Executive Overview
In The Ford/Hill Project, creators Lee Sunday Evans and Elizabeth Marvel construct a rigorous theatrical investigation into the institutional mechanics of American power. Staged at BAM Fisher in Brooklyn, the production collapses twenty-seven years of political history into a tight, sixty-five-minute documentary performance. By splicing, editing, and superimposing the verbatim transcripts of two watershed Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearings—those of Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas in 1991 and Brett Kavanaugh in 2018—the production exposes the cyclical, immutable nature of judicial selection and patriarchal defense mechanisms within the United States government.
Directed by Evans and co-created by Marvel, who also performs alongside Gabby Beans, Josh Hamilton, and Teagle F. Bougere, the play strips away the gilded, bureaucratic architecture of Capitol Hill. What remains is a stark, minimalist environment where history operates as soft mortar: moldable, reconstructive, and ultimately hardening into permanent power structures. By utilizing an intricate real-time earpiece feed to deliver unedited testimony—inclusive of stammers, pauses, and emotional ruptures—The Ford/Hill Project moves beyond simple dramatization. It establishes a venue of forensic review, interrogating how the political establishment repeatedly metabolizes and dismisses allegations of sexual misconduct brought by women against men poised for lifetime appointments on the nation’s highest court.
Detailed Chronology: Twenty-Seven Years of Parallel Trajectories
[1991] Senate Confirmation: Clarence Thomas
└── Allegations brought by Prof. Anita Hill (EEOC)
└── Outcome: Confirmed to SCOTUS
[2018] Senate Confirmation: Brett Kavanaugh
└── Allegations brought by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford
└── Outcome: Confirmed to SCOTUS
[Present] "The Ford/Hill Project" at BAM Fisher
└── Slices & merges 1991 & 2018 verbatim transcripts
└── 65-minute live performance collapsing historical timeOctober 1991: The Interrogation of Anita Hill
In October 1991, Anita Hill, a young law professor from Oklahoma, was called before an all-male, white Senate Judiciary Committee chaired by then-Senator Joe Biden. Hill was questioned on her testimony regarding severe sexual harassment experienced during her tenure working under Clarence Thomas at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in the early 1980s. Her account detailed repeated, unsolicited sexual advances, graphic references to pornography, and inappropriate comments within the workplace.
Read Also
The public proceedings quickly degenerated into a spectacle of political vilification. Republican senators attempted to paint Hill as a fabulist, an unstable partisan operative, or a scorned subordinate. In response, Thomas delivered a rigid, indignantly calculated counterattack, framing the committee’s inquiries not as an investigation into personal misconduct, but as a "high-tech lynching for arrogant Blacks who wish to think for themselves." The committee ultimately voted to confirm Thomas to the Supreme Court, solidifying a conservative seat for decades.
September 2018: The Interrogation of Christine Blasey Ford
Twenty-seven years later, in September 2018, the Senate Judiciary Committee convened under strikingly similar circumstances. Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, a professor of psychology, appeared to present testimony regarding an assault that occurred in the early 1980s. Ford alleged that a drunken, seventeen-year-old Brett Kavanaugh had forced her onto a bed in a locked room at a suburban Maryland party, pinned her down, and covered her mouth to stifle her cries, causing her to fear for her life.
Ford’s testimony—delivered with methodical scientific precision—was countered by Kavanaugh’s explosive defense. Marked by red-faced indignity, tears, and belligerent interruptions directed at Senate committee members, Kavanaugh’s testimony defended the drinking culture of his youth and decried the hearings as a calculated political hit. Despite the public outcry and Ford’s composure, the Senate confirmed Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court by a narrow margin.
The Theatrical Synthesis: Collapsing Time on Stage
The Ford/Hill Project merges these two historical points into a single, continuous narrative space. Creators Evans and Marvel treat the transcripts not as separate historical events, but as a single recurring script executed by the American political apparatus. The production collapses the twenty-seven-year gap, revealing that despite shifts in public discourse and the advent of national movements, the institutional posture toward women accusing powerful men remains structurally unchanged.
Supporting Context & Metrics: Mechanics of a Verbatim Reenactment
| Production Dimension | Details & Technical Specifications |
|---|---|
| Playwrights / Creators | Lee Sunday Evans (Director) & Elizabeth Marvel (Co-Creator/Cast) |
| Venue | BAM Fisher (Brooklyn Academy of Music) |
| Run Time | 65 Minutes (No Intermission) |
| Staging Design | Minimalist: 9 chairs arranged in a faint semicircle |
| Delivery Method | Earbud-fed audio feeds delivering verbatim transcriptions in real time |
| Cast & Core Roles | • Elizabeth Marvel: Dr. Christine Blasey Ford • Gabby Beans: Prof. Anita Hill • Josh Hamilton: Brett Kavanaugh • Teagle F. Bougere: Clarence Thomas (All actors toggle into various Senatorial roles) |
The Earpiece Technique and Gravitational Choreography
The technical execution of The Ford/Hill Project relies on audio feed technology. Offstage, audio feeds from the original broadcast recordings are transmitted directly into earpieces worn by the four cast members. The dangling wires connected to their earbuds give the actors an intentionally marionette-like quality, symbolizing their status as conduits for historic, systemic forces.
By requiring the actors to deliver the verbatim audio as it plays in their ears, the performance preserves the natural vocal artifacts of the original proceedings:
- Mid-sentence stammers, pauses, and throat-clearings omitted from official written transcripts.
- The stark contrast in tone between the accusers’ measured cadences and the nominees’ explosive outbursts.
