REVIEW: Kate Cortesi’s ‘Love’, by The Marin Theater Company

VIRTUAL TIX ARE ON SALE NOW TO STREAM Kate Cortesi's ‘Love’ at from the Marin Theatre Company!!! Book today thru April 12th to lock-in your access to this exclusive content, and bring the magic of live theatre into the comfort (& safety!) of your own home!

I’m heartsick for everyone involved, that ‘Love’s’ run has had to be cancelled, even if it is for the greater good. Love’s Labors Lost indeed. I count myself fortunate to have been among the lucky few to see it, before we all realized that social distancing is the only way forward.

I was absolutely compelled as I watched Kate Cortesi’s brand new play unfold. The script is sharp, witty and relatable and the characters highly believable, even though conflict and verisimilitude is inconsistent in places. ‘Love’ sets out to explore the subtler more nebulous side of #MeToo issues, questioning consensual sexual boundaries and asking us to pull out our moral compasses.

It unfolds in the years between the turn of the millennium and 2018. In 2003, Otis, (R. Ward Duffy), is the older, married CEO, at Art Start, a New York City non profit, specializing in art murals, who likes to seduce his young female employees, even though his wife is pregnant. Penelope, (Clea Alsip), our main protagonist, aged 22, and taking a gap year as an art teacher before medical school, when the story begins, is now a surgeon, married with kids. Jaime, (Bobak Cyrus Bakthiari), was Penelope’s platonic best friend at the time of the seductions, but is now married to her. Otis, the former boss, is now gaining influence and works in the New York Mayors office.

The play opens with a reunion between Vee, former art teacher, (wonderful Rebecca Schweitzer), now sober, and Penelope. Penelope learns that everything she did with Otis, he did with Vee too as well as Whitney, (talented Mari Vial-Golden), Penelope’s successor. Vee wants to bring Penelope on board, so they can expose Otis’ predatory behavior to the New York Times. Whitney won’t speak unless Penelope does. The trouble is Otis and Penelope have remained close friends over the years, plus he donates to the hospital where Penelope works. This is the crux of the play. Penelope’s dilemma, a very common one, is, what happens when a serial philanderer is actually a nice guy too and a friend of many years? Should she expose him or not? A series of scenes that cut between then and now show us how Penelope and Otis came to be, and eventually how Penelope and Jaime come to be. This is a potentially complex thing to pull off, and pacing worked well, and the play moved swiftly through the story. I think everyone in the theater would agree that the most memorable scene is the one in which Otis watches porn in the office and incites Penelope to join him. At the time she’s complicit. She knows he’s married with a baby on the way, but she’s in her 20’s, naive, and navigating a new adult world. Her moral boundaries are blurred too, although, simultaneously, she’s focused, and ready to start medical school in a years time. This scene definitely presents a directorial challenge. Did this need to be explicitly shown? How explicitly without seeming gratuitous? Where are the boundaries between titillating and predatory? Certainly it was a revealing scene, and an uncomfortable one.

In an off the record meeting with the New York Times journalist, (Robert Sicular), Penelope discusses her reticence to come forward. It’s in the journalist’s interest more than hers, she says. She questions why these issues always have to be politicized. I’ll either be a saint or a slut. Otis is actually a nice guy who would drive across the city to take an ‘at risk’ youth home. We have to consider his background. He grew up in a time where sexual boundaries were looser. Does his career have to be ended for this? We’re dealing with contradictions and grey areas. Indeed Otis himself is a Silver Fox. I wonder whether the actor’s similar physical resemblance to Jeffrey Epstein is a coincidence?

As such, this play is perhaps a vehicle on which we, as an audience, can project our own experiences of subtle and not so subtle sexual abuse. The thing about the #MeToo movement is that 99.9% of women have a story, or legions of stories. Heck even my 13 year old daughter has a couple.However, as much as I’ve experienced cases of subtler, less cut and dried abuse, as in ‘Love’, I also have two friends who, several decades ago, experienced much more sinister incidents, involving a predator, very similar to Otis. College graduation and their own fragile mental health were hanging in the balance. Otis’ pattern is all too familiar. Older married guy, seduces a young, vulnerable girl, who thinks he’s focusing exclusively on her, when in fact he isn’t. She’s consensual, because she doesn’t yet realize she’s just another victim in his unhealthy behavior pattern. He’s a classic Schmuck! When does disordered behavior become predatory? Penelope’s central problem is how she wrestles with reconciling the contradicting sides of Otis’ personality.

