Interview by: Joan Starkey, Staff Writer
Transcript
Leah Geisler [LG]: Welcome to The Grappler Wrights of Spring Series for 2022. This week we will be sharing four interviews with you from the third-year playwrights. These interviews are like telescopes into the world these playwrights are in and how they went about creating their work. Stay tuned this week to listen to the rest of the series.
Today we have an interview for you from the playwright Kenny-Finch, who wrote Ornithologists' Lullaby. Former horse girl and dragon kid, present fever dream of the ancestors, this Oklahoma born, Indiana incubated, and Chicago hatched writer aims to create pockets of whimsy, reimagining fantasy worlds of childhood, and bringing to life all of that which resides in the dusty, shadowy corners of the mind.
Joan Starkey [JS]: My name is Joan Starkey. It is May 24th, 2022, and I am here interviewing Kenny-Finch for The Grappler about Wrights of Spring. Would you like to introduce yourself?
Kenny-Finch [KF]: Hello, I'm Kenny Finch. I use he and xe pronouns, and I'm one of the playwrights for Wrights of Spring.
JS: And you are the playwright of Ornithologists' Lullaby.
KF: Yes, which has been so fun watching people try to pronounce it because it's not that hard. It's just a lot of letters put together and like, I promise you got it.
JS: So before we talk about Ornithologists' Lullaby, how would you describe your origin story as a playwright?
KF: So it's really... it's really funny because I think like in middle school, there's this weird history thing that happens. And then I went to high school in Indiana and there's this like thing and it was like, okay, pick like a person to write a research paper on. I was like, "I guess I'll do Shakespeare."
This is opened a whole other world to me. The thing I was supposed to write was supposed to be sort of like a fiction episode but I was like, what if I wrote a little scene and I didn't win the competition because I didn't adhere to the rules, but I was like, "Oh, this is fun" because I hate that.
Like, some of my biggest inspirations for playwriting are also people I would fistfight. Yeah. Because I just love Shakespeare's language and how he plays with language. It's just, it's so good and tasty. I'm like, I want to do it, but I want to do it better than he did. Which is kind of my whole thing for playwriting is just like, I want to do what this old white guy did, but a lot better. Also, in middle school, in seventh grade, that was a year that the drama club started at that middle school, and then I went to high school. I was like, "I guess I'll keep doing theatre." And then I wrote a few things.
We have this like 24-hour theatre thing, and I was like, "I'll be a playwright." And right from midnight to 6 a.m. and I was like, "This is so good." And they send us home so we could sleep. And then they come back for the performance. And I came back and I was like, "I wrote that, like, those are my words."
And they're like on the stage. So I had an epiphany junior year that I no longer wanted to be an architect, but I want to go into theatre.
JS: So how did this play specifically come to be out of that story?
KF: So basically my whole thing is the most cliche, like we're in Oklahoma and then move to Indiana. So that's my history and then like when I moved to Indiana, I was like, "Oh, I'm very queer. Like, extremely so." But also in northeast Indiana. So it was like I can't really do a whole lot. So all of this is basically just like me having my freedom for once, like when I first moved here for college.
But this is just a way that I do express and reflect on. Like, queerness is like how I experience it and how it's generally perceived. They just want to have that freedom to do that because like, I didn't really have that in Indiana. I wrote because we had a Halloween festival thing and they were like, "Can you write a play?" And I was like, "I guess so." I did that. But I wasn't able to really express myself fully in writing till I got here.
JS: Nice. Yeah. And I'm so glad. So how would you say that that queer expression manifest in Ornithologists' Lullaby?
KF: There are few ways that I can look at this play. It is either the general queer experience of being in relationships and isolation that sometimes people put themselves into. Like they only exist in their own little world. It was sort of born out of another thing. I want to connect them all together in one big play.
But it's basically this idea of queer love and how sometimes it goes into obsession and it's way too much and then like having to sort of back yourself out of that and sometimes being in situations where you're, you know, it's kind of stuck and then finding ways to sort of break out of that and get some freedom some way.
