Monday, October 12, 2026

‘Alba’ at Palm Beach Dramaworks: A Cuban Family Under Pressure

 

 


What a pleasure to see Alejandro Rodriguez’s Alba go from Dramaworks’ Perlberg Festival of New Plays to a fully staged production. It is a very personal and affecting drama, although it still feels like a work in progress. That, however, is how new plays develop, and being part of the process can be rewarding for playwrights and audiences alike.

 

Alba is set in unincorporated Miami in 2001 and was inspired by Federico García Lorca’s 1936 masterpiece, The House of Bernarda Alba. While the original features an all-female ensemble centered around five daughters, Rodriguez’s adaptation reduces the family to three sisters. He also makes a significant departure by adding a grandson, “the Poet,” who narrates the play, uncovers buried family secrets, and tries to see the women as more than their ostensible stereotypes, revealing them as layered, fully realized individuals.

 

The playwright wanted to take another look at Lorca. He has always loved Lorca’s plays but found their productions “all mood, very heavy and dense.” Rodriguez brings the story back home, from Spain to South Florida by way of Cuba.

 

Drawing on Lorca’s dramatic structure while establishing his own voice, Rodriguez infuses the adaptation with a visceral quality informed by personal experience and insight into the Cuban immigrant’s plight, particularly that of women. Rodriguez’s passion resonates personally with my wife and me.  Some of the dialogue is in Spanish, but it is understandable in context and lends the play authenticity.

 

Rodriguez doesn't bring the play all the way up to the present. Instead, he sets it at the beginning of this century, a dramatically useful transitional moment when new technology was beginning to intrude on an older world but had not yet become the ubiquitous presence it is today.

 

At the play’s center is Alba, a fierce Cuban matriarch fighting to maintain control of her working-class household in the face of that technology, unpaid debts, and a suspicious suitor. Maggie Bofill makes her a compellingly controlling figure, while allowing glimpses of the humanity beneath her formidable exterior.

 

Maggie Bofill as Alba

The play opens in the aftermath of the funeral of Alba’s second husband. Alba lays down the law: her daughters will observe the proper decorum of mourning, receive guests, and remain in mourning until she releases them. Otherwise, what would the neighbors think? Alba is obsessed with protecting the family’s reputation, a recurring theme that governs much of what follows.

 

The family home is practically another character in the play. It is multigenerational, a repository of family history, and a prison as well. “It all begins with that pink house,” the Poet observes. Alba makes her position unmistakable when she tells her daughters, “This is my house!”

 

Her three daughters respond to their mother’s authority in different ways, sometimes finding common ground and sometimes driving one another apart. Their relationships with one another alternate between competition and affection.

 

Monica Quintero, Barbara Bonilla, Diana Garle, Dayana Morales, Maggie Bofill, Gianna DiGregorio

The youngest, Adela, is the rebel, flaunting the traditions that bind her family. She is the modern woman, played by Diana Garle with defiant passion. Garle is the only member of the cast who has appeared at Dramaworks before; the other actors are making their PBD debuts. Adela feels trapped while her classmates travel and go to concerts. She, meanwhile, is stuck listening to “Father Morales’ homilies.”

 

The middle sister, Amelia, is the smart one, and what else, she’s in therapy. Played by Gianna DiGregorio Rivera, Amelia brings a more reflective voice to the family conflict. She articulates a central dilemma of the immigrant experience: “You think Mom chose to be here? You don't think she’d prefer to be back in Cuba with her cousins and aunts?” Is Amelia simply making excuses for her mother, or does she understand something her sisters don’t? Her perspective adds another dimension to the family struggle, even as she gets caught up in the competition among the sisters.

 

Gianna DiGregorio, Barbara Bonilla, Dayana Morales

The eldest, Angie, is 29 and played by Dayana Morales. Her deep religious convictions and fear of becoming an old maid have left her vulnerable. She is engaged to Roman, the son of a neighbor, who turns out to be interested in more than her affections. He has his eye on her eventual inheritance from her biological father, Alba’s first husband, which is a source of tension in its own right. The stage is set for a family struggle in which each daughter tries, in her own way, to resist Alba’s controlling personality.

 

Beyond the four central women, three other characters help fill in the picture.

 

Barbara Bonilla plays Yolanda, Alba’s childhood friend. Bonilla brings considerable humor to the role, including some memorable physical comedy. Yolanda also serves as a voice of reason and a buffer between Alba and her daughters, though she too remains under Alba’s spell. Recalling Alba as a young woman, she says affectionately, “Alba was one of the best salseras in all of La Habana.”

