Skip to content

Posts tagged ‘Sarah Kitz’

“Trauma isolates you. Theatre connects you.” In Conversation with Playwright Ellie Moon on WHAT I CALL HER and Using Art To Heal

Interview by Megan Robinson.

In our discussion regarding her newest play, What I Call Her, premiering November 16-December 8 at Crow’s Theatre, Ellie Moon is careful yet generous and endearingly enthusiastic. From her temporary home in Montreal, where she’s playing the role of Emmy in A Doll’s House, Part 2 at the Segal, Moon speaks fondly of her creative team back in Toronto, who are working hard to bring this comedy (or at least, very funny play) to life.

Her second production, following last year’s Asking For It, this new play offers theatre-goers the chance to see the young playwright’s work in a more traditional form. The show takes a look at two sisters who are struggling with different perspectives of the same story. It’s a complicated exploration of how we heal from trauma in an era in which our identities are worked out online, and so much more. After writing the first draft in one sitting (basically a miracle for a writer), What I Call Her was quickly programmed at Crow’s Theatre by Artistic Director Chris Abraham, who recently tweeted “Read this play last year, and it got right under my skin.”

We spoke with Moon about life after Asking For It, what it’s like being mentored by Chris Abraham and using art to heal.

Megan Robinson: Can you talk a little about the experience you had after Asking For It? Maybe about how you were feeling and where you were at as an artist?

Ellie Moon: Post-Asking For It, I had the biggest vulnerability hangover of my life, which was difficult, because I went right back into auditioning but didn’t really want anyone to look at me (laughs). It was a lot that I asked of myself in that project. You’re just getting to know yourself in your early 20s, and playing myself in a play, asking very vulnerable questions, it was a big deal – and I wasn’t relaxed about it. If I had known that once the show closed, much of the world would be standing up and saying “I had this sexual experience and I’m not sure what it meant, whether it was consensual, what my power was or is”, if I’d know Albert (Schultz) would no longer be running Soulpepper a few months later, I would have slept much better during the rehearsal process, but these things were completely inconceivable to me while I rehearsed this play. So, I was cripplingly terrified. The terror did relieve significantly after #MeToo broke during the run of the show, but the vulnerability, of course, persisted, and I was pretty exhausted by it all when it closed. I felt like spending a lot of time alone after the play closed, which I did, and which allowed me to write this play.

MR: This show is about healing from trauma. I’m curious to know more about what role your art plays in helping you heal or grow as a person?

EM: Theatre has connected me with the most empathetic, accepting people in my life, so that’s a big part of it. It allows me to discuss and test behaviour, to learn about and consider its impact on people, without needing to try it out (that’s not to say that I haven’t tested out some good and bad behaviour in my life anyway, though). Most powerfully, maybe, I’ve written multiple “unlikable” characters that I’ve watched artists embrace and see good in that I couldn’t see when I wrote them – and that is very healing. It’s also enabled me to connect with others with similar life experiences, or different life experiences, because at the end of the day, the experience of all lives is similar enough to unite us. Trauma isolates you, theatre connects you.

Photo by Dahlia Katz

MR: What was the process like of writing What I Call Her? How did it come about?

EM: This is super strange and wild and hasn’t happened for me before and I don’t expect for this to happen again…But I sat down and started writing without a plan, and 7 or 8 hours later I a) moved after all that time b) ate peanut butter toast and c) read it back and went “Woah, I really like this”. It had a few development workshops this year, but the changes have been very delicate – Director Sarah Kitz contributed an important stage direction, and I added and took away some text, but not much. I don’t think the original draft would look too different from the production draft, were you to look at them side-by-side. This is not at all how I work, usually, not even a bit. It was hard to speak about this play at first, because it was so born of my subconscious. I needed to work backwards to learn how to represent it to the community and I did this by sharing it with trusted people, and discussing with them what exactly it is.


Photo by Dahlia Katz

MR: How did Crow’s get involved?

