Bobby and the Chimps is a play about a campaign for school board in a small Pennsylvania town where a believer in evolution — the Bobby of the title — is running against a creationist. Unfortunately, the first act of the play is exceedingly slow-moving and almost entirely without dramatic interest, so that we’re hardly ready for the robust confrontations that make act two much more interesting. Author James Phillips — who also directed the USF students in the current production — can be a powerful writer, but he needs to grab our attention quickly, not an hour or more into the show.
As for the student actors, only three out of 12 turn in persuasive performances. All in all, then, the play — which is part of USF’s British International Theatre Program — is a less-than-satisfying experience. I’m glad I held on for the tense exchanges in the second act, but I wish I hadn’t had to wait for them so long.
The premise is that a certain Bobby Young has decided to take on creationist Katie Westman — a woman he once dated — for a post on Pennsylvania’s Southern Lehigh School Board. Bobby is supported by a posse of fellow-Darwinists, the most vocal of whom is Jude Holloway, a young man who despises religion and anyone who believes in God. But while Bobby and his “Chimps” are trying to put together a decent campaign, life gets in the way: Bobby’s wife Amy is in danger of falling back into mental illness, and campaign worker Mary has designs on the (supposedly) charismatic candidate. There’s worry that Bobby might identify himself with atheists, and there’s a debate with Westman coming up that may decide the contest. Finally, there’s the problem of Bobby’s own beliefs — which may not be as dependably materialistic as Jude and others want them to be.
We spend the first half of the play watching Bobby’s campaign get underway — as boring as watching glue congeal — and then in act two the various plotlines lead to genuine and riveting drama. Unfortunately, the play’s surprising climax depends on a reversal that’s never truly earned, so even a would-be stunner can’t be fully enjoyed. The theater program refers to Bobby and the Chimps as “a new version of Inherit the Wind,” but the fact is, this newer work doesn’t have a fraction of the eloquence — or logic — of that classic.
It does have some memorable acting, however. For example, there’s Nic Carter, who plays a firebrand anti-creationist with all the anger and overconfidence of a born rabble-rouser and true believer. Charging around G.B. Stephens’ modern set, Carter as Jude seems ready at any moment to beat someone up for daring to contradict him — even if that someone happens to be on his own team. Then there’s Dahlia Legault as Bobby’s wife Amy, a woman whose stability is dubious at best, and who can become abusive and paranoid when she forgets to take her meds. Legault’s performance grows on you little by little: At first she hardly registers, but by the end of the evening she has earned our concern and hope. An actress who commands respect from her first appearance is Tori Fuson, as Bobby’s opponent Katie Westman. Fuson plays this sturdy Bible-reader with a smile and an equanimity that stand in sharp contrast to Jude’s febrile partisanship; it’s possible, she reminds us, to be religious and not a fanatic. As Bobby, Zo Vallejo-Bryant is less than compelling, though: He seems a decent enough fellow but lacks complexity and, finally, personality.
Author/director Phillips uses projections on two screens to remind us of another Bobby — Bobby Kennedy — and Jennifer Bronsted’s costumes are so up-to-date and casual that they seem natural, not imagined. A nice touch is the inclusion of a Barack Obama speech on a television screen; you could hardly find a better way to suggest that Bobby’s contest is a contemporary one.
Bobby and the Chimps is a new play, so author Phillips may still be willing to revise it. I hope so. With some meaningful conflicts in act one, and with a Bobby whose contradictions can make sense of act two, this could be an important contribution to the strict Darwinian/intelligent design debate. For the moment, though, its intentions are more noticeable than its results. And Inherit the Wind is in no danger.
2 1/2 stars
This article appears in Mar 11-17, 2009.