(other dramatics)

Dearest Trudy,

Love! Valour! Compassion! Nathan!

I must explain before I write this that You-Know-Who has been unwell recently. The medication is making him ill and disoriented and he cannot seem to focus. At the last minute we jointly agreed that even the promise of three hours of Terrence Mc and naked boy-flesh would not be enough of a reason to keep a sick person in an uncomfortable seat. A play, by-the-by, in large measure, about our least favorite acronym!

This "Gay" play - I apologize to every queer for using that awful, awful neologism! - was serious in intent, funny - hilarious! - to its audience, and an also-ran to me. (My companion is eighteen and wonderfully un-neurotic. The little dear adored it.) Terrence writes funny and serious but they do not coalesce well. The politics leaps out, or, to change metaphors (I change everything every chance I get!) it felt appliquéd. There was little real drama and I hated - but hated - all but two of the characters. The representation of me (and when you read the text you'll know who Terrence was thinking of when he penned Nathan's character) was accurate, but I didn't feel like spending three hours with myself for sixty bucks when I could so easily do it for free! The boys were all succulent, God bless 'em, and it was, for the most part, well directed. (There was one absoutely dreadful false moment in Act III involiving a garbage disposal and serving coffee which so horribly phoney I nearly leapt out of my seat to assault Joe Mantello, wherever he was! (Needless to say, the eighteen year old lapped it up. The little dear is a big lapper!) But a play about the saintly queer and the unpleasant musical theatre fairy would have been sweet and painful - a playabout two fascinating and six other unpleasant men was tedious!

I'm being difficult, I know. Just as I was a curmudgeon about the Angels thing, so I am being difficult about this. I want our plays to be everybody's plays and I want them to be as good as the best. It will happen. And Terrence may do it. And Tony K. may do it. And J.R. Baitz may do it. But they haven't done it yet. Such talent, such brains, such effort... Some day, I think.

Oh, yes the boys. Nathan was the usual scenery chewing selfish actor he always is. Appropriate to this role, true, but annoying to me. The real acting kudos went to John Glover and isn't he just the best. He turned that chestnut of a stunt (playing identical twins) into a beautiful, graceful thing. Bravo! And the young cock boys were lovely, though R. Becker has a voice which could cut steel and that took away from his hairless beauty. Considerably. (My companion, drawn to the more mature in our society - cough, cough - thought Stephen Bogardus was a the morsel of the night - and who am I to argue?)

Where does the time go? I have to get You-Know-Who to the doctor. He'll be all right - we all know it - but this just has to be put up with for now. He will be fine. He has to be, doesn't he?

Keep out o' the sun!