Reviewed by:

• Good Standing by Matthew Greene
• Catherine Heiner

Is God the only one who can show love? Depending on the individual or the organization asked, this question inspires a multitude of answers. For Matthew Greene, this question is bound up with similarly complex questions of mercy, justice, and religion, all of which he addresses in his one-man play, Good Standing. The story follows Curtis Browne, a former member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (informally known as the LDS Church) who has been brought before a disciplinary council to determine whether he can restore his status as a member in good standing, or ultimately face excommunication. His offense? Marrying the man of his dreams. While plenty of plays have taken on the tension between LDS faith and homosexuality, Greene’s approach offers far more commentary on disciplinary councils as systems of justice within the LDS framework by taking the time to introduce and explore the perspectives of all fifteen men arguing and debating the particulars of excommunication. In doing so, Good Standing readily points to the failures of such a system, and in the midst of the hurt, asks what alternative possibilities may be available.

Kenneth Starling (Curtis Scott Browne) in Good Standing. (Photo: Abhiijith Harikumar.)

As the play takes on unwieldy themes of mercy and justice, the text itself is grounded in the highly specific background of the LDS Church. Disciplinary councils, modeled after the US judicial system, exist at the intersection of faith-based repentance and organizational acts of regulation, where members of local priesthood leadership meet and debate on behalf of and against the member in question. (Disciplinary councils held to address gay marriage like the one portrayed in Good Standing have come to be known informally as “courts of love.”) In this context, justice and judgment take on even [End Page 85] more of a celestial consequence, as LDS doctrine teaches that members who do not repent properly to cleanse themselves of sin will face retribution in the hereafter.

The type of religious justice shown in Good Standing is specific and perhaps peculiar. But the justice system as we know it in both civic and religious circumstances is built on this binary of winning and losing—either guilty or not guilty, a member in good standing or excommunicated. What makes Good Standing remarkable is the space it creates between these binaries through Curtis’s failure. Greene further emphasizes this margin by utilizing only one actor to perform all of Curtis’s commentary and narration alongside the warring arguments from the other fifteen members of the council. Greene’s work on Good Standing stands apart from similar narratives, given that his protagonist enters the disciplinary proceedings aware that his stance will likely do nothing to change their judgment. The focus is not on the council’s judgment, and in the space between binaries Greene magnifies the harm of this system and questions the necessity of religious discipline.

In the fall of 2020, the Great Salt Lake Fringe’s entirely digital festival included a streamed production of Good Standing, produced by Next Step Theatre Company and directed by Sam Allen. Salt Lake City, which serves as the worldwide hub for the LDS Church, seemed a fitting location for this particular play, and an appropriate virtual venue through which to experience the story. Rather than accentuating the cultural specificity and familiarity of the LDS Church, Next Step focused on the internal repercussions of marginalization, namely the casual intolerance within the individuals and the institution. This approach reflected how Curtis’s emotional turmoil fueled the anger and resentment toward the disciplinary system and the organization itself, further questioning its necessity.

Upon his first entry as Curtis Browne, Kenneth Starling indicated a sense of disorientation and discomfort with simply existing in the space. Surrounding Starling with an abundance of white folding chairs, Allen’s staging underscored this state of mind as Starling constantly organized and reorganized his surroundings to suit his needs. This disorientation...

审核人：

• 马修·格林（Matthew Greene）的《信誉良好》
• 凯瑟琳·海纳（Catherine Heiner）

上帝是唯一能表达爱意的人吗？根据所询问的个人或组织的不同，这个问题会激发出许多答案。对于马修·格林（Matthew Greene）来说，这个问题与仁慈，正义和宗教等类似的复杂问题紧密相关，他在他的单人戏剧《良好信誉》中谈到了所有这些问题。故事发生在柯蒂斯·布朗（Curtis Browne）之前，后者曾是耶稣基督后期圣徒教会的成员（正式称为LDS教会），后者已被带到纪律委员会审议，以确定他是否可以恢复其信誉良好的成员的地位，或最终面临开除。他的进攻？嫁给他梦想中的男人。虽然在LDS信仰和同性恋之间的紧张关系上已采取了许多措施，但格林通过花时间介绍和探讨所有15个人争辩和辩论的观点，对LDS框架内的纪律委员会作为司法系统提供了更多的评论。开除的详情。这样做，信誉良好 随便指出这种系统的故障，并在受到伤害的过程中，问可能有哪些替代方法可用。

肯尼斯·斯塔林（柯蒂斯·斯科特·布朗）的良好声誉。（照片：Abhiijith Harikumar。）

由于该剧以仁慈和正义为主题，文本本身以LDS教会的高度特定背景为基础。以美国司法制度为蓝本的纪律委员会位于基于信仰的悔改和组织规制行为的交汇处，当地神职人员领导层的成员会面并代表和反对有争议的成员进行辩论。（为解决同性恋婚姻问题而设立的纪律委员会被正式称为“爱之法庭”，如“良好信誉”中所描述的那样。）在这种情况下，正义和审判甚至在[End Page 85]上都产生了巨大的后果，正如LDS教义所教导的，如果成员们为悔改自己而没有适当地悔改，他们将在以后遭受报应。

良好信誉中显示的宗教正义类型是特定的，也许是奇特的。但是，在公民和宗教环境下，我们都知道司法系统是建立在这种胜利和失败的二元关系上的-无论是有罪还是无罪，是有良好信誉的人还是被驱逐出境的人。是什么让良好声誉显着的是通过柯蒂斯的故障，因此这些二进制文件之间产生的空间。格林进一步强调了这一余地，只利用一位演员来执行柯蒂斯的所有评论和旁白，并与来自理事会其他十五名成员的有争议的论点相提并论。格林关于良好信誉的工作他的主角在进入纪律程序时意识到自己的立场很可能不会改变他们的判断，因此与类似的叙述截然不同。重点不在委员会的判断上，而是在二进制文件之间的空间中，格林扩大了该系统的危害，并对宗教纪律的必要性提出了质疑。

2020年秋天，大盐湖边缘的全数字电影节包括由Next Step Theatre Company制作，Sam Allen导演的流媒体作品《Good Standing》。盐湖城是LDS教堂的全球枢纽，似乎是此特定剧集的合适地点，并且是一个可以体验故事的虚拟场地。下一步并没有强调LDS教会的文化特殊性和熟悉性，而是着眼于边缘化的内部影响，即个人和机构内部的偶然不宽容。这种方法反映了柯蒂斯的情感动荡如何激起了对纪律系统和组织本身的愤怒和不满，从而进一步质疑了其必要性。

肯尼斯·史达琳（Kenneth Starling）首次担任柯蒂斯·布朗（Curtis Browne）入场时，就对空间中的简单存在感到迷失方向和不适感。在史达琳周围有大量白色折叠椅，当史达琳不断地组织和整理周围的环境以满足他的需要时，艾伦的演出突显了这种精神状态。迷失方向...