The 1960s unfolded as a decade bursting with upheaval and transformation across the United States. Shrouded in the shadow of the Cold War, the fear of an impending nuclear catastrophe loomed large, particularly following the Bay of Pigs debacle—a botched mission to eliminate Cuba's communist leader, Fidel Castro, in 1961. During this turbulent period, Castro aligned Cuba closely with the Soviet Union. Across American landscapes, billboards served as stark reminders that the specter of Communism lingered a mere ninety miles from Florida's shores. The tension escalated dramatically when the Soviets positioned missiles in Cuba, confronting President John F. Kennedy's administration with the Cold War's most perilous standoff.

Amidst the Cold War's icy tensions, Kennedy's inauguration as the thirty-fifth president infused the nation with renewed optimism. He promised a government keen to address pressing domestic issues like racial discord and poverty, aspiring for justice for every American. Tragically, this hope was shattered with Kennedy's assassination on November 22, 1963. Although his successor, President Lyndon B. Johnson, vowed to advance the civil rights legislation envisioned during Kennedy's time, a somber atmosphere enveloped the nation. This led to a surge in activism, epitomized by Martin Luther King, Jr.'s monumental civil rights march in Selma, Alabama, in 1965, and the eruptive race riots in Newark, New Jersey, in 1967.

As the decade reached its midpoint, the United States found itself ensnared in the Vietnam conflict—a war that many Americans viewed as unjustifiable on strategic and moral grounds. Coupled with racial tensions, the conflict sowed seeds of division, fostering a tide of unrest and open rebellion. This era witnessed the emergence of a counter-culture, proudly brandishing the slogan “make love, not war,” and indulging in uninhibited sexual freedom and the experimental use of psychedelic drugs like LSD and marijuana. In 1969, the spirit of this counter-culture culminated in Woodstock, where 300,000 young souls gathered in upstate New York for a jubilant festival celebrating life and peace. That year also bore witness to the tragic deaths of Black Panthers Fred Hampton and Mark Clark at the hands of Chicago police, even as Neil Armstrong left humanity’s first footprints on the moon’s surface.

The fissures of the 1960s unleashed a torrent of violence, claiming lives through brutal assassinations. Beyond John Kennedy, the decade saw the loss of influential figures like Malcolm X, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Robert Kennedy. Atrocities abroad mirrored those at home, with the infamous 1968 massacre at My Lai, where American troops slaughtered 500 unarmed Vietnamese civilians. This cycle of violence carried into the 1970s, marked by the tragic shooting of four Kent State University students by the Ohio National Guard during Vietnam War protests.

Much of this violence stemmed from sweeping changes that threatened the established order, rooted in Vietnam War opposition and the relentless pursuit of racial equality. However, the 1960s also birthed movements that compelled the nation to reevaluate its principles and social norms. In 1962, through her pivotal work The Silent Spring, Rachel Carson ignited the environmental movement, which led to the enactment of the Clean Air Act in 1963. By 1966, the National Organization for Women (NOW) was established to champion women's rights. This was followed by the founding of the American Indian Movement in 1968, advocating for Native American rights. The following year, the Stonewall Rebellion in a New York bar sparked a fervent campaign for gay rights and equality.

The 1960s also heralded a cultural revolution. Rock music surged to the forefront, catapulting the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, Jimi Hendrix, and Janis Joplin to iconic status among the youth. Films evolved into powerful societal critiques,...

Setting
Nestled within the opulence of a lavish resort’s grand suite, Oh Dad unfolds amidst the resonant allure of an imaginary Port Royale. This Caribbean utopia, existing only in dreams, beckons with its exotic symphony of sounds and dazzling lights, crafting a realm both enchanting and romantic. Yet, its vibrant pulse, filled with spirited life, remains a distant fantasy for Jonathan, who finds himself confined within its walls, yearning for the life it promises but denies him.

The alluring lights and evocative music stir within Jonathan a primal yearning. Yet, Madame Rosepettle’s suffocating influence has so thoroughly distorted his mind that he shudders at the mere thought of engaging with the world beyond his secluded watchtower. She is determined to shield him from the realm of desire and chaos, a place she describes as a “sex-driven, dirt-washed waste of cannibals eating each other up while they’re pretending they’re kissing.”

