"Doubt' at the Merriam

Doubts about Doubt

STEVE COHEN

To see Cherry Jones in Doubt is to experience a great actress at the top of her game. But John Patrick Shanley’s contrived, manipulative drama disappoints.

His script deceptively equates the questioning of orthodoxy with child abuse as it builds up and then tears down a compassionate priest who may or may not be a child molester. The priest is defeated by a dogmatic and prosecutorial nun, the school’s principal, who isn’t too principled to concoct a lie to trick the priest.

Critics and award committees were impressed by the acting and by the play’s apparent social significance. But major flaws in the writing are accentuated by the casting of this national
tour, which came to the Merriam Theatre May 15.

The play is set in 1964, when the recent assassination of JFK has filled the world– especially the Irish-American world– with fear and doubt, and the recent death of Pope John XXIII raised doubt about whether his reforms would prevail. The value of doubt is a meaty subject, and Shanley’s exploration of that provides the best moments in the play. But he too-obviously trades on more-recent headlines about priestly abuse. His script poses the proposition: Mightn’t it have been better to remain closed-minded and doctrinaire than to have priests sexually molesting boys?– as if that were an either/or question.

In this cast, the contest is lopsided

Doubt enjoyed great success in New York when it pitted combatants of equal stature against each other. In this cast the contest is lopsided. Jones, as the rigid Sister Aloysius, is intimidating and powerful of voice. Young Sister James should show a contrasting personality that is sweet and loving– but Lisa Joyce’s Sister James is so soft-spoken as to be nearly inaudible, and dramatically she’s invisible. Her character is caught between two people she respects— she is a stand-in for us— so her weakness hurts the play significantly.

Father Flynn can be played one of two ways, either of which makes him a believable foil for Sister Aloysius. He can appear strong and charismatic, the embodiment of Pope John XXIII as he humanized Catholicism; or compassionate and sensitive to the point where the biased Aloysius might suspect him of being gay, thereby setting the plot afoot. (I lean towards the second approach; otherwise, why would the scent of liquor on a boy’s breath immediately cause Aloysius to suspect homosexuality?) But Chris McGarry takes a bland approach that fails to engage our empathy.

Jones is a tower of strength, and she has one scene of tenderness as she shrouds her rosebushes in burlap, shielding them from the coming frost just as she protectively shields her pupils from all outside elements.

But only one other member of this cast belongs in a class with Cherry Jones. She is Caroline Stefanie Clay, as the mother of the parochial school’s first and only black student, whom Sister Aloysius suspects of having a sexual relationship with Father Flynn. When Jones summons the mother to her office, Clay defends her son and stands up bravely against the formidable headmistress.

Would you believe...?

The problem with this scene is its unbelievability. Why would a mother who merely wants her son to get through the rest of the school year, "just ‘til June" until he can transfer to a public high school, blurt out so much information that might jeopardize the boy’s chances of being allowed to stay? Why would she reveal that her husband is a child-beater and her son probably gay? Why would any mother volunteer such damning information— especially the school’s only black mother, in an era when blacks and gays had such tenuous positions in society?

Through most of the play, Father Flynn is portrayed as a well-intentioned priest who is exasperated with Aloysius’s rigidity and lack of warmth toward students and faculty. He takes notes in preparation for bringing charges against Sister Aloysius. Then, after a private confrontation during which Aloysius presents no hard evidence, Flynn suddenly crumbles and obeys Aloysius’s demand that he resign his position. The drama collapses along with Flynn.

In a brief final scene, we learn that Flynn has received a promotion to become headmaster of a boys’ school in another parish. Some critics thought that this added yet another level of dramatic ambiguity, but it’s a cop-out. Shanley seems determined to remind viewers of what we now know were widespread cover-ups of pedophilia.

Deceiving the audience

There is one ambiguity that, oddly, Shanley’s play fails to explore. What if Father Flynn admitted that he let the boy sip wine? Lacking any other evidence, does that indicate a homosexual relationship? And if it lacks that connection, does that make it right? Is it OK for an Italian father to share wine with his children in his own home? Or a Jewish dad to share Passover wine with his? Where do you draw a line? Do considerations change when it’s a teacher or a priest, rather than a parent?

Aloysius in her black habit with her absolute beliefs is fascinating, but Tevye she ain’t. As the play progresses and she displays neither warmth nor vulnerability we are led to root against her and for the priest. It’s a trick, of course, meant to surprise us when the good guy turns out to be evil. More than that, to shock us when the evil one winds up with a promotion. Shanley, who was a student at a Bronx Catholic school at that time, stacks the deck, and a clue lurks in the preface he wrote to the play’s published version:

"We had, like many animals, flocked together for warmth and safety. As a result, we were terribly vulnerable to anyone who chose to hunt us. When trust is the order of the day, predators are free to plunder. And plunder they did. As the ever widening Church scandals reveal, the hunters had a field day."

Shanley adds: "I still long for...an assumption of safety, the reassurance of believing that others know better than me what’s for the best."

So, with an axe to grind (not to mention defective syntax) , Shanley constructed a clever play. But it isn’t the fulfilling experience that previous commentators would have you expect.