Interview with the Student Directors of The Potting Shed | Thomas More College

Interview with the Student Directors of The Potting Shed

This year, the Thomas More College Players presented Graham Greene’s The Potting Shed – A Play in Three Acts. Directors Torrey Culbertson (’22) and Bridget Ruffing (’22) worked alongside a dedicated troupe of student actors, set designers, lighting, costume, and makeup teams to bring Greene’s Tony-nominated play to life. We caught up with them to ask a few questions about how they approached the play and how the liberal arts education they have received at TMC informed the production.

How did you choose The Potting Shed? What themes resonated with you the most? 

Torrey: Bridget was actually the one who chose The Potting Shed. She is doing her thesis on Graham Greene, so she is very familiar with him as an author. After we read the play for the first time, both of us saw that the themes he introduces and the philosophical inquiry he presents particularly matched the charism of Thomas More College and its students. The play also deals with themes that are present in my Senior Thesis as well as my Junior Project, such as materialism, progressivism, and how those philosophies lead to hopelessness and despair.

For me, the interplay between hopelessness and hopefulness within the play was incredibly powerful. The various characters are shown struggling in different ways over hope—how can one have hope in a life without faith? What about a life from which faith has gone? How does one contend with the reality of God’s existence when the proof of it is shoved under one’s nose? Each of the characters grapples with the reality of miracles, of God, of desiring there to be something beyond the world which is immediately known to our senses. This struggle with our mortality—our finite nature—is something seen in today’s materialistic culture, and I think the terror the Callifer family has for the unknown is one that is reflected very much in our times. 

One of my favorite examples of this is in the character of Mrs. Mary Callifer. Mrs. Callifer, a recent widow, is sliding uneasily into life without her husband, Henry Callifer, the man who she chose to protect at all costs against the reality of God, even at the cost of her son. However, as the play progresses and we see her learning how to deal with grief, she seems to have a secret hope that death is not the end of everything. In an argument with her son, James Callifer, she exclaims, “Can’t one keep a promise to the dead?” to which James replies, “Why should you, if he’s really dead?” When the difficult problems of life arise, when death must be encountered face-to-face, atheism seems too empty. Something inside us, despite any attempts to quiet the supernatural within, yearns for a reality outside of our reality; for our loved ones to exist not in empty spaces, but to be alive, somehow, somewhere. 

Bridget: I stumbled upon The Potting Shed in a roundabout fashion. Ever since the end of this past spring semester—when I was given the opportunity to direct this year’s production—I’d been racking my brain trying to settle upon a play I thought was worth months of cumulative dedication from myself and my cast and crew. I knew I wanted to direct a tragedy: tragic plays, to my mind, present a worthwhile challenge to the director, actor, and audience alike to relinquish mundane concerns in exchange for an active engagement with uncomfortable realities and truths not immediately apparent. I have an affinity for modern writers, so I looked to them, considering for a while Tennessee Williams and T.S. Eliot. While weighing the merits of these two playwrights with my mother, she remarked that Graham Greene had written a play called The Potting Shed, which she’d always meant to  read. Once I read a short synopsis of the play, I was sold—I had presented my Junior Project on Greene’s The End of the Affair and was already planning to write my Senior Thesis on his other Catholic novels, and here was a play that encapsulated all the themes that these novels explored in depth.

The most pronounced themes in The Potting Shed are industrialism and materialism and their disastrous effects on England after the two World Wars. Greene battles these realities fearlessly, exposing them for all their bleak emptiness. The theme that resonates with me the most in this play and in all of Greene’s works, however, is his more subtly defined discussion of love. The play’s main character, James, spends his life grappling with the empty affection he has always received in the place of real love. He looks for love from his father, from his wife, from his mother, and every time he is disappointed in his search. No one can give him what he seeks because no one is willing to face the reality of who he is—no one, that is, except his uncle, Father William Callifer, who loves him so unconditionally that he sacrifices everything he has to give for his nephew’s sake. The Potting Shed asks, in shorthand, the question Greene wrestles with in greater detail throughout his novels: “Isn’t there a love that just exists and doesn’t want?” Isn’t there a love that envelopes the entire human person, body and soul—both despite and because of his fallen nature?

 

How did your studies in the liberal arts influence how you chose to approach this material?

