Can edited ‘Proof' go onstage?

October 28, 2005

CASEY RESSLER\Valley Life editor

The Valley Performing Arts board of directors has sent a letter to a national play licensing service asking if an edited version of &#8220Proof” can be presented, instead of the original version, which contains profanity and may offend some theater-goers.

Board president Janet Kennedy said the decision to present &#8220Proof” in an edited way isn't a question of ethics, it's a question of economics.

If profanity keeps people from coming out, it puts VPA in a financial bind, she said.

&#8220At this point, we figured that rather than settling for a loss on this show, let's see if we can get permission to tone it down, to appeal to a larger audience,” she said. &#8220This is as much a financial decision as anything. We're not against putting on this play, but we need to be able to do well financially with the season lineup.”

Between 60 and 70 percent of VPA's operating budget comes from ticket sales, so having one bad production attendance-wise can be devastating to the organization. Last year, Kennedy said, VPA lost around $18,000.

&#8220We need to have as many people in seats as possible, to pay our bills,” she said. &#8220It's that simple, really.”

The decision to send the letter to Dramatists Play Services was made Sunday during a special board meeting. VPA marketing director Marty Metiva stressed that no decision has been made, pending the response from the letter.

&#8220Proof” is a Pulitzer Prize- and Tony Award-winning play by David Auburn. Longtime VPA director Dean Phipps was scheduled to direct it, but has said he probably won't if the play isn't presented as written.

&#8220I don't think there's much chance that they'll get approval. It would go against everything art is about,” Phipps said Monday. &#8220I think that what is going to happen is that they'll be facing the same issue they're facing now, at a later date. I hope they get around to doing it in time to actually put it in the lineup.”

Following the controversy, longtime VPA artistic director Grant Olson resigned. Olson presented this season's list of plays to the board, which approved them.

&#8220Proof” is one of two VPA plays currently without a headlining sponsor.

Metiva said that if a sponsor stepped up and offered to support &#8220Proof” with the stipulation that it is presented as it is written, VPA would consider it.

&#8220That would meet our financial needs for the production, definitely,” Metiva said. &#8220I think we would have to consider it. It also would be a great problem to have if people were lining up to buy tickets for ‘Proof,' but we haven't seen that. Right now all we have is words that people will support it.”

In 2003, &#8220Stones in His Pocket” was put on by VPA, and a content disclaimer went out to season subscribers.

Some subscribers opted out of that play, and were reimbursed with tickets to another production. Because &#8220Proof” was approved by the board initially, no such disclaimer went out to season subscribers this year.

People from both sides of the issue have weighed in, from letters to the editors to e-mails sent to the various parties involved.

Kennedy and Metiva said they've heard from people who want the play toned down, as well as those wanting it presented as it was written. Phipps said he's also received several e-mails of support for his stand.

&#8220The play deserves an audience, and I'll probably gauge the interest and see about doing a stage reading if they remove it from the lineup. I've already got a lot of e-mails of support about it. I'm amazed, too, because they aren't from people you'd think they are from. Ironically, a lot of them come from pretty right-wing conservative-type people,” Phipps said.

VPA is now in a holding pattern, pending the decision by Dramatists Play Services, which could take a few weeks. Kennedy said she is preparing a letter to season subsribers, clarifying the board's feelings on the issue.

Contact Casey Ressler at

352-2265 or valleylife@

frontiersman.com.