Responsibility and Privilege
Posted by Martha Lavey on 1/10/2007Producing Sonia Flew is proving to be a unique experience. Because Sonia Flew borrows from the historical record–a history near enough to touch on the experience of contemporary lives–we have had the privilege of presenting the play to some of the folks who are a part of the history. In post show conversations, we have had participants to the conversation who were, themselves, Pedro Pan children. The insight that they are able to bring to the experience of the play and to the ensuing conversation is singular.
What my own participation in those conversations produces in me is a profound recognition of the responsibility and the privilege we have in making theater. Occupying a platform, the agenda for which is providing a reflective space for how we live our lives, is the privilege. The responsibility is to make the portrait of those specific lives authentic–to get the particulars right. The responsibility, artistically, is to make the expression of those authentic lives eloquent–to craft their expression in a way that is meaningful, in a way that transcends the particulars to universal resonance. It is that transcendence of the particulars, in the eloquence, that empathy is possible. On our stages, we offer up lives and experiences and ask our audiences to recognize a commonality in our shared humanity.
We are keen to this responsibility as we anticipate our production of The Diary of Anne Frank. The experience of the Holocaust is near enough, historically, for our audiences to include survivors, to include the children and families of survivors. The story of Anne Frank is one over which many people feel an especial ownership–they feel that the events of the play have, and continue to, shape their identity in our current world. We find this an awesome responsibility–and a privilege. A privilege because if we are eloquent in the crafting of our production, we will make a particular story an enduring and universal one.
All of us at Steppenwolf appreciate and feel enlivened by your willingness to respond to the work–be it in post-show conversations, e-mails, letters, calls, comments to our Audience Services staff. It reminds us, again and again, of the connection of what happens on our stages to your hearts and minds. Thank you for this. (I had an amazing experience last week: a long-time Steppenwolf subscriber called me to tell me how much he liked Sonia Flew. He told me that he has been a subscriber for about twenty years but that this was the first time he had called to remark on a production but that Steppenwolf had provided him much happiness and insight over those years.) These are the moments we live for–the moments when we make contact with our conversation partners. Or, as many a director has acknowledged to his or her cast of actors: when the audience shows up, you have gained your final scene partner.
January 10th, 2007 at 1:06 pm
hi martha. thanks, as always, for such an eloquent piece of writing. i’m really looking forward to “Anne Frank”, both for the anticipation of a very moving story as well as for the chance to see more of Tina’s direction (Tina = pure theatrical genius. there. i finally said it publicly.) i know (like i’m sure many readers could say) that i first encountered “The Diary of Anne Frank” in junior high (it was, thankfully, required reading). is Steppenwolf going to be beefing up student performances for this run? i read that wonderful article in the NY Times recently about Paper Mill’s success with student performances of their production of “Anne Frank” (they made it sound more like it was a demand to do more student matinees!), and, in fact, i believe Steppenwolf’s production is the same adaptation.
is Steppenwolf doing more student performances for “Anne Frank”?
January 12th, 2007 at 12:04 pm
Hello Justin-
In answer to your question about student matinees for Anne Frank, we are planning on having two student matinees that have already sold out. We also have a teacher workshop around non-fiction called The Holocaust Project, and we are planning to partner with an organization called FACING HISTORY AND OURSELVES to help with materials and resources. We are also working with the same organization around their Alexandra Zapruder evening on April 12.
Thanks for your inquiry.
Hallie
January 12th, 2007 at 3:53 pm
oh that’s great that they are both sold out! are more performances going to be added? i think getting to see a steppenwolf production of this script would be a really wonderful thing for most students.
January 17th, 2007 at 6:50 pm
Operation Pedro Pan Overview - Why Sonia Flew
by Oscar B. Pichardo
Operation Pedro Pan has been described as the “exodus of 14,048 Cuban children” and the “largest child refugee movement in the Western Hemisphere.” For us, the children of Pedro Pan it is much more. It’s an integral part of who we are.
Operation Pedro Pan began December 26, 1960, and ended October 23 of 1962, when the Cuban missile crisis put a halt to commercial air service between Cuba/Havana and the U.S./Miami. Between December 1960 when the first two kids arrived and October of 1962, over 14,000 unaccompanied Cuban kids – the official number is 14,048 – arrived in the U.S. under the sponsorship of the Catholic Welfare Bureau. The youths came from all the provinces of the island. While the majority was Catholic, several hundred were Protestant, Jewish or non-believers. Most were of the middle class or lower middle class and included children of all races.
The key individual was Monsignor Bryan O. Walsh the Director of Catholic Welfare Bureau. In January of 1961 the State Department granted Father Walsh the authority to grant a visa waiver to any child between six and 16 who came to the U. S. under the guardianship of the Diocese of Miami. Those between the ages of 16 and 18 had to be approved by the US State Department.
The name Operation Pedro Pan was coined by Gene Miller, a reporter for the Miami Herald, and first appeared in his article of March 9, 1962 “Peter Pan Means Real Life to Some Kids.” Earlier, when Miller had approached Monsignor Walsh to inquire about the large number of kids in the camps, Monsignor asked him to keep the details confidential. Through every phase of Pedro Pan, publicity was avoided as well as any attempt to use it for political propaganda.
