minutes with them reading the play. When we were all in lockdown, they called me and said, \u201cWould you be willing to do it over Zoom as a fundraiser?\u201d I think a lot of the work they were developing was more physical work so it wouldn\u2019t have worked on Zoom, so I said, \u201cSure, I\u2019ll do that.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Honestly, it was really nothing for them. Everybody was trying to keep theaters going. And long story short, that fundraiser went well, so they asked me to do it again. Then, they asked me to do it again, and said they wanted to produce it on Zoom, do a full production \u2014 as in, paid Equity wages, and all of that stuff. We thought about getting other actors, but under the circumstances, it was like, \u201cDo we want to kill ourselves doing the casting checks and all of that?\u201d That\u2019s a huge project unto itself which takes a long time. Or should I just do it? And they said, \u201cYou just do it.\u201d So when Ciaran [O\u2019Reilly, Irish Rep producing director] called me up, he said, \u201cYou just do it.\u201d I am not an actor, haven\u2019t acted in a long time, and I\u2019m really fine with that; but, apparently, I\u2019m an actor now.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: When you\u2019re acting in this as opposed to having written it, does that change it for you in some way?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: It\u2019s a funny thing. As a writer, you\u2019re thinking about theme, what you\u2019re trying to accomplish, and about rhythm \u2014 because for me, rhythm is story. Also, with my acting background, I developed those elements with the character in mind. But I discover things in this all the time, which I actually quite enjoy, even though I didn\u2019t miss acting or anything. I have enjoyed the discovery of \u201cOh, that\u2019s there, too,\u201d or how it\u2019s almost more elastic \u2014 \u201cOh, I didn\u2019t realize it could extend that far.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: When you\u2019re acting it, you\u2019re also thinking about, \u201cwell, how will this look to an audience? I can\u2019t just read this flat.\u201d It\u2019s as if you\u2019re doing a reading. But then you\u2019re acting, with costume and lighting changes, so how does that affect things?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: The audience affects it a lot because they are in a solo show, [so] they are your partner, right? This play has surprised me because \u2014 I don\u2019t know what the audience you were in was like \u2014 but some audiences laugh much, are responsive verbally, and other audiences are silent. They seem to be with it, the silent ones, because you can hear a pin drop. And I have to accommodate it. It\u2019s almost like, \u201cWhat do you guys need from me?\u201d Is there a big laughing audience? I can give them all the indications they need to go for it. I can actually respond to their laughter. But if they\u2019re a silent audience, I need to respect that and be mindful that they are seemingly very affected by it. It\u2019s almost like I need to push through so that I can release them from it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: In a way, you have a second audience. You\u2019re made this as if it were a Zoomcast or something with a setup iPhone \u2014 your daughter or someone gave you the idea to do this?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: I didn\u2019t say it specifically, but I indicated that kids today film themselves doing everything. So I\u2019m inspired to film myself.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: As the character, you have a different audience than just the \u201caudience\u201d because the audience you are presuming might see this. Did that affect you in the way you wrote it and envisioned it?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: No, it fell short. First of all, that came about because of the Zoom production with AFO. I very much wanted \u2014 this is pretty much true in all of my work \u2014 I wanted to create a circumstance where the audience viewing it on the computer would actually be viewing it on the computer. So we did some rewrites about that.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I had originally thought that, you know, she\u2019s been asked to give a talk \u2014 the Daughters of the American Revolution or something \u2014 and she goes off the deep end. I hadn\u2019t fully developed it, but it was in that storyline. Anyway, when we came to do it in 3D, the circumstances were obviously different and so we adapted it again, for her to be filming herself on an iPhone.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What I found in the acting of it\u2026? A director once said to me, \u201cI need you to look at the iPhone more, just technically, so that we keep the reality of that going.\u201d I said to him, \u201cYou know what I find when I look at the iPhone? I look at it in at least the first two-thirds of the thing. I look at the iPhone when I\u2019m saying nice things about Jack. When I\u2019m saying mean things or iffy things about Jack, I find myself wanting to look away.\u201d He felt that was super-interesting. That happened organically, almost like I didn\u2019t want to confront the iffy stuff with my iPhone audience by looking at them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: But didn\u2019t that limit you in some way? You created a situation where you were limiting yourself even further, and that\u2019s an interesting challenge. Is it a good thing that you restrained yourself even further?