What do you think?
Rate this book
Detroit
When Sharon and Kenny move into a long-empty house in the suburbs of an American city, they are welcomed by neighbours Ben and Mary. But, fuelled by alcohol and backyard barbecues, their new friendship veers rapidly out of control as inhibitions are obliterated, laying bare the fragility of Ben and Mary's off-the-shelf lifestyle. Originally produced by Chicago's Steppenwolf Theatre, Lisa D'Amour's Detroit made its UK premiere at the National Theatre, London, in May 2012. 'Convincing and compelling and tartly funny... This may well be the most effective play yet produced about our current economic doldrums.' Variety
96 pages, Paperback
First published September 13, 2011
8 people are currently reading
273 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 73 reviews
January 5, 2025
hat mich nicht abgeholt und nur in meiner entscheidung bestärkt für immer alleine mit meinem hund in meiner ein zimmer wohnung im ruhrpott zu bleiben
February 2, 2017
I hate stage directions at the best of times, but these took that to a whole new level. 'Ben runs over and jiggles the door, or does Kenny get up and jiggle it with his hand still on his head?' 'Maybe Kenny will sit on a couple of bags of charcoal? Or maybe a suitcase?' 'Ambient sounds of the neighborhood. Are they the same as usual or have they changed?' UGHHH!!!
Was is a good play? Did it deserve to be a Pulitzer Prize Finalist? Perhaps it did or perhaps it didn't.
Was is a good play? Did it deserve to be a Pulitzer Prize Finalist? Perhaps it did or perhaps it didn't.
January 21, 2013
It had its moments, but I can't believe this is Pulitzer material. None of the characters were compelling, the plot went nowhere and the stage directions were bizarrely casual.
January 24, 2021
When I first picked up this play, I figured it would be about the city of Detroit, but as the playwright says in the Introduction, it can be set in any first-ring suburb outside a major city. (First-ring =. the homes first built on the outskirts of the city proper.)
Perhaps it's not the best title, but its story is truly universal: The (de)evolution of neighborhoods that were once highly-respected places to live but have since sunk into a state of decay and decrepitude.
The play concerns two couples, neighbors, who at first seem like polar opposites but soon realize they have more in common than just the street they live on. Each are struggling with their own inner demons, the neighborhood serving as a place of disintegration for one couple and a step-up for the other. They meet somewhere in the middle of their own trajectories, first over a backyard barbecue, which grows like the very flames that power their grills.
In one way, this play is reminiscent of "Clybourne Park," where the neighborhood is its own character. There are traces, too, of "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" as they couples began taking swipes at each other, often fueled by alcohol, personal failure, and lost dreams. Unlike the latter, though, this one manages to find some heart by the end.
Some people may be put off by the casual way D'Amour writes, with some passages have little, if any, punctuation, and stage directions not telling but asking what should be happening on stage ("Or maybe he is carrying a wine bottle?"). But these qualities strike me as almost Mamet-esque in their natural patterns of speech and the freedom which they give the director and creative team.
As a theatre director myself, this show would certainly present challenges, specifically the final scene, but as a text, D'Amour has managed to pack a lot into an otherwise "little" play. (It's only 55 pages which would likely translate to a little over an hour performed).
Perhaps it's not the best title, but its story is truly universal: The (de)evolution of neighborhoods that were once highly-respected places to live but have since sunk into a state of decay and decrepitude.
The play concerns two couples, neighbors, who at first seem like polar opposites but soon realize they have more in common than just the street they live on. Each are struggling with their own inner demons, the neighborhood serving as a place of disintegration for one couple and a step-up for the other. They meet somewhere in the middle of their own trajectories, first over a backyard barbecue, which grows like the very flames that power their grills.
In one way, this play is reminiscent of "Clybourne Park," where the neighborhood is its own character. There are traces, too, of "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" as they couples began taking swipes at each other, often fueled by alcohol, personal failure, and lost dreams. Unlike the latter, though, this one manages to find some heart by the end.
Some people may be put off by the casual way D'Amour writes, with some passages have little, if any, punctuation, and stage directions not telling but asking what should be happening on stage ("Or maybe he is carrying a wine bottle?"). But these qualities strike me as almost Mamet-esque in their natural patterns of speech and the freedom which they give the director and creative team.
