“What the Constitution Means to Me”, Canadian Style on the Day After Election Day in America – front mezz junkies, Theater News

The Toronto Theatre Review: Soulpepper’s What the Constitution Means to Me

By Ross

When I first saw this play off-Broadway at the New York Theatre Workshop, it just happened to be on one of the most upsetting days in American political history since that horrendous election eight years ago when Hillary lost her bid for the White House. I’m talking about the Kavanaugh hearings that led him onto the Supreme Court. After watching him get approved, I found myself thrust headfirst into a theatrical debate centered around the male-centric Constitution and the impact it and the male-dominated Supreme Court have and continue to have on a woman’s body. So it’s quite the surreal experience, yet again, to see another production of What the Constitution Means to Me on another absolutely horrendous day in American history. the night after the American election when a fascist rapist racist felon monster was reelected. I can’t even type to what office he will ascend to. It’s just too upsetting, infuriating, and frustrating to take in, even days later. The man has absolutely no right to be anywhere near that office. He has no respect for the wildly diverse country America is, nor this document; a document that means so much to playwright Heidi Schreck (Grand Concourse) and her 15-year-old self.

So when seeing What the Constitution Means to Me, a co-production with Soulpepper Theatre, Nightwood Theatre, Necessary Angel Theatre Company, and Talk is Free Theatre, the day after the election, my head was still swimming in the mucky angry mess of disbelief and grieving for a country that I had called my home for so many years. It’s pretty unforgivable. So when the lead character, Heidi Schreck, the playwright, portrayed cleverly and carefully by actor Amy Rutherford (Soulpepper’s A Streetcar Named Desire), greets us at the casual sweet beginning, I struggled a bit to want to take on the collective role assignment, as asked, of becoming one of the many old cigar-chomping white men sitting in attendance of a fifteen-year-old young lady giving a speech about the Constitution of the United States. Those were uncomfortable shoes to want to slip on that particular evening, but Rutherford’s Heidi greeted us with such a wide-open engaging smile, that I just had to let down my guard, step into the room, and go along with the request without hesitation.

Watching this fascinating Canadian version of Schreck’s ever-so-personal show, once again, continues to be revelatory, as it continues to deliver the goods in such a casually contained way. Held together by the steady hand of Rutherford’s Heidi, it sneaks up on you with its fact-based brilliance, creating an overall effect that is completely enlightening. It spins itself out like a teenage nervous memory, while also being a sharp and jarring examination of the systematic inequality and injustice in America that has lingered in the law for far too long. We are told, upfront by the “psychotically polite” Heidi Schreck to step back in time with her as our guide, and examine this document alongside her 15-year-old self. It’s a smart and inventive setup, this recreation of Schreck’s own history with this type of event, and Rutherford delivers the alternating framing with a solid expert charm and teenage energy.

Formulated around a traditional competitive debate given by wise teenagers, this powerful and reminiscent unpacking grows big and strong, spreading its wings out wide to encompass us all. But now it’s our turn to take a look at the American Constitution with Heidi, through Canadian eyes. And maybe, we can reflect back on our own problematic Charter of Rights and Freedoms and help us see our own problems with systematic oppression and inequality.

This auditorium scenario, directed with a gentle hand by Weyni Mengesha (Soulpepper’s The Guide to Being Fabulous), with simple straightforward lighting by Kimberly Purtell (Crow’s Rosmersholm), solid sound design by composer Richard Feren (Canadian Stage’s The Inheritance), and exacting costumes by Ellie Koffman (Studio 180’s 4 Minutes 12 Seconds) is engaging, but not the be all and end all of this creation. It is simply a jumping-off point towards a place that triggers a strong emotional response for all involved. This is especially true for the centerpiece soul of the show. As What the Constitution Means to Me spins itself forward, we start seeing the slyness in its formulation.

