Playwright’s
Notes
The universe of the play is American politics. For anyone who seeks and gains
political office, there are two (not necessarily, and certainly not always)
competing drives. One is personal ambition - the hunger to win and be
recognized. The other is service - applying one’s talents in the best possible
way to serve the constituency of the office. Nowhere are these two drives more
visible and significant than where the U.S. Presidency is involved.
Ike, in the play - and I believe in fact - represents the public service drive.
He is already a hero - in fact his election as President doesn’t really elevate
his standing as a public hero. He is reluctant to enter the arena - doesn’t
truly get in until motivated by his fear of what a Taft presidency and an
isolationist view of the would mean. I’m not suggesting that Ike wasn’t also
driven by ambition. No one does what he did without that. But his ambitions
support his commitment to serve his country.
Nixon -from his first entry into politics is driven by fierce ambition and the
desire to be somebody - to get as high on the ladder (president) as he can get.
His priority is to win. Here again, it is not that Nixon has no interest in
doing good with the positions he is elected to - but his good works are chips
played toward gaining the recognition he seeks. (Chotiner represents the
extreme of the ambition side and
In a sense, Ike is the citizen-soldier, the last of his kind (so far) in US
presidential politics. Nixon represents politics as it was and is – where the
prime drive is to achieve. His side tells us quite a bit about where we (as a
society) are today. The use of special interest to raise money to gain
exposure, the cultivation of image, and the polling/focus group-research done
to make positions conform to voter prejudice are all tools of the candidate
who’s aim is primarily to win and fulfill ambition. Think Karl Rove, the current counterpart of
Chotiner.
The relationship between Ike and Dick ties into this conflict. Dick (the
younger, less experienced man) is thrust upon Ike. He is, if not the son, at
least put in the position of adopted or maybe foster son. And Ike -
historically, as well as in the play, repeatedly sees Dick’s ambition as at
odds with Ike’s view of public service. It is not that Ike doesn’t want Dick to
succeed - it is that he is frustrated and disappointed. This theme starts from
the moment the two meet and runs through the end of the first Act and all of the
second. An analogy that comes to mind is the comment supposedly made by the
senior Steinway when his son came up with ways to improve the bottom line by
using the name to market more price-accessible pianos. “But we’d have to make
one change,” the father said. “Take the name, Steinway, off the piano.” I need
to say here that I’m not talking about personal qualities or even ‘character’
in other than the limited sense I’ve described. Nixon is the more introspective
man - his memoirs are far more honest than Ike’s. Nixon to my mind is more
loyal (you could say he had to be because that’s where his bread was being
buttered). In some ways Nixon (despite the moniker ‘Tricky Dick’) is more
direct in his dealing with people than Ike - more willing to confront adversity
and controversy. But these personal issues don’t alter the basic conflict
between service and ambition. To my mind they make the conflict more complex
and interesting.
The first scene of the play introduces the idea. Nixon and Dewey are engaged on
the ambition side. How does Dick get ahead? How can Dewey get help from
Herb
Brown