[Mb-hair] HAiR - Questions regarding Revised Script

[John Zuehlke]

Dear Cybertribe:

I just saw a new production of HAiR in Southern California, and I wonder
whether any tribe member who has done a recent production, or anyone who has
a copy of the latest script revision, could answer some of my questions.
They are:

1) How "old" is the current revision?

2) Does the current script still have the part of Claude's Hallucination
where one group kills another group, and then, in turn, is killed by a third
group, etc., etc.?  If I recall correctly, this sequential action is
repeated three times, each time being performed more rapidly, and that it is
often done under strobe illumination.  In many, but not all, of the HAiR
productions that I have seen, the scene, though quite politically
meaningful, has been rather hard to "read" from the vantage point of the
audience.

In the "complete" production that I just saw, this scene is performed by
having two "Nuns" in chest-baring habits (males, however) run across the
stage followed by a general melee reminiscent of a "mosh pit."

Is this change in the new script or was it made by the director?

3) When I saw Berger deliberately tearing the yellow shirt, stomping on it,
and slapping Sheila's face in the UCLA production a couple of years ago, I
attributed these choices to the director rather than to the script.  Since
the ambiance of his entire production was rather violent and ugly, I felt
justified in this assumption.

Now that I have seen this new production, which also features Berger
deliberately tearing the shirt and slapping Sheila (one of three face slaps
in the production), I am now not so sure that this is a not a part of the
new script.  I still can't believe that James Rado would want the scene
played this way.

Are these face slaps in the new script?

4) About 5 years ago "Act This!" did a production at Los Angeles Valley
College that featured a totally nude woman who "morphed" into a clothed
Claude when he is summoned in the Second Act to the theme/chant of
"Aquarius."   I assumed that she probably was supposed to represent
Aquarius, although she had no identifying props such as a pitcher, etc.  At
that time I also assumed that this staging was the director's idea, as she
had used quite a lot of nudity throughout her production.

The new production, however, does this scene in exactly the same way except
that the nude is a man rather than a woman.

Is this similarity just a coincidence, or does the new script say that the
scene should be staged this way?

Incidentally, this new production provides, IMHO, a classic, textbook
example of how NOT to end Act 1!  Claude sang "Where Do I Go" mostly from
the high center platform at the rear of the stage that supported the band.
He descended to the stage and joined the rest of the tribe to finish the
song.  I am rather unclear about the following action since the house lights
had been brought up slightly and the stage dimmed out, making the action on
stage hard to see.  From here on the action was quite hard to see since,
except for some light spill from the house, the scene seemed to only be
illuminated in by some forward-facing lights, placed behind the tribe at the
rear of the stage, which made them appear as vague silhouettes.  At this
time, I assumed that it was intermission and that the "nude scene" had been
cut.  However, Act 1 had not yet ended.  The tribe members lay down on the
stage, and, as I was told though I could not see this for myself, they
placed small flags on their chests.  A large scrim was brought in to cover
the supine tribe for a few seconds, and then lifted off.  I could only see
the vague outlines of some of the tribe, and that only for about five
seconds, before two panels of mini-PAR lamps, that had been mounted above
the stage on the band platform facing into the audience, were turned on.
These eighteen lamps emitted a blinding glare that completely obliterated
the remainder of the scene.

Finally a "cop" came out, declared that the performance was obscene and that
everyone was subject to arrest.  He made true to his word by selecting an
audience member in the first row, pulling him out of his seat, turning him
around, and bending him forwards back over his seat.  The "cop" then
proceeded to frisk the audience member!

During the intermission, I talked with members of the group I attended with.
They all agreed that the optical "blinders" were very uncomfortable, and
that they, too, had seen little or nothing of the scene.  One man even
complained that the light caused him a painful headache while it was on.
The other prime topic of discussion was whether or not there was any nudity
in the scene.  The group behind us was also overheard to be discussing the
same topic.  Another member of my group said that all he saw of the scene
was a tribe member, of indeterminable sex, running off stage dressed in
underwear.  I DON'T BELIEVE THAT CLAUDE'S SONG WAS EVEN A TOPIC OF
DISCUSSION!

Sorry to rant and rave so much, but I really would like to know if any the
changes that I have discussed are actually parts of the "newly revised"
script.



Blessed be with peace, love, freedom, and happiness!

John