A Conversation with Director Daniel Nakawatase, “Urinetown: The Musical”, Studio Theater, Cal State Long Beach, by James Scarborough

Daniel Nakawatase’s approach to “Urinetown: The Musical” at the Studio Theater promises a compelling fusion of social commentary and theatrical satire. The production, set against a dystopian backdrop of water scarcity and corporate greed, challenges us to confront pressing societal issues through the lens of dark comedy. Nakawatase’s 12-year experience in theater arts, especially his focus on leveraging the medium for social change and community engagement, suggests a nuanced interpretation of the musical’s themes.

The director’s background in applied theater practices informs his treatment of the show’s critique of capitalism, environmental collapse, and the legal system. His commitment to using theater as a transformative tool for human connection aligns with “Urinetown’s” meta-theatrical elements, potentially enhancing our role as both spectator and participant in the unfolding commentary.

Nakawatase’s direction is likely to emphasize the musical’s homage to Brechtian techniques, balancing entertainment with social criticism. The challenge lies in maintaining the delicate equilibrium between the show’s irreverent humor and its underlying serious themes. How Nakawatase navigates this tonal tightrope, particularly in his approach to the musical’s satirical nods to Broadway classics, will be crucial to the production’s success in both entertaining and provoking thought.

JS: Your background emphasizes theater as a tool for social change. How does this perspective inform your approach to directing “Urinetown,” particularly in addressing its themes of environmental crisis and social inequality?

DN: Theatre as a tool for social change is particularly important to me because throughout the ages, theatre has been used to subvert harmful systems of power and to express and represent the experiences of the people. Even though “Urinetown” is a silly comedy that seems like there’s not much to it on the surface, I wanted us to explore the absurd, the truthful sincerity, and bring the heart of the community to the forefront as tools for highlighting the important themes of this show so the audience has the opportunity to connect, both intellectually and emotionally, what’s happening on stage to what they might be experiencing in their everyday lives and in our country right now. 

JS: The musical employs Brechtian techniques to critique societal issues. How do you balance these didactic elements with the show’s entertainment value to ensure audience engagement?

DN: I think the key to employing the Brechtian techniques in this show is to do it in such a way that a general audience wouldn’t know that that is what’s happening. What they register is that this isn’t your typical passive viewing experience, and that your engagement and attention is demanded. The goal was to engage the audience on multiple different levels. The obvious level is entertainment. There’s plenty of that, and folks will have a good time. However, we also bring the show into the audience and interact with them at times to dissolve the barrier between actor and spectator. This immediacy and intentional disregard for traditional theatre conventions forces you to engage on a critical and intellectual level because we’re all a part of this together. 

JS: The play parodies various musical theater conventions. How do you plan to highlight these meta-theatrical aspects while maintaining the integrity of the narrative?

DN: For those that understand the parodies of musical theatre conventions and catch the references, it should increase the entertainment value for them. For those that do not catch those references, it shouldn’t feel like they’ve missed out on something. I’ve crafted this in such a way that these elements are plausible and believable in the style of this world, are motivated by character, narrative, and storytelling, and serve a dramaturgical purpose. Multiple access points for the audience to engage with the show is important to me. There’s nothing worse than feeling like you’re not in on the joke. So we worked to unify the comedic and meta-theatrical aspects with the fabric of the narrative. 

JS: Given your experience in community engagement, how do you envision this production fostering dialogue about the social issues it addresses beyond the theater walls?

DN: The material does a lot of this work for us and positions itself as something to be talked about afterwards. The audience is disarmed by laughter and the unassuming nature of the show. The parallels between the world we live in today are so evident that it would be very difficult for anyone not to make those connections. Especially with the election coming up, issues that impact our safety, quality of life, and ability to live freely are at the forefront of most people’s minds. My hope is that this show will remind people to reflect on what’s important to them for our country, talk about it with people, and take action to make their voices heard come November. 

JS: The character of Bobby Strong leads a revolution against corporate control. How do you approach directing this storyline to resonate with contemporary audiences and their sociopolitical concerns?

DN: I think the material does a fantastic job of setting this up in ways that the audience will immediately connect with. Most people feel the burden of rising costs, increased expenses, wages that don’t keep up with inflation, taxes/fees/subscriptions that reduce our financial agency, and CEOs that think they can do whatever they want and take advantage of the people. There isn’t really anything special I’ve had to do directorially to make these issues resonate, other than tell the story on the page. It speaks for itself. 

JS: The play treads a fine line between comedy and serious commentary. What strategies are you employing to navigate this tonal complexity?

DN: In true Brechtian fashion, we don’t want the audience to get too emotionally caught up in this musical. We often use the comedy and the laughs as a way to take the audience out of the action emotionally and activate the cerebral mind. Then we’ll let them get swept up in the hard-hitting truths and moments of poignancy before jarring them with laughter back into the cerebral. And sometimes, we bring both together to create moments of true Theatre of the Absurd so that the laugh and the truth are working on the audience at the same time. 

JS: How does your background in applied theater practices influence your work with the cast in developing their characters within this satirical framework?

DN: The concept for the show is that this community experienced the events of “Urinetown”, and the community members have come together to put on a pageant to commemorate the 10th anniversary of the uprising in the building formerly occupied by the corporation, as a cautionary tale for members of other communities who have traveled far and wide to attend. I worked extensively with the cast to develop their community member characters (who likely would not have had any theatre or acting training) who are then playing the actual characters in the show. Through a variety of methods inspired by Boal and Grotowski, we used this additional layer to find more depth, motivation, and a truthful reason for the absurdity. 

JS: The musical critiques capitalism while being a product of commercial theater. How do you reconcile this inherent contradiction in your directorial concept?

DN: Going back to the description of the concept and by the very nature of putting this on in a university setting, I think we do reconcile these two aspects that are at odds with each other. The concept is very grassroots theatre and embraces the conventions of practitioners like Boal, Brecht, and Grotowski who were against what the commercial theater stands for. This production of “Urinetown” is very much for the people and collaboratively constructed to represent the creativity of the people who were part of this process and what’s important to them. 

JS: The play touches on environmental issues that have only become more pressing since its debut. How are you updating or recontextualizing these themes for a 2024 audience?

DN: To be quite honest, in striving for unity of the elements for a more impactful narrative, I felt it best to use the environmental issues as the backdrop of the narrative that unravels and reveals a plethora of other issues that we really bring to the forefront, like capitalism, social inequality, corporate greed, and giving voice to the people. 

JS: The show’s ending subverts traditional musical theater resolutions. How do you plan to direct this finale to maximize its impact on the audience’s perception of the entire work?

DN: As Little Sally says, the good guys finally take over and everything falls apart. The complexity of this show lies in the fact that it truly doesn’t take sides. By not taking sides, it advocates for revolution for the people, yes, but also thoughtfulness and purpose. It really calls for unity across differing ideologies and perspectives. It advocates for opposing sides to finally come together for the true and balanced good of all people. By the finale, we see the community members drop their show characters and exist together as real people. It’s a very heady ending, and I think it’s a good thing for the audience to leave not quite knowing how to feel. In the not knowing, there is processing and reflection. And in processing and reflection, there is realization. 

Performances are October 2–5 and 8–12 at 7:30 PM, with additional matinees on October 5, 12, and 13 at 2 PM. Tickets are $25 for general admission and $23 for students, military, and seniors (55 and older). The Studio Theater is located at California State University, Long Beach, attached to the north side of the Theatre Arts Building, accessible via 7th Street and East Campus Drive. For more information, click here.