CONSTRUCTING A “SENSE OF LIFE”: AYN RAND’S NIGHT OF JANUARY 16th FROM CONCEPTION TO “DISASTER” Patrick M. Konesko A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS August 2009 Committee: Dr. Ronald Shields, Advisor Dr. Scott Magelssen Dr. Lesa Lockford ii ABSTRACT Dr. Ronald Shields, Advisor During the course of her career, Ayn Rand published a number of landmark novels, plays, and essays that, in many ways, influenced conceptions of the individual spirit, society, and government. With boldly drawn, individualistic characters battling against an oppressive and compromising society, Rand’s writing has inspired many devoted fans and passionate opponents. Even with her notoriety, and the frequent interpretation of her novels, her early work remains largely unexplored. In her play, Night of January 16th, Rand began with a simple goal: to adapt courtroom drama into an exciting and interactive form by including audience participation and frequent ruptures of the fourth wall. As the project began to develop, however, Rand’s work took on a new focus—to attempt, using the audience as the jury for the production, to gauge, and ultimately influence the audience’s “sense of life.” This study begins with in-depth exploration of Night of January 16th from conception to Rand’s ultimate declaration of failure. Then I compare two versions of the script in order to examine Rand’s later changes and updates. Throughout this process I suggest possible motivations for these changes, and their implications on the larger work. Finally, using a selection of reader-response techniques I examine the unique context in which Rand is attempting to stage her “sense of life” test, and explore other factors that conceivably influenced Rand’s experiment. Throughout the study, I work towards the question of whether or not it is possible, within the complex theatre environment, for Rand to effectively transmit a purely philosophical message or “test.” iii For my wife, Alyssa, for her love and support, and for my parents, for pushing me to succeed. iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS If we take Ayn Rand at her word and accept that each human being has a fundamental “sense of life” governing their reactions to the world around them and that it can be altered through constant effort or exposure to outside forces, then this project seems a worthy fulfillment of growth. Certainly, the most important of these influences lies in the context, in those who helped me to succeed. First and foremost I must thank my wife, Alyssa. Without her constant support, encouragement, and love this project never would have been completed. Every day she pushed me to succeed and picked me up when I was discouraged—whether with incredible (and fattening) baked goods or her wonderful hugs. To her, I owe everything. I also must thank my mother and father for their life long dedication to my education and success. Never has a week gone by without their attention, encouragement, and humor. Never has a play or ceremony gone by without them in attendance. Through example and expectation (as well as fairly frequent bickering) they have forged me into the man I am today. My sincere gratitude must also go to my committee chair, Dr. Ronald Shields. With gravitas and humor, with suggestion and support, and with knowing when I needed to be left to my own pace and when I needed an immediate (and often horrifying) deadline, Dr. Shields was an incredible mentor throughout this study. My thanks, too, to my other committee members, Drs. Scott Magelssen and Lesa Lockford. Their dedication, suggestions, observations, and enthusiasm were invaluable throughout this process. And of course, I must thank the incredible group of people that I began this journey with. From my first, terrifying, moments of graduate school, Jeff La Rocque, Elizabeth Guthrie, Heidi v Nees, and Chanelle Vigue have supported me, laughed with me, and given me frequent reality checks. To list I must also add those that I have become friends with along the way—Stephen Harrick, Rob Connick, J.P. Staszel, Hephzibah Dutt, and Andie Markijohn. Each of these individuals offered me wise advice and calmed my anxiety over the process. Also, my thanks to Mathew Easterwood, my preliminary editor and best friend. He provided a constant supply of support and cynical wit that helped me through this transitional period. My thanks also go to my mentor at Saginaw Valley State University, Dr. Janet Rubin. It is with her support and example that I first contemplated graduate school. Thanks also to the other professors, staff, and friends that were part of my undergraduate experience. Finally, my heartfelt thanks to the rest of the faculty and staff who have supported and instructed me in my time at Bowling Green. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………………… 1 CHAPTER ONE: FROM CONCEPTION TO “DISASTER” ……………………………… 13 CHAPTER TWO: THE RE-BIRTH OF NIGHT……………………………………………. 