Theater Production about the Fourth Turning

[sbarrera]

There is actually a play up Off-Broadway that incorporates the Fourth Turning idea. It's pretty amazing to consider - I guess it's completely mainstream now. You can thank Steve Bannon for that.

Here's one review - it's only up for a couple more days so you'll have to see it by by this weekend. I actually went and saw it a couple of weeks ago and I will post my own review as well.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/07/theat...gQpFolEffs

Review: In ‘Heroes of the Fourth Turning,’ a Red-State Unicorn

An astonishing new play by Will Arbery risks a rare stage subject: Christian conservatism.


From left: Zoë Winters, Jeb Kreager and Julia McDermott reuniting at a conservative college in “Heroes of the Fourth Turning.”Credit...Sara Krulwich/The New York Times

By Jesse Green

• Oct. 7, 2019
  

They would not at first seem so different from you and me.

Teresa works in media and lives with an actress roommate. Kevin has a stultifying job but spends his off-hours watching “Portlandia” and devouring internet porn. Justin reads a lot of books and worries about the state of the country.
Yet unless you’re a hard-line Catholic conservative, you probably don’t have much in common with these people, who were undergrads together at Transfiguration College of Wyoming: an anti-abortion, anti-L.G.B.T. school where sex and cellphones (and federal funding) are forbidden.

And unless you live in an alternative theatrical universe programmed by David Mamet for The Heritage Foundation, you’ve probably never seen their like onstage.

That’s one of the things that makes Will Arbery’s “Heroes of the Fourth Turning,” which opened on Monday at Playwrights Horizons, something of a red-state unicorn. The astonishing new play explores the lives and ideas of conservatives with affection, understanding and deep knowledge — if not, ultimately, approval.

As such, it would be a welcome corrective almost regardless of its quality. When conservatives show up in contemporary plays, they are usually laughable blowhards, whining billionaires or troglodyte parents whose children scorn them. What use are they to anyone, even liberals who want to understand what they’re up against?

But Teresa (Zoë Winters), Kevin (John Zdrojeski) and Justin (Jeb Kreager) are serious, attractive, articulate young people — and troubled in ways we usually find sympathetic, at least in characters who didn’t vote for Donald J. Trump. (Kevin vomited after doing so.)

Mr. Arbery brings them together, seven years after graduation, for a reunion at Justin’s house; he has stayed in town and works at Transfiguration. Also at the party — which celebrates the appointment of their mentor, Gina Presson, as president of the school — is Gina’s daughter, Emily (Julia McDermott), who escaped Wyoming but has now returned with a debilitating mystery illness. During the course of a somewhat drunken dark night of the soul, the four friends catch up, argue, have crises and regroup.

Yet “Heroes of the Fourth Turning,” directed with nerves of steel by Danya Taymor, is no narcissistic midlife reunion dramedy like “The Big Chill.” The characters are still young enough to believe they can make significant changes in their lives — and in the life of their country, which they think and talk about constantly.

It’s no accident that Mr. Arbery sets the play just after the 2017 murder of Heather Heyer in Charlottesville, Va.; very much on everyone’s mind are the limits of the conservatism they inhaled and exalted at Transfiguration.

For Teresa, the limits come from within the movement: a movement weakened by craven “soy boys.” An Ann Coulter wannabe and self-professed Bannonite, she is a lightning-fast debater, a glib liar and a talented polemicist. (“Liberals are empathy addicts,” she says.) She sees herself as a hero of the “Fourth Turning” — the pseudoscientific theory that predicts political change on a generational timetable. As such, she is almost erotically fixated on the idea of near-term culture war, or literal war, as both rapture and ravishment.

Her three friends stake a variety of positions on the issues that feed Teresa’s outrage machine. Saintly Emily, who worked in a Chicago “pro-life women’s advocacy organization,” nevertheless counts among her friends an abortion-rights activist and — oh, the horror! — a drag queen. Justin, who packs a revolver and keeps a rifle handy, may argue that “proximity to L.G.B.T. is a threat to Christian children and families,” but he cares lovingly for Emily with no expectation of anything in return.