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: We did it on focus. We wanted to see \u2014 as she says, \u201cYou may forget in the denseness of the thing.\u201d Many people do, and that\u2019s fine. She says, \u201c\u2018Tell me a story\u2019 are the four greatest words in the English language.\u201d So we wanted to see if we could actually sustain her just leaning in and telling us, the audience, a story. I happen to love that. The simplicity of that works for me as an audience member. So we decided to go for it and see the simplicity of \u201cMary is going to tell you this story now. Buckle up for 70 minutes.\u201d We found that kind of theatrical, actually, the expectation being that she would move around and be theatrical or whatever. But we decided to channel all of that into the story, all of that physicality into the story, and create a minimalist kind of physical experience as she sat in her chair. So we decided to give it a go, and we hoped it would be theatrical in its own right \u2014 that she doesn\u2019t move.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: The irony of it is, you never do reveal exactly, and in very specific terms, what Jack did. You kind of hover around it a lot, until the end.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: You know, I do. That was a choice, and I\u2019m sure it works for some people and maybe doesn\u2019t work for others. I do reveal at the end \u2014 I gave the audiences plenty \u2014 I do say he\u2019s a Supreme Court justice. I do specifically say that in the end. I have laid it out that he is a very powerful person. People can draw the conclusions they draw. There is nothing literal about this, I have not written a literal play about any actual person\u2019s life. But people can draw the conclusions they draw based on their own experiences, what kind of person Jack might be. But I do say specifically at the very end he\u2019s a Supreme Court justice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: Obviously, intentional or not, the timing of this particular play seems ideal because there are movies like \u201cWomen Talking\u201d, \u201cShe Said\u201d so that it falls in line \u2014 not in a bad way. It connects to that context of \u201cMeToo.\u201d In some ways, that gives a greater power to your story because it fits within the framework of what\u2019s going on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: First of all, I never expected it to be a solo play. I expected Jack to show up. I kept writing and writing, but he never showed up \u2014 which I found hilarious, actually. But [when] I started the play, I had read a novel that felt like a memoir. It was a novel, but it felt like a memoir, and I found that super-provocative, especially since it\u2019s a novel where no one knows the actual identity of the author. It\u2019s a female name as the author, but there\u2019s some thoughts that it\u2019s written by a guy. I thought that the trick that that author pulled off of making fiction seem like a memoir was super-provocative to me. So I was like, \u201cI wonder if I could do that in a play?\u201d [And] I started writing \u201cJack was Kind\u201d and Jack kept not showing up, but Mary kept talking. Then, I thought I had created this person who seemed like a lot of people I\u2019d known in my life. I thought, \u201cOh, I have actually somewhat achieved what I went for.\u201d Then I thought of various things that had happened in the United States in recent days, weeks, months and years, and thought, \u201cOh, I could drop this very familiar person into the feeling of actual American events.\u201d So I did that, and it felt for me that I was really pleased with how I was tackling America, but tackling it from the most personal, most primitive, most private, and most simple point of view.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: Have you seen \u201cWomen Talking\u201d yet?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: I did, yes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: One of the things they clearly delineate throughout the movie is, in trying to re-engage with these men, are they being collaborators, are they implicitly guilty as well for allowing this behavior to continue? Obviously, this wasn\u2019t one incident, this was an ongoing pattern of behavior. You here also raise the question, \u201cOkay is he\u2019s done with this?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: The thing he\u2019s called out for is having assaulted somebody in high school. [Mary] says it comes quickly. He says he did that to [the woman when she was just in high school and he was in high school, too.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: The important implication is whether he continued the behavior, or was trying to continue the behavior. Was it just a one-time incident? In your case, [Mary] knows what he\u2019s done and hasn\u2019t really called him out for it, basically continuing with him, yet knowing this. In the end, both [stories] are about the woman being complicit by having allowed it to continue, or not revealing it, or not addressing it. I thought that was interesting. Am I on the right path there?