What the Structure Means to Me

What the Constitution Means to Me

The phrase “well timed” has gotten a hell of a exercise during the last a number of years. That’s what comes of dwelling on a knife’s-blade second in historical past. We stability, teetering, on a skinny slip of stability, diamond-sharp and diamond-precious. At such occasions, tales can not assist however tackle new resonance. But on this second, by which just about something can out of the blue really feel virtually painfully related, the arrival of Heidi Schreck’s “What The Structure Means To Me” on Amazon Prime on this of all weeks is on one other degree. It’s a towering achievement, a piece of devastating readability. It’s additionally humorous, compassionate, and shocking, and in some way, in the end, in possession of a vivid flare of optimism. To observe it’s each painful and important, like taking an incredible deep breath with a set of damaged ribs. It is going to harm. The ache is definitely worth the reward.

Captured within the closing weeks of its 2019 Broadway run with thoughtfulness and magnificence by Marielle Heller, “Structure” is on the floor remarkably easy. (Whereas Heller fantastically directs the movie, the stage manufacturing was helmed by theater director Oliver Butler with equal grace, ability, and perception.) Schreck performs herself, recounting the story of how she traveled the nation as a 15-year-old, competing in constitutional debates in American Legion halls to earn scholarship cash for school. When taking part in her youthful self, she dons a yellow blazer and calls it a day; she tells her viewers, who she asks to function the outdated white males she’d converse to throughout these occasions, that the set was conjured from her reminiscence, however alas her reminiscence forgot to incorporate a door. It’s pleasant, informal, not a lot breaking the fourth wall as not bothering to place one up within the first place, and the dearth of artifice underlines that approachable tone, as does Heller’s frank but light method behind the digicam. We’re simply speaking, Schreck appears to say with every alternative; we’re all simply right here speaking, no massive deal.

However it’s a massive deal, and Schreck’s option to forgo extra grandly theatrical selections imbues “Structure” with immediacy, vulnerability, and honesty. Dwelling largely on the ninth and 14th amendments, Schreck digs into the wonder, contradictions, and particularly the failures of the US Structure by it via a number of lenses: that of her at 15, at 20, as a younger girl, a grown girl, as a daughter and granddaughter and great-granddaughter. (She can also be, as she notes in one of many play’s finest jokes, a giant fan of males; “I’m the daughter of a father,” she deadpans, hand on coronary heart.) It’s about her household historical past, and the historical past of the US; it’s about what exclusion from the preamble has meant for her life, and what it means for ladies, folks of colour, LGBTQIA+ and non-binary folks—and notably for trans girls and ladies of colour—day by day.

Inevitably, the work that Heller’s movie of “Structure” will get in comparison with most continuously will seemingly be Thomas Kail’s movie of the unique solid of “Hamilton”—proximity of launch, subject material, and naturally format all invite the comparability. (Lin-Manuel Miranda’s Angelica Schuyler desires Thomas Jefferson to “embrace girls within the sequel;” Schreck’s play asks whether or not the unique wants a rewrite or if the entire thing must be canceled and rebooted with a brand new solid and script.) However in its method it hearkens again far more to documentarian Jennifer Fox’s 2018 narrative function “The Story,” which chronicled Fox’s childhood sexual abuse by analyzing her personal perspective and using the instruments of fiction to each add and take away private distance. The previous is previous, the current is current, and each are consistently taking place without delay.

To say extra about Schreck’s impeccably structured, remarkably considerate textual content is to decrease the expertise of watching it unfold, however there are just a few parts that demand point out, certainly one of which can play even higher on movie than it did within the theatre. Whereas the above paragraphs might recommend that Schreck’s play is a one-woman operation, she’s not alone on stage for lengthy, as actor Mike Iveson enters, taking part in each himself now (as Schreck does) and a legionnaire there to make it possible for Heidi and her unseen fellow debaters observe the foundations to the letter. His is a largely silent, unsmiling presence, watchful and distant, there to implement guidelines that he or males like him wrote. Extra importantly, although, he’s there merely to be there, a person watching and listening as Schreck peels again layer after layer, addressing abortion, consent, home violence, and the numerous methods by which the doc her 15-year-old self so cherished has failed her and numerous different girls for generations. But the connection just isn’t a static one, and Heller captures Iveson’s regular presence and Schreck’s eager consciousness of it with sharp-edged subtlety. It’s all within the framing—a press release which, come to consider it, additionally applies to sure interpretations of constitutional regulation.

However Iveson isn’t Schreck’s solely onstage companion. Within the movie’s closing moments, Schreck is joined onstage by Rosdely Ciprian, a New York excessive schooler and debater who squares off in opposition to Schreck in an unscripted however staggeringly well-prepared debate on the query of whether or not or not the structure of the US needs to be abolished. Schreck’s play is astonishing, her efficiency unforgettable, but it surely’s in these closing moments that “What The Structure Means To Me” achieves its closing type: proof, visceral and thrilling, that our future generally is a exceptional one if we battle to jam the door open just a bit bit wider. The pandemic halted the nationwide tour of “Structure,” because it did nearly all dwell theatre, and no movie, nevertheless exceptional, can replicate the expertise of seeing it dwell. However Heller’s movie comes rattling shut, notably when her digicam captures Schreck and Iveson’s faces, alight with delight and pleasure and one thing like optimism, as Ciprian brings down the home. The longer term is unsure, and ache is inevitable. And but when Ciprian says “We the folks,” “Structure” doesn’t really feel “well timed.” It looks like a promise—albeit one now we have to earn.

Now accessible on Amazon

About the author