Michele Pawk, right, as the college’s new president, debates John Zdrojeski, an alumnus still seeking his place in the world, while Mr. Kreager and Ms. Winters look on.Credit...Sara Krulwich/The New York Times

And Kevin is the screw-up, the holy fool, struggling to locate a viable philosophy in the aftermath of the collision of his education and real life. “Why the heck do we have to love the Virgin Mary?” he asks, almost heretically. Also: Why can’t Christians test their faith by befriending the enemy instead of hating or avoiding him? And, most important: Why can’t he get a girlfriend?

The conflicts among the four friends, and eventually with the formidable Gina as well, are carried out in a series of arguments and arias the playwright aptly likens to a fugue. And though the play is peppered with theatrical interruptions — a song, a story, some ominous sounds, fits of aggression and feints of emotion — you will not find “Heroes of the Fourth Turning” very entertaining if you don’t believe in the dramatic potential of debate.

Ms. Taymor’s uncompromising production makes the strongest possible case for that potential. As the play takes place at night on the edge of the Wyoming wilderness, most of Laura Jellinek’s set is forbidding empty space; the lighting (by Isabella Byrd) is unrelievedly dark. Justin Ellington’s sensational sound design is almost another haunted voice in the fugue. In this ominous environment, Ms. Taymor moves the actors around like chess pieces, always threatening or defending.

She also encourages them to dig for the emotional realities beneath their discourse. We get a strong sense, for instance, of how mandated premarital celibacy has warped everyone’s temperament, especially Kevin’s; Mr. Zdrojeski, in a big breakthrough performance, makes the tightrope walk of pathos and ludicrousness thrilling to watch. And Mr. Kreager, though much more contained, likewise backfills Justin’s political positions with longings he can hardly name.

Indeed, the conflict between engagement and recusal that is at the heart of the characters’ questioning of conservatism is also at the heart of their unhappiness. Even Teresa worries that her wedding won’t be beautiful because she is “too private” with her love. And though Gina (Michele Pawk in a terrific cameo) is a charismatic and even poetic leader, you have to question, as you look into Emily’s eyes, what kind of a mother she’s been.

But insights into the devil are not the point here, even if Teresa calls Mr. Trump “a Golem molded from the clay of mass media” who has “come to save us all.” (Gina calls him “chemotherapy”: vile but necessary.) To Mr. Arbery, conservatives aren’t devils at all; their bad behavior is much like everyone else’s. So is their good behavior. Surely it’s not irrelevant that his father, Glenn Arbery, is the president of Wyoming Catholic College, a school apparently identical in philosophy and location to the play’s Transfiguration.

That autobiographical likeness — also a feature of Mr. Arbery’s “Plano” — gives “Heroes of the Fourth Turning” an aura of absolute authenticity. It may also give the play a slight aura of overindulgence; there are probably a few turns too many in its characters’ convolutions.

What makes it riveting anyway is its eagerness to admit, and to subtly criticize by juxtaposition, all arguments. When Kevin, confused and self-loathing though he may be, articulates the desire to “let two competing facts exist in the same space,” he might as well be speaking for the play. Without two competing facts, we wouldn’t have much of a drama — or a democracy.

[Warren Dew]

If The New York Times thinks it explores conservatives with "deep knowledge", you can be pretty sure it's a left wing travesty - and that's confirmed in the rest of the review.

I also don't see any actual generational theory, other than the reference in the title.

[sbarrera]

(11-15-2019, 01:52 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: If The New York Times thinks it explores conservatives with "deep knowledge", you can be pretty sure it's a left wing travesty - and that's confirmed in the rest of the review.

I also don't see any actual generational theory, other than the reference in the title.

I saw the play; one of the characters expounds on turnings theory in a monologue. I thought it was astounding to see, since I've been following S&H since the 90s. Never expected to see a play about it in a theater in New York. But life is strange sometimes.

[pbrower2a]

(11-15-2019, 01:52 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: If The New York Times thinks it explores conservatives with "deep knowledge", you can be pretty sure it's a left wing travesty - and that's confirmed in the rest of the review.