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: I think so, in that she does understand that about herself. What I find interesting about her is that she seems a powerless person, but in fact, the fact that she stands behind him, as she says in the play, \u201cI sat there, I filled in the most looming gap\u201d gave her tremendous power. Because I would argue in other situations like that, if the spouse didn\u2019t sit behind her husband at those hearings or whatever, the person at the hearing who is looking for the job wouldn\u2019t get it if the wife decided not to show up. I\u2019m thinking of an actual hearing that we both know. If that wife hadn\u2019t showed up, in protest or whatever, I bet you that guy wouldn\u2019t have gotten the job. So in fact, this seemingly powerless person has extraordinary power. I found that interesting. She doesn\u2019t realize that until the very end of the play. And she certainly doesn\u2019t think of herself as a complicit character until the end of the play, when she begins to understand that she was doing it for her children. She was preserving the image of their father as a great man, a wonderful man, a worthy man, for her children. And she realizes that it\u2019s blown up in her face. Her children were on to it more than she was.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: It doesn\u2019t matter when she became aware of his transgression or not?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: I don\u2019t think she knows it until the end of this play. One of the last things she says \u2014 she lays all of that out \u2014 she says this about Jack\u2019s composed face: \u201cMaybe that\u2019s how I could just sit there.\u201d And then, after she says that, she says, \u201cOr maybe I wanted what Jack said to be true, so I sat there to make it true.\u201d But I don\u2019t think she understands that about herself until those words come out of her mouth. I don\u2019t think it\u2019s political for her. It\u2019s so personal, which is, again, back to what I tried to do. I tried to create fiction that felt like a memoir. But it\u2019s her daughter who is the one \u2014 [Mary] says, \u201cI tried to make it true. But then Flo came home and it couldn\u2019t be true. She said she\u2019d never forgive me, so it couldn\u2019t be true.\u201d So it\u2019s Flo throwing it in her face that, frankly, wakes her up. And destroys her. SHe\u2019s absolutely destroyed by the end of it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: When she\u2019s making this thing on her iPhone, is this something being recorded, or is it actually going out as it\u2019s happening, in your eyes?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: It\u2019s being recorded, which she then \u2014 the implication when you see the film at the end, is that she sent it somewhere.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: Does she finally release it? That raises another layer to the show.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: Exactly, and I like the ambiguity of that. But then when we show you the clip of video at the end, a) we thought it was fun and theatrical and what\u2019s wrong with that; but, b), we thought, \u201dYeah, she sent it. She pressed \u2018Send.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: That\u2019s an important point, because it does raise the question: did she do this all for nothing or does she really make it happen?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: Well, she says at the very end \u2014 very, very end, as one of her last lines, she says, \u201cBut everyone knows about Jack.\u201d As in, we all know that he did it. We pretended we didn\u2019t know. And then she says, \u201cNow Jack does, too.\u201d I.e., I called Jack out by sending this to the Daughters of the American Revolution or whomever invited her to speak.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: Does the name \u201cJack\u201d have implications in your mind or was you just chose the name John, Jack?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: Place holder. It was a placeholder. The funny was, I started it because \u2014 it was a dialogue. I started the play in a Word document, and when you save a Word document, it titles it the first few words of the document. When I started it at the very beginning, the first lines of the play were \u201cJack was kind.\u201d So I kept seeing that Word icon on my desktop. When those lines had changed a lot, I thought, that\u2019s a good title. I just kept it \u2014 \u201cJack was Kind\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: We could interpret it as having implications about \u2014 well, let\u2019s say the Kennedys. Did that come back to you in a way that was good or that haunted you?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: Well, it only haunted me hilariously. Jack is not my father, but my father\u2019s name was Jack. I never thought about it, never thought about it, never thought about it. But as I often do when I start a play, sometimes they\u2019re called A and B, sometimes they\u2019re called She and He, sometimes they\u2019re called Jack and Jill. You know, just a simple placeholder. But then it stuck, and so my mother kept telling her friends \u201cIt\u2019s not about your father.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: How did your parents deal with it?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: Well, my dad\u2019s not with us anymore so he never had to hear it, never had to tell his friends.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: How about your family? How does your husband and kids \u2014 how old are they?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: We have one we like to tease, she\u2019s \u201cFlo\u201d \u2014 she\u2019s a Flo type, the daughter. My family frankly, in all honesty, they\u2019re moved by it. They felt it very moving, all of them. I appreciate that they dived into it and they find it moving.