EM: I gave Chris Abraham (Crow’s Artistic Director) the play to read, just as a friend. I was looking for feedback but absolutely not expecting him to program it. He read it and said “I might have space for this at Crow’s in the season” and then, “I have space for this in the season” and suggested Sarah Kitz as director. Sarah and I actually met for coffee a year and a half ago, after we had first “met” in the comments section of your incredibly brave piece about your experiences at George Brown, which brought about meaningful change – bravo! I understood Sarah to be a deeply ethical, smart person and I was like, “yes” this is a great fit.

MR: Chris (Abraham) has acted as a mentor to you, and I’m wondering if you can share some of the vital beliefs about playwriting or theatre in general that you’ve received from him and how they’ve shaped your work?

EM: Really too many things to name – I’m incredibly grateful to Chris. Most of the language I have to speak about plays comes from Chris and that’s pretty major. I wrote Asking For It while assistant directing a production The Watershed and that was the first time I heard the word “dialectic” (and I embarrassed myself by thinking he was saying dialect at first and being like “no I think the accents are good” (laughs)). On that project and others we’ve worked on or discussed, Chris talks a lot about moving a dialectic (or argument) through action, and that idea was at the front of my mind when writing What I Call Her (as well as Asking For It, and my new plays for the Tarragon). Chris is very gifted with taking a complex idea and simplifying or distilling it, it’s partially why he is such a good director and teacher. A practice I learned from him, and that he passed on from someone else, is that I try to name in just one short phrase what my play is about – what the central argument is – as early as possible in the process of writing. Chris is also wonderfully open-minded and accepting (I mean, for example, there was zero judgement when I thought dialectic meant accents…except from me, of myself) and I am working to make that more and more part of my practice as an artist and my life in general.


Photo by Dahlia Katz

MR: Tell me about working with director Sarah Kitz!

EM: It has been absurdly wonderful to have Sarah as a collaborator on this play. From the very first conversation I had with her about the show, I was gob-smacked by how completely and fully on the same page we were. I have never had this experience before, and I don’t consider it necessary to always see eye to eye with a collaborator, but it’s just a fact that she has never said one word about the play that hasn’t made me go, “yup, exactly”. Sarah has an enormous heart to balance out her enormous brain. As well as being able to navigate every aspect of the arguments the characters make in this play, and being able to hear the lines exactly as I do, and crack the language like a code, she has always had an understanding of how this play would exist in bodies and in space. Sarah also has a stunning capacity to hold both of the conflicting truths this play presents, side by side, with enormous empathy for and acceptance of both, and an acceptance of the mystery of where these meet. As an actor herself, she is also an incredibly gifted coach and director of other actors. That has been so essential here because these roles demand an absurd amount of these actors, and I know the cast would back me up when I say that Sarah is a gift to them as their guide.

Speaking of, I can’t believe how hard we lucked out with the cast – their qualities are bang on for these parts and they are extremely gifted and can manage this highly wordy, challenging text with ease. This was something I was nervous about – this combination of the inherent qualities I saw the actors and characters as needing to have, coupled with the need for actors who are extremely proficient with text, and especially because the play needs such young actors. Your energy changes a lot year by year between 20 and 30, these are like dog years, and if these roles feel “played down” by older actors, the play is so delicate that it could tip it into satire. A big question in the play is one of responsibility and the entrance into adulthood. At what point in someone’s life do they go from behaving in a way that can be reasonably understood as being in response to their given environment, to them being active in the world, not reactive, and responsible for their conduct? It’s probably not 18, right? You’re still a kid at 18. It’s probably somewhere more between 20 and 25. So the casting, and casting as close to the right ages of these characters as possible, was very important to me. I was fortunate that Sarah agreed wholeheartedly with this, and that she adores and understands actors as she does. And of course, these fine actors (Charlie Gould, Ellie Ellwand and Michael Ayres) deserve a shout out in here, too. They have had to learn a lot of very precise, very, very wordy text and hold all that alongside the massive emotional stakes of the show. And they are also hilarious.


