Theater Review - 'A Chorus Line'

Theater Review – ‘A Chorus Line

Produced by The Gateway Theater – Bellport

Reviewed by Jeb Ladouceur

    

When seventeen desperate-for-work dancers make the first audition cut for an upcoming Broadway musical, the Director and his Choreographer inform the survivors that they’re looking for a chorus line of (oh dear!) only eight members … four boys and four girls. “Tell me about yourselves,” says ‘Director Zach’ … and that’s how he and ‘Larry’ (his Choreographer) will determine who stays, and who is summarily excused.

The hopefuls aren’t nuts about this unusual method of measuring talent but what’s a hoofer to do when at the end of his or her rope? Five – six – seven – eight… If you’re a professional dance aspirant, you don’t tell Directors and Choreographers how to gauge ability … not if you expect to stick around long on stage, you don’t. So, one by one, the candidates start to reveal even intimate details about their lives, invariably beginning with their earliest dance experiences.

After the first two young men have fessed up to what can only be termed confidential childhood information, the other contestants begin seriously to wonder whether agreeing to this strange audition technique was a good idea after all. I mean, how much should the performers tell these guys? To say that the odd process makes one uncomfortable is an understatement. But, what the hey … that’s show business, right? Five – six – seven- eight…

I’ve always thought this story-line device is more than a bit thin. After all, if it’s truly required, there are ways to extract an individual’s innermost feelings apart from flat-out demanding to know chapter and verse about one’s life story. Accordingly, it’s this critic’s view that one should approach The Gateway’s snazzy production of ‘A Chorus Line’ with total disregard for the contrived ‘personal revelation’ premise right from the outset. Because it really doesn’t matter, folks. There’s plenty of glitz in this production to bring the show gloriously across the finish line without all the unnecessary psychological nonsense.

How successful was ‘A Chorus Line’ after it opened at New York’s Shubert Theatre in 1975? Well, not only was the boffo musical nominated for a dozen Tony awards (winning nine), but Broadway theatergoers kept the Marvin Hamlisch show in demand on The Great White Way for more than six thousand performances. It became the longest-running production in The Big Apple’s history until surpassed by the iconic ‘Cats’ in 1997. Indeed, ‘A Chorus Line’ remains the 6^th longest-running show ever to light up Broadway!

Many theater patrons assume that this musical is a takeoff on the familiar theme wherein a stageful of eager young performers dance their hearts out in pursuit of that one big break that will bring them fame and fortune. Not entirely. ‘A Chorus Line’ is largely about veteran hoofers who are approaching the culmination of their careers and are desperate to achieve one more success while they still possess the necessary terpsichorean tools. It’s this novel twist on an otherwise everyday stratagem that saves the James Kirkwood Jr. – Nicholas Dante book from mediocrity. Though it must be acknowledged that in 1976 Kirkwood and Dante did, in fact, win both the Tony and Drama Desk awards for Best Book of a Musical. Go figure.

One thing is a lead pipe cinch, however: when regional theaters like The Gateway, Theatre Three, and The Engeman want to send audiences home tapping their toes and humming a familiar refrain, they can’t go wrong treating them to ‘A Chorus Line,’ or any other Marvin Hamlisch production. Long a favorite of the great Barbra Streisand, Hamlisch (who died at 68) was one of but 12 people to win Emmy, Grammy, Oscar, and Tony awards. What’s more, only Richard Rogers joins him in having added a Pulitzer Prize to that impressive lineup.

The Gateway never disappoints … never! Whether the show they’ve mounted is performed at the sumptuous Patchogue Theater, or the ultra-comfortable playhouse in Bellport. And that’s true of the current offering at the latter venue. It’s hard to imagine a more impressive production than the ‘…Chorus Line’ being staged there thru May 26. The single hope from this quarter is that readers will take advantage of the unforgettable experience that awaits them there.

________________________________________________________________  

Award-winning writer, Jeb Ladouceur is the author of a dozen novels, and his theater and book reviews appear in several major L.I. publications. His recent hit, THE GHOSTWRITERS, explores the bizarre relationship between the late Harper Lee and Truman Capote. Ladouceur’s newly completed thriller, THE SOUTHWICK INCIDENT, was introduced at the Smithtown Library in May. The book involves a radicalized Yale student and his CIA pursuers. Mr. Ladouceur’s revealing website is www.JebsBooks.com

SUFFOLK CLOSEUP - Bamboo Once Unleashed Extremely Difficult To Control

SUFFOLK CLOSEUP

By Karl Grossman

Long Island “has been a hotbed of anti-bamboo sentiment going back several years,” declares the industry website “Landscape Management.”

