Discussion Series
Join us for a Script Club with the Portland Public Library. Check out your copy of the script and join us two weeks before opening of each Mainstage Production. Scripts are available at the reference desk at the Main Branch of the Portland Public Library. This year discussions will be held in the Rines Room at 1:30pm two weeks before a show opens. Feel free to come and chat about the plays with Literary Manager, Todd Brian Backus; his Directing and Dramaturgy Apprentices, and special guests. Visit portlandlibrary.com/programs-events/ for more information.
The Artistic Perspective, hosted by Artistic Director Anita Stewart, is an opportunity for audience members to delve deeper into the themes of the show through conversation with special guests. A different scholar, visiting artist, playwright, or other expert will join the discussion each time. The Artistic Perspective discussions are held after the first Sunday matinee performance.
Curtain Call discussions offer a rare opportunity for audience members to talk about the production with the performers. Through this forum, the audience and cast explore topics that range from the process of rehearsing and producing the text to character development to issues raised by the work Curtain Call discussions are held after the second Sunday matinee performance.
All discussions are free and open to the public. Show attendance is not required. To subscribe to a discussion series performance, please call the Box Office at 207.774.0465.
drAmAturg KimmArie mccrAnn, PlAyWright Bess Welden, And Artistic director AnitA steWArt, in A tAlKBAcK After Madeleines By Bess Welden At PortlAnd stAge comPAny
Edward Albee's
Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?
PlayNotes Season 51 Editorial Staff
Editor in Chief Todd Brian Backus
Contributors
Charlie Bowen, Sadie Goldstein, Micki Demby Kleinman, Kimmarie McCrann, Larsen Nichols
Copy Editor
Adam Thibodeau
Cover Illustration
James A. Hadley
Portland Stage Company Educational Programs, like PlayNotes, are generously supported through the annual donations of hundreds of individuals and businesses, as well as special funding from:
About the Play
by Kimmarie McCrann
“Any play that leaves me unchanged from the person I was when I walked in the door is a waste of time.” —Edward Albee
George and Martha have been married for twenty-three years. George is a professor, and Martha is the university president’s daughter. They’ve been through a lot together, as Martha describes, “through the sick nights, and the pathetic, stupid days, through the derision and the laughter…” But everything is about to change one fateful night when they invite newcomers Nick and Honey to their home for an evening of late-night drinking, games, and an all-around examination of the soul.
Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? playwright Edward Albee was born in 1928 to a woman named Louise Harvey. He was put up for adoption at just two weeks old, and taken in by a wealthy couple, Reed and Frances Albee. Reed owned several theaters, and Edward was taken by limousine to see Broadway shows from a young age. Edward Albee was transparent in interviews later in life that he didn’t feel very close to his parents, saying, “I never felt comfortable with the adoptive parents. I don’t think they knew how to be parents. I probably didn’t know how to be a son, either.” Many themes of marriage, adoption, and fertility appear in Albee’s plays, with his own childhood experiences being largely influential on his writing.
After a disagreement with his parents, Albee left home at age 18 and moved to New York City, where he discovered a love for playwriting. His first successful play was a one-act named The Zoo Story, which premiered in West Berlin in 1958, and then transferred to Off-Broadway a couple years later. Albee stated that playwrights Anton Chekhov and T.S. Eliot profoundly influenced his style of writing. Albee’s work is also known for leaning into absurdist styles that reflect the European Theatre of the Absurd, which is found in the works of playwrights like Samuel Beckett and Eugène Ionesco.
Albee questions the elusive American Dream, and brings up matters of truth, illusion, and morality in his Tony Award–winning classic, Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? In addition to winning the Tony Award for Best Play in 1963, the play went on to become a highly successful major motion picture, under the direction of Mike Nichols, starring Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton. The movie won five Academy Awards, including Best Actress for Taylor, at the 1967 ceremony. Virginia Woolf has gone on to be produced around the world, and is widely considered one of the great classic plays of the modern era. Many high school English courses across the United States read the play in class, using its text to practice skills of literary analysis.
Edward Albee passed away at his home in Montauk, New York, in 2016. He left behind a titanic legacy on the American theater. He taught an intensive playwriting class at the University of Houston from 1989 to 2003. He won three Pulitzer Prizes for Drama. The Edward F. Albee Foundation, which he established in 1967 (using royalties from Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?), is still operating today. Albee was a strong believer in funding the development of individual artists, with the foundation's mission statement being "to serve writers and visual artists from all walks of life, by providing time and space in which to work without disturbance." The Foundation runs a facility in Montauk, which is a highly competitive residence for accepted playwrights, writers, and visual artists.
Albee certainly set quite the example for excellence in playwriting for emerging playwrights around the world. Portland Stage Company’s production of Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? honors the play, and sheds new light onto its classic words with an all-Black cast (read more in “Howard, Albee, and an All-Black Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?”). Check out the production this spring, running until June 1st on the Mainstage.