Torrey: As seniors, both Bridget and I have the advantage of having gone through most of the curriculum that TMC has to offer. We have studied Aristotle’s De Anima and Metaphysics in depth. We have read through the works of the Enlightenment, the French Revolution, the Industrial Revolution, and, this semester, the American Inheritance. All of these works—plus the many, many others we’ve read over the past three and a half years—gave Bridget and me an understanding of the whole history of human thought and how it plays into the world today. With this background, we were able to bring in a depth of understanding that would not have been present had we not had such a rigorous training in the liberal arts. Additionally, as I stated before, Bridget and I had a particular attachment to and knowledge of the themes present in The Potting Shed, as both of our Junior Projects and Senior Theses dealt with similar subjects. 

For our actors, too, their studies greatly influenced how they portrayed their characters. Our cast had members of the Freshman, Sophomore, and Senior classes, and it was fascinating from a director’s point of view to see what each of the different classes saw in the play based on their experience with what they were reading. My hope is that—particularly for our underclassmen actors—they are able to take what they’ve learned from the themes and philosophical inquiry present in The Potting Shed and continue to contemplate them in future classes or even when taking on the challenge that is the outside world. There is so much packed into the play that is valuable for people of every stage and station in life, I think the lessons learned from it are invaluable to learning how to cope with the hopelessness and despair found in modern secularism. I know that, for myself, even after having directed the play, after having read it and watched it in practice hundreds of times, I still get something new out of it every time I delve into it again. I would highly recommend for anyone and everyone to take some extra time and read through the play or even to watch it—the video of our performance is now up on YouTube—to experience the clever wordplay and foreshadowing, the heavy themes and subjects, and the beautiful story that is Graham Greene’s The Potting Shed

Bridget: The Humanities courses I took during my Junior year provided me with knowledge that was essential to my ability to approach and understand this play. In Humanities V, I read authors who inquire into man’s proper place in creation, and each author comes to a different conclusion. Montaigne wonders about man’s place within himself, Luther about man’s place within the Church, Pascal about man’s place within the universe. In this Humanities course, we also study some of Shakespeare’s works in depth. This study was invaluable to me both practically, in that it gave me a better grasp of what theater can and should be at its fundamental best, and formatively, in that the more times I read the Potting Shed, the more I saw Shakespeare’s influence on Greene’s writing. There are direct quotations from Macbeth and Romeo and Juliet in The Potting Shed, and my increased knowledge of Shakespeare enabled me to see the Shakespearian format Greene intended to give his play. Some of the play’s characters embody the archetypes Shakespeare pioneered, such as the fool who alone speaks the truth and the Hamlet-esque conflicted hero. In Humanities VI, I read works that presented the unstoppable evolution of materialist thought and its explosive consequences throughout the eras of Romanticism in Germany, revolution in France, and utilitarianism in England. This gave me the historical foundation I needed to approach Greene’s work from the perspective of his time: I saw the beginning of the world’s trajectory toward materialism, and so I could locate Greene and myself further along that trajectory.

The courses I have taken on Aristotle’s De Anima and Metaphysics have also had an essential influence on how I approached The Potting Shed. Many of the play’s characters are products of their time, and so they are materialists, whether or not they acknowledge it. As such, they do not believe in the existence of the soul or of any being beyond those that can be perceived by the senses. Because these two courses provided me with a foundational understanding of the immaterial realities these characters deny, I could better understand the pain they suffer as a result of their lack of belief. In turn, I could better direct cast members who have not yet taken these courses and help them to understand more profoundly their characters’ motivations.

 

What was it like working together to direct the play? What was the biggest challenge you faced in bringing The Potting Shed to the stage?

Torrey: Bridget was the best co-director anyone could ever ask for. She has an incredible eye for blocking, she’s able to get actors to understand exactly what kind of emotion she’s looking for, and her grasp of Greene’s writing helped the actors to truly digest the meaning of each and every one of their lines. The two and a half months that Bridget and I spent working on this play were very difficult but absolutely worth it. I think, after averaging out all the time we spent in meetings together, at practices, coordinating stage crew, hair, makeup, costumes, and lighting, shopping for props and costumes, creating documents, spreadsheets, and calendars, and meeting individually with actors to solidify particular scenes, Bridget and I spent almost twelve hours a week preparing for the production. However, even with the massive time commitment that it was, I could not have asked to spend my time in a better way. There is something so unusual about plays; you spend hours upon hours with people you normally don’t see that often from all different classes and circles, and you have the opportunity to come together and share the joy of a common work and a higher purpose. Every single person that was a part of this production was an absolute joy to work with, and I will forever cherish all the time we spent together.