JS: Yeah, absolutely. So an ornithologist is -I had to look this up- someone who studies birds. How does that connect to this play? Or is there a personal connection with that to you?
KF: Sort of both. I just think birds are really cool. I literally named myself after a bird but with this one specifically, the whole thought of it is basically they're these two people, Harper and Mouse, they're like 24 I believe, and they've like just moved to the big city. But they're sharing a little studio apartment because it's all they can afford.
Because Harper doesn't really have a job and Mouse does. And Mouse was just always so willing to support them and all of that. And then what ends up happening is the last relative that Harper has, their mother, passes. So then all they have left in the world is Mouse. And then it's their sixth sixth wedding anniversary, and they have their little dessert at home. It's fun and cute. And then Mouse is like, "I need to tell you something. I actually don't love you." I guess that's just the thing I know now because like, there's nowhere else that they can go. So they're like, "What am I going to do? Because this person likes me as a friend but doesn't love me as a romantic partner. But they're also all I have left in the world." So they're going to walk one day and they see a pigeon that's drowned in a little puddle and they reflect on how birds have this freedom and simplicity of life. And they're like, what if I just became a bird? So then they bring it up to Mouse because it's like a very high fantasy world where they're doing some wacky shit science, and they're like, "What if you just turn me into a bird?"And that is basically how the rest of it plays out.
JS: Wow. So talk to me about this high fantasy world we've got going on.
KF: I have realized I do this thing where I will take an idea very, very literally. Or because in this world created when two people get married, they will like literally surgically switch their hearts while they're just giving it to someone else, but also literally doing it. So I was like, well, "If we can do that, what else can we do?"
And I'll just be a bird I'm like, "Yeah, sure. Why not? That makes sense." I mean, if you can take out someone's heart and swap it around, that's just the normal convention of it. Like, yeah, sure. Someone can be like, "I'm bored and sad with life. I'm going to become a bird so I can fly away and be free and have fun."
JS: That's so interesting. So I'm sensing these themes of levels of grief and then platonic and romantic relationships, but then also transformation and otherness as maybe a form of queerness.
KF: Yeah, it's it's been super fun. And also the thing specifically that I've been trying to focus on is this idea of platonic versions of romantic love because I dislike the way that conventionally those are seen as... romantic love is seen as more valuable than platonic love. But I believe that it depends on each person because this whole thing is like, "I don't love you like that, but I still love you, like as my best friend in this whole world and I care about you."
And they were the only friends that they ever had for each other. So it's like, "I just want to continue to be here and take care of you in the way that I'm able to, even though it's not what you want." Or it's not a devaluing of Mouse's feelings because it's very like they feel strongly for her, but it's just not in the way that someone would expect.
JS: Yeah. That kind of fluidity that comes with those relationships.
KF: Also, you know, just being queer, it's just a nightmare. Like, are we friends? Are we not flirting? What's going on? Like, did we just go on like a three-day date or are we just hanging out?
JS: It's very ripe for dramatic material.
KF: Absolutely.
JS: Is there speaking of which, is there a specific audience that you imagined for this play?
KF: Just like, honestly, we're people because it's such... when I had all my actors read it for the first time, they're like, "That hurt because I related so much" and I was like, "Good, that's what I wanted." And sort of maybe to help someone have an epiphany of like, "Hey, there are other options for me. Like, I don't have to go so far as like becoming a bird. But like, if I'm unhappy in a situation like the love that exists there, it's the only love in the world." Like when there's love you can get yourself into, there's love from other people that you could try to seek out. But then sometimes with being queer, especially from a small town, you're like, "I don't have that many options. Like, I just have to take what I can get." It's like, "You don't have to do that there." There's a whole world out there. It's also really about gender and transness. But I feel like the queer romantic sexuality aspect is more there. I think it would be a an enlightening experience perhaps for someone who's not of those specific identities to watch, because I feel like people should try to watch things that don't specifically represent them, especially when they're like the majority.
