A while back, The Show spoke to Heidi Schreck and Kate Haas, the creator and star, respectively, of Phoenix Theatre Company's production of “What the Constitution Means to Me.”
The show tracks a young constitutional scholar’s realization that the framers of the Constitution had almost no understanding of women’s lives. It was a smash hit when it premiered on Broadway back in 2019.
But that was several political lifetimes ago, and the production at Phoenix Theatre was cut short due to low ticket sales. And that got us wondering if there’s still an audience for political theater.
Michael Bernard, artistic director at the Phoenix Theatre, joined The Show for a debrief on what went wrong and why.
Full conversation
MICHAEL BARNARD: Somebody will read the title, “Oh, 'What the Constitution Means to Me.' Oh, I wonder what — is this a political show is, you know what? And I don't want to go and hear about the Constitution being bad or slammed or whatever."
And even though we tried to explain what exactly the show was, it didn't seem to resonate and now we were scheduling it for a long, I mean, a really long run, like 14 weeks, 15 weeks. Could we have continued on? Yes. Or could we try to put something in there that might, I don't know, perk up into those, those last four weeks. And so we sort of did something that was fun and fluffy and, and et cetera and, and it did, OK, but —
SAM DINGMAN: Which was?
BARNARD: Oh, it was a tribute artist. She did covers for Dolly Parton, Reba Mcentire and things like that. So it was kind of her and she was delightful. And the audiences loved it.
DINGMAN: Yeah. Well, thank you for talking about this. I know it's difficult to talk about. And for me, it puts its finger on something that I'd, I'd love to get your take on, which I think is one of the oldest questions in theater, which is, who is this for?
BARNARD: Well, first and foremost, theater was originally created to discuss and bring forth ideas or subjects that the society at that time was going through. So, I would much rather be a part of something that is responding to a social conversation, a social challenge, something that we can offer that creates a dialogue.
We just did "Cabaret." Well, what, what was happening in 1929 in Germany? There are similar things that are happening in our world today. So, but you put it in a different era or a different place and you can reflect on it in a, from a different perspective and heaven knows, get a young person out of the phone.
DINGMAN: But that phone thing is interesting to me because I love the way you framed it. That, from its very beginnings, theater was a forum for members of a community to speak to other members of a community about hot button subjects. And our phones now are by and large where we go for that, you know, we, we get so much of that same impact from something like TikTok or Instagram Reels or something where people are in many cases doing little mini pieces of theater, you know, performance art. And so it raises this question about what theater can do that the phone can't do?
BARNARD: I don't think about that per se but I do think definitely about how do we engage a younger audience. So now the point is to do things that have subject matters to them that they're interested in. And I think they're very interested in learning about acceptance and hope, and what can our future be and what could our future be, and what has held us back and what happened before that we could do differently now?
DINGMAN: Now, it makes me think about "Cabaret," which you were just mentioning and, and which you guys ran recently and you were talking about the political context of that story. If I'm not mistaken, “Cabaret” premiered in the 50’s?
BARNARD: '60s. ‘64.
DINGMAN: ‘64. OK. So, at that point, you're not so many years removed from Weimar Germany.
BARNARD: 20.
DINGMAN: And the resonance of that is completely different than, than doing it now. And it also has this patina of being a Broadway classic and, you know, the lead role, having been turned into kind of a crucible for great actors and, and all these sorts of things. How much do you think about, with something like that, preserving the original political context?
BARNARD: I think "Cabaret" is an anomaly. I've never really known of another show that has the name value to it as strong as "Cabaret," and yet it has been reinterpreted probably differently than any other revival musical I've ever known.
The original musical in 1964 the audiences and what they would accept and not accept is quite different than what the audience will accept and expect to accept today. And so, the new interpretations are much edgier in the early '60s they could make or nod to the idea the Kit Kat Girls are to do other professions besides dancing, and things of that nature, but it was all done very big, happy.
DINGMAN: Right, it's there if you know, to be looking for it.
BARNARD: Right, but it's pretty masqueraded. And I chose to do it where the masquerade was there at the beginning. And then slowly it was shredded and taken away.
DINGMAN: Oh, that’s interesting.
BARNARD: Much the same way as the Nazi party when, when they were first trying to get a foothold in Germany, they would do anything and everything for anybody and you could, "We'll provide you this and we'll do that and it's going to be great and just, just listen to us, believe in us, we'll take care. We're gonna make Germany perfect, you know, and you're not gonna have to worry about a thing, just follow us and everything will be great."
And slowly but surely that was where that went. And, and then, as they took a stronger foothold, that mask kind of went away and, and then you began to understand what you've, what had happened and you've bought into it and now it's too late.
DINGMAN: Yeah. So, this is fascinating to me because, you know, I feel like your answer has disproven the idea of behind my question, which is you're saying that your approach with "Cabaret" has been to move closer to the original political context and intention of the production, not farther away, not to treat it like a museum piece, not to treat it like something that lives behind theatrical classic glass, but rather to get closer to the really raw.
BARNARD: What the original text was.
DINGMAN: Yeah.
BARNARD: That and to me, "Cabaret" is more relevant today than I think it's been in since it opened.
DINGMAN: Yeah. So what did you find in terms of audience reaction? Did people connect with?
BARNARD: Yes, I really truly do believe that. We didn't get a lot of pushback from taking a political point of view. We weren't taking a political point of view. We were literally saying, "This is what happened in Germany in 1929."
DINGMAN: So as you think about going forward, do you think the experience with 'Constitution' will, will change the way that you think about season planning?
BARNARD: No. I think if anything, we may decide that yes, we're going to do this piece, but we'll probably only run it three or four weeks because we just don't have a large enough audience that's interested in that niche, that niche piece. But that, I don't think we should not do something based on that. I just choose a piece that says, "Here's what happened. You choose how you feel about this."