She realizes that whilst she was contemptuous of Whitney, when she was training her to take over her job at Art Start, she should in fact have been protecting her. I was surprised that there’s little to no attempt to discover if Otis is still abusing girls in his current job at the Mayor’s office. The point that Penelope wants to protect Otis’ future female employees isn’t emphasized, although for me it would be critical in making a decision as to whether to expose him or not. This also raises the question, if it happened in the past, but is no longer a problem, is retribution worth it? Or should we just look to creating less fertile soil for predators to grow in, in the future? Because Penelope takes her job at Art Start to fill a gap year, she has no ambition there, which puts she and Otis on more equal ground. Whilst this makes the question of mutual consent in their relationship more ambivalent, it also reduces potential conflict between them too, and misses opportunities for a subtle but unequal office power dynamic, which might strengthen the story and raise the stakes.

Even after Penelope makes her decision, she has regrets. As we approach the final scenes, Penelope does something that really stretches my suspension of disbelief, and seems inconsistent with her character. In her emotional turmoil she displays what at first glance is a self destructive case of Stockholm Syndrome. Quite rightly, she wants to know why Otis did what he did. However, her demands that he be honest with himself and his now teenage son going forward, are morally right, but seem woefully unrealistic, especially in the light of her own actions. The why of Otis’ behavior is a compelling and climactic question, although the way Penelope sets him up to ask him, lacks verisimilitude, and make her appear erratic, reckless and selfish, rather than empowered but also flawed. This is not an easy story to write, no story ever is, but I would have liked to see this climax presented in a way that feels more congruent with the rest of the story.

‘Love’ is a play that provokes questions about consent and harassment from a woman’s viewpoint. It’s an immorality play, that outlines the dangers of sexual predators in the workplace and the world in general, and illuminates the repercussions of self deceit and acting without a moral compass. Other than sternly warning our daughters about the behavior patterns of predatory schmucks, and modeling for our sons how not to be one, what can we actually do to address problems like Otis in the future? Are men like him capable of remorse, and redemption? Can the nicer sides of their personality overwhelm their predatory ones? We’re in a post #MeToo world now, and it’s more open to listening. ‘Love’ prompts us to consider what procedures are in place to safely expose and prevent low key sexual predators, as well as major ones. How can we raise men that aren’t insidious abusers in the first place, and change the mindset of those that already are? To emphasize how far we’ve come, compare the behavior of sexual abusers to those of basic work place bullies. I’m watching a pathological bully I encountered in my own life, return to a new job, after years off, raising children. Her behavior although not sexual abuse, was nevertheless traumatizing. If I was to warn her new colleagues, over a decade later, I would appear to be a vindictive lunatic, although she may well still be insidiously destroying an office environment. If this had been sexual abuse, it would be much easier now, (though still difficult), to come forward. Is it nevertheless my moral duty to intervene? The question about how we can create and implement appropriate repercussions for all types of abuse is constantly evolving and we still have a long way to go, although increasingly these stories are now being heard, and so we need lots of them. In this context ‘Love’ is an important and provocative part of the conversation.

All of the performances in ‘Love’ are top notch and keep this play compelling despite some inconsistency at the end. R. Ward Duffy undertakes and champions an extremely brave and demanding role as Otis. He is indeed likable, despite his character flaws, and his is a strong and convincing performance. Clea Alsip as Penelope is also terrific, steering us through her dilemma with fortitude and confusion in turns, she’s likable and very easy to relate to. Together she and R. Ward Duffy very solidly carry the play towards its emotional climax.

Stephanie Osin Cohen’s scenic design is appealing in it’s simplicity with homage to early 2000’s start-up utilitarian design. Projected year and location tells us where we are in time and place. Text exchanges projected on the screen, are an interesting form of exposition. Furniture such as bed, chairs and desks are brought onto the stage by the actors. The simplicity of the set further promotes the idea that this story is one on which we can project and explore our own similar ones. Transitions between the past and present are highly effective through changes in costume alone. It’s almost as if the characters lose and gain weight as they move back and forth through time.

Mike Donahue has done a fine job in assembling and steering us through this very timely play, although I personally feel that certain scenes in the denouement need to be more cohesive. Nevertheless, ‘Love’ compares with the Marin Theater Company’s usual high standard.

Catch it on video if you can, and please consider donating the cost of your cancelled ticket, in these uncertain times. The arts need our support more than ever before.

marintheatre.org | 415.388.5208 | @marintheatreco

Review by Hannah Yurke

---

VIRTUAL GALA53

Each year Marin Theatre Company (MTC) depends on the annual fundraising gala to celebrate accomplishments and raise critical funds for MTC’s artistic and educational programs. In its place, MTC will hold VIRTUAL GALA53!, an entirely digital silent, live and wine auction. Guests can now preview auction items online and register for online bidding. Bidding will open on Friday, April 3rd at 5:00pm and will continue throughout the weekend. All auction bidding will close at 7:00pm on Monday, April 6th. During this time, guests will also be encouraged to contribute directly to MTC’s fund-a-need campaign, funding artistic and educational programs. Click here for more information.