Who's AfrAid of VirginiA Woolf?
An Interview with the Director: Goldie E. Patrick
Edited for length and clarity by Kimmarie McCrann
Assistant Director and Dramaturg Kimmarie McCrann sat down with the director, Goldie E. Patrick, for a discussion regarding her artistic process and approach to Albee’s classic play.
Kimmarie McCrann (KM): You are a storyteller of many mediums: playwriting, directing, poetry, education, and activism. How do these different mediums inform your work? Do they intersect at all?
Goldie E. Patrick (GEP): I started calling myself a storyteller probably about three or four years ago. I had a friend of mine who was facilitating a residency that I was in, and she posed the question, “Who are you? Who are you at your core?” And I found myself wanting to not ignore all the versions of myself I had been. I started acting when I was seven, I started writing poetry when I was nine. Those are integral parts of me, so I felt almost disingenuous to say that I'm a playwright and not an actor. Saying I'm a theatermaker doesn't seem the fullest because I have a very
specific community and love around theater that has roots inside community, or roots inside teaching. And so the idea of being an educator is so important. I'm the child of two educators, who are the children of educators, right? So that's a value of mine. I came to being a storyteller because when I looked at the ingredients of all the parts of me, it was the common denominator. And it was like, if I didn't have a stage, if I didn't have a proscenium, if I didn't have a script, if I didn't have a student, I would still want to tell the story. And so that's why I began to really lean into identifying myself as a storyteller, because that part of a storyteller tells a story, supports the story getting written, can hear the story, and understand the story.
KM: You saw the original production of Virginia Woolf at Howard University in 2001 with an all-Black cast. You described it as “one of the best productions you had ever seen.” Can you elaborate on that? What made it so great?
GEP: I think what made it particularly transformative for me is that, because it was in a university setting, these are people that you see everyday. I looked up to Ashley [C. Turner, who played George then and plays him in the PS production]. He was a senior, and I was a freshman, and I was just like, “How does he know how to act already? Like, this is crazy.” The woman who played Martha was my professor, and so I saw her as a professor throughout the year, and had never seen her perform. The woman who played Honey was someone who I was familiar with, but she, in real life, was very shy, so I had never seen her perform. And so it was impactful to watch people who I felt like I knew completely transformed to become these characters, and for it to be completely believable. The idea of them being written white never crossed my mind because they were the characters so fully. And so I was drawn into the authenticity that they brought to it. And, you know, it's an intense ride. And you're watching your professor drink and wile out as Martha, and you're like, “Oh my god, she's
director goldie e. PAtricK
the sweetest, quietest, most demure woman in the world.” And onstage, she was Martha, and she transformed before my eyes. And Ashley, similarly, was very to himself, like soft, and polished. And you see him onstage, and I believed in the magic of theater. I believed in the magic of people transforming when they become the character. And I was hooked.
KM: How does it feel to direct the work now all these years later?
GEP: Really crazy. I have plenty of moments where I remind myself of that younger version of me that saw it in awe and wondered, “How?” And so, even when it gets really complicated and difficult to conceptualize, as a director, I go back to that part of myself that says, “Yeah, this is why it's this big of a task.” So it's very humbling. It's also really difficult. I think this is what the play is about, right? Truth versus illusion. We're often encouraged to not say things are difficult, not say things are messy, not admit when we don't know. And I appreciate how much this play and directing this play has really forced and also invited and allowed me to say the things I don't know and not have to be right, because I don't think I could direct this play if I was right and I knew everything, and this was it. I couldn't tell these actors how to become these characters. I don't know them well enough to do so and the text has so many layers that I'm like, “I need somebody else's ears.” I need the whole team. So it's a combination of things. I'm really grateful.
KM: You’ve talked a bit about emulating the rehearsal process of the renowned Black American theater director Lloyd Richards. Why are you inspired by Lloyd’s work?
GEP: I'm a huge Lloyd Richards fan, and it's because I'm a playwright who desires to write in the extension of the Black canon of theater. It's you know, you learn [about] Lorraine Hansberry and August Wilson as pinnacle examples of the voices. And what they have in common is Lloyd Richards. A play on page is one thing. A play in production is a very different thing. And I think nowadays we look at it as easily synonymous. But what you write on the page doesn't always translate into a production. And so Lloyd Richards, in my opinion, is a genius, if not the genius of my lifetime, our lifetime, that was able to help some seminal writers like Lorraine Hansberry and August Wilson learn how to write on the page something that lives on the stage without the hardest work being on the director to translate it. And so I look at Lloyd Richards, who, I think, from a perspective of what the writer is saying, also understands what the actor's task is. And so it comes back to helping the actor do a certain set of play analysis, to be able to develop a full character, to be able to be present, to be able to be honest. And that's where the six questions [Richards’ technique of script analysis] kind of come from; each actor is creating the world and is responsible for understanding the text that they're responsible for, then living in and delivering the lines. He was great. And he was also from Detroit [like me], so I have to rep extra because, I mean, that's what we do.