 

Yolanda offers a glimpse of a different Alba, allowing us to see the matriarch as something more than the tyrant she has become. The play also hints that the two women shared more than friendship, although that possibility is never fully explored. Yolanda is one of the production’s most engaging characters, thanks in large part to Bonilla’s sparkling performance

 

Then there is Josefina, Alba’s mother and the girls’ grandmother, or “abuela.” Suffering from dementia, she is a link to the past and its buried secrets, a kind of truth teller who reveals what the family would rather leave unspoken. Mary Lou Simo brings considerable pathos to the role, although I found the character’s function in the larger drama less clear. Perhaps this is something to consider as the play develops further.

 

Gladys, played by Monica Quintero, is a healthcare worker from Honduras to whom Alba always seems to owe money. Although hers is a smaller role, she delivers one of the play’s bluntest lines: “We [in Honduras] did not know the type of unhappiness that I have seen in this house.” Her portrayal of a beleaguered caretaker made us keenly feel her exasperation.

 

Finally, there is the unnamed Poet, the playwright’s stand-in, who breaks the fourth wall and frames the story as a memory play. He is Adela’s son, conceived during her affair with Roman, and his presence allows the family history to be examined from a distance, even as he remains emotionally implicated in it. Matthew Ferro has the challenging task of making this personal journey believable, giving voice to Rodriguez’s perspective while also conveying the pain, regret, and tragedy of the story’s conclusion.

 

At the heart of the conflict is Adela’s love for Roman, who is engaged to her older half-sister, Angie. Along the way, however, the play sometimes falls back on familiar, even stereotypical, observations. “It’s such a cruel joke being born a woman,” Amelia observes, a sentiment that speaks to the limitations imposed on the daughters by their mother, their culture, and their circumstances.

 

Matthew Ferro as The Poet

The play also offers a glimpse of the digital world as it was emerging at the turn of the millennium. When Alba learns that naked pictures of a neighbor’s daughter have appeared online, her incredulous response is, “On the computer?” Computer pornography was hardly new even then, but the exchange seems almost quaint today, when artificial intelligence can generate images that never existed in the first place. The Poet also reveals that his grandmother had an older brother who committed suicide because he was gay, another family secret that exposes the destructive power of shame.

 

For all its familiar elements, Alba has much to offer. Its examination of family, cultural identity, repression, and the immigrant experience gives the story contemporary resonance, even as it remains rooted in an earlier time. The acting throughout is another of the production's strengths.

 

Director KJ Sanchez keeps the play moving at a good clip, maintaining the audience’s interest. As the denouement approaches, however, a couple of choices left me wondering whether the staging or the script might benefit from further consideration.

 

In a confrontation between Adela and Amelia, the middle sister threatens to expose Adela’s affair with Roman to Angie. The exchange takes place almost entirely offstage, in the laundry room at stage left, making it difficult for a substantial portion of the audience to see and, at times, hear an important confrontation. The concluding scene, too, did not have the emotional impact I had anticipated. Given the weight of what has preceded it, I had hoped for a stronger response.

 

As a fully staged production, though, Alba has much to recommend it, including some effective technical work. Brian O’Keefe’s costume design establishes the characters and the period while providing considerable variety. Alba’s deepest black mourning ensemble, militaristic and starched in the opening scene, exposes her personality before she speaks a word.

 

Robert Aguilar makes his PBD debut as lighting designer. Interestingly, the program identifies him as a specialist in working with new plays, which made me think about the particular challenges of lighting a production without a road map provided by previous stagings. Aguilar also views lighting as a narrative tool. At several crucial moments, the stage shifts abruptly from full illumination to partial darkness, reflecting the changing nature of the conflict. The effect is striking, if occasionally unexpected.

 

Roger Arnold’s sound design also makes its presence felt, with outside sounds entering at key moments, including when doors open and when shots are fired. I have deliberately avoided discussing the latter in detail to avoid spoilers.

 


Tanya Orellana, also making her PBD debut, has created a serviceable and visually attractive set. For me, however, the design did not fully convey the cultural environment or the strained economic circumstances of the family.

 

So, if you want to experience the development of a new play and immerse yourself in a cultural world that is perhaps different from your own, Alba offers an engaging opportunity, even if not every element is fully realized. There is much to learn from the world Rodriguez has created, and the production offers plenty to discuss afterward.

 

As Angie says, “We either love each other or we don’t.” That question may linger in your mind, too.

 

 

All photographs except for the stage and program by Coastal Click Photography

Wednesday, September 30, 2026

How Rich Is Too, Too Rich?

 


Nothing captures the national Zeitgeist like a political cartoon, this one by Matt Wuerker.