Photo by Dahlia Katz

MR: If you were to liken this show to something else, what would it be?

EM: I realize this is a very ballsy thing to say about my own work, to compare it to one of the great plays of the past century, but I think it’s kind of a funny, female, millennial Long Day’s Journey Into Night.

MR: What is at the heart of this show for you?

EM: How much we need validation to heal, and how difficult that is in a world where other people exist, and not just to be in service to you and your narrative, but have their own experiences of things that need validating, too. How people who are traumatized often behave in ways that destroy their credibility and make that validation very difficult to receive. How responsibility is needed for healing, but is so often arrived at through blame.

MR: What makes you want to write? What sort of things get you inspired?

EM: I’m not sure what makes me want (or more accurately, need) to write and I want to respect the mystery of that and not think too hard about it. I’m very grateful that I can do this and that I’ve had the opportunity to share so much of my writing at this point in my life. Right now, I’m definitely interested in morality and responsibility and power, but I can feel this shifting, and I want to invite it to shift.

MR: Asking For It was documentary theatre, where this one has more of a classic play structure. Do you have a preference of one form over the other?

EM: I don’t have a preference with regards to form. I want to have a diverse writing practice. I definitely notice that people give you a lot more credit as a playwright when it’s a fiction play and not docu-theatre, though, which is too bad and misguided. Docu-theatre requires an incredible amount of work, responsibility and authorship. People have a lot of bias against it as a form. They assume it’s dry, didactic, condescending. It doesn’t need to be and I have been fortunate to see so much docu-theatre that isn’t.

MR: Since being a playwright-in-residence, how has your craft evolved?

MR: I’m the Bulmash-Siegal playwright-in-residence at Tarragon and in this capacity, I’ve worked a lot this past year (and will this coming year) with Richard Rose, Jason Sherman and Joanna Falck – awesome, sharp, wise people and artists. As well as adding significantly to the language I have for speaking about plays, this residency has allowed me the space to develop plays (two of them!) over time, to take in and incorporate very precise feedback (or feedback that’s imprecise, but just as potent and useful). I’m usually one to rush to immediately apply notes, but this arrangement allows me to really hear a note, and maybe not understand immediately exactly how I will apply it, but to not be afraid of that, to sit with it and come back to it. This opportunity to not have to figure it out right away is invaluable, especially because, as I said before, your 20s feel like dog years and I feel like a different person than, like, a week ago.

MR: What’s your favourite line?

EM: ”I’m an adult: I have a reusable water bottle in my bag.”

Photo by Dahlia Katz

What I Call Her

In Association in partnership with Crow’s Theatre
Michael Ayres – Kyle
Ellie Ellwand – Ruby
Charlie Gould – Kate
Ellie Moon – Playwright
Sarah Kitz – Director
Annie Clarke – Producer
Suzie Balogh – Production Manager
Ashley Ireland – Stage Manager
Imogen Wilson – Lighting Designer
Ali Berkok – Composer & Sound Designer

Trauma, truth, freedom & the internet age
The estranged mother of 25-year old Kate is on her death-bed. A Facebook post becomes the subject of heated debate. Then, a knock on the door. A play about gaps in how people perceive and understand the world they live in, female generational rage, and the loneliness of holding onto one’s own truth.

Crow’s Theatre
345 Carlaw Ave.

Nov. 16-Dec. 8


In Conversation with Sarah Kitz – Director of Agamemnon at the Next Stage Theatre Festival

Interview by Ryan Quinn

RQ: Hello! I’m speaking with Sarah Kitz, director of Agamemnon. It’s premiering at the Next Stage Theatre Festival, presented by Theatreworks and the Agamemnon Collective.

SK: Hello!

RQ: So this is a new adaptation and translation by Nicolas Billon of the ancient Greek play by Aeschylus. For those unfamiliar with the original story of Agamemnon, do you want to tell me a bit about it?

