Glimpses of Intrigue in Somber Brothers

Questions regarding the presence and purpose of God are often
vague and enigmatic. Perhaps this is why Paul Rawlings’ new
play, the two-person work, Two Brothers who are not
brothers, lacks concrete progression and development.

Two Brothers is structured around a chronological series
of conversations between two brothers-in-law. The wives and
children of Jack (John Jimerson) and Dix (Joe Thompson) have
recently been killed by a gun-carrying maniac. Through the intimate
conversations of the two men a close friendship is formed and they
attempt to deconstruct the pain and grief caused by the tragedy.
Themes of faith and its absence are addressed through Dix’s
antagonistic accusations of God and Jack’s subsequent
suggestions to be strong and accept His will as fate. The act of
questioning and assessing God, the afterlife, and guilt takes hold
throughout the entirety of the play.

Under Sue Lawless’ direction, ambiguity marks the first
act, as no establishing explanation is given of the tragic slayings
that have occurred. The audience strains to discover the
play’s defining conflict by gathering clues from the two
“brothers’” conversations and Dix’s moving
out of his house (which forms the only set). This constant state of
unknowing maintains forward movement within the first act, and
keeps the repetitive dialogue from becoming too slow.

As the first act ends, Dix submits to a state of emotional
breakdown and reveals the nature of the accident which connects the
two men. The sudden change from bright to somber blue stage
lighting and the unexpected onslaught of emotion from Dix leaves
the audience in a state of shock. The viewers finally realize what
the play attempts to focus on: the progressive healing of two men
by untangling the chaos of sorrow and guilt. Thompson’s
skillful display of emotion promises a second act that will answer
some of the tough questions obliquely presented in the first
act.

Outside of the dialogue, Two Brothers is certainly geared
towards this episodic progression from emotional pain to emotional
healing. The stage’s gradual emptying of household props
suggests a similar disposal of anger and grief within the
characters. Gregory Hirsch’s subtle lighting changes also
allude to an evolution in character thought. Even the manner in
which the play is formed, a series of separate conversations,
suggests that progression into an acceptance of the tragedy will
take place in the second act.

Unfortunately, from the beginning of the play’s second act
to its end, the audience’s guided assumptions are transformed
into severe misinterpretations. There is no progression of thought
between the two men. Dix maintains his stance of anger toward God
and Jack continues to advertise his own flat methods of survival.
The same philosophical questions are asked and no progressive
attempts are made to answer them. The “goal” of
personal healing and growth in both characters is never reached,
and because of this lack of progression, the second act of the play
turns into a slow cycle of periodically glancing at one’s
watch and counting the minutes until the play’s
conclusion.

This lack of progression is not wholly due to bad acting. Both
actors are serviceable, though Jimerson’s Jack is more
effective. In one of the play’s last scenes, Dix questions
Jack’s faith and strength in God, thus provoking him into
violence. Jack eventually collapses to the floor and begs Dix to
not “take my Jesus away.” Jimerson’s shocking
portrayal of vulnerability and weakness not only creates a moment
of rare poignancy within the second act, but also creates the
possibility of depth within Jack, who before seemed so flat and
unchanging.

Two Brothers’ shortcomings stem mostly from
Rawlings’ poorly written script. He fails to create forward
momentum within the play by not developing the characters. The
second act momentarily reveals Jack’s growing dependence on
prescription drugs and his musings on suicide. Unfortunately, these
glimpses into Jack’s inner turmoil are quickly abandoned,
leaving an ultimately undeveloped and unenthralling character
study.