 

Today’s Wall Street Journal carried a report that I didn’t find shocking, but I did find profoundly sobering. According to recent Federal Reserve data analyzed by the Journal, America's top 0.1% have accumulated a staggering $14.5 trillion in new wealth just since the end of 2019. Driven by a historic stock market boom, this ultra-wealthy fraction now controls roughly 15% of the entire nation's wealth—a $28 trillion buffer separating them from even the merely affluent.

 

Reading it brought me back to a book I published nearly thirty-five years ago, How Rich Is Too Rich; Income and Wealth in America (Praeger, 1992), and a subsequent post I wrote on this blog fifteen years ago.

 

The book visualized the American economy as a "sixty-minute grand parade" where marchers’ heights represented their incomes. It noted that for the first 50 minutes, the marchers are dwarfs. Only in the final seconds do you see skyscrapers—giants whose faces you can’t see, only their feet.

 

The Wall Street Journal’s data confirms that the parade has warped into something entirely unrecognizable. The skyscraper class has pulled so far away from the rest of the procession that we have effectively broken into two distinct societies. On one side are the ultra-wealthy, flying in private fleets, purchasing sports franchises, and—as in the case of Larry Ellison—quietly buying up entire neighborhoods just to house their estate staff.  On the other side is everyone else.

 

This hyper-concentration of wealth is the structural reality behind the political promises of a new "Golden Age." But for the 99.9% of Americans walking below that top-tenth-of-a-percent threshold, it feels like a different age entirely.

 

To see how we arrived at this point, I used an AI research assistant to audit the fiscal math behind our national debt. I asked it to isolate what the balance sheet would look like if we had simply maintained the 39.6% top marginal tax rate from the Clinton administration—the last time the country ran a balanced budget—assuming it didn't impact growth. The data it surfaced from the Center for American Progress was startling: the legislative choice to dismantle that late-90s tax framework via subsequent rounds of sweeping tax cuts is responsible for roughly 57% of the total increase in the U.S. debt-to-GDP ratio over the last 25 years. If you strip away emergency crisis spending—like the funding required for the 2008 recession and the pandemic—those tax cuts are responsible for more than 90% of our structural debt expansion.

 

The math is as clear as it is devastating: our public deficit was largely manufactured to fund private windfalls at the very end of the parade.

 

So, how rich is too, too rich? We passed that boundary line long ago. The tragedy today is not just the lopsided accumulation of wealth, but the quiet, pervasive acceptance of it. The prevailing cultural message from the top has shifted from one of civic stewardship to a blunt, systemic "I got mine; now you get yours." It is the architecture of inequality that is actively fracturing the country—and it is a far cry from the America many of us grew up in.

 

Wednesday, September 9, 2026

December 7, November 22, September 11, January 6

 

 

The 1976 Bicentennial three years after the Twin Towers were built

These are my generation’s days of infamy. They were all shocking events, ones that left an indelible mark on history. In terms of immediate loss of life, September 11 and December 7 stand apart, although all were national traumas.

 

These dates are so burnished in our minds that we can remember exactly where we were when they occurred.

 

And now, astonishingly to me, it has been 25 years since the horror of September 11.

 

I have written before about that morning in these pages and this is something I wrote years ago:

On Sept. 11, 2001 Ann and I were on our boat in Norwalk, Ct., a clear somewhat breezy day with a deep blue sky. We had the TV on and, in complete disbelief, the tragedy unfolded before our eyes.

 

Although we were fifty miles away, we could see the smoke drifting south from the Twin Towers. To this day I still feel that sense of incredulity. Did this really happen here? My son, Jonathan, had been interviewed only a couple of weeks before by Cantor Fitzgerald, and offered a job to work on the 102nd floor of One WTC. They lost 658 employees on that fateful day. Jonathan decided to take another job. Is it merely coincidence and accident that governs life’s outcomes? Or is it simply Shakespeare’s more cynical line from King Lear: “As flies to wanton boys, are we to the gods. They kill us for their sport.”

 

My older son is the poet of our family and this is what he wrote on that very day. One line in particular resonates: “If Hell opened up, and swallowed my life, it could not compete with what witnessed, I.”

 

Twenty-five years later, I can still summon that morning almost physically.

 

In later years I was reading a short story by John Updike and it was with some trepidation that I realized his story, “Varieties of Religious Experience,” is about that very day. Until then I had assiduously avoided 9/11 literature, as the pain of remembrance was too great. But I relented.