The website outlines the hope for bamboo and the big problem involving it. “Bamboo has often been used as [a] landscape ‘problem solver.’ Certain species of bamboo grow quickly forming a dense screen that can reach 40 feet or more [high.]….Bamboo becomes a problem when some species do not stay where they are planted. Bamboo in the genus Phyllostachys, commonly called “running” bamboo, seems to cause the most problems. Unchecked, running bamboo can easily invade a neighbor’s yard, popping up through asphalt driveways and dislodging sidewalks, as much as 30 feet from where it’s intended to be grown.”

Once unleashed, it is extremely difficult for control to be gained.

The anti-bamboo beat on Long island continues. The Town of Riverhead is currently considering joining with other Long Island jurisdictions which impose restrictions on bamboo. 

Riverhead would make it illegal to plant or replant bamboo or allow the spread of existing bamboo on a neighbor’s property or onto public land. The property owner or occupant would be liable for “the direct and indirect costs of abating the nuisance and all expenses incidental thereto,” says the town’s proposed code. The code, however, is being redrawn after a public hearing last month at which landscapers and bamboo growers said the town should exclude “clumping” bamboo. Clumping bamboo doesn’t spread dramatically like running bamboo. Rodney Anderson, a member of the Suffolk County Planning Commission, testified at the hearing that the proposed Riverhead law “will hurt growers like myself and retailers.” 

There’s been a varied approach to dealing with bamboo in this area.  

The first bamboo ban here came in 1981 with Ocean Beach on Fire Island passing a law 

stating that “no owner of any land within the Village of Ocean Beach shall permit any plants or any weeds known as ‘poison ivy’ or bamboo or any other noxious weeds…or invasive growth…to be grown upon such property.” There was no provision for clumping bamboo. 

Similarly, the Village of Malverne in 2013 prohibited the “planting, growing or maintaining” outdoors of all bamboo. 

In many Long Island jurisdictions, after battles between bamboo opponents and bamboo supporters—landscapers and growers largely—no restrictions were enacted. 

That’s what happened in Sag Harbor in 2011. State Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele, Jr., then also the village’s attorney, drew up a law outlawing bamboo but, he recalled last week, there was “no agreement” on it by the village board after a hearing. Also in 2011, a bamboo ban got nowhere in East Hampton Village.

In other jurisdictions, restrictions have been applied to running bamboo but not clumping bamboo—as was the plea at the hearing in Riverhead.

The first of the 10 towns in Suffolk County to act on bamboo was Smithtown which in 2011 enacted a law providing that “no owner, tenant or occupier of property anywhere in the Town of Smithtown shall cause, suffer or allow bamboo to be planted, maintained or otherwise permitted to exist within 10 feet of any property line, street, sidewalk or public right-of-way.” The Village of the Branch, in Smithtown, followed the town with its own prohibition. 

Since, the towns of Huntington, Babylon and Brookhaven have all adopted restrictions on bamboo. The Village of Northport in Huntington followed the town and passed a ban. And the Village of Lindenhurst in Babylon Town enacted its own prohibition. On Fire Island, Saltaire followed Ocean Beach.

In Nassau, the Village of Roslyn Harbor adopted a ban this past June and the Village of Flower Hill enacted one in August. The towns of North Hempstead and Hempstead in Nassau and the cities of Glen Cove and Long Beach and also Garden City have restricted bamboo.

New York State moved into the situation in 2013 adding two varieties of running bamboo to its list of invasive species and banning their sale, transportation or planting in the state.

The Brookhaven law, passed in 2012, prohibits new planting of running bamboo. But it permits existing running and clumping bamboo, however directing that “the owner or occupant of said property confine such species to prevent the encroachment, spread, invasion or intrusion of same onto any other property or right of way.” The town’s environmental analyst, Michael Albano, is responsible for policing its law. “It’s really easy for bamboo to take over,” Mr. Albano says. And control of running bamboo is a major project that includes placement of a a “root barrier” 18 inches deep with a two-inch lip—“ideally made of plastic; metal rots away.”         

Brookhaven’s penalties are tough. Its law states that violators are subject to “a fine of $500 or $2,000 or by imprisonment not exceeding 15 days, or by both such fine and imprisonment; upon a second or subsequent conviction, by a fine of $1,000 to $3,000 or by a maximum period of imprisonment not to exceed six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment.”