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: What is your relationship to the Irish Rep? How did this come to them, and how did it come at this time, since it is very relevant?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: We all find it hilarious because nobody knows how they got a copy of the play. Nobody knows. I got an email from Ciaran. I was working on a TV thing, which \u2014 I am not lying about this: I was sitting on my sofa, I just pressed \u201cSend\u201d on this TV thing out in Hollywood, and an email from Ciaran popped in saying, \u201cWe\u2019d like you to do \u201cJack was Kind.\u201d Right before I could think \u201cOh, crap, what do I do next?\u201d I was like, \u201cIrish Rep wants to do \u201cJack was Kind\u201d? What?\u201d So we don\u2019t know how they got it. They got it somehow, and none of us knows how.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: That was uncanny timing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: I thought my agent sent it to us, and I was looking back in my emails and had to call my agent, \u201cDid you send it to him?\u201d He said no. So we have no idea how they got it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: You\u2019re in the New York theatre community in one way or another, so you have known Ciaran and Charlotte [Moore] for a while.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: Charlotte and I did a play together when we were both actors. Hilariously. It was one of the \u2014 oh, it actually might have been the first \u2014 I had a summer stock job and it was my first professional production in a proper year-around theatre, and she played my mother. She actually is part of my origin story, because I met my husband when I was working with her. I had been invited out for a drink after the show, and we were out of town in New Haven. I spent all day, the matinee and the evening: \u201cBut I don\u2019t know if I should go, Charlotte. I have to spend the night\u201d \u2014 because she and I drove back and forth together from New Haven. \u201cI don\u2019t know\u201d da da da. And finally, at the intermission of the evening performance, the great Charlotte Moore looked at me and said, \u201cLook, I will pay your hotel fee. But you\u2019ve just got to stop talking about this.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
She didn\u2019t pay my hotel, but hilariously, she let me know that I had become tiresome, and that was the night I met my husband. So I\u2019m glad I stayed. We haven\u2019t worked together since, but we had had a fantastic time in New Haven, and both remembered it when we were reunited at the Irish Rep.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: I assume you were writing more conventional plays with multiple characters, and you didn\u2019t have to put all the burden on yourself.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: Yes, I never plan to do that again, actually. It\u2019s very over.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: What lesson did you learn from all of this?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: I learned that it was a good idea that I decided to be a writer full-time. That\u2019s what I learned.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: Do you see this as potentially expanding out to a movie, or a version with multiple characters?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: No, I don\u2019t think I\u2019ll do the version with multiple characters. Once you explore something, you think, bye, I did that, now it\u2019s time to explore something else. I mean, sure, I think it would make a wonderful movie. I did it on Zoom, but it was very different on Zoom. It was super-successful on Zoom. The simplicity of it worked great. Sure, if somebody wanted to do a little film of it or something, that would be great. And they are very welcome to stick a movie star in there. Go for it, guys.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: So you do see it as being handed off to other people?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: Always. Oh, yeah. I did not write it for myself. Everyone, of course, assumes I did, but it never occurred to me to do that. We had readings of it with other actors before all of this happened. No, it never occurred to me \u2014 not one time did it occur to me to do it myself.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: Do you see yourself writing other things like a novel, articles, or nonfiction essays?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: Well, I am lucky enough to have some fantastic fiction writers in my life, and I don\u2019t know that I have that skill set. I certainly admire them so much, but I kind of feel like, \u201cI don\u2019t know.\u201d But I don\u2019t know that I have the skill set. My skill set is, character is destiny, and the nature of prose is such that I don\u2019t know that I know. But I do write television, and I\u2019m early in the game of developing it. But I really like long-form storytelling like that. I love a nine-hour, 10-hour movie. Or if it\u2019s over several seasons, a 30-hour movie. Love, love, love, love, love.