Absurdism

Though it serves as a parody in part, Kopit’s play also delves deep into the realm of absurdist drama. Language falters and crumbles, rendering communication a challenging endeavor, especially for Jonathan, whose dialogue is a clumsy tapestry of stammers and stutters. The characters themselves are exaggerated caricatures, dysfunctional in their extremes: Madame Rosepettle embodies monstrous maternalism, while Jonathan is a hyperbolic representation of repressed fears and inhibitions. Serious themes like love and death are treated with irreverence, and logic is twisted into chaos, as evidenced when Jonathan’s father’s stuffed body inexplicably springs to life, or when Venus flytraps grow with wild abandon.

Black Humor

A hallmark of absurdism, black humor thrives within the play, weaving grotesque elements with grave themes, particularly death. In a darkly comedic moment, bellboys bungle the delivery of Madame Rosepettle’s husband’s coffin, accidentally detaching its handles and dropping it. Later, as Rosalie attempts to seduce Jonathan, Madame Rosepettle’s corpse grotesquely emerges like a macabre Jack-in-the-box, twice tumbling from the closet onto the would-be lovers, cutting their encounter short.

Parody

Kopit takes aim at fellow playwrights in Oh Dad, particularly Tennessee Williams. Madame Rosepettle’s extended confessional in the third scene playfully mocks the soul-baring monologues of tormented women in Williams’s works, like Blanche DuBois in A Streetcar Named Desire. In his whimsical use of "rose" within character names, including Rosalinda the fish, Kopit humorously critiques Williams’s The Rose Tattoo. Additionally, he takes a swipe at the heavy-handed Freudian themes prevalent in realistic dramas, notably Eugene O’Neill’s Long Day’s Journey into Night (1956).

Femme Fatale

Rosalie presents a comically exaggerated twist on the femme fatale, a woman whose allure spells doom for men. With a girlish façade wrapped in a frilly, pink party dress, she lures Jonathan into a deadly embrace that ironically leads to her demise rather than his. This comedic misdirection reveals her true nature, as she confesses to Jonathan her numerous past liaisons, shattering the illusion of innocence.

Grotesque

The grotesque pervades Oh Dad, most notably in Madame Rosepettle’s bizarre collection of pets. Far from cuddliness, these malicious creatures—like Rosalinda the piranha—devour traditional pets, with a preference for fresh Siamese kittens. Two giant Venus flytraps, growing menacingly, symbolize the ominous threat to Jonathan and any man who crosses Madame Rosepettle’s path. These voracious creatures mirror the woman’s own predatory nature, bent on consuming any male in her vicinity.

Pathetic Fallacy

Endowed with human-like awareness, Madame Rosepettle’s pets animate their surroundings, reacting to events in eerily sentient ways. When Jonathan attempts to hack at the Venus flytraps with an axe, they dodge and weave like prizefighters. Rosalinda, the fish, lets out a shrill scream as Jonathan threatens her. Even the dictaphone, disturbed by a jolt from Jonathan, comes to life, emitting a "strange noise" before echoing Madame Rosepettle’s voice.

Satire

Through the bizarre personas of Madame Rosepettle and Jonathan, Kopit offers a scathing critique of early 1960s America's sexual norms, as perceived by the avant-garde. The characters are grotesque exaggerations, with Madame Rosepettle transformed into an emasculating shrew, and Jonathan reduced to a neurotic tangle of fears. Their absurdity provides biting commentary on middle-class sexual mores and the destructive force of such societal constraints.

Symbolism

Symbolism runs rampant in Kopit’s play, with Madame Rosepettle’s pets serving as vivid metaphors for her devouring nature. Just as her pets physically consume living creatures, Madame symbolically devours men, likely having killed her husband and stripped Jonathan of his independence. The recurring "rose" motif in character names is rife with irony. While roses typically symbolize love and purity, these characters twist that symbolism: Rosalie, despite her pretensions, is far from pure; Commodore Roseabove, feigning love, merely seeks lust; Rosalinda, the piranha, is a ruthless predator; and Madame Rosepettle, whose name directly evokes the flower, embodies traits starkly opposed to its romantic ideals.

1960s: The Cold War casts a formidable shadow over the American psyche, with the ominous specter of communism ever-present. This tension reaches a fever pitch during the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1963, a moment etched into the collective memory of the era.

Today: The specter of the Cold War has largely dissipated, vanishing with the collapse of the Soviet Union. Nonetheless, remnants of communist governance persist in nations like China, North Korea, and Cuba, maintaining their unique roles on the global stage.

1960s: The Civil Rights Movement ignites, fiercely challenging the scourge of segregation and societal inequities. This era also witnesses the burgeoning of movements advocating for women's rights and LGBTQ+ rights, marking a transformative period of social awakening.