KM: You’ve incorporated the use of games in rehearsal exercises, i.e., playing Uno, dancing, and a script “scoreboard.” What’s your intention behind that?
GEP: The text is so big, I think you can drown in it because it's so big. And so I want to make it practical, and I want to make it tactical. I think the characters are so big that they become very easy to judge. And you go, “Oh, Nick is a narcissist. Oh, Honey is a ditz. Oh, Martha is a sex-crazed brat. Oh, George, he's a loser. He's a psychotic loser.” You know, it's easy to do that and and for me, the games narrow it down into finding ourselves in the risk of the characters, finding ourselves in the strategies of the
Who's AfrAid of VirginiA Woolf?
directing And drAmAturgy APPrentice KimmArie mccrAnn With her VisuAl drAmAturgy BoArd. Photo By AressA goodrich.
gun! I am making a rifle that shoots out an umbrella. Most of the other props in the show are things we've been able to pull from stock, it's mostly furniture and bottles, some fake flowers, set dressing elements, making labels—nothing too crazy or fancy. But yeah, I spend a lot of time trying to engineer a fake gun that can shoot an umbrella, which is a tricky fun thing because umbrellas are weird, and getting it to come out of a tube and open all at once dependably with a trigger pull is a funny challenge.
MDK: How do you feel like you're doing that challenge?
EN: Good. Decent. They have a functional prototype in the rehearsal hall, which the actors seem to be managing—if it's broken, no one's told me yet—but it's super clunky and it's clearly a piece of PVC with some melted plastic over it. So it works, but making it look pretty and survive the run of a professional theater show where they’re doing it six or seven times a week is challenging.
MDK: How did you figure out how to engineer the umbrella gun?
EN: I did some YouTubing…I wish I was more of a YouTube tutorial person, but I feel like I am a big fan of just figuring it out the way my brain works…but yeah, the base idea [is] having the umbrella fixed to a loaded spring in the tube and latched. I feel like the
prop maker of a little nightmare thing. It was originally a manufactured toy that Edward Albee just had, it wasn't a commonplace product, and he wrote it into the play. And now sixty years later, people still have to make this thing that doesn’t exist anymore.
MDK: It seems like you’ve gone through a lot of umbrellas…
EN: Yeah, I think we're on umbrella six right now. Some of them are umbrellas from our storage that I have destroyed beyond any sort of repair. I've started buying umbrellas online for a specific spring mechanism, ‘cause I’ve learned every umbrella works very differently. The double layer and spring operated ones ended up being useful.
MDK: What's your dream show to make a puppet or props for?
EN: I mostly make original shows. I think if I was to do a known work, I think it would be really awesome to do a Bunraku-style production of The Little Prince (except for the narrator). Bunraku is a specific theater company in Osaka, Japan, but it's the most famous example of a direct-operated puppet where there are three people on one jointed doll. You can get really beautiful specific movement out of it. The Little Prince would be a really fun, Western story to adapt that other people know.
MDK: When you feel like you're stuck on a project, or you need a troubleshoot, what do you do?
EN: I ask Ted and Jacob [PS's Technical Director and Assistant Technical Director]. Or Anita [PS's Artistic Director] or Mary Lana [PS's Production Manager and Lighting Supervisor]. It’s awesome working here as a young, relatively inexperienced theater production worker. There's a lot of really smart, capable people here who are very willing to help and uplift one another. I think that's my favorite thing about working here. Except for having all these tools that I can play with that I don't have at home. That's my real favorite thing. And that I'm getting paid so I can eat and pay my rent.
elliot's ProP house from Murder on the links. the house hAs internAl lighting, A hinge on the roof, And other cleVer tricKs.
Howard, Albee, and an All-Black Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?
by Kimmarie McCrann
In 2001, a production of Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? with an all-Black cast was performed for the first time at Howard University, under the direction of theater arts professor Vera J. Katz. Goldie E. Patrick was a rapt freshman student and audience member at this groundbreaking production. Now, 24 years later, Patrick is directing a fresh rendition of the play with a cast of Black actors—including one of the original Howard performers—at Portland Stage Company. Let’s take a look at what occurred back in 2001 to make the pioneering production come to fruition at Howard University.
Vera J. Katz has often been described as a “force of nature” and a powerful contributor to theater arts in higher education. Katz knew that she wanted to push boundaries and direct the first all-Black production of Virginia Woolf with a cast of strong student actors and professors at a Historically Black College and University (HBCU) like Howard. Although not a Black woman herself, Katz is very connected to her Jewish identity and had been working extensively with Black students for many years. And Katz knew that in order to direct such a production, there would be some necessary script changes. In the original text,
there are moments when characters in the play are described as “blond” and “blue-eyed.” Practically and dramaturgically, this wouldn’t work for the group of students that Katz was hoping to cast in the production. So, this tenacious professor wrote out a letter longhand to playwright Edward Albee himself and sent it to his agent, explaining her dilemma. Vera’s own husband said to her on the matter, “You’ll never hear from him.” Much to the Katzes’ pleasant surprise, Albee responded to Vera’s request by calling her directly, and excitedly agreed to make several script changes to allow the production to materialize.