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: It certainly gives you a chance to develop characters in a way that you can\u2019t do it in a movie. On the other hand, the good thing about a movie is you go in there and it\u2019s done, you\u2019ve made it work in two hours \u2014 or you didn\u2019t \u2014 and you\u2019re on to the next thing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: I definitely will write for TV because I like that long-form storytelling. I definitely will write more plays. And Lord knows, if I can write a novel I\u2019d be thrilled with myself. But I have no idea. My daughter is a novelist and she has got the Thing, whatever that is. She\u2019s in her 20s, and is in actually in an MFA fiction writing program now.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: How did this experience change your way of writing theatre, film, or TV?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: Well, Mary\u2019s mode of thinking is super-duper complicated. That\u2019s one of the reasons it\u2019s so hard to perform, because it\u2019s circular thinking. She\u2019s making connections. She says something forty minutes ago that then she circles back to. I am always like that in storytelling, but I can see that that is very hard for actors to mine and discover. So I might look for a simpler way of thinking in my characters next time. It\u2019s hard for me to follow Mary\u2019s line of thought \u2014 and I wrote it\u2014 and I have always written in a complicated way like that. One of the reasons I like television is that it is inherently simpler . So I might apply that in a good way, not a bad way, to my next play. We will see.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: Now you\u2019re at the early stage of seeing how audiences will respond. If this play continues to sell, will they extend or will it just\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: Oh, that\u2019s above my pay grade. That\u2019s for the big shots at the Irish Rep. I don\u2019t know the answer to that.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: What happens if you start getting offers now as an actor?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: [laughs] I\u2019ll cross that bridge when I come to it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: Have you seen \u201cWomen Talking\u201d yet?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: I did, yes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: One of the things they clearly delineate throughout the movie is, in trying to re-engage with these men, are they being collaborators, are they implicitly guilty as well for allowing this behavior to continue? Obviously, this wasn\u2019t one incident, this was an ongoing pattern of behavior. You here also raising the question, \u201cOkay is he\u2019s done with this?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: The thing he\u2019s called out for is having assaulted somebody in high school. [Mary] says it comes quickly. He says he did that to her when she was just in high school and he was in high school, too.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: The important implication is whether he continued the behavior, or was trying to continue the behavio. Was it just a one-time incident. In your case, [Mary] knows what he\u2019s done and hasn\u2019t really called him out for it, basically continuing with him, yet knowing this. In the end, both [stories] are about the woman being complicit by having allowed it to continue, or not revealing it, or not addressing it. I thought that was interesting. Am I on the right path there?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: I think so, in that she does understand that about herself. What I find interesting about her is that she seems a powerless person, but in fact, the fact that she stands behind him, as she says in the play, \u201cI sat there, I filled in the most looming gap.\u201d It gave her tremendous power because, I would argue in other situations like that, if the spouse didn\u2019t sit behind her husband at those hearings or whatever, the person at the hearing who is looking for the job wouldn\u2019t get it if the wife decided not to show up. I\u2019m thinking of an actual hearing that we both know. If that wife hadn\u2019t showed up, in protest or whatever, I bet you, that guy wouldn\u2019t have gotten the job. In fact, this seemingly powerless person has extraordinary power. I found that interesting. She doesn\u2019t realize that until the very end of the play. And she certainly doesn\u2019t think of herself as a complicit character until the end of the play, when she begins to understand that she was doing it for her children. She was preserving the image of their father as a great man, a wonderful man, a worthy man, for her children. And she realizes that it\u2019s blown up in her face. Her children were on to it more than she was.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: It doesn\u2019t matter when she became aware of his transgression or not?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: I don\u2019t think she knows it until the end of this play. One of the last things she says \u2014 she lays all of that out \u2014 and she says this about Jack\u2019s composed face: \u201cMaybe that\u2019s how I could just sit there.\u201d And then, after she says that, she says, \u201cOr maybe I wanted what Jack said to be true, so I sat there to make it true.\u201d But I don\u2019t think she understands that about herself until those words come out of her mouth. I don\u2019t think it\u2019s political for her. It\u2019s so personal, which is, again, back to what I tried to do. I tried to create fiction that felt like a memoir. But it\u2019s her daughter who is the one \u2014 [Mary] says, \u201cI tried to make it true. But then Flo came home and it couldn\u2019t be true. She said she\u2019d never forgive me, so it couldn\u2019t be true.