Here’s the conclusion of my talk with Permanent Collection playwright Thomas Gibbons.
Jacqueline Lawton: Permanent Collection is inspired by the story of the Barnes Foundation and addresses issues of race in America. 
What compelled you to write this play? How did you decide which characters/points of views would appear in it?
Thomas Gibbons: On the most immediate level, what compelled me to write the play was an image of a particular actor named Frank X standing onstage in an expensive Italian suit. Frank has been in several plays of mine; I’ve written parts specifically for him, as I wrote Sterling North, the central character in Permanent Collection. His opening monologue was written very quickly, and throughout the development of the play I made very few changes in it, apart from changing it from the first person to the second person.
On a larger level, the entire history of the Barnes Foundation and the controversy that engulfed it in the 90s fascinated me. To put it very briefly, the newly appointed foundation head, who was African American, wanted to build a parking lot on the foundation grounds; a neighbors’ group opposed the proposal. Eventually the director accused them of racism, and they sued him for slander. From that point on, the controversy was no longer about a parking lot; it was about race. When I began to do my research, I found that race was an important strain in the Barnes’ history; its founder, Albert Barnes, was well known for his interest in African art, and included specimens in his displays long before this was widely accepted. Instead of focusing on a parking lot, I invented the central conflict of the play – whether pieces of African art in storage should be placed in the galleries – because I wanted to examine the notion of a museum as a place that displays our consensus of what is most valuable in our cultural heritage, and what will be visible. Who decides what hangs on the wall? What criteria are they using?
JL: In an interview in September of 2005, you observed that “Race is the central dilemma in American history, which we still have not succeeded in untangling.” Do you feel that that Americans have come any closer to dealing candidly with the issue of race? Or do you feel that we are as tangled up as ever?
TG: My feeling (and it’s no more than a feeling, I admit) is that many Americans, on a personal level, are able to approach the subject with candor and openness – younger people in particular. Publicly, our racial history is still an occasion for hypocrisy, dishonesty, and posturing.
JL: Throughout Barack Obama’s campaign and at the early stages of his presidency, many in the media decided that we had shifted into a post-racial era. While the definition of “post-racial” is still being debated, the working definition is that we, as a society, had moved to a place where race no longer matters. What are your thoughts on this? Is there such a thing as a post-racial society? Would you ever want there to be one? Why or why not?
TG: Race is part of the American DNA; it will always matter. The question is, exactly how will it matter 20 years from now, or 50? No one knows, least of all the media.
JL: Which aspect of Sterling’s character do you most relate to? What aspect of Paul’s character do you most relate to?
TG: Sterling wants to introduce change to what he sees as an ossified institution, to bring it into the present. Paul wants to preserve what he sees as the best of the past. I recognize both of those impulses in myself.
JL: What was the most challenging part of writing Permanent Collection? Which character’s voice was the most difficult to capture?
TG: Without question, the challenge of this play was to present both viewpoints in the conflict fairly, with as much eloquence and clarity as I could summon, so that the audience feels it’s not being propagandized. I’m not interested in telling an audience what I believe; I hope to prod them into asking themselves what they believe. As for the characters, I’d rather say whose voice was the most enjoyable to write: Alfred Morris, the foundation’s founder who delights in provocation and outrage.
JL: What surprised (continues to surprise you) you about Permanent Collection? Whether it’s the audience response or your response when you see it?
TG: When the play was first produced in Philadelphia, I think audiences viewed it through the lens of the actual controversy unfolding at the Barnes Foundation – that they were going to see the true “backstage” story. In some ways the play has been seen more clearly by audiences in other cities who weren’t all that familiar with the Barnes. It also seems to me that this play about an African American man elevated to a position of leadership, and the controversy that ensues, has acquired an additional resonance that I never anticipated.
JL: What next for you as a writer?
TG: After writing plays that deal with the subject of race in America for about ten years, I’ve come to feel I don’t have anything else to say about it. Also, there are other subjects that I’ve long wanted to explore. My current work in progress, Silverhill (inspired by the history of the Oneida Community in upstate New York), deals with a 19th-century American communist utopia that practices “Bible communism” and free love, and how it runs aground on the rocks of jealousy, desire, generational conflict, and greed. Human nature, in other words.
Thanks for reading the blog. I hope to see you at Round House Bethesda for Permanent Collection!
Jacqueline Lawton
Dramaturg