SK: For sure. The back story is really important. What happens ten years previous is that Agamemnon agrees to sacrifice his eldest daughter, Iphigenia, in order to get a win from the gods to sail to Troy, to sack Troy, to bring back Helen. So that’s what happens at the end of the play Iphigenia. Now we flash forward ten years, it’s been a ten year war in Troy. Troy has now fallen and the men are coming home. So Agamemnon is coming back to his home and, of course, the men coming home from war are expecting to enter a soft, domestic, female space. They’re expecting to leave the war zone behind and instead they enter a different kind of war zone.

My entrance to the play, my vision of the play is that the sacrificing of this young woman is a thing that breaks the world. They are doomed from that moment. All of the soldiers die in that moment, before their bodies are actually blown up and all of the people in the community that are left behind are in a kind of death, as well. All of the things that we value like the body and life and youth and the future and the feminine, all of those things are immediately upended and devalued in the sacrifice of this young girl. So the men return from war to a broken world. That’s where we are now, and Clytemnestra, Agamemnon’s wife and mother of Iphigenia has been plotting revenge for ten years, waiting for this moment.

RQ: So history was written at that moment ten years ago, and now Agamemnon is reaping what he’s sown.

SK: Now it’s comeuppance time, yeah.

RQ: Do you want to tell me a bit about the adaptation?

SK: Yes! So Nicolas has updated it to now, even a few years in the future. We’ve taken this classical structure and we’ve perverted it into the vulgar, base, funny, uncomfortable world of reality TV, let’s say. So, to hit on these themes we live with now, but have turned up the volume on even more so. The level of sex and violence we accept as the normal baseline in our culture is even higher. And that, again, is because of the sacrifice of this young girl, things that we value have become devalued. So, violence and extreme sexuality are everyday and not noteworthy until we see people come back into the community and register the horror show that is normality.

RQ: So with reality TV, the second we embrace that vulgarity, there’s no way to take it back in the future.

SK: Exactly. It becomes the new normal, and we just keep building up from there.

RQ: I want to know how this came about. You’ve got this great playwright. You’ve got a great cast including, but not entirely limited to, Nigel Shawn Williams, Brigit Wilson, Earl Pastko. What was the genesis of the show?

SK: Nicolas was commissioned to write Agamemnon for Theatreworks. After Theatreworks saw Iphigenia, which he did at Summerworks years ago, they approached him and asked him what he’d like to do next and he said he’d like to write this companion piece. So, he wrote it for them and they workshopped it a few years back. Then, nothing happened with it and he really wanted to put it on. He and I have been friends for quite a while and are always looking for opportunities to work together. So, when I was out in Winnipeg this summer directing Antony and Cleopatra, he called me up and said he wanted to submit Agamemnon for Next Stage, and he wanted me to direct it. He sent me the script, I read it and I was captivated. I called him back and said yes, and we immediately started excitedly planning.

Agamemmnon 11

Photo of Amy Keating by Robert Harding

RQ: A lot of Agamemnon has to do with myth-making, and the myths we create of ourselves, our culture, our history. I was wondering where those parallels are between the way myths were created by the Ancient Greeks, and the myths we create for ourselves now.

SK: There is a myth that is at the center of this show, which is unfortunately valid still. That myth is that you can purchase peace with war. Or you can purchase forgiveness with violence. That this war will be the last war. That hasn’t changed, and that is one of the central arguments of this play both in its classical original form, and in the contemporary form; and the fact that it is updated only underlines that point. It’s the idea that people who go to war are heroes. In this play, we have people who come back from war, who have seen and partaken in atrocity, and they know different. It’s the people who haven’t gone to war who treat them like heroes in some aspects. We have one character say to a returning soldier “You are a hero,” and he says “No, miss”. He’s been, and he’s seen, and he’s done.

RQ: The original myth that we bought into.

