Men on Boats

by Jaclyn Backhaus

Ten explorers. Four boats. One Grand Canyon. MEN ON BOATS is the true(ish) history of an 1869 expedition, when a one-armed captain and a crew of insane yet loyal volunteers set out to chart the course of the Colorado River.

Genres: Plays, Read For School, Drama, Historical Fiction, School, Theatre

89 pages, Paperback

Published January 1, 2017

Reviews

[Aaron Thomas · Rating 4 out of 5]

I wasn't sold on this at the end of act one. The gimmick – that all of the men who believe themselves to be white who made this run down the Colorado river are played by women – seems to exist for laughs for the most part... that is until the play becomes a play about white masculinity, compulsory able-bodiedness, individualism, USAmerican scientific knowledge production, and colonialism. The play is about all of these things, and the gender difference of the actors puts these aspects of the men's trip into intriguing relief.

[Doug · Rating 1 out of 5]

Based on the journals of a real-life boating expedition exploring the Grand Canyon in 1869, the 'gimmick' (and that is really ALL it is) of the play is that all the male characters are played by women and 'non-gender conforming' actors. Although reviews of productions of the play have been respectable, on the PAGE, it is just repetitious and rather boring; had I not bought the script, I would have abandoned reading it after a few pages. It is page after page of, literally, characters screaming 'Look out for those rocks!'. The leader of the expedition is one-armed, but the other 9 or 10 have little to differentiate them, so that one really doesn't care for any of them - or their fate.

Here's a snippet from the original production which exemplifies these critiques: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0EtmM...

[val · Rating 2 out of 5]

the men were on boats i guess

[Katie]

not good

[Ethan Rosario · Rating 3 out of 5]

Whimsical, good humor, interesting real-world implications and surprisingly bittersweet ambiguous ending. Not my favorite of Backhaus' plays but still solid

[liz · Rating 3 out of 5]

cannot wait to see this in person. so curious how the set design works for this one. in love with the idea of having everybody BUT cis-het white men play literal explorers from the 1800s. will definitely be back to review after our production

[Ruth · Rating 2 out of 5]

This is a good play for colleges/young people (my college produced it this spring), and from a movement perspective and design perspective I think there are some fun moments to be had. Narratively not very compelling and not incredibly funny, but I think the right production could make it entertaining.

I remember listening to a podcast about this show when it premiered at Playwrights Horizon and listening back its so bizarre to hear 2016 reactions to the show. The casting choice now feels dated to me, very empowered girlboss while also wanting to appear super self aware that the narrative in the first place is colonialist bs without digging into that at all besides a few quips and a five minute satire scene lol. The script appears to be a bit confused on what it wants to be and ends up pretty shallow overall.

I'd love to see a production of this show that plays around more with gender presentation/period v non period gender presentations and that casts trans people in this ensemble (which I know the og and other productions have done, the one I worked on did not) just to have more FUN with it. Approaching this show as an empowering feminist achievement is asking for disappointment, it should be approached as a fun romp and adventure story, a chance for interesting roles to be inhabited by non-cis-men. Also the fact that theres no gay shit in this play sucks like you really think a bunch of guys went on this exhausting voyage for weeks and nothing kinda gay happened? Please.

[Denise · Rating 2 out of 5]

I do not understand the need or point of casting all women and making certain the native characters are actually played by Native Americans, especially when the native characters are made more marginalized and shown almost absurdly. There is no element of that casting that supports any statement being made by such a cast, i.e. Like Hamilton by Lin-Manuel Miranda, et. al. using today’s minorities as cast emphasizes that we’re all immigrants including the founding fathers and we’re all a part of making the US, not just whites. This makes me think of the 60s where they did plays nude “just because.” If it adds nothing to the message, it is only a distraction and misplaced revolution. Maybe it’s because I went to “Girls in Science” programs in high school, not because I needed to be encouraged to go into science, but to see the technology I already knew I’d work with; I don’t need women in pants on adventures for representation.
Otherwise, a good story but nothing really profound or deep in it either. At what point do we stay on an adventure and at what point do we quit is the only cerebral theme here. It would be interesting to see how the rapids are staged....

