NK: Can you talk a bit about how you wrote your ‘nance’
routines? Were there common stereotypes they generally played off historically?
DCB: In the 30s sketches, he’s very innocent. He doesn’t
know why the audience is laughing at him, which I thought was theatrically very
exciting because it requires the character to say something very dirty but not
know he just said something dirty. Then he’s always looking at the audience going,
‘Why are you laughing at me? What? Stop it!
Oh, behave! You’re brutes! You’re terrible!’ and that I thought was a
delightful energy because it forces the actor to engage with the audience
constantly. It also lets the audience be ahead of the actor in an interesting
NK: Right, and the nance routines you’ve written have a
certain affection for the character built into them, but was that always the
case or is this a sort of reclaiming of the form?
DCB: They do, and if you watch the sketches, they start to
turn on the nance. As I did research, in 40s and 50s burlesque, the nance is
less and less tolerated and rejoiced in, and by the 60s, he’s an object of
ridicule and he’s mocked, and they say horrible things about him. Whereas in
the 30s, the common punch line is that he winds up getting the guy to sleep
with him, or has [already] slept with the guy, the straight man.
I would think, I can’t
believe they just said that, when I read these old sketches. So I would take
jokes or come up with ones that I remembered, or write something similar in style.
With some of these jokes, not until you read them out loud did you realize the double
entendre, it was so subtle.
NK: Chauncey is a gay Republican—an interesting combo in any
era—what made you choose to write the character that way?
DCB: A Republican then is very different from what a
Republican is now, but there was something about the Republican line in that
period, which was, you’ve got to get
through it on your own and you can’t be relying on everyone to take care of
each other. I thought well that’s an interesting point of view for a
character, and how does one’s politics manifest itself into one’s personal life
and into one’s sex life?
I have a place in Pennsylvania and it is very Republican. I
was watching a television special about voting habits [there], and the center
part of northern Pennsylvania has voted Republican for hundreds of years. Suddenly
I’m thinking, 1932—the depths of the
Depression, and you’re not going to give Roosevelt the benefit of the doubt?
I thought that was really fascinating—someone who’s sticking to their guns,
who’s going to vote against their interest.
What I’m proud of about the play is that [Chauncey] is a
moral person, he’s a good person and that comes out at the end, and the far
left wing characters wind up getting burned as much as he does.
NK: It’s interesting what you said about how his values play out
in his sex life. I was going to ask, what do you think are the major roadblocks
for him accepting himself, and accepting Ned’s love (his romantic interest in
the play)? Is it his conservative mindset of ‘you’re on your own?’
DCB: No, I think that’s one part of it. Also, gay life as it
has been explained to him does not make sense with what gay life was going to
be in the next ten years, in terms of gay history. He has been taught a certain
way. Ned represents the next generation, World War II gay men, which is filled
with just as much discrimination, but there began to be real people having
relationships—saying, ‘We’re going to be quiet about it, but we’re doing it.’
But really, there was a much greater sense of sexual freedom, as part of what
being gay was [before then] was to have sex with straight men only in a passive
So it’s a little snapshot of that period, but it’s also what
I see happening today with gay men in their 20s in conversation with gay men in
NK: You mean how much more comfortable younger men are?
DCB: Yes, guys I know who are in their 20s are looking for
husbands. That was not even to be considered. When I was young and gay, what
older people believed [about homosexuality] was much more in line with
You know there’s that book, Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex (But Were Afraid To Ask).
I remember I read it when I was really young, like twelve or thirteen. The view
on homosexuality is just so appalling. It’s all in Q & A form and I remember
one of the questions, ‘But can’t two gay men or two gay women have a lasting
relationship?’ and the answer is, ‘No, not really!’ and on to the next
I think that was 1972, that was a doctor dispensing wisdom
in a book. So I read that as a kid, and I said, ‘OK, got it. I have to go to
bowling alley bathrooms now to meet guys. I don’t really like bowling alleys or
bathrooms, but I guess that’s what I have to do.’ It was just awful, really
hilariously bad. In fact, he’s still alive and I haven’t heard him apologize
But that’s just one little example—how society views you
affects how you view yourself.
NK: So what’s next for you? Any projects on the horizon you
DCB: Well, I did two shows this season and that just
about killed me! But the next big project will be for the Metropolitan Opera,
I’m doing Die Fledermaus next season,
a new book adaptation with a new take on it. That opens on New Years Eve and
will run through January and February.
I loved writing history so much that the next couple things
will involve research. I’m going to do a new musical with my partner Lewis
Flinn, who I did Lysistrata Jones
with. We’re beginning research right now on a new musical, which we’ll probably
Recent theatre features…
'Matilda The Musical' Opens On Broadway: REVIEW
'Kinky Boots' Opens On Broadway: REVIEW
Michael Urie Takes On Barbra Streisand in 'Buyer & Cellar': INTERVIEW
Nora Ephron’s 'Lucky Guy' Starring Tom Hanks Opens on Broadway: REVIEW
'Breakfast At Tiffany's' Opens On Broadway: REVIEW
Follow Naveen Kumar on Twitter: @Mr_NaveenKumar (photos: joan marcus)