We are now three rehearsals in to The Designated Mourner and I have reached an incontrovertible conclusion: this play is hard.
Here’s the deal: You’ve got three characters. Jack–a youngish intellectual, his wife Judy, and her father Howard. Howard is a luminary of the intellectual / artistic establishment. He’s all anti-government and stuff. Oh, also the government becomes increasingly totalitarian and starts incarcerating artists and intellectuals. Including Howard.
Wait, let me try this again. See, there are these three characters and they speak to the audience. Occasionally to each other, but mostly to the audience. Two of them are married. One is the woman’s father. And they talk a lot. Some of them are dead.
Let me try again–the government cracks down on intellectuals, in the process extinguishing a very special little group of people who know how to read John Donne. Jack, the designated mourner, spends many words mourning them. Designatedly.
Right. So it seems to me like there are at least two ways into the play. The first is to take it as a statement about repression and the value (and power) of art in an oppressive world. Those are kind of abstract concepts. Honestly, that reading of the play doesn’t do much for me as an actor or as a reader.
A second way into the play is to look at it as a story about the relationship between Jack, Judy, and Howard. All the government stuff is background, circumstances, important but not central to the story. It can be, at its core, a story about the transformative power of love and loss in the life of an emotionally blocked/stunted man.
Now all I have to do is act all emotionally block and stunted. It’ll be a stretch, but. . .