SK: And we’re still buying into it. The only way to stop that myth and stop that history is to refuse to go to war and have everyone in the world refuse to go to war. That is the only way to break that myth. Otherwise, when these warring tribes in this far away country are fighting each other, we will still feel entitled to involve ourselves in that, we’ll make an incursion into another country, blow it up, and create a vacuum of power. Then some other insurgency will step in.

RQ: When we think of war in terms of results instead of the act itself.

SK: I’d say that’s one of the other central points of this play – that in war time, violence doesn’t stay at the site of conflict. It affects all of the communities that have sent people to war. We are then living in a culture of war, and violence and sexuality reach a kind of fevered height, both at home and at the site of conflict. All adrenaline becomes the same adrenaline at that point. If you’re not fighting, then you’re playing violent video games or watching porn, because all of those things are the same. The body has no value, and there’s no intimacy, there’s only getting off.

RQ: One of the things we spoke about when you were directing Three More Sleepless Nights by Caryl Churchill was about the class divide at the center of that piece. Do you feel that’s present in this piece as well?

SK: There is a strong sense of class in a way that may be invisible, but is definitely noteworthy. In the classical Agamemnon, they’re royalty; but in this updated version we’re doing, they’ve moved way down in the world. The people we send to war now aren’t kings and presidents. The people with power, money, and status are at home or at a far, safe distance pushing a button. The people we send into physical contact are poor, dispossessed, and working class. So the family we’re looking at, the house of Atreus, were royalty ten years before the Trojan war. Now they’re blue collar at best.

RQ: What draws you toward a project?

SK: Danger excites me. Laughter excites me. People living large excites me. Words excite me. If I don’t get that physical rush reading a script, that’s a good indication that I shouldn’t do it. I’ve started to say “no” a lot, which is interesting to me. And that doesn’t mean a show shouldn’t be done, it means I’m not the person to do that show. I want a show that has something to say to us. Pure escapism is not for me. It has its place, absolutely, but I’m not the director or the actor for it. I’m also interested in politics, but I don’t want people to come to the threatre and think they’re being lectured at. However, I do believe that theatre can be a revolution. If you get people breathing in a room together, and you’re presenting an argument, it’s a challenge to the way we live our lives. That’s revolutionary ground. It’s an opening for dialogue, and it’s a dialogue that’s happening inside of a community.

RQ: As we start 2016, what would you like to see in the world of theatre this year? For yourself personally, or for the community as a whole?

SK: I would like to see more diverse voices being programmed, and that not be something specialized. That needs to be the new normal. We need to stop talking about it already and just be doing it everywhere. Diversity isn’t a genre. A show about a family is a show about a family. Whether they’re a Greek family or a Chinese immigrant family, or a family run by a mixed-race lesbian couple. It’s a family story, and that’s what we want to see. So, I’d like to see a greater diversity of voices happen.

Also, I’m really excited by what’s happening in the indie theatre scene in Toronto a lot. I love watching our generation step up and start producing the work that they want to make without waiting to be invited into larger institutions because there aren’t always enough places for everyone to be. It’s very exciting and sometimes creating outside of those boxes is the best way because you have the most control. Then when you get to move in to more institutionalized places, you’ve probably worked out kinks in your own process and in your own aesthetics, and you have a good idea of what it is you want to do, how you want to say it, and who you’re really great working with. That makes me really excited to watch happening. And they’re breaking structures of plays, too. What is a play? Do we need to follow the classical structures? I think the idea of dramaturgy can be shattered.


Presented by Theatreworks Productions and The Agamemnon Collective

What: After a ten year siege, the city of Troy finally lies in ruin. Clytemnestra waits for Agamemnon with murder in her heart. A visceral, contemporized re-imagining of the opening chapter of Aeschylus’ Oresteia by Governor General award winning playwright Nicolas Billon.