[Addie · Rating 4 out of 5]

The casting note somewhat confused me, but I’m giving it four stars anyway. The unashamed modern language and comedy makes the story of these men feel so much more real, human, and relatable to our contemporary men and women, as well as unabashedly establishing a fun comedy atmosphere rather than an austere drama. The end is interesting: my personal take is that Backhaus is using the current narrative framework of “white people are rewriting minority history” and throughout the play, seems to be turning that on its head by having minorities portray the heroic white men; but at the end of the play, Mr. Asa plays the prophet, and exposes an (I dare say) an even more consequential truth: history is always being rewritten to only retain the flashiest stuff, and not the real human stories—the way I read it, the casting note is a symbol for the fact that even Powell’s crew’s contributions are not safe from the fickle press or the unsympathetic sands of time. Ultimately, it prompted me to further exploration and research of people inexplicably felt closer to by reading his play.

[Leanne Baker · Rating 3 out of 5]

Fun and comedic, definitely has a good concept that will come alive when read aloud with others or performed onstage. However, the play for me is written for laughs which at points can make it fall flat. If you like plays that have more of a deep meaning behind them this might not be the play for you.

[Jazz Sewsanker · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was a fun read but only because of the people I read it with. It was clear from the off set that some parts were written for laughs and did not serve the story. Maybe the humour is not to my taste. Over all a decent read but much more fun to act in. ✨eMmA DEaN iS cAugHT BEtweEN rOCks✨

[Liz · Rating 2 out of 5]

A cycle of the same three scenes. Nothing happened in this play. Terra Nova but on the river and not as cool.

[Anne · Rating 2 out of 5]

I'm so confused what was that. The only reason it gets higher than 1 star is because of the author's note not to cast male actors as any of the men on the boats but that's not even explained in the story itself and I'm just kind of lost. Is that the point to make me feel lost

[Daniel · Rating 3 out of 5]

Fun.

[Not Mike · Rating 3 out of 5]

Play.

[Bearhands · Rating 1 out of 5]

I thought this play missed the chance to reach a triumphant point of view about "men's" exploration. The playwright appears to almost reach that moment but pulls back. Was not a big fan of the play.

[Leo · Rating 4 out of 5]

We're doing this for my show this year and it was well written and the story definitely explores the idea of afab people taking on male roles.

[Ronnie Avansino · Rating 4 out of 5]

Each time I read a play I wish I was seeing it on stage. This was the same.

[cecil · Rating 5 out of 5]

fun!

[Lydia Kytle]

Good for scenes

[Whitney Wilson · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is the play we're doing for theater. It's a really funny adventure comedy, it's got lots of funny scence and great characters!

[Emma Greer · Rating 5 out of 5]

scratches the eternal itch of wanting to experience the inherent profoundness of male emotion as a female performer, but more importantly it’s just really fun

[Tyler · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really liked this! Very nice balance of hope and despair. I'm glad she included the irony about "discovering" land.

[Janine · Rating 4 out of 5]

Funny, bouncy, unexpected moments of beauty in this satirical play.

[charlie · Rating 5 out of 5]

This play is hilarious, bold, and conscious of its deeply flawed characters without slipping into maliciousness. I found myself grinning widely the entire time I was reading, and I occasionally laughed out loud. Men on Boats is absolutely a historical play for the present day and I desperately would love to stage it one day.

[Asa Martha · Rating 2 out of 5]

I think this play is funny, although for me it lacks a sense of depth beneath the well-written humour. I like plays that leave me trying to work out what is going on beneath the surface, but unfortunately with this it didn’t seem like there was much there.

[jo · Rating 4 out of 5]

"ALL: Oars up!
Oars out!
Annnnnnnd
WE TRULY BEGIN!"

I'm stage managing this! I am so excited! There is so much comedic potential! I want to kiss Bradley on the mouth!

[Scott]

Excellent play. Physical. Honoring the explorers while also giving gender politics a send up.

[Cori · Rating 3 out of 5]

Funny stuff.

[Nicole · Rating 5 out of 5]

Originally saw the production at The Wild Project years ago and have been thinking about it ever since; I bought the book a few weeks ago and it is as good as I remember with moments of most heartbreaking beauty. A thrilling adventure play with the perfect twist.