"Indulgences": Good and Plenary

by Jack Craib, New Rep Reviewer

Bless me, reader, for I have grinned. Depending on your tolerance for painful puns, you might also find yourself amused by the unconventional goings-on at New Rep’s production of out-there playwright Chris Craddock’s “Indulgences”. The title refers to that regrettable period of several centuries when some clergy in the Catholic Church were guilty of literally selling indulgences, which were either partial or full (“plenary”) remissions of purgatorial punishment for sin. While not as infamous as the Inquisition or the Crusades, it was a lamentable period that led to the protestations of Martin Luther.
Happily, New Rep needs neither absolution nor contrition. This show, Artistic Director Kate Warner’s second directorial effort (after the season opener, “Mr. Roberts”), is impeccably paced and immaculately performed. Beginning with the rumpled character of Salesman (Benjamin Evett in full “Glengarry Glen Ross” mode), then moving on to the Pinteresque Man 1 (Joel Colodner) and Man 2 (Neil A. Casey), and further still to the Machiavellian plotting by Advisor 1 (Leigh Barrett in an atypical non-singing role) and the rest of the cast, this company need feel no guilt about their part in the commission of this production. Mention should also be made of the perfect precision of lighting and sound, both essential to the vitality of this piece.
If there is fault to be found in “Indulgences”, it lies in the author’s sometimes overwrought writing. Described in the program as a “fractured fairy tale” a la “Rocky and Bullwinkle”, it has both the sublimely weird wackiness and the grossly sophomoric crudity of those fondly remembered tales from one’s youth. In both content and context, playwright Craddock straddles the fence between brilliant theater of the absurd and overcooked Hasty Pudding. The test is whether a theatergoer truly believes or goes roguely heretic; the style and level of humor will appeal more to some, less to others.
Craddock’s influences are as diverse as Mamet, Shakespeare and Rocky the Squirrel. After a lengthy exposition devoid of much overt hilarity, most will probably find the rest of the tale a worthwhile retreat from reality, especially in the second act when the indescribable (or as God puts it in Her off-stage proclamations, ineffable) is translated into several alternative resolutions, not unlike “City of Angels”, “Mystery of Edwin Drood”, and especially Pirandello. The specifics defy synopsis: suspicion, treachery, cross-dressing. Suffice it to say that this is a work that is unabashedly political, and a gay play in both senses of the word.
If you’re in need of a respite from the harshness of everyday life, then get thee to this punnery. If your preferred cup of theatrical tea tends toward the outrageous, you won’t regret this pilgrimage.