The biggest challenge we faced together as directors was, at least for me, facing the almost Herculean task of presenting such a rich play with incredibly complex and deep characters without having it seem overdramatic. Even though the emotions running through the play are incredibly intense, they are also hidden under the surface of British stoicism. Finding that balance with our actors was very challenging, and it pushed their skills to the absolute limit. The range they all had to have—particularly Alex Tapsak, who played the main character—was monumental. However, the dedication that each actor put into understanding their characters and truly delving into all of their lines was amazing, and both Bridget and I are incredibly proud of all of their hard work. 

Bridget and I had to face the additional challenge of never having directed a play before. Every step along the way was a new experience for us, and we had to learn alongside our actors just how to pull off such a difficult play. I think I speak for everyone involved in The Potting Shed, however, when I say that the work we all poured into this project paid off: this production is something that will last in all of our minds and hearts, as well as those of our audience. 

Bridget: Torrey was a marvelous director to work with. She has an eye for detail and an insatiable passion for The Potting Shed that made the entire production a remarkably joyful experience. Whenever I was overwhelmed by other obligations and found it difficult to devote my full attention to the play, Torrey was by my side to help me out and bring her own expertise to rehearsals, scheduling, set design, and every other tiny part of the whole production. Torrey is a master organizer, so for every idea that she or I came up with, she had a detailed plan that made for a flawless execution. She kept everyone in the cast, me included, on schedule and motivated. She brought life and enthusiasm to every rehearsal, and she provided directorial insight into scenes that I couldn’t wrap my head around. Our performance of The Potting Shed simply would not have been possible without Torrey.

I think the biggest challenge Torrey, the cast and I faced when it came to bringing The Potting Shed to the stage was exhaustion. We knew that this play would rely entirely on skilled acting and flawlessly memorized lines, since it contains almost no physical action. The plot develops exclusively through dialogue, so if an actor’s delivery fell flat, the performance would be a failure. Therefore, we had a rigorous rehearsal schedule, meeting twice a week for upwards of three hours at a time, drilling lines, discussing their meaning, and blocking tiny but essential interactions between characters. Because of the structure of classes this semester, each rehearsal would take place at night, so the actors would arrive already worn out from their studies. I remain amazed at and grateful for how motivated every single member of the cast was. They would always rally their energies remarkably each night and push past waves of exhaustion to deliver the best performances they could. To me, every late night was worth it. We all bonded in these moments of struggle and stress, and in the end, the cast brought me to tears with the passion, devotion, and strength they gave to performing their individual roles—both on and off the stage.

I am also immensely grateful for the help Torrey and I received from our stage, costume, and lighting crew. Mary Fahey costumed everyone impeccably and truly brought the play to life. Ashley Bryant, Elijah, Ashley, and Josephine Moorman, and Molly Hugo were each an enormous help when it came to replicating Wild Grove and the 1950s on stage. Peter Thompson also provided crucial directing advice alongside his amazing performance as an actor. The play could not have succeeded without the help of these individuals.  

 

Cast List:

  • Dr. Frederick Baston: Peter Rao (Class of ’24)
  • Anne Callifer: Catriona Fahey (’24)
  • Sara Callifer: Emma Anderson (’24)
  • Mrs. Mary Callifer: Lydia Smith (’22)
  • John Callifer: JP Baughman (’22)
  • James Callifer: Alex Tapsak (’25)
  • Dr. Kreuzer: Declan Nielsen (’24)
  • Corner: Liam Beecher (’25)
  • Mrs. Potter: AnneMaria Gerads (’24)
  • Miss Connolly: Bernadette Mahoney (’22)
  • Fr. William Callifer: Peter Thompson (’22)

If you missed the play, click here to see a recording of the performance on YouTube.

 

For further reading:

Life at TMC

Student Organizations

The Thomas More College of Liberal Arts
Six Manchester Street
Merrimack, NH 03054

Phone: (603) 880-8308
Fax: (603) 880-9280
Contact via email


Copyright © 2024 Thomas More College of Liberal Arts. All rights reserved.