Where: Factory Theatre Mainspace (125 Bathurst St)

Length: 75 minutes

Playwright: Nicolas Billon (after the play by Aeschylus)
Director: Sarah Kitz
Featuring: Nigel Shawn Williams, Brigit Wilson, Earl Pastko, Susanna Fournier, Ron Kennell, Amy Keating, Zita Nyarady, Marcel Stewart, Samantha Brown

Tickets: $15.00


January 06 05:45 PM  buy tickets
January 07 09:30 PM  buy tickets
January 09 04:15 PM  buy tickets
January 10 06:30 PM*  buy tickets
January 11 08:45 PM  buy tickets
January 14 05:30 PM  buy tickets
January 15 07:30 PM  buy tickets
January 16 08:45 PM  buy tickets
January 17 02:00 PM  buy tickets

* Talk Back after the show

Connect with us:

Sarah Kitz: @Sarah_Kitz

Ryan Quinn: @MrRyanQuinn

In the Greenroom: @intheGreenRoom_

A Few Words with Sarah Kitz – Director of Caryl Churchill’s Three Sleepless Nights – 2014 Playwright Project

Interview by Ryan Quinn

RQ: So, Sarah Kitz! You are directing Three Sleepless Nights by Caryl Churchill with Bad Joe Theatre for the 2014 Playwright Project.

SK: I am!

RQ: And this show takes place around the beginning of Margaret Thatcher’s government.

SK: It’s early in her reign of terror.

RQ: Yeah! I was wondering if you could speak to the point of view the show takes on her. She was the first female British prime minister, but she didn’t leave a fantastic legacy.

SK: Well, it’s interesting because Churchill stridently doesn’t talk about her shows. Other people talk about them, but she doesn’t do interviews. So, you’re forced to just go to the text. She is such an overt feminist, and Margaret Thatcher obviously was no feminist, even though she was holding the highest office in the land, it was all about pulling yourself up by your bootstraps. Women did not do better under her government, and minorities didn’t do better, and underprivileged people didn’t do better. It’s a political play because of the context, but we don’t hear people discussing much politics. What we get instead is people in tenuous circumstances that are getting increasingly dangerous and just the traps closing around them. We understand because of the framing of the show that that’s largely, but not totally, Thatcher’s doing.

RQ: A society or a community in flux, and how it affects the people in it.

SK: Yeah, and not so dissimilar from now, with the economic divide widening dramatically. The people on the bottom end of that are going from a hand-to-mouth situation that’s bearable into a really precarious place.

RQ: Well that’s something I wanted to ask you about, how the world of this show parallels our own, but you just touched on it, how social classes are becoming further apart.

SK: When I chose this show, I realized that with some of her work, you can get away with not doing a British accent very easily, but I don’t think this is one of them. It’s very “London working class”, so we decided to keep that, but the resonances in people with economic hardship is so unfortunately similar to what’s happening right now that I think that will reverberate very strongly.

RQ: How do you approach something like this that’s so similar to our world now, but also so firmly planted in a certain era?

SK: I think, fortunately, with someone like Churchill, she’s so clever in her writing that you can just serve the text and know that it will resonate. The actors are really, really good, and the scenes are stand-alone but interrelated so we get a few different viewpoints going on and that’s helpful as well. It’s not just one bedroom with two people for the entire show. One of the couples has a bit more money and resources than another, so you do see some change. I don’t think it’s ultimately a very optimistic play, but I think that making art is overtly an optimistic venture, so they balance out.

RQ: What is it about Caryl Churchill that you think makes her great for a festival like this?

SK: She’s so political, and the politics in our country are so in-your-face right now that we need to have more politics in our theatre. And her political discourses are very palatable in how theatrical they are. So you can come see a political show and it will be entertaining, not didactic, though there is a lot of substance in there. Plus, since she doesn’t talk about it, as artists working on the show, you can kind of do whatever you want in the realm of working with the script you have. She hasn’t said, like Shaw, the table must go here beside the french door. You can imagine it fresh every time and that’s really exciting. I don’t know what the other directors are doing with their shows, but I imagine we’ll see four drastically different, ambitious theatrical adventures, that’s really exciting.