As a theatre director myself, this show would certainly present challenges, specifically the final scene, but as a text, D'Amour has managed to pack a lot into an otherwise "little" play. (It's only 55 pages which would likely translate to a little over an hour performed).
November 14, 2025
Absolutely loved
Read
July 22, 2025this play is brilliant and i get to work on it in the fall!!!
May 23, 2013
D'Amour can write excellent and funny dialogue as well as craft interesting, realistic characters. Therefore "Detroit" is a definitely stageable play, fun to act, entertaining and, as any good play should be, not easily adapted to film or television. However, a play written and set in Great Recession America, with the title "Detroit" should deal much more extensively with the problems of that place and time- it is telling that in the introductory material D'Amour states that the play doesn't even need to be set in Detroit. D'Amour doesn't do much to confront economic or racial issues head-on, and doesn't seem to be interested in educating her audience. What we are given instead is a perfectly entertaining but forgettable piece about two couples in the suburbs, about secrets, and about addiction.
What I hoped for when I first head about this play was something more like Angels in America, something invested in portraying the complexities of being American in our time, and interested in challenging received ideas about where our nation has been, is going, and should be going. And I don't think we should accept anything less from our contemporary playwrights. Lisa D'Amour, do more than portray some fucked-up suburban homes. Actually show me Detroit.
What I hoped for when I first head about this play was something more like Angels in America, something invested in portraying the complexities of being American in our time, and interested in challenging received ideas about where our nation has been, is going, and should be going. And I don't think we should accept anything less from our contemporary playwrights. Lisa D'Amour, do more than portray some fucked-up suburban homes. Actually show me Detroit.
June 13, 2013
I honestly don't get how this play was nomited for Pulitzer prize. Or any prize really. I didn't care for it, maybe I didn't get it. To me it just read as a play about four unpleasant and uninteresting human beings hanging out together and nothing really happens. The ending was the best part and the older gentleman was the best character. Suppose this was a commentary on the concept of neighbors and neighborhoods, which to me only reinforced my firm belief that good fences make good neighbors and the fact that majority of human kind is deeply disappointing underneath or in depth.
November 13, 2012
Honestly, not a fan. There's some interesting stuff in here. But the characters seem a tad bit superficial, and Ms. D'Amour's habit of using questions in her stage directions got very grating. There are large monologues for both women, though they may not work out of context. An interesting read, but nothing I need to return to unless I pull a monologue from it.
August 12, 2014
There were entertaining moments, but it was
Something that was not so though-provoking or really focused on a lot of the issues that have occurred with the American economy. This felt more like white trash pulling a fast one on a couple that already has issues.
Something that was not so though-provoking or really focused on a lot of the issues that have occurred with the American economy. This felt more like white trash pulling a fast one on a couple that already has issues.
August 5, 2023
This play is certainly well-written, but I believe it paints those recovering from addiction in a bad light.
Characters are allowed to be flawed, but when the moralizer of the play (in this case an older benefactor who is introduced in the last scene of the play) clearly outs these “flawed” characters as trespassers, liars, and criminals, it reads as the playwright denouncing the characters who are recovering addicts as fundamentally bad people. The play is not interested in painting a nuanced view of addiction. In the world of the play, Kenny and Sharon are bad people who did and continue to do bad things, no matter their intentions. This is a problematic message, and it makes me wonder who the intended audience for this piece is.
The fragility of the stereotypical American experience is an interesting theme in the play, but I do not believe that it needed to be explored at the expense of those who are perhaps outside of the norm. Both stories could have been told sympathetically, not just Ben and Mary’s (which, even then, is not fully explored — Ben’s journey with unemployment and Mary’s alcoholism being footnotes in the play).
This play shines through it’s competent writing and the relationships between its characters. I would probably enjoy this play if it were lead with great performances; however, by just reading the piece, I am left wanting more from the script.