The alterations that Albee mulled on and sent to Katz included changing the mentions of the “blue-eyed child” to the “dark-dusky child.” Additionally, Albee changed the names of several of the prestigious universities mentioned in the script, like MIT and UCLA, to HBCUs such as Howard University and the Tuskegee Institute. Albee also expressed to Katz his desire to visit Howard University and speak with the young actors. A visit was arranged, and Albee took the trip from his residence in New York to Howard in Washington, DC. Katz later described the encounter: “When he arrived, he insisted on
Who's AfrAid of VirginiA Woolf?
drAWnig of hoWArd uniVersity in WAshington, d.c. circA 1910.
shaking every actor’s hand and gave a brilliant lecture about the play.” She also noted Albee’s tour of the university’s campus, saying, “He was very knowledgeable of persons the dormitories and buildings were named for—Mary McLeod Bethune, Dr. Charles Drew, Frederick Douglass, Harriet Tubman, and Ira Aldridge. For me, he seemed to want to expand his awareness of the Black experience during this visit.” Albee was unable to attend the performance of Howard’s Virginia Woolf in the end because he was in production at the same time for another one of his plays, but Katz was sure to send him a copy of the program. Ashley C. Turner, the actor who is currently playing George in Portland Stage’s production, is actually the same person who played the role when he was a senior student at Howard University in 2001!
Despite Albee’s enthusiastic support of the Howard production, there have been several controversies regarding casting practices for Virginia Woolf over the years. For example, in May 2017, a production of the play with The Complete Works Project in Portland, Oregon, was denied licensing rights by the Albee estate when they cast a Black actor in the role of Nick. The estate, and Albee himself in the past, said that casting Nick as the only BIPOC actor would add a racist narrative to the story that he didn’t intend. The controversy made national news and sparked some outrage, and the Albee estate released a letter clarifying that multiple BIPOC actors could be cast, but not only one. Jonathan Lomma, Albee’s former agent who now oversees the playwright’s estate, provided the statement that clarified why the Oregon production had been denied. Lomma went on to say, “Virtually all of the roles can and should be done in a diverse, color-conscious fashion.” Lomma’s statement proves that the controversy was a general misconception and misunderstanding by the public on Albee’s morals. This letter, in addition to Albee’s 2001 visit to Howard University, shows how the playwright had always been encouraging of BIPOC actors playing Virginia Woolf’s roles, while still honoring the play’s narrative.
Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, which already explores themes of classism and makes plentiful social and political commentary, gets an extra layer of meaning with a diverse cast and creative team at Portland Stage. Director Goldie E. Patrick has spent a lot of time in the rehearsal room facilitating conversations around the cu lture of Blackness in 1960s Virginia, institutional racism in higher education, and intergenerational conflict. One can safely assume that if Albee could see the production today, he would be quite proud of its depth and magnitude for our 2025 audience.
PlAyWright edWArd AlBee circA 1975.
Photo from the los angeles tiMes
rosA PArKs With dr. mArtin luther King in the BAcKground circA 1955. PhotogrAPh from ebony Magazine a chart topper in 1961, and Chubby Checker’s “The Twist” topped charts in 1962, bringing with it a dance craze that older generations often deemed too provocative.
In addition to national shifts in music and television, the 1950s in America saw a great hobby boom. In an era when suburbs held contests for beautiful houses and lawns, and home life was glorified, the art of crafting at home became an obsession for many. Building model trains, planes, and boats were all popular pastimes in the 1950s. The ’60s saw the addition of building model rockets to this list. Stamp collecting, painting, and ceramics were also common, and these crafts were displayed at events called “hobby shows.” These were intended for people around the country to gather and demonstrate their local craftsmanship. Popular pastimes also included listening to records, going to drive-in movie theaters, reading books and magazines, hiking, camping, picnicking, playing baseball, and going to sporting events.
One of the most significant movements that happened over the course of the 1950s and 1960s in the United States was the Civil
Rights Movement, which was a time of major political and social unrest and change. The movement campaigned for racial equality for Black Americans, and the end of segregation and discrimination practices that had been very present in the country for a long time. The Civil Rights Movement included boycotts, massive protests and rallies, and changes to US legislation. In 1948, President Harry Truman issued an executive order to end discrimination in the military, setting the tone for the movement that was to erupt in the 1950s and ’60s.