I also don't see any actual generational theory, other than the reference in the title.

At this point, it is safe to assume that liberal journalists know conservatives either as deceased persons or as contemporary stereotypes (hicks in Appalachia, snake-handlers, young-Earth creationists, Holy Rollers, people who believe to this day that Barack Obama is a Muslim born in Kenya, etc.) and of course ranters devoid of morals and kindness (like Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh).  

The real problem is that America no longer has much of a center-right, people with some flexibility on social issues and who have an interest in a vibrant economy in which financial assets don't get trivialized in inflation.

[sbarrera]

(11-16-2019, 03:16 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(11-15-2019, 01:52 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: If The New York Times thinks it explores conservatives with "deep knowledge", you can be pretty sure it's a left wing travesty - and that's confirmed in the rest of the review.

I also don't see any actual generational theory, other than the reference in the title.

At this point, it is safe to assume that liberal journalists know conservatives either as deceased persons or as contemporary stereotypes (hicks in Appalachia, snake-handlers, young-Earth creationists, Holy Rollers, people who believe to this day that Barack Obama is a Muslim born in Kenya, etc.) and of course ranters devoid of morals and kindness (like Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh).  

The real problem is that America no longer has much of a center-right, people with some flexibility on social issues and who have an interest in a vibrant economy in which financial assets don't get trivialized in inflation.

It's unfortunate; neither side can understand the other at all. It's where we get the idea of Civil War II. Ostensibly, the writer of Heroes of the Fourth Turning is trying to shed light on how the political right thinks and why they supported Trump. He comes from a conservative Catholic background himself (I am getting this from the playbill for the show).

[sbarrera]

Here is an interview with the playwright, Will Arbery.

https://www.wnyc.org/story/empathy-devil...lDD-mt_4wc

[sbarrera]

Here is my review of the play. I saw it on Nov 2.

REVIEW: HEROES OF THE FOURTH TURNING
 November 15, 2019  Steve Comments 0 Comment

I have been a student and fan of the Fourth Turning theory for over a quarter of a century. Imagine my surprise and delight when I learned that a play which incorporates the theory is running off-Broadway. It’s called Heroes of the Fourth Turning, written by Will Arbery and directed by Danya Taymor. I got a ticket for it as soon as I could, and luckily my BFF was able to come along as well. It’s premiering at Playwrights Horizons, which is basically a development house supporting playwrights and producing new works.

Since I am so interested in the aforementioned theory, I wanted to review not so much the play itself as how it presents and incorporates the Fourth Turning concept. So I will be looking at the play through a soda straw, so to speak. But I will start with a brief summary review from a general perspective.

The play we saw is an excellent production. It’s well written, well directed and well acted. It has one long act, entirely set on the back porch of a house in Wyoming, on a very specific night in the year 2017. It has great tech too, with the set design and dark lighting pulling you into a setting that seems very real.

There are only five characters, and the premise of the play is that four of them are from the same college class and are reuniting seven years after graduation. Their dialogue establishes their characters, the tensions between them, and reveals secrets from their past – good dramatic stuff. The fifth character is their former teacher/mentor, who arrives later in the play to add a little generational conflict.

The Fourth Turning idea comes into the script because one of the Millennial graduates is familiar with the theory. She explains it in detail in an animated monologue, which absolutely amazed me to behold, seeing as I’ve been interested in generational theory for so long. I certainly never expected to see it explained one day on stage in New York City.

Now this character knows about the theory thanks to Steve Bannon, which is possibly how many people first encountered it back in 2017. And she’s interested in Bannon’s ideas because she is a conservative Catholic and a Trump supporter. In fact, the college the four graduates attended is a conservative Catholic institution – so the play ends up being a kind of exposé of the Red State perspective. We can see why it is set in Wyoming.

The director’s notes mention that the play is meant to shine light on how people on this side of the political spectrum think, but not necessarily to empathize with them. Judging from their reactions, the audience did not approve of the characters’ beliefs at all (at least that was my impression). The conservative stances on abortion and LBGTQ seemed particularly upsetting. Of course, this is not surprising coming from an audience in New York. The promotional material makes a point about how this show is giving a perspective not usually presented to theater audiences.