Playwright of 2014 The Playwright Project- Caryl Churchill

Playwright of 2014 The Playwright Project- Caryl Churchill

RQ: What do you think the place is of these small festivals in a city with a few large festivals every year?

SK: I think it’s fabulous. With the Playwright Project in particular, we get to focus in on a particular writer, one who has a broad body of work to choose from. It’s incredible immersion. Plus I think the selection body is very interesting, why we choose these shows. Part of it is practicality, what we can do on a small budget in a small space. A lot of her shows are gigantic, and nobody in this festival is doing a show with a cast of fifty. Also, though, there’s not a lot of Caryl Churchill done in this city, and what is done is put on at a very high level like Alisa Palmer did Top Girls for Soulpepper, and then she did Cloud Nine for Mirvish. If you want to talk politics, that’s a different price bracket, those tickets. So there are a lot of people in this city that don’t have access to those shows just by virtue of how much they cost. And they have to cost that much because it costs so much to put them on.


RQ: So she’s a playwright that’s speaking directly to the hardship of the lower half of society, and yet most people in that lower half can’t afford to see it.

SK: I mean she doesn’t always put her words in the mouth of the lower class, but she does have a focus on the vulnerable, the disadvantaged, the politically under-served. She is very populist in that way.

RQ: What do you hope people discuss, or think about, or argue about on the way home?

SK: I hope people argue about what the traps are, because I think there is more than one in my show. And also how familiar the refrains are that we get ourselves into in relationships. How much fine negotiation it takes to get out. Fine negotiation or revolution, explosions of the status quo.

RQ: In some senses, is the explosion ever justified, or is it ever essential?

SK: Exactly. If they’re justified, how they’re justified, and the disparity between the lip service and the execution. And if the execution ever happens, or if we stay trapped and talk about it and do nothing. If silent revolution is possible, or if that’s a lot of tongue wagging and a lot of sitting around.

Three More Sleepless Nights

by Caryl Churchill, presented by Bad Joe as part of the 2014 Playwright Project


London, 1980. Thatcher is newly in office. It’s the end of an era; it’s a new age. Late night communication breakdown. In the close quarters of the bedroom, enter people on the brink.

Directed by: Sara Kitz
Starring: Diana Bentley, Chala Hunter, Jeff Margolis, Ryan Rogerson,
Where: The Downstage (798 Danforth Avenue)
Tickets: Available  HERE
Single Tickets: Weeknight Single Ticket: $10.00, Weekend Single Ticket: $15.00 

Project Passes: Weeknight 2-Show Pass: $15.00 (see both shows playing on a weeknight), Weekend 4 Show-Pass: $45.00 (see all four shows playing on a Saturday or Sunday)

About Sarah Kitz:
A Toronto writer, director and actor, Sarah recently directed the hit show Savage in Limbo for Bob Kills Theatre, which extended its run at The Downstage. She has assistant directed Long Days Journey Into Night at Soulpepper (dir. Diana Leblanc); associate directed This Wide Night at Summerworks (dir. Kelli Fox), and has directed for Fringe, Summerworks, Here Is My Hand, Leah Posluns Theatre, One Night Stand, My Livingroom’s New Art Night, and Birmingham Readings at The Stratford Festival.
As an actor Sarah has been a member of the Stratford Festival Company and a graduate of the Birmingham Conservatory for Classical Theatre, where she played Eliza in Pygmalion (dir. Chris Newton) and Fool in Lear (dir. Martha Henry). Sarah has played Olivia in Twelfth Night (Dream North); Hali in The Sicilian (Fringe); Portia in The Merchant of Venice (St Lawrence Shakespeare Company); One Woman Freak Show (Buddies/Cheap Queers).
Upcoming Sarah is directing a new play by Nicolas Billon. This fall Sarah will play Edna St Vincent Millay in With Individual Desire, currently in development with Lady Parts Theatre and Nightwood Theatre, to be presented at Groundswell.