A Conversation with Director Max Mayer, “Demolition,” Pacific Resident Theatre, by James Scarborough

“Demolition,” directed by Max Mayer at the Pacific Resident Theatre, navigates the complexities of masculinity, identity, and personal growth within a deceptively simple narrative. The play juxtaposes Doug, a rugged, blue-collar worker, against Paul, a delicate, introspective young man on the verge of adulthood. Matthew Letscher’s script explores the contrasts between these characters, using their interactions to delve into deeper themes of mentorship and the varied influences on a young man’s development. The dynamic between Doug’s crass, practical life lessons and Paul’s quiet resistance serves as a microcosm for the broader societal dialogue on masculinity. Mayer’s direction emphasizes these contrasts, bringing an understated tension to their exchanges that suggests far more than the dialogue conveys. The production’s success lies in its ability to blend humor and gravity, creating a nuanced portrayal of what it means to become one’s own person amidst conflicting external pressures. The performances, particularly those of Keith Stevenson and Ryan Foust, underscore the play’s themes with a raw authenticity that engages the audience’s empathy. “Demolition” ultimately questions the essence of manhood and the courage required to defy traditional norms, making it a compelling addition to contemporary theatre.

JS: What drew you to direct "Demolition?” How did you envision bringing Matthew Letscher’s script to life on stage?

MM: I was first impressed with the combination of humor and earned emotion that Matt has packed into his story. I was immediately taken with the main character, a “shovel man” in a contractor’s crew. I find the journey of this character and the way his primacy comes into focus unusual, subtle and impactful. I found myself drawn to these characters and their struggles set in a community with which I was largely unfamiliar. How great would it be, I thought, if a wildly entertaining comedy, could have the impact of a great production of an Arthur Miller classic.

As to really envisioning it, that developed as we worked together, first with Matt and then in collaboration with the actors. With a new play the first job is to deeply understand the author’s intention and then perhaps help him a bit in shaping and clarifying it. Matt and I worked together for about three months before we went into rehearsal. The more we worked on it, the better I liked it, which I took as a very good sign.

JS: Elaborate on the exploration of masculinity in the play. How did you approach it in your direction?

MM: This question reminds me of what I think is a very wise quote of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s on writing, “Begin with an individual and before you know it you find that you have created a type; begin with a type and you find that you have created --- nothing.”

I’ve used this quote as a directorial touchstone for many years. I’m hoping that the individuals, the actors found in DEMOLITION have something to say about modern masculinity both nutric, a word I have recently learned and should become as popular as its opposite, toxic.

JS: How do the characters of Doug and Paul represent different facets of identity and growth?

MM: I’d say perhaps Doug represents the challenges of ‘nutric’ masculinity in a culture where the toxic often masquerades as strength and leadership. That’s as political as I’ll get. Doug has his own confusions aplenty about what it requires to be a man. He is the person, however, in whom Paul can find tolerance and some loving mentorship, for his own fragile passage from victimized and panicked youth, to becoming his own version of a man.

JS: How did you work with the cast to develop the nuanced dynamics between Doug and Paul, especially in their contrasting personalities?

MM: The main tool that actors and directors have in creating character relationships is a close reading of the text, along with senses, feelings, and the creative imagination to find out what may be going on underneath the words. When we arrive at an agreement about what a character really wants in a scene or in the whole play and what is in the way both internally and externally, of their getting it, then we start to understand how each needs to interact with one another.  Of course, in talking about these craft principles, I’m describing a process that often takes place largely instinctively for some actors.  It is mostly the director’s job to encourage choices that serve the story as a whole while making sense to the actor.  For instance, it is very important for all the other characters in DEMOLITION, including Paul, to put pressure on Doug to take action. So, whatever they all want for themselves, the way they go about getting it must work on Doug towards that end.

JS: What challenges did you encounter in balancing the humor and the more serious undertones of the play’s narrative?

MM: I think that both the serious undertones and the humor are derived from character, so that one doesn’t have to be subordinated to the other, although there is an energy or motor under the story that needs to be maintained for the humor to land. Also, of course, until we had an audience, we didn’t entirely understand the balance required. With any play, but particularly new ones, audience response is wildly informative to both actors and directors. In this production, because there isn’t much rehearsal time after opening, it will basically be up to the actors to continue the learning process about performing the play as performances go along.