Major civil rights developments happened over the course of the ’50s. In 1954, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of equal rights in the landmark Brown v. Board of Education case, declaring that state-sanctioned racial segregation of public schools was a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment and therefore unconstitutional. A year and a half later, Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat to a white man in a racially segregated bus in Montgomery, Alabama. She was arrested for her refusal, and became “the mother of the modern-day civil rights movement.” Baptist minister Martin Luther King, Jr. formed the Montgomery Improvement Association (MIA) and led the Montgomery Bus Boycott
simone de BeAuVoir, Author of the second sex, circA 1967.
with Rosa Parks and other activists, which lasted 381 days. Largely as a result of the Montgomery Bus Boycott, the Supreme Court ruled that segregated seating was unconstitutional in 1956. The next year, President Eisenhower signed the Civil Rights Act of 1957, which allowed federal prosecution of anyone who tried to prevent a US citizen from voting. This act attempted to put an end to “Jim Crow” laws. Jim Crow laws, which included unfair systems such as literacy tests, codified racial segregation, and outright racism, had prevented many Black Americans from voting in elections and participating in integrated public life until this point.
But despite positive changes to US legislation over the course of the ’50s, change was slowmoving and many Black Americans still faced extreme discrimination all over the country. On February 1, 1960, four Black college students took a stand against segregation when they refused to give up their seats without being served at Woolworth’s lunch counter in Greensboro, North Carolina. The sit-in gained national media attention and sparked a series of peaceful sit-ins and demonstrations that spread to 55 cities in 13 states. Many of the protestors were arrested for trespassing, but more and more people came to show their support. In response to the success of the sit-in movement, dining facilities in the South were being integrated by the summer of 1960. University intellectuals like Martha, George, Nick, and Honey would’ve been highly aware of, and possibly involved in, such movements
and political action, especially in the southern state of Virginia.
The Civil Rights Movement largely set the stage for the Second Wave of Feminism, which was just getting its legs at the start of the ’60s. Simone de Beauvoir’s The Second Sex had been published in the US in 1953 (about ten years before Virginia Woolf ) and set the stage for further feminist thought during this period, along with having a lasting impact on women’s understanding of themselves and the construction of gender. Advances were also being made in women’s science: in 1960, the FDA approved the first birth control pill, called Enovid. Thanks to this drug and the reproductive agency it gave women, women were able to join the workforce at new rates in the ’60s, when Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? takes place. For a deep dive into how the gender norms of the time period are upended and examined in this play, take a look at “Martha’s the Man” on page 30.
Albee’s masterpiece takes place during a period of huge social and political change and upheaval. The older generation of Martha and George are faced with a world that differs greatly from the one they grew up in, and cling to the ideals of a previous generation, while the youthful Nick and Honey are more likely to embrace the ideas that the 1960s introduced. No doubt the unsettling changes that George and Martha feel threatened by are reflected in the chaotic mind games that they subject Honey and Nick to throughout the entire play.
ciVil rights Protesters And WoolWorth's sit-in, durhAm, north cArolniA, 10 feBruAry 1960.
1960s Nuclear Families in the Media
by Sadie Goldstein
In order to understand the tensions of Martha and George’s tumultuous relationship in Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, it is helpful to understand how couples and families were conventionally depicted at that time in media. With the boom of television programming of the 1950s coinciding with the post-WWII baby boom, situational comedies (sitcoms) about the nuclear family were in fashion. The concept and genre of the sitcom was still new to American audiences, with Mary Kay and Johnny (1947–1950) credited as the first sitcom, though it was not considered a “high brow” form of media. All the same, sitcoms like Leave It to Beaver, The Honeymooners, Ozzie and Harriet, and Father Knows Best were the primary depiction of American familial life in media in the 1950s. These shows showed the classic American nuclear family: a father, a mother, 2.5 children, all in a comfortable house in suburbia (or Brooklyn, in the case of The Honeymooners). The conflicts of these shows came from non-scandalous mishaps, mischievous (but well-meaning) children, or crazy ideas from the kooky neighbors next door. The families of these sitcoms depicted an idealized version of what the middle-class American family could be. However, in trying to depict this “typical” nuclear family, these shows missed out on major portions of the American public: anyone who is not in a white, middleclass, suburban family.
Four main social trends impacted the decline of the nuclear family in the 1960s: decreased fertility rates, the rise of the sexual revolution, women more rapidly entering the workforce, and the rise in divorce rates. Moving away from the postwar era, women were growing sick of their role of the idealized domestic wife. Therefore, when Betty Friedan’s The Feminine Mystique was released in 1963, many female readers welcomed its message. The Feminine Mystique refers to the (potentially false) idea that women are wholly fulfilled by their roles as housewives and mothers. Friedan called on women to instead examine the cultural, intellectual, and sexual freedom they could have if they focused their lives outside of the
home. This cultural movement, part of the larger countercultural movement of the 1960s, had significant effects on the depiction of the nuclear family. As two-parent, two-child families became less common, those nuclear family sitcoms fell out of fashion as well. Instead came the rise of two different styles: the “Fantastic Family” sitcom and “Broken Family” sitcom.
