The simple stage design, including trashcans and a telephone booth, was perfect for The Indian Wants The Bronx. The vague location added to the play by demonstrating that random acts of violence, like the one occurring in the play, are possible anywhere. The costumes where well chosen and the actors successfully delivered the lines and made the story come to life on stage.
While I personally didn’t enjoy the play because of the lack of plot and subject matter, I do see some value in the story. If you focus solely on the part of the innocent Indian, it is easy to sympathize with the character. A story about a minority being attacked by uneducated white guys isn’t exactly a new concept and it doesn’t take much to see what is wrong with that scenario. Obviously, Horowitz is trying to send the message that racism and violence are bad. The question is, are there any other themes hidden beneath the obvious? I think there are.
While the behavior of Joey and Murph cannot be justified, it can be explained. In their conversation about Pussyface (their social worker) and their promiscuous mothers, you can identify the source of Joey and Murph’s frustration. I think that the assault on the Indian and other criminal activities mentioned in the play were acts of misplaced anger. With no fathers or male role models mentioned and two mothers who would sleep with their sons best friends, it is easy to identify that their terrible home lives are the reason why Joey and Murph feel the need to violently lash out. I think that maybe Horowitz included these details not only to help the audience see Joey and Murph as something more than just stupid thugs and criminals, but also to put a spotlight on how a child’s environment impacts their adult life and comment on the general causes of troubled American youth.
Considering the setting of the What Strong Fences Make is a military checkpoint and “fences” is the third word in the title, I felt that it would have been nice if the set design might have actually included a fence. The combination of the terrible acoustics in the auditorium, the prop-less stage, and my unfamiliarity with the political situation the play was based upon, made What Strong Fences Make extremely difficult for me to follow. I constantly had to ask my friends in the audience what was going on, which ruined the experience. The army fatigue worn by the soldier was the only indication of the plays location and I didn’t understand that the second character was a suicide bomber until the end when he actually blew up.
Beirut Rocks was my favorite play out of the three. The set didn’t really add to or take a way from the story, the costumes where realistic, and the sound effects and lighting were ok. For me, it was the acting that made the play. The tension between Benji and Nasa was perfect and the play’s impact on the audience was great! Art is meant to say something. It’s supposed to send a message and if someone finds it offensive then that’s what makes it good! I guarantee Beirut Rocks made everyone in the audience stop and think. While Benji’s character is easy to hate, he’s not the only one to blame. The other guy (who’s name I forgot) and Sandy let Benji violate Nasa in the most cruel and hurtful way. All three of them, not just Benji, strip Nasa of her pride and force her to break one of the most sacred rules of her religion. All three of them push her to say the things she says out of anger. When Nasa told her story about her entire family being killed and how she is reinventing herself and assimilating into Palestinian culture to feel closer to her family I almost started crying! Needless to say, I thought the actress who portrayed Nasa was incredible. Maybe it was because she was a woman, but it was almost easier for me to side with her than with Benji.
I think Horowitz’s intention for Beirut Rocks was to confuse the audience. He wanted us not to be able to decide which side we wanted to take. There was no obvious good or evil character. Both the Jewish character and the Muslim character had undesirable characteristics. I think he was commenting on how war brings out the worst, most carnal instincts in human beings. Nasa’s last lines in the play are that she is going become a suicide bomber and murder Benji’s family. I think Horovitz was taking an anti-war position by showing us that killing doesn’t solve anything. Killing innocent people (Nasa’s family), just turns innocent people (like Nasa) into murderers.
As a collection of pieces I thought that The Indian Wants The Bronx didn’t really fit in with the other two. While they all share the common themes of racism and racial profiling, I thought that it would have been better if the collection focused only on Israeli-Palestinian relations.