JS: Absolutely. And I think that queer and maybe not queer or straight, cisgender audiences are going to get different things out of this play. Do you anticipate that?
KF: Yeah, the feedback that I get from people who are straight versus the people who are queer, like they see very different things and which are both useful. But it's just interesting. Generally, queer people get it more and they understand it. They're like, "Yeah, I too would just be comfortable in that situation. Like, that's the obvious solution."
JS: So I'm so curious about this thing that happens where they actually become a bird.
KF: Yeah. So during the feedback or a little talk back after my first reading, someone was like, "Is this metaphorical or do they literally become a bird?" And I was like, "Oh no." Like it happens because there are some scenes where like it's Mouse sort of helping them transform their physical human form to become more bird-like and there's a scene where they're sewing wings and feathers into their back and then another like, you know, birds have like a weird little backwards-looking leg.
Or like, for Mouse, there's sort of this thing of like, "This is not great, but I love you, and I'm going to support you. But also from a medical scientific standpoint, this is not good." But also it's like they realize the situation they've put her in. So they're like, "I'm going to do anything I can to sort of make up for that."
JS: That's interesting. So there's a lot of different things happening in the relationship between these two people. Yeah. And they're just trying to serve one another in the ways that they know how to.
KF: Yeah. Which is really fun because I think someone asked me if they do love each other, it's like, yeah, it's there. It's just in that specific context, it's very confusing, like how that or what it even means and then sort of like who has power over the other? Because someone was like, "Why do you need Mouse?"
I was like, "Does that have anything to do with Harper?" Typically birds eat mice, but like this mouse has control of her bird, also the bird has control over them. And it's just like, I love like power dynamics that where it's just like a constant... who is actually in charge here?
JS: Absolutely. And that's so compelling, especially in theatre. Were there any parts of the playwriting process for this play that were particularly challenging for you?
KF: Just writing. Getting my ideas, like from my brain onto a page. It's the most difficult thing. Like there's still some pieces from the play that I have not done yet, but I'm like, "They're in here. I got the whole plot and storyline. I just have to figure out how to write it." And also because I, you know, decided to use a very particular type of language for it that's like very poetic. The whole process of having an idea trying to just write three lines of dialogue is so painful sometimes.
JS: Yeah, absolutely. And I know that playwriting is different for everyone who tries their hand at it. Is there something special to you about your process or is there a specific way that you do it?
KF: I know that some people like do a very like like a strict straight outline of, "Here's what happens in Act One, scene one, two, three..." and they have it all down. And then for me, I'm just like, "I have this idea for this one scene. I'm just going to write it and see where it falls into everything else."
But the idea that you just kind of put them in different orders and the way that you put these different events shows the others in a different way. But yeah, I'm more of like, I guess, I guess it would be like they're jigsaw puzzle playwrights who put it all together perfectly, and then I'm just kind of, I don't know, I'm an etch-a-sketch.
JS: Yeah, I love that. How is this place similar or different from things that you've written before?
KF: The play that I wrote for last Wrights of Spring, I would say that is very much not linear because the opening scene, it technically could be seen as the end because like the character who is in the rest of it, like basically dies or at least like severely mutilated. So it's like you can't be doing all this stuff after this.
But it's also like maybe doing the end and beginning, middle and switching it all around. And for that one, I think it worked really well because it emphasized certain parts of the relationship and for this one, I think it needed the more like linear progression for it to make sense because at one point I was like, "Oh, okay, this makes up all the scenes."
I was like, "No, it's not going to it's not going to make any sense, especially because it's like Harber having this physical transformation." So it's like things need to go a little more streamlined for this one.
JS: Absolutely. And would you say that thematically this is similar or different?
KF: Thematically, it's very similar to the one I wrote last year... is very like obsession within queer relationships and overly devoting yourself and really getting in way too deep and losing yourself in the other person. Like those three play ideas I have this dream of making them into cycle plays. I love that because I was just like, they all have such a similar unhealthy balance that can sometimes happen in relationships, and then also having that idea of taking things very literally, which reminds me the idea of taking things very literally.