- The underlying cadence of political posture and institutional exhaustion.
Onstage, the four actors move around the nine empty chairs in a circular, gravitational choreography. They swap roles fluidly, stepping out of their primary identities as Ford, Hill, Kavanaugh, or Thomas to embody the various senators questioning them. This constant shifting emphasizes that the individual figures are caught within an automated, self-sustaining machine.
[ Senate Committee Arc (9 Chairs) ]
(Beans / Hill) (Marvel / Ford)
/
/
[ Gravitational Choreography ]
/
/
(Bougere / Thomas) (Hamilton / Kavanaugh)The Intersectional Divide: Analyzing Race, Gender, and Public Perception
A central critique embedded within the production is the dynamic between the two female witnesses, highlighting how race and class shaped public and political reactions to their testimony.
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
| POLITICAL & MEDIA RECEPTION |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
| |
| Anita Hill (1991) Christine B. Ford (2018)|
| ----------------- ------------------------|
| • Depicted as "fabulist" / "liar" • Framed as "pleasing" |
| • Subjected to racial tropes • Sympathized via class |
| • Erased via "de-racing" dynamics • Protected by status |
| |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+In evaluating these dynamics, literary and legal scholars have noted distinct disparities in how the two women were perceived:
- The Treatment of Anita Hill: As detailed in Toni Morrison’s essay collection Race-ing Justice, En-gendering Power, Hill was subjected to a dual erasure—or "de-racing"—within the national imagination. Scholars such as Kimberlé Crenshaw and Nell Irvin Painter observed that Hill, a professional Black woman of Christian faith, could not easily be categorized within existing stereotypical frameworks available to the Senate committee. Consequently, she was demonized by opponents who used extreme metaphors, including Senator Orrin Hatch holding up a copy of The Exorcist to accuse her of fabricating details from literature.
- The Treatment of Christine Blasey Ford: By contrast, Ford—a white woman representing an affluent demographic—was described by political figures like Senator Hatch as "attractive" and a "pleasing" witness. While her testimony was ultimately set aside in favor of confirmation, the tone adopted toward her reflected a higher degree of societal deference, underlining the intersectional fault lines that govern public empathy.
Official Statements and Documentary Evidence
Excerpts from Verbatim Testimonies
The core of The Ford/Hill Project relies on direct archival testimony. The contrast in rhetoric between the accusers and the nominees highlights the divergent strategies used during the hearings:
Dr. Christine Blasey Ford (2018):
"Indelible in the hippocampus is the laughter. The uproarious laughter between the two of them, and their having fun at my expense."Justice Clarence Thomas (1991):
"This is a circus. It’s a national disgrace. And from my standpoint, as a Black American, it is a high-tech lynching for arrogant Blacks who wish to think for themselves, upper-class Blacks who want to contend for a different program, rather than submitting to the shirt-sleeve mentality of an old order."Justice Brett Kavanaugh (2018):
"This whole two-week effort has been a calculated and coordinated political hit, fueled with pent-up rage by left-wing opposition groups… This is a circus."
Congressional Continuity
The production underscores institutional continuity through recurring vocal cues. Archival audio cuts across human performances, featuring long-serving lawmakers—such as Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont—speaking at both the 1991 and 2018 hearings. This audio bridge illustrates how power remained concentrated within the same institutional framework across three decades.
Classical Classical Framings
The theoretical foundation of the production is anchored by its theatrical epigraph, taken from Sophocles’ tragedy Antigone. The quote frames the Senate proceedings around classic themes of hubris and tyrannical authority:
Tiresias to Creon (Antigone):
"All men make mistakes, but a good man yields when he knows his course is wrong, and repairs the evil. The only crime is pride."
Future Outlook: Activist Theatre and Judicial Realities
The Ford/Hill Project arrives during a period marked by increasing polarization and shifting public trust in democratic institutions. By presenting the confirmation hearings as a continuous loop of institutional self-preservation, the play poses fundamental questions regarding the future of political advocacy and accountability.
HISTORICAL RECORD THEATRICAL INTERPRETATION
[ 1991: Thomas Hearing ] / [ Earbud Delivery ]
===> [ BAM ] => [ Verbatim Transcript ]
[ 2018: Kavanaugh Hearing ] / [ Modern Reenactment ]
|
v
[ Institutional Legacy ]
• Lifetime Appointments
• Jurisprudential ShiftsThe Jurisprudential Legacy
The physical resolution of the production reflects the modern legal landscape. Near the end of the performance, actors Bougere and Hamilton don black judicial robes and take their seats on stage while figures representing Hill and Ford look on.
This visual staging connects the historic hearings directly to contemporary Supreme Court decisions:
- Lifetime Tenure: Both Thomas and Kavanaugh secured lifetime appointments on the Supreme Court, solidifying a conservative majority.
- Jurisprudential Reversals: The current bench has issued monumental rulings altering constitutional protections, including the overturning of long-standing precedents regarding reproductive rights, administrative authority, and federal regulatory scope.
- Institutional Accountability: The play highlights the absence of formal recourse or internal appeal mechanisms once a judicial confirmation is finalized by the Senate.
The Role of Fact-Based Theatre
As an entry in documentary and activist theatre, The Ford/Hill Project illustrates how live performance can serve as a forensic tool for civic memory. By stripping away political posturing and placing two distinct eras on a single stage, the production creates a space for audiences to analyze the mechanisms of power, trauma, and institutional continuity in modern American politics.
Comments
Facebook App ID not configured. Please add it in the Customizer.