The playwright, Will Arbery, actually comes from a conservative, Catholic background himself (though he makes clear in his notes in the program that he voted for Obama), which I guess is why he was motivated to write about the subject of conservative thought. It’s kind of a weird twist of fate that the Fourth Turning theory is associated popularly with the political right, seeing as it could just as easily be applied in a story about supporters of Bernie Sanders.

It’s understandable why a theory about a cyclic return to civic renewal would appeal to a minority group of beleaguered traditionalists. Kudos to Will Arbery for making that connection. He also incorporates the idea of different generations – one of the graduates is a Gen Xer, since he is ten years older than the others, who are Millennials, while the professor is a Boomer who was a Goldwater girl, like Hillary Clinton. It’s the Millennials who are ostensibly the Heroes of the play’s title, and whether or not they are ready for the challenge of the Fourth Turning is for you to decide.

Heroes of the Fourth Turning is a brilliant play. If you are interested in what a play could have to say about generational theory, or what it could reveal about conservative politics in the Trump era, or just want some good character drama, it is worth seeing. You’ll have to hurry, though – it’s only up through November 17. I hope it finds another venue because it is a wonderful work and very pertinent to our time.

[pbrower2a]

(11-16-2019, 10:55 AM)sbarrera Wrote: Here is an interview with the playwright, Will Arbery.

https://www.wnyc.org/story/empathy-devil...lDD-mt_4wc

I heard this, and it was impressive. 

...In view of the low approval ratings of Donald Trump and his administrative chaos, I can see Donald Trump as a flash in the pan. Although the generations are not monoliths, as class, ethnicity, religion, and region matter, we can see why Trump was attractive to so many people. Americans want a definitive end to the Crisis, and liberals have become a scapegoat for divisiveness. Many want a comforting world in which 'freaks' for any reason are shoved into the recesses and rendered irrelevant. Howe-Strauss theory is meticulously non-partisan and says nothing about any class struggle (which can as easily be everyone else against the middle class as the Marxist interpretation of the proletariat against oppressors in the middle and upper classes).

Nostalgia may be an excellent commodity for marketing, but it is horrible public policy. As a political appeal it is excessively elitist even if it has the populist appeal to the common man.  Such a stock phrase as "Make America Great Again" means whatever one wants it to believe until one realizes that it really means "make America great for crony capitalists like Donald Trump". 

Trump is a false regeneracy, the sort of regeneracy that demands too much and offers too little. Maybe Trump fares best in states in which people rarely come in contact with the economic elites and their enforcers, and rarely get to see the expressions of elite indulgence and arrogance first hand. If a gigantic chunk of your income goes to a landlord so that you have the privilege of working where one can do one's career, then you are more likely to be a liberal on economics. If you see easy income going to people who live like sultans in countries in which the royal family owns the mineral resources that underpin the entire economy then you will be hostile to Trump. You might be no Marxist, but you might be an adherent in practice of Henry George, who suggests that a wholesome society taxes the Hell out of easy income to support a generous public sector. To the fascistic Right, any challenge to crony capitalism is in the same category of evil as is the Khmer Rouge.

Trump is above all else a landlord who owns property in places of high incomes and from which his class can extract high rents. He need not innovate, as he has what may be the easiest way of making money that there is short of outright crime. Where the economy is in the tank (which is much of America outside of the glitter zones), the landlords don't have it so great. Trump would have never gotten rich off real estate in Detroit, Cleveland, or St. Louis. It is far more difficult to get a high income as a slumlord than as a dealer in 'luxury' apartments that would themselves be slums if the high-income dwellers were to vanish with a collapse of the local economy. If you don't believe me, then consider what Detroit, Cleveland, and St. Louis were soon after the Second World War. The Good Times were never going to end.