\u201d So it\u2019s Flo throwing it in her face that, frankly, wakes her up. And destroys her. SHe\u2019s absolutely destroyed by the end of it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: When she\u2019s making this thing on her iPhone, is this something being recorded, or is it actually going out as it\u2019s happening, in your eyes?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: It\u2019s being recorded, which she then \u2014 the implication when you see the film at the end, is that she sent it somewhere.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: Does she finally release it? That raises another layer to the show.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: Exactly, and I like the ambiguity of that. But then when we show you the clip of video at the end, a) we thought it was fun and theatrical and what\u2019s wrong with that; but, b), we thought, \u201dYeah, she sent it. She pressed \u2018Send.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: That\u2019s an important point, because it does raise the question: did she do this all for nothing or does she really make it happen?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: Well, she says at the very end \u2014 very, very end, as one of her last lines, she says, \u201cBut everyone knows about Jack.\u201d As in, we all know that he did it. We pretended we didn\u2019t know. And then she says, \u201cNow Jack does, too.\u201d I.e., I called Jack out by sending this to the Daughters of the American Revolution or whomever invited her to speak.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: Does the name \u201cJack\u201d have implications in your mind or was you just chose the name John, Jack?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: Place holder. It was a placeholder. The funny was, I started it because \u2014 it was a dialogue. I started the play in a Word document, and when you save a Word document, it titles it the first few words of the document. When I started it at the very beginning, the first lines of the play were \u201cJack was kind.\u201d So I kept seeing that Word icon on my desktop. When those lines had changed a lot, I thought, that\u2019s a good title. I just kept it \u2014 \u201cJack was Kind\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: We could interpret it as having implications about \u2014 well, let\u2019s say the Kennedys. Did that come back to you in a way that was good or that haunted you?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: Well, it only haunted me hilariously. Jack is not my father, but my father\u2019s name was Jack. I never thought about it, never thought about it, never thought about it. But as I often do when I start a play, sometimes they\u2019re called A and B, sometimes they\u2019re called She and He, sometimes they\u2019re called Jack and Jill. You know, just a simple placeholder. But then it stuck, and so my mother kept telling her friends \u201cIt\u2019s not about your father.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: How did your parents deal with it?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: Well, my dad\u2019s not with us anymore so he never had to hear it, never had to tell his friends.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: How about your family? How does your husband and kids \u2014 how old are they?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: We have one we like to tease, she\u2019s \u201cFlo\u201d \u2014 she\u2019s a Flo type, the daughter. My family has \u2014 frankly, in all honesty, they\u2019re moved by it. They felt it very moving, all of them. I appreciate that they dived into it and they find it moving.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: What is your relationship to the Irish Rep? How did this come to them, and how did it come at this time, since it is very relevant?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: We all find it hilarious because nobody knows how they got a copy of the play. Nobody knows. I got an email from Ciaran. I was working on a TV thing, which I had just \u2014 I am not lying about this: I was sitting on my sofa, I just pressed \u201cSend\u201d on this TV thing out in Hollywood, and an email from Ciaran popped in saying, \u201cWe\u2019d like you to do \u201cJack was Kind.\u201d Right before I could think \u201cOh, crap, what do I do next?\u201d I was like, \u201cIrish Rep wants to do \u201cJack was Kind\u201d? What?\u201d So we don\u2019t know how they got it. They got it somehow, and none of us knows how.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: That was uncanny timing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: I thought my agent sent it to us, and I was looking back in my emails and had to call my agent, \u201cDid you send it to him?\u201d He said no. So we have no idea how they got it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: You\u2019re in the New York theatre community in one way or another, so you have known Ciaran and Charlotte [Moore] for a while.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: Charlotte and I did a play together when we were both actors. Hilariously. It was one of the \u2014 oh, it actually might have been the first \u2014 I had a summer stock job and it was my first professional production in a proper year-around theatre, and she played my mother. She actually is part of my origin story, because I met my husband when I was working with her. I had been invited out for a drink after the show, and we were out of town in New Haven. I spent all day, the matinee and the evening: \u201cBut I don\u2019t know if I should go, Charlotte. I have to spend the night\u201d \u2014 because she and I drove back and forth together from New Haven. \u201cI don\u2019t know\u201d da da da. And finally, at the intermission of the evening performance, the great Charlotte Moore looked at me and said, \u201cLook, I will pay your hotel fee. But you\u2019ve just got to stop talking about this.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