I got like an official autism diagnosis a few months ago. So it was like, "This makes so much sense, oh."
JS: How would you say that that has affected your work or how you think about your process?
KF: And anyway, it definitely affects the speech. And I realize it's hard to really describe it, but the way in which my characters speak is not how most people would speak. And it's kind of reflected for me how I focus more on the words exactly that I'm using and the meaning that they have rather than the tone of what I'm saying because like that's not always reliable for me.
So with my characters I'm very specific about what words they use and the way that they talk to each other is sort of a very directed way of speaking. It's sort of like the way that I try to put things in a more prose sense does kind of balance out how sometimes speech can be very awkward, like just for me and then me writing people, it's like nobody knows how to hold a conversation, but having that element sort of ties it all together and having this very direct honesty and then also like having this literal idea of or taking things very literally because it's like, when you love someone and marry them you have each other's hearts. And in this one, it's like, yeah, they have each other's hearts. And then in my last one, it was like, we need to become as close as possible. And then it's like cannibalism. That'll do it, which is a completely different tone from this one.
But it's just that idea of taking these sort of these cliches of love and being like, "Okay, what if I take it to the most extreme?" My autism diagnosis made me realize, like, "Oh, that's why things are so literal in everything that I write," which I think is really fun.
JS: That's fascinating. I love that you were able to identify that now, and we talked about this a little bit, but I'm I'm so curious. In your bio, you said you love creating whimsy and fantasy. So how does that what does that look like in Ornithologists' Lullaby?
KF: It definitely is like "What if I just become a bird?" Because it's like, you can't do that in real life. At least, I don't think so. I don't keep up with science. Well, as far as I know, you can't just make yourself a bird. But I do like just having this anything can happen because I just read a lot of books that had magic and fantasy, and it's like, none of this is realistic, but it's so super fun because it would never be able to happen in real life.
And I want to be able to sort of create those things, but in a way that it aligns with, like, my way that I've matured as an artist at the old age of 21. But yeah, I just, I think it's fun because reality is boring. And you can express so much when you're not using realism. And it's also fun. Like how much sometimes it shows the truth of reality. Yeah. Because it's taking these concepts in such a different direction that like is able to highlight it.
JS: And I've just got one last question. We're going to end on a little bit of a sentimental note because I very much want to do that. But what does writing plays mean to you?
KF: Just like expression? Because again, like with the whole autism diagnosis, like, feelings and words are very difficult for me. But when I'm able to sort of process it out through characters, like speaking to each other and having their own issues that's sort of a way for me to process some things. And also, in general, I just want to create characters that reflect myself that I wouldn't be able to see before on any other stage because it's for this play specifically, I was like, "I want my cast to be all Black and nobody's cis," which was so fun to try to put together.
And it's like, I just want to be able to see myself on stage and have people who share different identities that I have, like see themselves on stage because it's just like it's nice to be like that to me. Like, one of the first shows I saw here was At The Wake of a Dead Drag Queen, and it was written by Terry Guest and I love him so much. We're like kind of pals. I'm actually the dramaturg for his show that's in rehearsal process now. Having this show, being the first one I saw, like this very gay, very Black, very queer show. It was like "I'm in Chicago, like, this is really it. Like, I'm seeing things I've never seen before."
So, like, I want to be able to sort of create that for other people.
JS: That's so wonderful. I absolutely adore that. Thank you so much for coming in. Other than the Wrights of Spring website, where can any listeners find you?
KF: I can be found on Instagram @polkadotjellyboop.
JS: Love.
KF: And then if you want to venture into my Twitter, which I don't recommend for most people, it's just an experience, but it's also @plkdtjllybp. No vowels, et cetera.
JS: Well, awesome. Thanks so much for being here. I really appreciate it.
LG: Thanks for listening to The Grappler's Wrights of Spring Series. This interview was conducted by Joan Starkey, audio engineering by Ember Sappington.
Love what you're reading? Subscribe to our newsletter!
Σχόλια