In California one sees people driving expensive foreign cars at excessive speeds... and having a sense of entitlement. "My taxes pay your salary, and don't you forget it", says a scion of some real-estate baron or a high-tech magnate to a 'lowly' state trooper. (If I were a state trooper I would throw the book at this arrogant SOB, and as a judge I would assess as high a fine and as many points as possible). In New York City, Studio 54 may be no more, but there surely is some sybaritic replacement. 

I can see how we have an attractive High. Opportunity is more widespread by region so that America isn't Shining Cities on the Hill (for which the rent is exorbitant) and urban wrecks in which the best opportunity for many is to be a domestic servant or hamlets in which the best opportunity for most is to work in a restaurant at a freeway exit. We are going to need more equality of opportunity, and it will take an economy in which the priority is something other than enriching and indulging the Right People.

[Marypoza]

(11-17-2019, 12:58 PM)sbarrera Wrote: Here is my review of the play. I saw it on Nov 2.

REVIEW: HEROES OF THE FOURTH TURNING
 November 15, 2019  Steve Comments 0 Comment

I have been a student and fan of the Fourth Turning theory for over a quarter of a century. Imagine my surprise and delight when I learned that a play which incorporates the theory is running off-Broadway. It’s called Heroes of the Fourth Turning, written by Will Arbery and directed by Danya Taymor. I got a ticket for it as soon as I could, and luckily my BFF was able to come along as well. It’s premiering at Playwrights Horizons, which is basically a development house supporting playwrights and producing new works.

Since I am so interested in the aforementioned theory, I wanted to review not so much the play itself as how it presents and incorporates the Fourth Turning concept. So I will be looking at the play through a soda straw, so to speak. But I will start with a brief summary review from a general perspective.

The play we saw is an excellent production. It’s well written, well directed and well acted. It has one long act, entirely set on the back porch of a house in Wyoming, on a very specific night in the year 2017. It has great tech too, with the set design and dark lighting pulling you into a setting that seems very real.

There are only five characters, and the premise of the play is that four of them are from the same college class and are reuniting seven years after graduation. Their dialogue establishes their characters, the tensions between them, and reveals secrets from their past – good dramatic stuff. The fifth character is their former teacher/mentor, who arrives later in the play to add a little generational conflict.

The Fourth Turning idea comes into the script because one of the Millennial graduates is familiar with the theory. She explains it in detail in an animated monologue, which absolutely amazed me to behold, seeing as I’ve been interested in generational theory for so long. I certainly never expected to see it explained one day on stage in New York City.

Now this character knows about the theory thanks to Steve Bannon, which is possibly how many people first encountered it back in 2017. And she’s interested in Bannon’s ideas because she is a conservative Catholic and a Trump supporter. In fact, the college the four graduates attended is a conservative Catholic institution – so the play ends up being a kind of exposé of the Red State perspective. We can see why it is set in Wyoming.

The director’s notes mention that the play is meant to shine light on how people on this side of the political spectrum think, but not necessarily to empathize with them. Judging from their reactions, the audience did not approve of the characters’ beliefs at all (at least that was my impression). The conservative stances on abortion and LBGTQ seemed particularly upsetting. Of course, this is not surprising coming from an audience in New York. The promotional material makes a point about how this show is giving a perspective not usually presented to theater audiences.

The playwright, Will Arbery, actually comes from a conservative, Catholic background himself (though he makes clear in his notes in the program that he voted for Obama), which I guess is why he was motivated to write about the subject of conservative thought. It’s kind of a weird twist of fate that the Fourth Turning theory is associated popularly with the political right, seeing as it could just as easily be applied in a story about supporters of Bernie Sanders.

It’s understandable why a theory about a cyclic return to civic renewal would appeal to a minority group of beleaguered traditionalists. Kudos to Will Arbery for making that connection. He also incorporates the idea of different generations – one of the graduates is a Gen Xer, since he is ten years older than the others, who are Millennials, while the professor is a Boomer who was a Goldwater girl, like Hillary Clinton. It’s the Millennials who are ostensibly the Heroes of the play’s title, and whether or not they are ready for the challenge of the Fourth Turning is for you to decide.

