The Cavalier daily :: Wednesday, February 28, 1973 :: University of Virginia Library

The director was refusing
the G.S.U. his permission to
circulate in the lobby or insert
in the playbill our leaflet. It
disclaimed, he said, the
authenticity of his production
of The Boys In The Band.

"Mr. Jontz, are you telling
me that your production
represents the homosexual
subculture?"

"Yes."

"May I just ask you if you
are or ever were a practicing
homosexual?"

"Why – uh, no. Uh, why
do you ask?"

"I ask because I am. And I
am telling you that your
production is not true to my
experience. It is not an
imitation of my life. It is a
ruthless distortion."

"Well, I happen to have a
good friend in Richmond who
is homosexual and he has
assured me that the production
is authentic."

Disappointed

I accepted the director's
invitation to preview his play.
His insights into gay life being
so personal and profound, I did
not expect much. And the play
disappointed my minimal
expectations.

There is no longer a great
need to denounce the play.
Regardless of this or that
interpretation, it is a piece of
oppression. The author
himself, Mart Crowley, has
admitted as much in his latest
interview (Playbill Magazine,
Jan. '73).

It is demoralizing to behold
characters who accept their
persecuted status – the hell on
earth that psychiatrists,
vice-squadsmen, priests,
capitalists, and -heterosexuals
can create for the subculture
when they are not restrained.
It is appalling to behold
characters who internalize
rather than externalize hatred.
It is painful to behold a drama
which emphasizes the ravages
of guilt without suggesting its
resolution in rage.

Candid

Let me be candid. The Boys
In The Band may be an
authentic representation, but it
is only an authentic
representation of a
subculture within a subculture:
sophisticated, established, and
urbanized homosexuals
constitute only a segment of
the whole homosexual
population. Furthermore,
while this portrayal of a
particular segment may once
have been exact, it is now a
distortion. The nothing less
than revolutionary intervention
of Gay Liberation between the
life-styles of the 60's and the
70's has made the portrayal
passe.

The Boys In The Band is s
passe a play s Tea and
Sympathy. I should have
thought, therefore, that the
interpretation would have tried
to date the play as much as
possible. On the contrary, this
production has attempted to
update it, suggesting some
relevance where none exists.
Inappropriate to the 60's
period piece which the play
actually is, we have the music
and clothing in style for the
70's.

Bitchiness

Worse still, none of the
actors ever quite caught the
right tone; the production has
as much camp as a minstrel
show has soul. In a play which
depends upon smart talk for
much of its success, the
sooques and repartees were
invariably ill-timed and
monotonously high-pitched.
Often the bitchiness of camp is
the inhibition of someone
(Michael) to communicate
openly to someone else
(Donald) his respect and
affection. Thus, in the
conventions of camp, insult is
compliment. The camp in the
play never conveys this tone;
the bitchiness is nothing but
bitchiness.

Worst of all was the casting.
The play demands type-casting.
It is a sociological fact that
before the sexual revolution
sexual identification ("male")
determined gender
identification ("masculine").
Our Society expected its males
to act "masculine," with the
exception of the homosexual
male, who could act as
"feminine" as he pleased.
Hence it is no distortion – nor
is it an affront – to see the
hyper-effeminate Emory.

Gender Identity

What is ridiculous is that
the gender identity of the
characters does not correspond
to the gender identity of the
actors themselves. The director
has cast some of the more
"feminine" actors in
"masculine" roles and vice
versa. The actor playing Hank,
the butch, certainly has a more
"feminine" carriage and
address than the actor playing
Emory, the fem. Not
type-casting stereotyped
characters seriously strains the
characterization.

What more can I say about
the authenticity of a
production that presents as a
hustler a young man who
crosses his legs and fluffs his
hair on stage, who looks more
like he was from Phillips
Exeter than Times Square? The
production suggests that what
was once a coterie play – a
production by Village gays for
Village gays, can not now
become a popular play for a
Virginia audience.

Not only does the Virginia
Player's production of The
Boys In The Band distort the
current lifestyle of the gay
subculture, it manages to
distort the past life-style, too.