Letters to Aaron Sorkin

The one person show gets a bad rap in this town. Here is my little protest. 

I once heard a CD say something like this:

"I see plays all the time, and I'll go see anything except a one person show. Those are a waste of time because acting is about reacting."

Hmmm. Yes, but...

Surely this casting director has seen movies that employed the use of a green screen or CGI, so that the actor was reacting to something other than another actor or even something tangible. And surely this casting director uses a reader for auditions in their office, expecting actors to act with a fairly non-responsive person so that the CD can judge the actor's interpretation of the role. Perhaps they've even heard a soliloquy.

Hmmm. 

What's going on here?

It's possible that the CD just doesn't like one person shows. I find that to be a valid opinion. It could be that for scouting and research purposes a one person show is not a good use of time for the CD. This is also valid. 

I have seen the indulgent, disconnected one person show. I have seen the indulgent, disconnected 3, 5, and 30 person show. The presence of another person does not guarantee that an actor will react to what is going on in the moment, nor does the absence of another person preclude it. 

In 2004, I saw Jefferson Mays on Broadway in the one man show I Am My Own Wife, for which he won the Drama Desk Award that year. He was alone on stage. He was a fine actor.

Maybe what the CD really meant was, "No, you people in this room, I will not see your one person show. I believe it will be shallow and false and a waste of my time."  

I can accept that much easier than I can accept the discounting of an entire genre of the performing arts.

(Protest is officially over.) 

Best, 

Laura