Heroes of the Fourth Turning is a brilliant play. If you are interested in what a play could have to say about generational theory, or what it could reveal about conservative politics in the Trump era, or just want some good character drama, it is worth seeing. You’ll have to hurry, though – it’s only up through November 17. I hope it finds another venue because it is a wonderful work and very pertinent to our time.

-- sounds interesting. Hopefully one of our local theatre companies will perform it

[sbarrera]

(11-17-2019, 05:19 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(11-16-2019, 10:55 AM)sbarrera Wrote: Here is an interview with the playwright, Will Arbery.

https://www.wnyc.org/story/empathy-devil...lDD-mt_4wc

I heard this, and it was impressive. 

...In view of the low approval ratings of Donald Trump and his administrative chaos, I can see Donald Trump as a flash in the pan. Although the generations are not monoliths, as class, ethnicity, religion, and region matter, we can see why Trump was attractive to so many people. Americans want a definitive end to the Crisis, and liberals have become a scapegoat for divisiveness. Many want a comforting world in which 'freaks' for any reason are shoved into the recesses and rendered irrelevant. Howe-Strauss theory is meticulously non-partisan and says nothing about any class struggle (which can as easily be everyone else against the middle class as the Marxist interpretation of the proletariat against oppressors in the middle and upper classes).

Nostalgia may be an excellent commodity for marketing, but it is horrible public policy. As a political appeal it is excessively elitist even if it has the populist appeal to the common man.  Such a stock phrase as "Make America Great Again" means whatever one wants it to believe until one realizes that it really means "make America great for crony capitalists like Donald Trump". 

Trump is a false regeneracy, the sort of regeneracy that demands too much and offers too little. Maybe Trump fares best in states in which people rarely come in contact with the economic elites and their enforcers, and rarely get to see the expressions of elite indulgence and arrogance first hand. If a gigantic chunk of your income goes to a landlord so that you have the privilege of working where one can do one's career, then you are more likely to be a liberal on economics. If you see easy income going to people who live like sultans in countries in which the royal family owns the mineral resources that underpin the entire economy then you will be hostile to Trump. You might be no Marxist, but you might be an adherent in practice of Henry George, who suggests that a wholesome society taxes the Hell out of easy income to support a generous public sector. To the fascistic Right, any challenge to crony capitalism is in the same category of evil as is the Khmer Rouge.

Trump is above all else a landlord who owns property in places of high incomes and from which his class can extract high rents. He need not innovate, as he has what may be the easiest way of making money that there is short of outright crime. Where the economy is in the tank (which is much of America outside of the glitter zones), the landlords don't have it so great. Trump would have never gotten rich off real estate in Detroit, Cleveland, or St. Louis. It is far more difficult to get a high income as a slumlord than as a dealer in 'luxury' apartments that would themselves be slums if the high-income dwellers were to vanish with a collapse of the local economy. If you don't believe me, then consider what Detroit, Cleveland, and St. Louis were soon after the Second World War. The Good Times were never going to end.

In California one sees people driving expensive foreign cars at excessive speeds... and having a sense of entitlement. "My taxes pay your salary, and don't you forget it", says a scion of some real-estate baron or a high-tech magnate to a 'lowly' state trooper. (If I were a state trooper I would throw the book at this arrogant SOB, and as a judge I would assess as high a fine and as many points as possible). In New York City, Studio 54 may be no more, but there surely is some sybaritic replacement. 

I can see how we have an attractive High. Opportunity is more widespread by region so that America isn't Shining Cities on the Hill (for which the rent is exorbitant) and urban wrecks in which the best opportunity for many is to be a domestic servant or hamlets in which the best opportunity for most is to work in a restaurant at a freeway exit. We are going to need more equality of opportunity, and it will take an economy in which the priority is something other than enriching and indulging the Right People.

Turmp could well be a temporary aberration, but his downfall won't solve any problems (other than that of his being in power at all). The "true regeneracy" still needs to happen, which is why I think Arbrery's play could be redone from a different political viewpoint.

[Hintergrund]

Interesting, thanks! Now we'll have to see whether Trump will survive the term and how he'll do in the election and whatnot. Not sure how this play will age.