She’s terrifyingly turned on by this document and what it means to us all, even at the sweet young age of fifteen, but particularly for all the women who are referenced within this captivating play. The historical personal level this play activates hits us deep and sharp, almost as complicated as the ripples of distrust and pain that strike through Rutherford’s Schreck, overwhelming her composure and compassion. This deeply personal oration resonates within her soul and ours, almost, but not entirely as strong as when I first saw the actual Schreck perform this piece years ago on and off Broadway. Yet it remains disturbingly deep and determined, as it focuses on how clearly dysfunctional the country that I used to call my home truly is. It’s terribly upsetting, especially all those horrific statistics she, and Atkins, deliver to us, and the well-chosen audio bits and pieces that are shared. They are all required listening, and I’m thankful for Schreck’s thoughtfulness in her writing and the smart emotional way she keeps turning up the dial.

Damien Atkins (Soulpepper’s De Profundis) gives Rutherford’s Schreck a much-needed positive male support system, while alternatively adding a structural and creative dynamic that adds and floats the piece up higher than one expects, adding layer upon layer.  It is a greatly needed construct, at least for this out gay man, one that I’m trying hard to not disclose the surprise and inventiveness that exists in this well-formed play. His participation adds alternative vistas to the ride, bringing me personally into the room more than I already was, especially with Atkins’ clever humorous asides that are charmingly awkward, clumsy (oops, I just knocked over the water bottle and got everything wet!), and infinitely engaging. He brought something humanizing to the other side of the stage, even when not given any lines by the playwright. In his silence, his engagement was crucial.

And then we got into the last section of the piece, but this time, we were given a clearly Canadian perspective that brought this piece fully home. In NYC, I had the pleasure of seeing two well-spoken firecrackers and members of their school’s debate team, Rosdely Ciprian (NYTW) and Thursday Williams (Broadway) join Schreck on stage and into the conversation, breathing some youthful energy and spunk into a debate that is in dire need of happening across this country. To keep or discard. This time around, I had the good fortune of seeing another equally wise self-composed young lady, Gabriella King, who couldn’t have been more brilliant or commanding, and this debate centered around the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The two smart women sat behind their opposing desks and scribbled notes for their coin-tossed sides of the argument. Should we keep the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. or should we discard and write a new one? (Schreck did the same in the American production with the Constitution.) That becomes the question to be debated, and, as moderated by Atkins and his stopwatch, each side had the opportunity to step forward and argue their side, which they both did most effectively. I appreciated the information and the subtle way we were being told that Canada isn’t standing on some higher sacred ground looking down on that ridiculous neighbor of ours and their shit-show election (Kamala, you ran a great campaign, just saying!). We are not exactly a pillar of righteousness as we like to think of ourselves. Canada has a few of its own problems, many of which are very similar to America’s, especially when we can see a possible similar right-wing outcome next year in our own federal election. We’ve seen it happen all around the world. Liberalism falling and failing against Conservative false alternative-fact ideals being repeatedly bashed into our heads until a majority actually starts believing them. We will have a similar outcome in Canada, that is if we don’t start paying attention to what is at stake and what is actually true.

Dramaturg Joanna Falck keeps the production on track, and standing on solid ground, but the effortless grace of Rutherford as Schreck, pulling hard from past experiences and the history of women, solidifies the experience in such a compelling way that one can’t help but be moved. Especially on that particular night. This is the conversation that must happen, in both countries, as the debate outside swirls out of control with misinformation and propaganda gaining ground every day, down there in America, and up here in Canada. Unfortunately for us all, the masses are missing the point of what is at stake. They aren’t seeing the truth clearly. It lightened my load, seeing the smart and funny What the Constitution Means to Me, although my broken heart continues to be confused and perplexed in these trying times. Disheartened and frustrated, yet somewhere deeply still hoping for change, I applaud the playwright Schreck for giving us a debate that feels so pure and required. I welcome your “covert resistance“, and every other kind of resistance you can bring to the world.  You are a voice much-needed, both in America, and here in Canada. For tickets and information, click here.