Maya Sasaki-George ’28
Arts & Entertainment Editor
From Oct. 9-17, 2025, the Austin Arts Center was home to the wholly unique one-man show “Where We Stand,” written by Donnetta Lavinia Grays and directed by Vernice Miller. Part-play, part-performance art and part-spoken word poem, “Where We Stand” was an excellent opportunity for Hartford artist Laugh Sanchez to shine as the show’s sole performer. Sanchez, an effortlessly charismatic entertainer, captivated the audience for the show’s entire 90-minute runtime, even when aspects of the writing or story may have fallen short. The story follows a well-meaning man who has made a decision on behalf of his town due to the influence of a mysterious stranger, potentially damaging the lives of everyone around him. Staged as a town hall meeting in the Austin Arts Center’s intimate Goodwin Theater, “Where We Stand” explored the fraught nature of such concepts as community, democracy and accountability through the audience-based trial of the show’s protagonist.
The show’s props and staging, though minimal, captured the atmosphere of a community center effectively. The harsh fluorescent lights, rows of folding chairs, American and Connecticut flags and refreshments table in the corner accurately echo what one might find in any small municipal building. This was an effective way to signal the social discomfort that was to come with much of the show’s audience interaction. Instead of the roles of performer and audience being clearly delineated through lighting and physical separation, these lines became heavily blurred as Sanchez was able to move freely about the room and look audience members directly in the eye. Sanchez transformed seamlessly between characters, portraying the man on trial, a mysterious stranger and numerous townspeople with ease. Each character had a distinct voice, physicality and personality expressed through their perspective on the issue. Sanchez’s command over the audience spurred laughter, applause and moments of quiet introspection at numerous points during the performance.
While many elements of “Where We Stand” were overwhelmingly successful, aspects of the script appeared unduly difficult to understand and absorb in the fast-paced nature of the performance. There were instances in which the writing seemed almost excessively lyrical, sacrificing narrative coherence in favor of bouts of song or spoken-word poetry. It’s true that “Where We Stand” labels itself a “long-form poem” rather than a play for this reason, proudly advertising its unique medium, but the show may have been even more impactful and accessible to a wider audience had those elements been scaled back slightly, allowing for greater appreciation of the story.
“Where We Stand” concluded with an audience vote on the fate of the protagonist: punishment or forgiveness, damnation or absolution. Each member of the audience was obliged to solemnly consider the evidence presented, consult their own moral compass and vote with both their heart and their mind. Though two or three audience members voted to punish the man in the Oct. 10 performance, the vast majority agreed to let him go free. Was this truly representative of the audience members’ consciences or merely the result of social expectations to forgive? Would the vote have gone differently had it been anonymous or if the man in question was not looking directly at us? Either way, Sanchez’s guilt was replaced with a new weight of responsibility to his community as he expressed his humble gratitude and exited the theater in the show’s final moment.
[…] Theatre Review: One-Man Show “Where We Stand” Is Complex and Conceptually Exciting […]