 

It begins with “THERE IS NO GOD: the revelation came to Dan Kellogg in the instant that he saw the World Trade Center South Tower fall.” The protagonist was from out of town, visiting his daughter and grandchild at their apartment in Brooklyn Heights. To get through the story, written from various perspectives, including a woman on ill-fated United Airlines Flight 93, which crashed in Pennsylvania, I had to continually take deep, slow breaths just to control my anxiety.

 

Not that Updike capitalized on gruesome details. It was the constant, unreal undercurrent of the lunacy of that day. One knows where it is all going. And if this is what God is all about, anyone’s God, religion seems to become a source for justifying anything.

 

One brief paragraph from the story encapsulates its essence:

 

Dan could not quite believe the tower had vanished. How could something so vast and intricate, an elaborately engineered upright hive teeming with people, mostly young, be dissolved by its own weight so quickly, so casually? The laws of matter had functioned, was the answer. The event was small beneath the calm dome of sky. No hand of God had intervened because there was none. God had no hands, no eyes, no heart, no anything. Thus was Dan, a sixty-four-year-old Episcopalian and probate lawyer, brought late to the realization that comes to children with the death of a pet, to women with the loss of a child, to millions caught in the implacable course of war and plague. His revelation of cosmic indifference thrilled him, though his own extinction was held within this new truth like one of the white rectangles weightlessly rising and spinning within the boiling column of smoke. He joined at last the run of mankind in its stoic atheism.

 

So, other than to somberly mark this date, I have struggled with whether to say anything about the moment in which we are living. I am reluctant to turn September 11 into another occasion for a political argument. But I cannot pretend that what is happening in this country does not affect how I experience this anniversary.

 

Passing the Brooklyn Bridge and the Twin Towers on our boat, 1994

And this is where I become angry.

 

We are living through what feels to me like a slow-motion national trauma. Not another September 11, obviously. Nothing could be another September 11. But the same awful sensation of watching something happen that you cannot stop, of knowing that something fundamental is being lost while those with the power to prevent it seem unwilling or unable to do so. Where are our justices, judges, representatives, senators, and cabinet members who have sworn allegiance to our Constitution?

 

The presidency was never intended to be a vehicle for one man's perpetual self-dramatization, enrichment, grievance, and pursuit of personal power.

 

Yet that is increasingly how it feels.  One by one, traditions, institutions, relationships with our allies, assumptions about presidential behavior and even elements of our national culture are being pulled apart. The White House itself has become a stage for the president's carefully constructed image of omnipotence. American culture becomes spectacle. Foreign policy becomes personal theater. Even the possibility of war can be addressed with the casualness of playing a video game.

 

And while all of this is going on, the president and those around him continue to test how much power can be accumulated in the executive branch and how much the other institutions of government will tolerate. That frightens me. What frightens me even more is how quickly the extraordinary can become ordinary.

 

A president says something that would once have produced days of national outrage, and we move on to the next statement. An institution is challenged, a norm is violated, a traditional restraint disappears, and we shrug because there is another outrage waiting tomorrow.

 

Perhaps this is what a slow-motion national trauma looks like: not one building collapsing before our eyes, but the gradual realization that traditions we assumed were permanent may not be.

 

I have lived through wars, assassinations, Watergate, political upheavals and other periods when the country seemed to be coming apart. I have always believed that, however ugly American politics could become, the underlying institutions were stronger than the people temporarily occupying them.

 

I am no longer sure. I cannot look at what is happening and simply reassure myself that American democracy is too strong to fail. Democracies survive because people defend them.

 

This brings me, uncomfortably, back to UA Flight 93. Those passengers eventually understood that they were not going to be rescued by someone else. They had to act themselves. This is not a call to violence; but citizenship sometimes requires people to stop being passengers.

 

Our equivalent is not storming a cockpit. It is voting. It is speaking. It is paying attention. It is refusing to accept lies simply because they are repeated often enough, or the increasingly fantastical AI-generated images and videos of a president who seems determined to turn himself into a character in his own mythology. It is supporting institutions when they are under pressure. It is insisting that the Constitution applies to everyone, including the person sitting in the Oval Office, no matter how festooned that office may be in gold.

 

But I can put into words what I see and what I feel. That is the only power I have, in addition to voting.

 

Twenty-five years ago, Ann and I were on our boat in Norwalk CT, where we lived each summer, and watched those towers disappear from the television screen while the smoke could be seen from our boat’s bridge across the western Long Island Sound some fifty miles away. I remember the disbelief and fear and wondering what had happened to the country I thought I knew.

 

I now find myself asking a different question: What are we willing to do to make sure we do not lose it? I don't know the answer.

 

But I know I don't want to be silent.

Capturing the void: The New Yorker, 2001