Characters are allowed to be flawed, but when the moralizer of the play (in this case an older benefactor who is introduced in the last scene of the play) clearly outs these “flawed” characters as trespassers, liars, and criminals, it reads as the playwright denouncing the characters who are recovering addicts as fundamentally bad people. The play is not interested in painting a nuanced view of addiction. In the world of the play, Kenny and Sharon are bad people who did and continue to do bad things, no matter their intentions. This is a problematic message, and it makes me wonder who the intended audience for this piece is.
The fragility of the stereotypical American experience is an interesting theme in the play, but I do not believe that it needed to be explored at the expense of those who are perhaps outside of the norm. Both stories could have been told sympathetically, not just Ben and Mary’s (which, even then, is not fully explored — Ben’s journey with unemployment and Mary’s alcoholism being footnotes in the play).
This play shines through it’s competent writing and the relationships between its characters. I would probably enjoy this play if it were lead with great performances; however, by just reading the piece, I am left wanting more from the script.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
February 22, 2021
I loved it, and have to wonder if some of the negative reviews come from people who didn't live in a time when you knew your neighbors in the "borrow a cup of sugar" way that the characters discuss. There's a lot in this play about the underlying illnesses of a society built without honest connections.
"Detroit" was so incredibly vivid it brought me back to specific moments of my childhood. There was one memory in particular of a house in our neighborhood that burned down, and was rebuilt to be about four times its size. The general response to the much larger house that stood where the tiny house used to be was one of disapproval, because who did those people think they were to put that house in this neighborhood? This sentiment was echoed in the monologue at the end, when he mentioned how no one wants to borrow a cup of sugar from that house (indicating an ostentatious house that didn't belong). The dismantling of the American dream seems to stem directly from the individualism of the American dream. We can't both want to focus on ourselves and our own ambitions AND want a better community. We can't want a neighborhood where everyone feels that they are equals and welcomed and accepted AND one person can have the giant house they've always wanted.
"Detroit" was so incredibly vivid it brought me back to specific moments of my childhood. There was one memory in particular of a house in our neighborhood that burned down, and was rebuilt to be about four times its size. The general response to the much larger house that stood where the tiny house used to be was one of disapproval, because who did those people think they were to put that house in this neighborhood? This sentiment was echoed in the monologue at the end, when he mentioned how no one wants to borrow a cup of sugar from that house (indicating an ostentatious house that didn't belong). The dismantling of the American dream seems to stem directly from the individualism of the American dream. We can't both want to focus on ourselves and our own ambitions AND want a better community. We can't want a neighborhood where everyone feels that they are equals and welcomed and accepted AND one person can have the giant house they've always wanted.
May 14, 2021
So....I liked this play...the characters were multidimensional and there are some great monologues in it...but it didn't really seem to go anywhere. What is the major plot question? Will Kenny and Sharon go back to doing drugs? Or somehow swindle their new best friends and next-door neighbors? Will Mary and Ben's marriage survive her alcoholism and his being laid off? Will these four have some fantastic orgiastic seance or something?
The ending was pretty anti-climatic and ultimately unsatisfying. Also, it seems like Lisa D'Amour wanted to write a play that would be challenging to stage. With the amount of furniture and set pieces that either break, get thrown around, or burnt to the ground (every character gets injured in this play), I couldn't help but think about the safety of the actors! Let's just hope whoever produces this play hires a good Stage Manager and Technical Director.
I wish there'd been some more twists and turns in the plot line - but I must say, this is a great play for monologues and scene work for actors. And I'd see a production - maybe it's different on its feet than reading it off a page.
The ending was pretty anti-climatic and ultimately unsatisfying. Also, it seems like Lisa D'Amour wanted to write a play that would be challenging to stage. With the amount of furniture and set pieces that either break, get thrown around, or burnt to the ground (every character gets injured in this play), I couldn't help but think about the safety of the actors! Let's just hope whoever produces this play hires a good Stage Manager and Technical Director.
I wish there'd been some more twists and turns in the plot line - but I must say, this is a great play for monologues and scene work for actors. And I'd see a production - maybe it's different on its feet than reading it off a page.