On Shelter Island a ban on bamboo was considered in 2012 but not enacted because of the imminent arrival of the state prohibition. Further, notes town building inspector Chris Tehan, the town code includes a “wetland” provision that says in a “vegetation buffer…planting, seeding, cultivating or maintaining a previously disturbed area is allowed” but, as to any “replacement plantings,” they must be “native vegetation.” Also, bamboo is listed on the Shelter Island Conservation Advisory Council’s list of “invasive species” and that body states on top of its list that includes bamboo: “We recommend you do NOT plant these.” 

Karl Grossman is a veteran investigative reporter and columnist, the winner of numerous awards for his work and a member of the L.I. Journalism Hall of Fame. He is a professor of journalism at SUNY/College at Old Westbury and the author of six books. 

SUFFOLK CLOSEUP - Foam Food Packaging Ban 1988 - 2018

Suffolk Closeup

 By Karl Grossman

It started here in Suffolk County in 1988—passage of the first law in the United States to ban polystyrene foam food packaging. And it spread from Suffolk to cities, counties and other jurisdictions across the nation.

Now, with the recent passage of bans on foam food packaging first and Patchogue and last month in the Village of East Hampton, it’s coming back to Suffolk. Hopefully, what Patchogue and East Hampton have started will extend in Suffolk, the original home of the polystyrene food packaging ban.

The ban was enacted when a Democratic-Republican coalition of especially environmentally-committed legislators held a majority on the Suffolk Legislature in the 1980s. In 1994, after a straight Republican majority took over the legislature, the ban was eliminated.

 As the original county measure stated, polystyrene food packaging constitutes “a threat to the environment in the County of Suffolk.” Its chief sponsor was Legislator Steve Englebright of Setauket, now a member of the New York State Assembly.

Polystyrene is stuff that throws a monkey wrench into nature—impacting on the environment and human health. The damage to marine and bird life has long been documented —pieces of the foam are commonly found in the stomachs of dead seabirds, fish and other wildlife. Made from petrochemicals, its production causes greenhouse gasses contributing to global warming and climate change. If incinerated, there are toxic releases. It stuffs up landfills. And as litter, it takes many centuries to biodegrade—it’s litter forever—a scourge on beaches and landscapes. Moreover, studies have shown that the chemicals from polystyrene food packaging leach into foods and drinks impacting on peoples’ health. 

The oil industry and trade groups went ballistic with the passage of the Suffolk law. The law was challenged in court and in 1990 was overturned by a state Supreme Court justice and subsequently by the Appellate Division. The judges accepted the argument that the county had not done a comprehensive environmental impact statement before passing the measure. Commented Suffolk County Executive Patrick Halpin: “We felt the benefits were obvious and, therefore, didn’t require a full impact statement.”

Then, in 1992, the New York State’s highest court, its Court of Appeals, reversed those rulings. It found that Society of the Plastics Industry, based in Washington, did not have  “the standing” to contest the law. Justice Judith S. Kaye wrote: “Protecting member companies from local conditions, such as the quality of their air and traffic congestion on their roads, cannot be said to be germane to the purposes of this nationwide trade organization.”

Commented Mr. Englebright: “The packaging industry thought that if they could defeat this in Suffolk County they could keep it from spreading. They wanted to snuff it out where it began.” Still, two years later, with the change in political complexion of the Suffolk Legislature, the law was dropped—despite it, by that time, having served as a model for polystyrene food packaging prohibitions in many jurisdictions in the U.S.

However, now the effort to outlaw polystyrene food packaging is returning, in at least parts of Suffolk. Patchogue passed its ban in January. Spearheading it was Village Trustee Joseph Keyes.  The “biggest problem” with polystyrene food packaging, he comments, “is that it doesn’t go anywhere. It can have the same harmful effect on marine life as the single-use plastic bags because they could choke on them. The manufacturing of the plastic foam is also harmful, and even when you heat up food in those containers, the chemicals can seep into your food.”

Under his measure, delis, restaurants, grocery stores or food trucks in Patchogue won’t be allowed to use cups, containers or plates made of polystyrene. As alternatives, they can use paper, cardboard and recyclable plastic containers.    

The Patchogue law notes that polystyrene foam “has been identified as a potential human carcinogen by the United States Department of Health Services and the International Agency for Research of Cancer” and other health agencies.

Of East Hampton’s passage of its ban, Mr. Keyes says Patchogue “is pleased that East Hampton has taken this step, and we’re encouraging our neighboring villages to follow suit.” He urges that “we start one-by-one cleaning up our backyards.” Yes, one-by-one jurisdictions on Long Island and through the country should do that regarding polystyrene food packaging. A parallel step forward: the Suffolk County ban should be reinstated.