In both of these sitcom styles, there is something slightly “non-nuclear” about the families depicted. In the case of the Fantastic Family sitcom, there is something “otherworldly” or magical about the characters. Shows like The Jetsons, The Munsters, or The Addams Family still present a conventional father, mother, and two children family set-up, but the contexts in which these families live are less relatable to an American audience. The Jetsons theme song comments on how conventional this family structure is: “Meet George Jetson… his boy Elroy… daughter Judy… Jane, his wife.” These words play as George Jetson zips his family around
the cAst of the 1964 ABc sitcom the addaMs FaMily.
“H” comes from an abbreviation that was used by early Christians to signify “Jesus” without having to write his full name.
Joseph Cotten: An American film, stage, radio, and television actor. Particularly known for leading roles in Citizen Kane (1941) and The Magnificent Ambersons (1942), both directed by Orson Welles.
Majorca: The largest of the Balearic Islands, which are part of Spain, and the seventh largest island in the Mediterranean Sea.
Micronesian tortoise: Fossil evidence from the Pacific region suggests that large-bodied and long-living tortoises may have once inhabited some areas of the island country of Micronesia.
Monstre: French for “monster.”
New Carthage: A fictional town in the United States, referencing Ancient Carthage. The Latin phrase "Carthago delenda est," meaning "Carthage must be destroyed," was famously repeated by the Roman senator Cato the Elder. Albee is likely hinting at the “old world” versus “new world” conflict that erupts in his play. George and Martha are Carthage, and Nick and Honey are Rome.
Parnassus: A mountain in Greece near Delphi that was sacred to the Muses in Greek mythology. The figurative use of "Parnassus" extends to any place or area considered a center of artistic or intellectual activity.
Peritonitis: A redness and swelling (inflammation) of the lining of your belly or abdomen. It is often caused by an infection from a hole in the bowel or a burst appendix, and requires immediate medical attention.
Pigmy: A word with Greek origins used to describe an unusually small person. Often used in a derogatory or offensive manner.
Putain: French word that literally translates to “whore/prostitute,” but is also used as a general expletive.
Puta: A word for “prostitute” in Spanishspeaking regions.
Pyrrhic: A victory that is not worth winning because so much is lost to achieve it.
Simp: A foolish or naive person. Primarily used as a shortened version of “simpleton” in the 1900s.
mount PArnAssus. Photo By george e KoronAios.
Production History
by Larsen Nichols, research by Kimmarie McCrann
One fateful night in the bathroom of a New York saloon, Edward Albee saw a phrase scribbled on the mirror in soap: “Who’s afraid of Virginia Woolf?” As he was writing the play currently at Portland Stage, the phrase cropped back up in his mind, and an iconic title was born. Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, written over 60 years ago, still remains one of the most produced and widely acclaimed plays in the American canon, with Portland Stage being only the latest in a long history of productions of Albee’s landmark script.
Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? was first published in 1962. The play opened on Broadway at the Billy Rose Theatre on October 13, 1962, directed by Alan Schneider. The production featured Uta Hagen as Martha, Arthur Hill as George, Melinda Dillon as Honey, and George Grizzard as Nick, with a different cast that took over matinee performances during the week due to the play’s length. The play quickly became a successful production: it
was well-received by critics and won the Tony Award for Best Play in 1963. The Broadway production closed after five previews and 664 performances over seven months. Due to the play’s critical acclaim in the US, a West End production of the show opened in London at the Piccadilly Theatre in 1964, and transferred to the Globe Theatre and then the Garrick Theatre in 1965.
The play’s most popularly known adaptation is the 1966 movie, directed by Mike Nichols and starring Elizabeth Taylor as Martha, Richard Burton as George, Sandy Dennis as Honey, and George Segal as Nick. The adaptation of the script was written by Ernest Lehman, who cut down the play’s three-hour runtime by almost an hour for the screen while still retaining the playscript’s electric arc. The movie, like the play’s previous productions in New York and London, was a huge hit. It was nominated for a range of awards including Best Picture and Best Adapted Screenplay at both the Oscars and the Golden Globes. The whole cast was nominated for Academy Awards in their respective categories, with Elizabeth Taylor winning the Oscar for Best Actress and Sandy Dennis winning Best Supporting Actress.
In 1970, actors Henry Fonda and Richard Burton attempted to recruit Warren Beatty and Jon Voight for an all-male production of the play, but Edward Albee refused permission. Mike Nichols (the director of the 1966 film) and Elaine May starred in a 1980 production in New Haven, and Patrick Stewart and Mercedes Ruehl starred in a 2000–2001 production at the Guthrie Theatre in Minneapolis.
