The Group Theatre: an evaluation Item Type text; Thesis-Reproduction (electronic) Authors James, Barry Lee, 1945- Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 02/10/2021 02:29:25 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/554486 THE GROUP THEATRE:. AN EVALUATION Barry Lee James A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OF DRAMA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 1 9 7 3 STATEMENT BY.AUTHOR This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of re­ quirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the copyright holder. SIGNED: APPROVAL BY THESIS DIRECTOR This thesis has been approved on the date shown below: niL WILLIAM A. LAN( Assistant Professor <£f Drama COPYRIGHTED BY BARRY LEE JAMES 1973 iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Gratitude is expressed to Professor Peter R e Marroney, Head of the Department of Drama, for his inspiration in the writing of this thesis. Special appreciation is extended to Rosemary P, Gipson, Assist­ ant Professor of Drama, for her patience, kindness, and devotion to scholarship. Thanks are also given to William A, Lang, Assistant Pro­ fessor of Drama, for his editing and proofreading. TABLE OF CONTENTS ' Page TR.ACT o e o e o o o o o o o o o-o o o o o o o o o o, o o o o o "VI CHAPTER 1 FORMATION OF THE GROUP THEATRE ............ 1 2 ACHIEVEMENTS OF THE GROUP THEATRE ........... 20 An Adaptation of the Stanislavsky Acting System ............ ......... 20 A Directorial Method Based on Stanislavsky .... 25 An Approach to Scene Design ............ 32 A Design for the Playwright ............ 36 A Mode of Living ............ 40 3 PROBLEMS OF THE GROUP THEATRE ............. 45 Misinterpretation of the Stanislavsky System Of Acting - o o o-o o.o e o o 6 o o o e e o o o 45 Lack of a Financial Base . e » . » . » » . 48 - Infiltration by the Communist Party . 0 « . » 54 Dissatisfaction and Reorganization . » » « « o . 57 4 ANALYSIS OF THE TERMINATION AND INFLUENCE OF THE GROUP THEATRE . .oo© © © © © © © © © © © © © © 64 Reasons for Dissolution of the Group Theatre . „ © 64 Influence of the Group Theatre ... © ....©© © 68 APPENDIX A: ACTORS WHO WERE GROUP THEATRE MEMBERS ©.©...© 75 APPENDIX B: SCENE DESIGNERS WHO WORKED WITH THE GROUP THEATRE . 76 APPENDIX O: GROUP THEATRE PRODUCTIONS ....©„....©. © 77 APPENDIX D: LETTER FROM PAUL MORRISON TO THE WRITER .©..©. 82 APPENDIX E: LETTER FROM ELIA KAZAN TO THE WRITER d ...... 85 LIST OF REFERENCES . © . © © © © © © » © © © © © © © © © © © 87 ABSTRACT The purpose of this thesis is to study the achievements and the problems of the Group Theatre which appeared on the American scene dur­ ing the years 1931 to 19410 The Group Theatre was a splinter organiza­ tion of the Theatre Guild and grew to become one of the best known theatre companies of the 19301 s. Although the contributions of the Group Theatre have been rec­ ognized by theatre historians, little has been done to evaluate their role in American theatre. Therefore, this study will investigate the formation, achievements, failure, and influences of the Group Theatre. CHAPTER 1 FORMATION OF THE GROUP THEATRE The story of the Group Theatre begins in the decade of the Roaring Twenties during an era of pleasure, good time jazz, and the Charlestone The American theatre was coming into its own with the­ atrical activity flourishing as it never had before. The Theatre Guild, a professional New York art theatre dedicated to the production of plays of artistic merit not ordinarily produced by commercial managers, ex­ perimented with a variety of new plays and with new methods of produc­ tion (Hewitt 1959:327). The Provincetown Players, a group dedicated to the production of plays by Americans, headed by playwright Eugene O ’Neill, scene designer Robert Edmond Jones, and critic Kenneth Maegowen, worked with new playwrights (Hewitt 1959:331). Actress Eva LeGallienne revived repertory in New York with the formation of the Civic Repertory Theatre in 1926 (Hewitt 1959:365), and playwright Eugene O ’Neill achieved international stature with his work (Brockett 1968:638). Producer and director Arthur Hopkins experimented with new production techniques, and designers Lee Simonson, Robert Edmond Jones, and Norman Bel Geddes used new methods of scene design (Brockett 1968:633). The nature of the American theatre underwent a change as the Twenties neared a close. Historian Ben Blake (1935:6-7), in speaking of the American theatre during the 1920’s, stated: 2 They [the American theatre] did not really understand the basic