New York City enacted a ban on polystyrene foam food packaging in 2013. Mayor Michael Bloomberg spoke about polystyrene being “one product that is impossible to recycle and never biodegrades…something that we know is environmentally destructive and that may be hazardous to our health… and that we can easily do without.” A state Supreme Court justice overturned the ban as “arbitrary and capricious,” but it was reinstated last year.

Karl Grossman is a veteran investigative reporter and columnist, the winner of numerous awards for his work and a member of the L.I. Journalism Hall of Fame. He is a professor of journalism at SUNY/College at Old Westbury and the author of six books. 

Amy's Perspective - Town Council Comments On Planning

Town Council Comments, April 26

On the occasion of David Flynn’s retirement, there is an awesome opportunity to publicly thank David Flynn our Town Planning Director who has been extremely accommodating and available to the residents of Smithtown.  Scheduling a public hearing to review the draft of Mr. Flynn’s Master Plan would be a fitting way to highlight and celebrate his dedication to Smithtown’s future revitalization and preservation of our historic heritage.   David Flynn has always acted with financial prudence and in the best interest of Smithtown’s residents and business community.   The work he accomplished on a daily basis has been outstanding.  His commitment to town planning is obvious as seen in his drafted town plan as per the town council’s request.  He and his staff were able to complete this draft while conducting business as usual.   This would be a great time to invite Smithtown’s residents to a public forum as an opportunity to consider his plan, the work involved and attention to the details of our town’s Master Plan.  The drafted unadopted Master Plan includes all five hamlets for a comprehensive approach to Smithtown’s future goals.   

You may have seen the recent articles in Newsday describing various Long Island communities that are concerned and actually protesting over-development of their well-established neighborhoods.  This seems to be a general concern of Long Islanders to prevent the threat posed by contractors and developers who intend to build up our neighborhoods into urban settings without considering those neighborhoods.  

This issue can be addressed through identifying consensus of our residents and by planning our level of development with smart growth practices including our concern for the environment.  Thank you for your interest in developing a Comprehensive Master Plan, we have a good foundation prepared by David Flynn that can be the foundation and then further developed into a working, viable Comprehensive Master Plan for Smithtown.  

Please take into account that planning for the future of Smithtown must work in concert and conformity to the environmental protections established in the State Environmental Quality Review Act whenever the economic interests of contractors and developers are under review.  This is not a mutually exclusive choice between conserving the available real estate in Smithtown and working with outside developers within the confines of Smart Growth best practices.  Smart Growth is an intentional process including a respectful approach to Smithtown’s residential homeowners and their investment in the future of Smithtown.  Our safety and quality of life are also critical concerns.  

Scheduling a  public forum would inform and include Smithtown’s citizens and highlight David Flynn’s contribution to Town Planning.  Thank you.  

Amy Fortunato is a Smithtown resident who ran for Town Council on the Democratic line in 2017.     

SUFFOLK CLOSEUP - Is Nissequogue's Future Bulkheads And Hard Structures?

SUFFOLK CLOSEUP

By Karl Grossman  

Kevin McAllister had just spoken before the Village of Nissequogue Board of Trustees earlier this month opposing an application by owners of a house on the Long Island Sound to reconstruct a bulkhead.

Mr. McAllister is founding president of the organization Defend H20. He takes the position that the “armoring” of the shoreline—whether along the Long Island Sound, the Atlantic or the many bays of Long Island—is wrong. He says the placement of “hard structures” on the coast results in damage to the beach in front of where the armoring takes place and also “downdrift,” resulting in erosion and loss of public access.

This was his second appearance in Nissequogue in recent times to oppose bulkhead projects. He says “what’s happening in Nissequogue is happening all over Long Island. Bulkheads and other forms of armoring, hard structures, are coming in everywhere.”

Mr. McAllister believes the choice for Long Island, particularly in a time of climate change and rise in sea level, is between “forever beaches or sand-be-gone seawalls. It should be crystal clear which one. It’s time for collective foresight. Our environment, economy and lifestyle depend on it.”

In sounding this message via email recently, he included a photo of what in recent times has become a big controversy in coastal armoring on Long Island, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ $8.4 million project involving the placement in 2016 of “geotextile” sandbags on 3.100 feet of beach in Montauk. Since then, there have been two substantial wash-outs costing $700,000 each for repairs. And major wash-outs from the nor’easters this winter are anticipated to cost $1.05 million for repairs. “Downtown Montauk” is the title of the stark and ugly picture of the sandbag revetment.