Read
August 4, 2024i kinda like plays where nothing happens, where in/through that nothing you can more clearly hear hearts and spirits quietly breaking. not sure about pulitzer finalist (d’amour could have dug into some societal themes deeper HOWEVER maybe numbness/apathy is part of the dampening effect of being in a suburban snow globe the audience can’t leave).
here are elements i do want to remember cuz they felt good:
- Capital-A Atmosphere: vivid views of suburbia. browning lawns. a backyard cement patio with weird furniture. the buzz and hum of AC units and automatic garage doors. hazy nostalgic restlessness. would love the challenge of set designing this
- men can be noble failures and their women can’t be angry, but it is gauche and infantile when a woman loses her grip
- honesty pin-holing through lies like little light beams
- starting fires
- the need for money can be a slowly creeping antagonist shadowed over an whole story, sounding like a barely audible whine that swells and falls in volume
here are elements i do want to remember cuz they felt good:
- Capital-A Atmosphere: vivid views of suburbia. browning lawns. a backyard cement patio with weird furniture. the buzz and hum of AC units and automatic garage doors. hazy nostalgic restlessness. would love the challenge of set designing this
- men can be noble failures and their women can’t be angry, but it is gauche and infantile when a woman loses her grip
- honesty pin-holing through lies like little light beams
- starting fires
- the need for money can be a slowly creeping antagonist shadowed over an whole story, sounding like a barely audible whine that swells and falls in volume
January 13, 2019
I have an allergy to plays featuring dysfunctional people for the sake of the characters seeming “complex,” but Detroit managed to inject enough plot and depth to make this play stronger than not.
A typical suburban couple finds their lives turned upside down when another couple, both recovering drug addicts, move in to the empty house next door.
The play does a lot of extraneous stuff that felt like filler, and the closing dialogue veered toward obnoxious and out-of-touch modernism, but Detroit is overall an engaging character piece. It has echoes of Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf, only here both couples are equally strong players. The play swerves a few times, making it seem like the story is going in one direction before it completely switches tracks. The play tackles drug use and abuse in a decidedly non-glamorous manner, and Ms. D’Amour does a good job of building towards a theme without showing her hand too early. Recommended.
A typical suburban couple finds their lives turned upside down when another couple, both recovering drug addicts, move in to the empty house next door.
The play does a lot of extraneous stuff that felt like filler, and the closing dialogue veered toward obnoxious and out-of-touch modernism, but Detroit is overall an engaging character piece. It has echoes of Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf, only here both couples are equally strong players. The play swerves a few times, making it seem like the story is going in one direction before it completely switches tracks. The play tackles drug use and abuse in a decidedly non-glamorous manner, and Ms. D’Amour does a good job of building towards a theme without showing her hand too early. Recommended.
July 11, 2019
I had a similar feeling about this play that I've been having with some of the plays that are winning Pulitzers and Tonys in the past 10 years. They seem to all be focusing on "first world problems" or white people no longer being in charge. Or...examining white people's failings. As a white person who comes from a economically disenfranchised culture, I get annoyed with these plays, and I'll be honest that its because I have a chip on my shoulder about people who piss away the advantages they were given. I know this is my own bias and not the play's fault. The play obviously did its job because it got under my skin, but I don't want to tell those stories as a theater artist, thus, I guess, I didn't like it. I will admit that Sharon has some really good monologues, and the scene work for the entire piece is a wonderful challenge for all the actors involved.
November 14, 2023
I don’t know how to phrase this, but…
The play ends with Sharon and Kenny relapse partially because of Ben and Mary, but the ending follows Ben and Mary is… weird. The ending leaves me with two possible conclusions.
1. Mary and Ben are worse for having met Sharon and Kenny. This rubs me the wrong way because it seems reductive, blaming addicts and increasing stigma. The moral is not to trust your neighbors.
2. Mary and Ben’s lives were touched by Sharon and Kenny. This seems to be what the author was going for, but that somehow rubs me even worse. It’s like the manic pixie dream girl trope: Kenny and Sharon and destroyed so this middle class couple can fix their marriage.
I like the twist that they broke into the house, but it seems the play stops just short of reaching its potential. And it’s good, don’t get me wrong. Maybe it would be better with 9 or 10 scenes instead of 8.
The play ends with Sharon and Kenny relapse partially because of Ben and Mary, but the ending follows Ben and Mary is… weird. The ending leaves me with two possible conclusions.