At various times, Operation Pedro Pan has been denounced by some as a cold and calculated plot by the CIA to undermine Fidel Castro, and as the result of a CIA misinformation campaign which duped Cuban parents into sending their children to the U. S. It has also been suggested Pedro Pan catered to the wealthy and the well connected. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Operation Pedro Pan evolved from the desire of Cuban parents to safeguard their children from an intrusive regime which everyday increased its control over the lives of the populace. To insinuate Pedro Pan catered to the wealthy and well connected is ludicrous. They had fled the island in late 1958 and early 1959 as Batista’s fate became obvious and Castro took over the country.
It is incomprehensible to most people how parents could send their minor children unaccompanied to a foreign land. Incomprehensible that is, until one examines the events and living conditions which led to the fateful decision.
The euphoria of toppling Batista’s regime was short lived. The summary trials and executions by the new government caused many who supported Castro to have misgivings about the new regime. The promised national elections fell by the wayside when Castro became premier of Cuba by his own decree in February of 1959. March saw the beginning of nationalization of foreign industry, and in April the USSR was approached to help with organizing an internal intelligence agency. May brought the Agrarian Reform by which the government appropriated most of the land - both Cuban and foreign owned. Shortly after, nationalization of private industry and business began and it would not end until the government owned it all.
In January of 1960, the government decreed all Cuban children must bear arms and undergo military training. In May under the slogan Students Must be Teachers the first group of young girls were sent to the mountains to teach reading and writing at government controlled camps. September of 1960 saw the debut of the vilest instrument of government control and oppression - The Committee for the Defense of the Revolution. Intentionally located in every block of every city and town, the committee members kept watch on every home, reported all the comings and goings in each house, and literally spied on everyone and everything said or done.
December 1960 brought the Student Index a file compiled on every school child. This was used to track not only the scholastic progress of the child but if the child and family member were good revolutionaries and supported the government unquestioningly. Children were asked to listen to conversations in the home and report any suspicious or “counterrevolutionary” activities in the home. Yes, the government demanded the children spy on their parents!
The first 1000 students were sent to study in the USSR in January 1961, while the Minister of Education declared no divergence from the revolutionary doctrine for education would be tolerated. In February the first two private schools were confiscated by the government and four youths executed for shouting anti government slogans. In April all schools were closed by government decree. Teachers underwent training to implement the revolutionary curriculum and brigades of children partook in literacy training sessions.
April also brought the failed Bay of Pigs invasion. In the aftermath, the Castro regime rounded up and incarcerated over 250,000 Cubans, holding them without due process for varying lengths of times from a few days to many months. After the failure of the invasion Castro declared this was a Socialist Revolution. Soon after, the government ordered children between seven and 12 to join the Union of Rebel Pioneers. Those 13 and older would have to join the Association of Rebel Youths. Refusal branded you and your family as counterrevolutionaries and you became a target for state sanctioned persecution and acts of repudiation.
It was against this stark reality that our parents had to make the hard decisions born out of love and courage to protect their children. When it came time to decide to either submit to the state or send the children to safety, Cuban parents chose freedom for their children– sending them unaccompanied to the United States.
What is today universally called Operation Pedro Pan was made up of two components. One was the clandestine network for getting the kids out of Cuba – Pedro Pan. The second was the Cuban Children’s Program responsible for the care of the children after they arrived in Miami. Arriving in the U.S., the kids would either go with family or friends, or be taken to one of the camps or residences run by the CWB – the Catholic Welfare Bureau.
According to Monsignor Walsh, about half of the arrivals went with family or friends within the first couple of days, while the others went to the camps or residences run by the CWB. The majority was between 12 and 16, but the arrival of much younger children, four or five years old, was not uncommon. The goal was to place the children in foster homes or orphanages as soon as possible to make room for the torrent of new arrivals in the Florida Camps. The names Matecumbe, Kendall and Florida City have become synonymous with Pedro Pan as the principal places where most of the Pedro Pan children resided at one time or another.
The children were housed by age and sex. In August of 1961 when I arrived, Kendall housed all the girls and boys 12 and younger. The teenage boys lived at Camp Matecumbe. Later when the camp at Florida City opened, the girls and young boys lived there while the teenagers were moved to Kendall. Children would sometimes move from camp to camp as the demographics and numbers of children in the camps fluctuated. All the time a steady stream of children would flow to facilities and foster homes throughout the United States.
The Pedro Pan experience is as distinct as each Pedro Pan is a unique individual. Depending on the institution or foster home where you were placed, it was great, bearable, or a very difficult situation. There is no doubt that some suffered as children alone waiting for their parents in a foreign land, and many found it difficult to adapt. Others were fortunate in their placement and have nothing but fond memories of the people who provided care and shelter for them far away from home.
For more information on Operation Pedro Pan, I recommend the following books: Operation Pedro Pan: The Untold Exodus of 14,048 Cuban Children written by Yvonne M. Conde a Pedro Pan child herself; and Fleeing Castro: Operation Pedro Pan and the Cuban Children’s Program by Victor Andres Triay.
Or you can visit these web sites www.cubankids1960.com www.eyelandpub.com/pedropan www.campmatecumbeveterans.com