Is this a model for the future of Long Island? Hopefully not!

“These hardening structures—these sandbags—have destroyed the beachfront at Montauk,” said Mr. McAllister. There are only a few sections through which people can now get access to this half-mile of Montauk beach, he points out.” 

“We need to implement coastal retreat,” emphasizes Mr. McAllister. “We have to relocate structures and restore the primary dune in this area—and in many other locations.”

“The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation last year issued a “medium projection” of sea level rise for Long Island of 16 inches by the 2050s and a ‘’high projection” by then of 30 inches, Mr. McCallister points out. He has a master’s of science degree in coastal management from Nova Southeastern University in Florida. A Center Moriches native, he worked as a marine scientist in Florida for 12 years before returning to Long Island. He was the founder and leader of Peconic Baykeeper for 16 years before establishing Defend H20 in Sag Harbor.

“There will be monumental change along the Long Island coast,” says Mr. McAllister.  “There will be a higher groundwater table and what is termed coastal inundation or, in other words, persistent flooding. The groundwater will be rising from below. And, the shoreline will be migrating. So we’d have to be spend exorbitant amounts of money to pump sand all the time—“sand folly or perpetual beach nourishment, which is economically and environmentally unsustainable,” or take the option of “armoring the coast” in versions of the Montauk mess, and the third option, which I am  advocating, is for retreat in the more vulnerable areas.”

For examples of locations of significant Long Island sea level rise necessitating retreat, he cites Dune Road in Southampton Town; Hashamomuck Cove in Southold on the North Fork; Gerard Drive in The Springs in East Hampton Town; along the bay front in Mastic Beach; “and what I refer to as the ‘front row’ of motels in downtown Montauk. These are clear examples of where relocation or coastal retreat is critical.”

“But every coastal area will be impacted—the oceanfront the worst, but even Shelter Island’s sheltered waters will rise—as well as all the harbors of Long Island,” he continues. The Fire Island barrier beach “will be especially vulnerable.’

“Properties need to be appraised and receiving areas—where these structures can be moved—identified. For instance, if there is a vacant lot across the street from a motel, it might go there or be rebuilt elsewhere.”

The “larger, worldly issue” involves the main cause of climate change and sea-level rise—the burning of fossil fuels. “The result is the production of greenhouse gases, melting of glaciers, thermal expansion of the oceans and elevation of the seas,” he says. 

Climate change denial and refusal by the Trump administration to address climate change and take steps to mitigate global warming is a “political tragedy,” says Mr. McAllister.

What can we do? We must act politically, he says, and even though President Trump has decided to pull the U.S. out of the Paris Climate Accord, people must press for a reversal. “The planet is being threatened,” says Mr. McAllister. And the threat isn’t necessary. A transition to green, renewable energy—led by solar and wind—to replace fossil fuel can reverse this enormous and insoluble problem in the long run if the way things are going now continue.

“We are talking about sea level rise into the 2050s. What will happen beyond that?  It gets very dire! There are islands in the Pacific already requiring evacuation. What will the impact be on New York City and other U.S. coastal cities? Already, Miami is flooding with every high tide.”

The headline of a piece in New Scientist magazine last year: “Future New York will be flooded.” It also noted how “climate change will make hurricanes more likely to hit the northeast U.S.” 

The climate change horror is unnecessary, avoidable.

“With a rising sea and moving shorelines the rush to armor the coast is intensifying. 

Montauk, Orient, Fire Island and the Peconic bays shoreline hardening structures are infiltrating the coast everywhere,” says Mr. McAllister. “But nowhere is the structural response more intense than the North Shore” with “the Village of Nissequogue being central to the public discourse concerning the protection and functionality of the beaches and bluffs.” 

  “Regretfully, the Village of Nissequogue is succumbing to the pressure from private interests, and allowing the proliferation of hardening structures,” says Mr. McAllister. “These approvals are in conflict with the well-founded coastal policy described in the Town of Smithtown Local, Waterfront Revitalization Policy, which the village had agreed to uphold. A more profound concern is the complacency of the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation. The agency is routinely rubber-stamping permits to the detriment of coastal resources which they are charged with protecting.”.

Karl Grossman is a veteran investigative reporter and columnist, the winner of numerous awards for his work and a member of the L.I. Journalism Hall of Fame. He is a professor of journalism at SUNY/College at Old Westbury and the author of six books.