1. Mary and Ben are worse for having met Sharon and Kenny. This rubs me the wrong way because it seems reductive, blaming addicts and increasing stigma. The moral is not to trust your neighbors.
2. Mary and Ben’s lives were touched by Sharon and Kenny. This seems to be what the author was going for, but that somehow rubs me even worse. It’s like the manic pixie dream girl trope: Kenny and Sharon and destroyed so this middle class couple can fix their marriage.
I like the twist that they broke into the house, but it seems the play stops just short of reaching its potential. And it’s good, don’t get me wrong. Maybe it would be better with 9 or 10 scenes instead of 8.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
November 13, 2020
Hmm much to think about. I was entertained! Pretty crazy at the end there! I think it will ill named, not really central to Detroit (even mentions that it doesn't need to be set in Detroit) and I don't really care about the white middle class! Ben and Mary's relationship was what the play was about, but I didn't really care about them at the end of it all. Interesting exploration of addiction and poverty, but when that addiction and poverty is just there to help out the white middle class couple.... that's kinda rude ya know.
December 6, 2017
I love the reversal she uses in the character, however, I was not a fan of this work. It seems to be a fun show to work on, and I am happy we are producing this for my theatre. The stasis the characters are an interesting subject to talk about. I don't want to give too much a way, but I do have trust issues because of this play. The dialogue is fun, but I guess the reason I was not a fan of this play is because I wanted something to happen. And I did not get that something.
January 15, 2020
I really enjoyed this play. It was very raw, contemporary and relevant. It’s a very smartly written satire, but I think the course language and humour may throw people off. Some people will either get it immediately and recognize these characters or not so much.
There’s a lot of depth. I was fortunate to work on this last year, and it is one of my favourite shows I’ve gotten the chance to do.
Also, loving that it’s a woman playwright.
There’s a lot of depth. I was fortunate to work on this last year, and it is one of my favourite shows I’ve gotten the chance to do.
Also, loving that it’s a woman playwright.
October 28, 2021
A very interesting play. Simmering, then explosive. I think all four of the main characters have a personal fight with every other character at some point: making a scene in every scene, even when the biggest point of contention is attempting to maintain a vein of civility in the presence of neighbors. I did not feel massively moved by this play, but would have enjoyed seeing it if I had had the chance to do so.
February 27, 2019
D'Amour's Detroit has plenty of plot twists and turns to keep readers/audiences holding their breath from scene to scene. I was not drawn as deeply into this work as I'd hoped, though there is plenty to enjoy on the surface. I wanted more from the characters and dialogue, and less from the stage and background notes.
January 10, 2020
There are so many layers in what may seem to be a simple set up. You think it's only a little weird and then the cover of the book makes sense. This play may only be set in two backyards, but D'Amour makes your the unseen parts of this place painted, without even trying. I would love to see a production of this. I'll be picking this one up again in no time.
October 17, 2023
I was randomly reminded today that this play exists and needed to write a review to combat all the 1 & 2 star reviews I was seeing. Detroit is an excellent sociological exploration of suburbia. So so funny and timely. Specific yet universal. **Absolutely** deserving of it’s Pulitzer nom. That’s it. That’s all I have to say.
April 3, 2018
Raw. Really raw. Great perspective in the final scene. Is this what the American Dream has devolved to?
I don’t know how they do this onstage with the specific special effects needed for the final two scenes.
I don’t know how they do this onstage with the specific special effects needed for the final two scenes.
January 1, 2020
Easily forgettable and appears to be rarely produced now in regional theater which shows the longevity of the piece.
I did not become invested in any of the characters so there was no shock at their trials and tribulations.
I did not become invested in any of the characters so there was no shock at their trials and tribulations.
January 28, 2023
Read this for my playwriting class and liked it-she wrote compelling dialogue and made me work to piece together what was strange about certain characters rather than explicitly spelling it out which according to my class is a hallmark of a good play! Would like to see it performed at some point.
May 25, 2017
Insightful, honest, surprising, with a fun whiff of danger to boot.
July 5, 2018
No more bourgeois dinner party plays.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 73 reviews