JS: Discuss your collaboration with Matthew Letscher. How did his vision influence your directorial choices?

MM: Matt has been wonderfully collaborative during this whole process. New plays can be a great joy or very difficult, depending on my relationship to the writer. I think it’s been helpful that he is an actor, and I was trained as an actor, so we both have a very character-driven approach to the work. In pre-production it was great fun to try out and keep or discard lots of script ideas and Matt has been very willing to do that. And I think we were able to make the play stronger and clearer and hopefully more emotionally satisfying to an audience. I hope that once we were in rehearsal, I was equally responsive to his ideas about the production.

JS: How does the Pacific Resident Theatre’s intimate setting enhance the audience’s experience of “Demolition”?

MM: Well, I’m one of those people who like to be as close to the actors as possible when I go to the theatre, so, the PRT space is great in giving the audience the choice to have a very intimate and involved experience of the story. The stage space is unusually large for the size of the theatre which allows the separation between audience and actors to almost disappear and for you to feel like you’re inside the house with them. Hopefully, this intimacy gives you a greater sense of the reality and complexity of the characters, more recognition, amusement and compassion for them.

JS: What role does the supporting cast play in enriching the central narrative? How did you guide them to achieve this?

MM: This play has a very classical structure in that it has a central protagonist who is driven to take an action at the climax of the play. All the way to that climax, all the other characters are, in one way or another, putting pressure on the protagonist to take action. Then, in this play, Matt writes past the climax, to show both the serious sacrifices the character has made in taking action, and hint at some benefit that may accrue to him as a result of it.

That said, all actors need to balance their ‘function’ in the story with their obligation to their own characters, what they want and need, their strategies, and their victories and defeats. Whether an actor is playing a lead or a ‘supporting’ part it is essential that everything they do, make sense to them and interests them personally, and not just fit in with a dramaturgical idea about their function in the narrative. I hope to encourage actors to find and insist on both.

JS: How do you hope the play will resonate with audiences regarding its commentary on societal expectations of manhood?

MM: I think the theatre can be good at making people feel more clearly, inspiring empathy, and entertaining. Occasionally, on excellent nights, it does all three; and that is what I’m always working for. 

As for what I hope? For as long as I’ve been conscious, from the 60’s up to the present, I believe that there has been an ongoing profound revolutionary transformation in defining both masculinity and femininity and the relationship between them. If our species survives, I think that transformation can be this era’s most positive and greatest legacy. There are, of course, powerful forces that resist and refuse change. I hope that DEMOLITION will do its small part to gently pry our fingers off of outmoded definitions.

JS: What are your thoughts on the evolving landscape of American theatre? How does “Demolition” contribute to that discourse?

MM: Oh gosh, theatre is in trouble. And yet there are so many smart, talented, fascinating people working in it anyway. According to archaeologists it has been around for over 10,000 years. That doesn’t mean that it’s inherently better than all the other forms of storytelling that have popped up since then, but it does show that, whatever need it fulfills, a group of people sitting together while fellow humans act out a story has had a lot of staying power. I still believe that, at its best, there is nothing like it.

I started a theatre on the East Coast called New York Stage and Film which for nearly 40 years has been committed to developing new plays for the American Theatre. This post-pandemic time has been the most difficult in which to support original work and also the time that the support seems most needed by artists. 

As far as “the evolving landscape” I guess I’d say that DEMOLITION represents an artist writing really well about what he knows.  And that should always be welcome in the theatre. Writing a new play these days is an act of love and faith. And he and I are very grateful that Pacific Resident Theatre and its tireless Artistic Director, Marilyn Fox, are still around to take the chance/opportunity/risk of producing it.

Performances are Thursdays through Saturdays at 8 pm and Sundays at 3 pm through to October 13, 2024. Tickets are $35-$45, with a $10 discount for 55+ and $12 student rush tickets available at the door. The Pacific Resident Theatre is located at 703 Venice Boulevard, Venice, CA 90291. For more information, click here.