38 CHAPTER THREE: AUDIENCE EXPECTATION AND RAND’S “TEST”……………... 62 CONCLUSION……………………………………………………………………………… 84 BIBLIOGRAPHY…………………………………………………………………………… 90 1 INTRODUCTION During the course of her career, Ayn Rand published a number of landmark novels, plays, and essays that, in many ways, influenced conceptions of the individual spirit, society, and government. With boldly drawn, individualistic characters battling against an oppressive and compromising society, Rand’s writing has inspired many devoted fans and passionate opponents. Her novels, which became immensely popular in the mid twentieth-century, created a firestorm of controversy and debate that still resonates today, twenty seven years after her death (Gladstein 12). Less examined than her novels is Rand’s early experimentation with theatre as a vehicle for the dissemination of her ideas. Although the run of her first Broadway production, Night of January 16th is considered by many scholars to be a success, in terms of its run and critical reception, Rand personally found it to be an absolute failure. For Rand, the experience was rife with setbacks and disappointments, battles with the actors and producer, and a general lack of true audience “understanding” (Branden, My Years 65). I believe it is a combination of these elements, and the uniquely diverse and uncontrollable nature of live performance that ultimately perpetuates this “failure,” and demonstrates the inability of many of her ideas from being viable outside of the text that defines them. The goals of this thesis are threefold. The first, using the sources available, is to construct a comprehensive descriptive history of Rand’s attempt to stage Night of January 16th. Though many scholars mention the work and its production in passing, few attempt to examine the experience with any depth. Those who do discuss aspects of the play often only do so in an attempt to position it as a proto-philosophical step in her rise to intellectual maturity. So, before further examination of Rand’s process or possible results of her process can be undertaken, the actual event must be examined as thoroughly as possible. This will also begin the process of 2 examining Rand’s stated conception of failure. Regardless of the many successes of Night, she disparaged the production and the process throughout her career. So, this descriptive history will also work to examine these grievances and to suggest possible reasons for Rand’s “failure.” The second focus of this study is a side by side comparison of Night scripts relying primarily upon the 1936 amateur edition edited by Nathaniel Edward Reeid and the 1968 “definitive” edition edited by Rand. The comparison of these scripts not only demonstrates substantial changes in content and melodramatic elements but also updates to the proto- Objectivist philosophy of the piece. Because an original copy of Rand’s script is not available, this analysis, out of necessity, relies on a play script twice removed from Rand’s control, and so cannot be a definitive examination of the author’s revision process. Instead, this reading is intended to point out melodramatic elements present in the 1936 edition that are later cut, hypothesize as to whether they might have been in an earlier version, and raise questions about the development of Rand’s philosophy between these two publications. Finally, this chapter works to suggest motivations for Rand’s rewrite, and to explore her conception of failure through the revisions. The third, and final, goal of this project is an attempt to broach the exceptionally complex issues of reception facing the 1935 Broadway production. Using traditional notions of reader response, as well as the work of more contemporary theatre scholars, I move to interpret some aspects of Night of January 16th, including its unique jury gimmick, architectural changes and staging choices utilized in the production, and the poignant context and possible expectations of the audience. Finally, I approach a complex issue: Is it possible to use theatre to successfully test an audience’s “sense of life” within the myriad of other factors influencing an audience’s 3 response, and was Rand’s self-proclaimed failure at this attempt central to her rejection of theatre as her primary means of philosophical dissemination? BACKGROUND Night of January 16th is a courtroom drama dedicated to uncovering the mysterious and deadly events of a single night. Based loosely on the real suicide of Ivan Kreugar and the subsequent failure of his vastly inflated “match empire” in 1932, the murdered figure is a prototype of Rand’s “selfish hero” (to be perfected in later novels). This daunting figure is survived by his longtime mistress, and woman on trial, Karen Andre. Set entirely within a New York courtroom, Rand’s script begins with a unique gimmick—members of the audience are called onstage to act as the jury for the trial.