Tim Kelly’s adaptation of Anton Checkov’s farce A Marriage Proposal gave a modern twist and southwestern kick to the original satirical commentaryn marriage and power. In this tertiary adaptation, we are presented with a marriage that is “non-traditional”—a same sex union. The tradition of marriage has evolved throughout history, and is, in reality, not solely based on love and romance, but a multidimensional commitment that intersects with race, class, politics, and socioeconomic status.
In this day and age, we are privileged to be able to have a conversation about gender and sexuality within the construct of a ceremony of eternal vows. Many political commentators—be it artists or satirists—portray same-sex marriage as traditional, dramatic, and as painful as any straight marriage. Kelly’s A Marriage Proposal Western Style, with its Americana and downhome Southwestern influences, provided an ideal foundation to swap the gender of Nathan, originally Natalie, to present how traditional an American same-sex marriage can be, with light hearted humor to boot.
Nathan is a feminine gay man living with his mother in the West. He is more or less the stereotypical media representation of the “Modern Family” homosexual—delicate, charismatic, over-the-top, and educated. Nathan is sophisticated and nuanced, or at least attempts to appear so despite his relatively humble roots. He likes his suitor Lem, but is also in search of power and economic prosperity. He vies for the same comforts that can be won through a heterosexual union.
Nathan’s suitor, the ironically bravado Lem, is an attempting-to-be-masculine gay man in search of the stability that marriage provides. He is an over-the-top hypochondriac, very weak, and not a great hunter. His desperate attempts to marry a “womanly” man such as Nathan, seems to further solidify his need to feel manly and powerful in a relationship. However, he eventually becomes aware that he is not in control when trying to wed a man raised in a home in which femininity warrants authority and influence.
In a same-sex marriage, because we have been conditioned to view marital unions exclusively through an opposite-sex lens, the big question is who is the girl, and who is the boy in the relationship. As the play shows, this is fundamentally preposterous, as traditional gender roles transcend our bodies—even in heterosexual relationships. A same-sex union is involving two people of the same gender for a reason.
But, to play devil’s advocate, Nathan would be perceived as the “woman” in this situation, and, because of his feminine disposition, thus be the weak, subordinate in the coupling. However, this “womanly” man, with his charm, looks and wits, uses his femininity as an instrument to great power—to seduce, allure, frustrate, provoke.
Miz Tuab is an even further testament to womanly power, as a feminine tour de force and Nathan’s matriarchal mother, whose worldliness and savvy, age and wisdom provide her an almost storyteller-like influence throughout this farce.
Miz Taub’s drag in this performance is a commentary on “motherhood” culture in the gay community. Because of the marginalization and mistreatment of gay men and women, the care for and mentorship of younger counterparts has become an important part of the social and emotional development of LGBT youth.
The great hope is that through this vignette, visceral perceptions of the tradition of marriage blur, making same-sex marriage appear not so different than heterosexual marriage. A promise, a commitment, a union, is filled with all of the forces, emotion, and complexity no matter the gender of the humans involved.
It is has been a true joy to work on this production. The actors have offered their time so generously, and worked so hard. I am so very proud of the transformations and portrayals they will offer you this evening. Thanking for sharing this moment with us.
Save the Date Alert