She didn\u2019t pay my hotel, but hilariously, she let me know that I had become tiresome, and that was the night I met my husband. So I\u2019m glad I stayed. We haven\u2019t worked together since, but we had had a fantastic time in New Haven, and both remembered it when we were reunited at the Irish Rep.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: I assume you were writing more conventional plays with multiple characters, and you didn\u2019t have to put all the burden on yourself.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: Yes, I never plan to do that again, actually. It\u2019s very over.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: What lesson did you learn from all of this?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: I learned that it was a good idea that I decided to be a writer full-time. That\u2019s what I learned.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: Do you see this as potentially expanding out to a movie, or a version with multiple characters?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: No, I don\u2019t think I\u2019ll do the version with multiple characters. Once you explore something, you think, bye, I did that, now it\u2019s time to do something, to explore something else. I mean, sure, I think it would make a wonderful . I did it on Zoom, but it was very different on Zoom. It was super-successful on Zoom. The simplicity of it worked great. Sure, if somebody wanted to do a little film of it or something, that would be great. And they are very welcome to stick a movie star in there. Go for it, guys.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: So you do see it as being handed off to other people?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: Always. Oh, yeah. I did not write it for myself. Everyone, of course, assumes I did, but it never occurred to me to do that. We had readings of it with other actors before all of this happened. No, it never occurred to me \u2014 not one time did it occur to me to do it myself.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: Do you see yourself writing other things like a novel, articles, or nonfiction essays?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: Well, I am lucky enough to have some fantastic fiction writers in my life, and I don\u2019t know that I have that skill set. I certainly admire them so much, but I kind of feel like, \u201cI don\u2019t know.\u201d But I don\u2019t know that I have the skill set. My skill set is, character is destiny, and the nature of prose is such that I don\u2019t know that I know. But I do write television, and I\u2019m early in the game of developing it. But I really like long-form storytelling like that. I love a nine-hour, 10-hour movie. Or if it\u2019s over several seasons, a 30-hour movie. Love, love, love, love, love.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: It certainly gives you a chance to develop characters in a way that you can\u2019t do it in a movie. On the other hand, the good thing about a movie is you go in there and it\u2019s done, you\u2019ve made it work in two hours \u2014 or you didn\u2019t \u2014 and you\u2019re on to the next thing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: I definitely will write for TV because I like that long-form storytelling. I definitely will write more plays. And Lord knows, if I can write a novel I\u2019d be thrilled with myself. But I have no idea. My daughter is a novelist and she has got the Thing, whatever that is. She\u2019s in her 20s, and is in actually in an MFA fiction writing program now.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: How did this experience change your way of writing theatre, film, or TV?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: Well, Mary\u2019s mode of thinking is super-duper complicated. That\u2019s one of the reasons it\u2019s so hard to perform, because it\u2019s circular thinking. She\u2019s making connections. She says something forty minutes ago that then she circles back to. I am always like that in storytelling, but I can see that that is very hard for actors to mine and discover. So I might look for a simpler way of thinking in my characters next time. It\u2019s hard for me \u2014 and I wrote it \u2014 to follow Mary\u2019s line of thought, and I have always written in a complicated way like that. One of the reasons I like television is that it is inherently simpler . So I might apply that in a good way, not a bad way, to my next play. We will see.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: Now you\u2019re at the early stage of seeing how audiences will respond. If this play continues to sell, will they extend or will it just\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: Oh, that\u2019s above my pay grade. That\u2019s for the big shots at the Irish Rep. I don\u2019t know the answer to that.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q: What happens if you start getting offers now as an actor?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TT: [laughs] I\u2019ll cross that bridge when I come to it.<\/p>\n