Today: While some critics argue that efforts for civil rights have overreached through initiatives like quota systems, often dubbed reverse discrimination, statistics tell a different story. The journey toward social justice for Black Americans remains arduous, with economic equality still a distant goal. Likewise, strides have been made by women, LGBTQ+ communities, and minorities such as Native Americans and Chicanos, yet their aspirations for full equity are far from fulfilled.

1960s: The advent of the Theatre of the Absurd in the early 1960s brings a novel, bewildering form of drama to the fore. This groundbreaking theatrical movement becomes a catalyst for the rise of the experimental Off-Broadway scene, offering audiences new and provocative ways to engage with the stage.

Today: First-generation absurdist playwrights like Ionesco and Beckett have ascended to the status of the classics. Their innovative techniques and themes have left a lasting impression on modern drama. Though their most iconic works are now revered, they are more celebrated for their historical significance than actively emulated in new productions.

The 1967 silver screen adaptation of Oh Dad embraced the full grandeur of its theatrical title. Helmed by the visionary director Richard Quine, the film featured a stellar ensemble cast that included the legendary Rosalind Russell, the charming Robert Morse, the effervescent Barbara Harris, the distinguished Hugh Griffith, the comedic genius Jonathan Winters, the versatile Lionel Jeffries, and the seasoned Cyril Delevanti.

This cinematic gem is available for home viewing on videocassette, inviting audiences to experience its captivating performances.

Sources
Brustein, Robert. ‘‘The Absurd and the Ridiculous’’ in the New Republic, Vol. CXLVI, March 19, 1962, p. 31.

Buckley, Priscilla L. ‘‘Well Now, Let’s See . . .’’ in the National Review, Vol. XII, June 6, 1962, p. 416.

Clurman, Harold. Review of Oh Dad in the Nation, Vol. CXCIV, March 31, 1962, p. 289.

Gilman, Richard. ‘‘The Stage: The Absurd and the Foolish’’ in the Commonweal, Vol. LXXVI, April 6, 1962, pp. 40-41.

Hewes, Henry. ‘‘The Square Fellow’’ in the Saturday Review, Vol. XLV, March 17, 1962, p. 35.

Review of Oh Dad in Theatre Arts, Vol. IL, May, 1962, p. 61.

Taubman, Howard. ‘‘One Work at a Time’’ in the New York Times, March 11, 1962, p. 1.

Further Reading
Auerbach, Doris. Sam Shepard, Arthur Kopit, and the Off- Broadway Theater, Twayne, 1982. Besides offering useful critical analyses of Kopit’s early work, especially Oh Dad, Indians, The Day the Whores Came Out to Play Tennis, and Wings, this study has an important chapter surveying the history of the Off-Broadway Theatre.

Bordman, Gerald. American Theatre: A Chronicle of Comedy and Drama 1930-1969, Oxford University Press, 1996. This work documents the production history of American theater over four decades and provides a good survey of the dramatic milieu in which Kopit and other early American absurdists wrote. For Bordman, the American theater went into a decline in the 1960s, after having passed through ‘‘Golden’’ and ‘‘Silver’’ periods.

Esslin, Martin. The Theatre of the Absurd, 3rd edition, Peregrine, 1987. Important chapters on the absurdity, tradition, and significance of the absurd remain mandatory for an understanding of the aims and methods of those writers lumped under the absurd rubric by Esslin. In ‘‘Parallels and Proselytes,’’ Esslin gives Kopit early notice as an American example, along with Edward Albee and Jack Gelber.

Kopit, Arthur. ‘‘The Vital Matter of Environment’’ in Theatre Arts, Vol. XLV, April, 1961, pp. 12-13. In this brief article, Kopit offers important insights into the state of the American commercial theater—its ‘‘inability to assimilate traditions’’ and its lack of invention. Although not an artistic manifesto, the article reveals the playwright’s mind set at the time Oh Dad was being readied for its London production.

Little, Stuart W. Off Broadway: The Prophetic Theater, Coward, McCann, & Geoghegan, 1972. Little’s study is a documentary history and useful guide to the Off-Broadway movement from 1952-1972, the period during which Kopit rose to prominence.

Wellworth, George. The Theater of Protest and Paradox, New York University Press, 1964. This study discusses the new, alternative theater of the 1950s and early-1960s and is valuable for its coverage of the early critical responses to Oh Dad.