The Lady or the Tiger
Maggie Lou Rader (left) and Emmy Rice (right) as Bailey and Jackie from “Banned from Heaven, Barred from Hell”
In 1882, Frank Stockton published the short story, “The Lady or the Tiger.” Since that initial release, generations have debated the outcome of the story. Which door did the protagonist choose? Did he choose the one with a beautiful woman behind it or the one with a hungry tiger? Happiness or sorrow? Love or Death? The reader is left wondering, pondering, the answer.
My initial goal in the creation of my most recent show “Banned from Heaven, Barred from Hell,” was to create a modern “Lady or the Tiger.” I wanted to leave the audience asking questions, to ponder what they had seen. I wanted them to think. Think, question, and debate.
In practice, I found that the audiences did leave with questions. I am happy to report that some had debates with their partners and friends about the outcome of the play. To that I am very pleased. However, this ending left others confused and some angry. After opening, a few of my actors were accosted with questions wanting to know what it all meant or who was chosen. I later found out that one of these persons was a critic, that chose to not write anything about the performance. Whether this is because they were not satisfied with the answers they received, one can only wonder.
I am an artist. I create art. Sometimes, my art is transparent in its meanings and is presented in a manner in which all can see and understand the intent. My play “Martha” is a great example of this. In the play, I wanted to show the realities of extinction through human eyes. The play follows the last few years of Martha, the last passenger pigeon. Everything in that play was presented with clear and intentional purpose.
As much as I enjoy creating art that has clear intent, I find my greatest joy when the audience interprets their own meaning from what I create. My show, “Unintentional Significance,” was created specifically for this purpose. The viewer is presented with varying puppetry scenes, each carefully designed to elicit multiple meanings. The show is so powerful that months after its creation, even I found new meaning in scenes that I created. I had to pause and think, “wait, was that why I made that.” Quickly reminding myself of the original inspiration behind a specific scene.
In short, I like to inspire people to think critically. To leave my shows asking questions. I recognize that this may not be every person’s cup of tea, as it were. Additionally, I’m not saying that I won’t go back and create different types of art in the future. Maybe, my next play will be more strait forward in its meanings and themes.
Regardless of what I do, I can almost guarantee one thing, I will continue to add elements to challenge the audience to think critically. It may or may not be the whole play, but I will leave some element to burrow into their minds. I have commented at other times on the transient nature of theatre. Once the show is over, all that remains is the memory of it. Many things get forgotten, but mental puzzles tend to stick around.
So if you saw my play and are still wondering who was voted off, I’m not going to tell you. I will provide clarity of details if you need a refresher. Who do you think it was? The Lady or the Tiger?