In 2001, a production of Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? with an all-Black cast performed for the first time at Howard University, under the direction of Vera J. Katz. Ms. Katz reached out to Edward Albee by letter, requesting changes be made for a more authentic production with Black students. These changes included changing the names of the universities mentioned in the script and the descriptions of Martha and George’s unnamed child. Albee
elizABeth tAylor circA 1952. PhotogrAPh By PhiliPPe hAlsmAn
company named Elevator Repair Service produced a feminist, vampiric reinterpretation of the play by Kate Scelsa, Everyone's Fine with Virginia Woolf. As opposed to TV episodes or sketches that give a nod to the famous play, Scelsa’s play dedicates its whole premise to the original. The play is intended to be a feminist take-back of Albee’s portrayal of Martha. In an interview with the podcast 101 Stage Adaptations, Scelsa speaks about why she is intrigued by Martha’s character. According to Scelsa, Martha, who is written by Albee, a gay man, has a “drag”-esque nature to her that is almost a caricature of womanhood, which is creatively fun for Scelsa to toy with. However, the central conflict of fertility (for both Martha and Honey) and Martha’s lack of children serving as a punishment for Martha’s bad behavior were not ideas that Scelsa wanted to perpetuate. Scelsa says, “I know narratively it is very satisfying for Martha to have her comeuppance, but I don't want her to.” What transpires is a comedic, feminist subversion of Albee’s classic play.
Virginia Woolf has even served as inspiration in the fine art world. In 1967, Jewish American artist Barnett Newman painted “Who’s Afraid of Red, Yellow, and Blue III,” an 8-foot-by-18foot painting, with a large red rectangle, and a yellow and blue “zip” on either side. This abstract expressionism painting was a response
to the horrors of the Holocaust and World War II. After such trauma, it was hard for Newman to fathom how to create art based on established conventions. Instead, starting from a blank slate was necessary. As for why Newman was inspired to name the painting with a nod to Albee’s play is unknown. Newman is known for having said, “I prefer to leave the paintings to speak for themselves.” The painting was met with outrage and was vandalized by slashing up the canvas.
Edward Albee’s Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? is one of the most impactful and recognizable contemporary American dramas. The play’s influence on mainstream culture and the American psyche cannot be overstated. It is interesting then that so many works of art that pay homage to the American drama in a comedic, subversive, or parodying fashion. Why is that so? With so much tension in Albee's original, it's easy to pivot to humor to break the tension. In a different vein, parody requires audiences to know the reference, so these frequent reinterpretations of this play show how enduring Albee’s cultural legacy is. Even after sixty years, Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? continues to influence American art and lives.
BArnett neWmAn's "Who's AfrAid of red, yelloW, And Blue iii."
Martha's the Man
by Larsen Nichols
Excessive drinking, sexual openness, and extreme profanity—when we think of 1950s housewives, it’s safe to say that these are not the first qualities that come to mind. With the rise of social conservatism and the nuclear family in the post-WWII era, social expectations for men and women became firm. Women were to serve their families as wives and mothers while husbands went to work. But Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?’s Martha doesn’t adhere to this mold. She drinks and curses in excess. She antagonizes her husband more often than she obeys him. She makes sexual advances on another man. Over the course of the play, her character becomes defined by habits that are traditionally associated with the performance of masculinity. Edward Albee positions Martha as a uniquely masculine figure in this play, developing a critique of gender norms that still challenges audiences today and prompting the question: Though Martha’s performance of gender is revolutionary, does she actually have agency in Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?
While George and Martha do their fair share of lying over the course of Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, Martha is certainly clear about one thing: “I’m loud, and I’m vulgar, and I wear the pants in this house because somebody’s got to.” Based on her dialogue and actions throughout the play, it’s certainly true. Martha employs this loudness and vulgarity to humiliate George (and later Nick) verbally and emotionally in the play. One of the most recognizable of these moments is when Martha criticizes George’s lack of aggression and drive in addition to other failings, calling him “a great…big…fat…FLOP!” Martha’s ridicule is so impactful that George breaks a glass bottle in anger. A wife speaking to her husband in this way (and more or less getting away with it) was almost unheard of during this era, and further highlights the unusual dynamics between George and Martha. Albee reveals that Martha has humiliated George physically as well, and it has, in Martha’s words, “colored [the couple’s] whole life.” As Martha recounts, a few years after they were married, Martha
punched George in the jaw with a boxing glove, and he stumbled and fell into a huckleberry bush in front of his boss (Martha’s father) and presumably the whole faculty. The incident of physical violence in addition to Martha’s use of the story to humiliate George solidifies Martha’s powerful role in their relationship. With the way Martha treats George verbally and physically over the course of the play, Albee paints a clear picture of Martha’s masculine dominance over George.