forces, political, economic, or cultural, at work in the contemporary world. And not understanding, they could : . offer no satisfactory, no true hope for the ultimate solu­ tion of the problems afflicting mankind. So that already in 1928, with prosperity at its height, the American theatre had no serious comment to make beyond what had been made in the previous decade on the world it was supposed to reflect. By 1928 the audience of the American theatre had begun to fall away, and the laments for a dying theatre were beginning to fill the air. The American theatre seemed not to relate to its time, to its life, to its audience, or to its society. The Group Theatre arose out of a desire to provide a theatre that would make a serious comment on the social, cultural, and moral problems of the times in which the theatre existed. Harold Clurman (1945:6), one of the founders of the Group Theatre, echoed Ben Blake*s indictment of the theatre: In the books I read, in the paintings I see, in the music I hear, in all conversations, I am aware of the presence of the world it­ self, I detect a feeling for the large issues of human concern. In the theatre these are either absent or diluted, frequently cheapened. The composers and the painters are searching for new words, so to speak, new forms, shapes, meanings. Aaron Copland tells me he wants to find the musical equivalent for our contem­ porary tempo and activity. Where is the parallel to all this in the theatre? There are little avant-garde performances here and there; Copeau speaks seriously about the theatre. Of course, the greatest poets of the past wrote for the theatre. Yet, despite all this, what I actually see on the boards lacks the feel of either significant contemporaneity that I get from even the lesser concerts of new music— not to mention the novel of Gide, Proust, D.H. Lawrence— or the sense of a permanent contribution to my inner experience that I get from some things at the Louvre from the finale of Beethoven *s Ninth, or even from the simple reading of certain classic dramatists. Where is the best thought of our time in the theatre, the feeling of some true personal significance in any of the works? Either there is something in­ ferior in the theatre per se or.there is something wrong with the practical theatre of today that escapes me. I can * t live with it. The theatre gives itself lofty graces, claims a noble lineage, but has no more dimension than a bordello* 3 The germ of an idea which was later to become the Group Theatre was born in Harold Clurman1s mind while he was a student at the Sorbonne in Paris. In addition to study at the Sorbonne, Clurman attended lec­ tures delivered by French director Jacques Copeau at the Theatre du Vieux Colombier in Paris. Clurman had long watched from afar the triv­ ialities and commercialism of the New York theatre with contempt, "a contempt matched only by the vitriolic diatribes he frequently posted to the New York newspapersM (Strauss 1939b:1). While in France, Clur­ man began to conceive of a solution to the problem posed by the Ameri­ can theatre in the 1920*s. Clurman dreamed of the greatness that a re­ vitalized American dramatic art could achieve, envisioning a theatre "capable of treating ideas less trivial than the boudoir farces with which the dilettantes aided the digestion of heavy dinners" (Strauss 1939b:1). In 1924 Clurman returned from the Left Bank of Paris for a brief visit to America (Strauss 1939b:1). The Theatre Guild at that time had inaugurated a new kind of experimental studio proving ground for future Guild productions. The younger Guild actors, the super­ numeraries, and a few outside recruits made up this laboratory. Fresh from Paris, Clurman walked into a studio rehearsal of Luigi Pirandello* s Right You Are If You Think You Are and noticed a peculiarly intense young actor, Lee Strasberg, playing the role of Ponza. Strasberg was later to join with Clurman in the formation of the Group Theatre. De­ spite his extreme interest in the Theatre Guild experimental studio, Clurman returned to Paris for further study. A year later* early in 19259 Glurman returned from the Sorbonne with a degree in letters (Strauss 1939b:1)0 Phillip Loeb, then casting director for the Theatre Guild, was making arrangements for the first Garrick Gaieties by Rich­ ard Rodgers and Lorenz Hart and chose Clurman as stage manager and Lee Strasberg as an actor in skits ("The Group Comes of Age" 1934:2)„ It was during the Garrick Gaieties rehearsals that Clurman and Strasberg became close friends— "they were kindred spirits.