Martha’s sexuality also plays a central role in her subversion of gender norms and majorly amplifies her agency as a character in the play. She is unapologetically sexual, even with company present: she changes into more seductive clothing; she kisses George passionately in front of Nick and Honey; and she recounts for the couple the story of her “revirginization” prior to marrying George. But her most sexually revolutionary act is seducing Nick, in front of her husband no less. While George and Nick only speak of infidelities, joking about “plowing” all the faculty wives and the faculty sport of “musical beds,” Martha is all action. She consistently comes onto Nick, and by the end of the second act, she convinces him to have sex with her (to make
Betty friedAn, Author of the FeMinine Mystique, circA 1960.
matters worse, in her and George’s marital bed). This seduction, conducted in front of George, angers George as Martha intended (though he doesn’t let her see his rage).
Once Martha has succeeded in conquering Nick and pissing off George, she takes her game a step further, making Nick (who we gather has not performed well sexually) her “houseboy” for the rest of the night. At the top of Act III, Martha orders Nick to open the front door for George and get him a drink. George’s unsurprised reaction to this gives the audience the impression that this is a normal occurrence, and has happened to George before. Given the predominant trope during this time period of husbands being the unfaithful ones, Martha’s seduction of Nick positions her once again as a masculine figure in her and George’s relationship.
So Martha wears the pants in the relationship. Why does it matter? Albee’s characterization of Martha was highly unusual for this time period (or any time period, for that matter).
Consider the social attitudes of the ’50s: white people were leaving ethnically diverse cities for suburbs, and as a result, Levittowns (predominantly white suburban developments) were popping up all over America. The nuclear family was lauded as the American ideal, reinforced by the media and widespread social attitudes. With the return of soldiers from WWII, women were returning to their “rightful” place in the home and taking care of the
children while their husbands went to work. While second-wave feminism was starting to take shape in the early ’60s, the revolutionary book credited with sparking it, Betty Friedan’s The Feminine Mystique, wouldn’t come out until 1963, the year after Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? premiered. Perhaps Martha was, in some way, a physicalization of these feminist sentiments that were beginning to brew in the early ’60s. In the face of widespread gender norms that reinforced the idea of women’s deference to their husbands, a loud, vulgar, and sexually promiscuous woman like Martha is truly remarkable. No wonder the character is commonly regarded among actors as “the role of a lifetime.”
But for all this talk of usurping of gender norms, does Martha actually have agency in Virginia Woolf? While she successfully conquers Nick, deceives Honey, and dismantles George’s self-esteem, at the conclusion of the play, she falls at the hand of her husband. At the end of a long-fought, long-winded battle, George plays his final card: the death of his and Martha’s imaginary son. Martha’s infertility and failure to be a mother is thrown in her face, and all of her comforting fantasies are stripped away. She’s left bereft by George’s decision to kill their illusion, raging at him and finally accepting this new reality. There are no more cards to play, and the party is finally over, with only George and Martha left to pick up the pieces. So while Albee may have written a revolutionary female character, ultimately, Martha’s fate falls into the hands of a man.
AeriAl VieW of suBurBAn leVittoWn, PennsylVAniA, circA 1959.
Portland Stage Company
Anita Stewart Artistic Director
Martin Lodish Managing Director
Artistic & Production Staff
Todd Brian Backus Literary Manager
Jacob Coombs Associate Technical Director
Ted Gallant Technical Director
Myles C. Hatch Stage Manager
Meg Lydon Stage Manager
Elliot Nye Props Coordinator
Mary Lana Rice Production Manager, Lighting Supervisor, & Resident Lighting Designer
Seth Asa Sengel Asst. Production Manager, Sound Supervisor, & Resident Sound Designer
Susan Thomas Costume Shop Manager
Administrative Staff
Paul Ainsworth Business Manager
Covey Crolius Development Director
Erin Elizabeth Marketing Strategist
Cassie Endicott Assistant Box Office Manager
Lake Marshburn-Ersek Audience Services Associate
Allison Fry Grants Coordinator
Aressa Goodrich Marketing and Graphic Design Associate
Lindsey Higgins Development Associate
Katie Hodgdon House & Concessions Manager
Savannah Irish Marketing Project Manager
Jennifer London Company Manager, Apprentice Coordinator
Carrigan O'Brien Audience Services Associate
Stacey Salotto-Cristobol Education Assistant
Don Smith Audience Services Manager
Julianne Shea Education Administrator, Apprentice Coordinator
Adam Thibodeau House Manager
Michael Dix Thomas Education Director
Apprentice Company
Charlie Bowen Education Apprentice
Kevin Commander Stage Management Apprentice
Renata Cortés Costumes Apprentice
Sadie Goldstein Education Apprentice
Micki Demby Kleinman Directing & Dramaturgy Apprentice
Kimmarie McCrann Directing & Dramaturgy Apprentice
Larsen Nichols Directing & Dramaturgy Apprentice
Casey Pitts Company Management Apprentice
Jessica Podemski Costumes Apprentice
Sierra Riley Electrics Apprentice Grάinne Sheehan Props Apprentice
Charlotte Teplitz Stage Management Apprentice
