Rob McClure on the Real Science Behind SPARE PARTS

Rob McClure is starring in the world premiere of Spare Parts, a new play that explores the rapidly evolving science of aging and the ethical questions that come with it. In BroadwayWorld’s interview, McClure discusses how the play’s scientific ideas are rooted in real research, written by scientist and playwright David J. Glass. He shares what surprised him most while learning about the science behind the story, explains his role as a researcher caught in the middle of complicated moral questions, and reflects on the collaborative process of developing a new play. McClure also talks about why the show’s blend of humor and real-world science will likely leave audiences debating its questions long after the curtain call. Read the full interview here!

---

This play deals with questions about the ethics of scientific progress, about aging, and identity. What do you think makes Spare Parts particularly relevant for audiences right now?

Here’s the crazy thing about this show; it is not science fiction, it is just science. It is what’s happening. The scientific progress that we are discussing—both the processes, the things that are available to us at the moment, and the rapid improvements and evolvement of that technology— are happening right now. Nothing that is discussed in the show is made up. It’s all really happening right now. And part of that is because it’s been written by a scientist. David Glass is a leading aging researcher and scientist who is writing from his own experience, and this script is sort of deliciously horrifying in that way! Where you go, “Wait, David, is this real?” and in the corner of the room he’d just keep nodding and we’d be like “Holy shit.” [Laughs]

 So, that, to me, is what sets this apart, is that it’s all real, it’s all legit. And I think the audience is going to get quite the education on where the scientific community is at the moment with that anti-aging research. It’s slowly becoming no longer a question of ‘if’, it’s becoming a question of ‘when’. And then the other question becomes not ‘can we?’ but ‘should we?’ That’s really where the play lives. That’s the large question that the play is asking. What is possible is changing, now the question becomes ‘What are we ethically allowed to do?’ or ‘should do’ or ‘should pursue’. And I think the play explores it in a beautiful psychological thriller way with a great company.

Being able to ask a playwright who actually knows the topic firsthand, that’s pretty special and interesting.

It’s crazy having him in the corner of the room and to see him turn to the props guy and be like, “For that experiment you would use a large bore catheter.” Like, ‘Oh, okay!’ It’s amazing! Having that resource in the room, dramaturgically and otherwise.

Is there anything that particularly shocked you or surprised you where you were like, “Is that real?” and he was like, “Yeah!”

 Yes! The system of parabiosis is something that is currently happening in the scientific community, and what it is doing for model organisms, the possibilities of what that procedure could do for human beings is crazy, and it’s just the fact that no one’s done it yet. And the play is going like, ‘Why? Why haven’t we done it yet? Is it because we are waiting to see what the ramifications of it physically would be? Or is it a moral question?’ 

And not just parabiosis. The audience across the course of the evening is going to learn what this technology is, and hopefully learn that it is not science fiction. It’s just science. And the more the play enlightens them as to where the scientific community is really, not in the play, but in real life, the more that the questions that are asked in the play become more visceral for the audience, because it’s legit. It’s only a matter of time.

Can you tell me about who you play in the show?

Yeah! I play a scientist named Chris Coffey, who is probably the closest representation of our playwright, David Glass. So, I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t keeping my eye on him in rehearsal, behaviorally! And he is sort of the voice of the scientific community. One of the other really large themes in the show is ‘Who pays for this type of science?’ And in a world where government funding is up in the air and unreliable, what is seen as scientific fact and what is seen as living in a time of ‘alternate facts’ and what does that mean for the scientific community, Chris Coffey is sort of caught in the center of that tornado, trying to make sense of, ‘Do I accept private donorship for scientific progress? Or is that unethical? Is it unethical to be pursuing scientific progress in the name of one person’s interest? Or one person’s funding? Or are the benefits that that single person’s funding provides then beneficial to the whole? So you should do that? But you still are operating under the regulation of this individual’s personal whims?’ It’s just scary and it’s a reflection of where we are in terms of money ruling the world. And money suddenly ruling the scientific community.

I would never think that a play about government funding, and where money should come from for scientific research could be quite so thrilling. When push comes to shove, we’re dealing with a generation of billionaires, and billionaires running the world. A small handful of people who are deciding what we’re investing in. And it’s kind of horrifying.

This is a world premiere. What has the development process been like in the rehearsal room as you and the company shape the piece?

It really is thrilling. I’ve been lucky enough to be a part of new musicals, and celebrated revivals of things, and you go, ‘Oh, it is a very different beast to be around a rehearsal table with the playwright looking you in the eyes that you can look up and say “Hey, why is it phrased that way? What is the intention?” Good rooms on world premieres become super collaborative. Our individual voices as actors bleeding into the language of each character, and shape how each character is different in speech patterns and points of view, so you feel very much a part of the creation of this character. And then it’s a thrill to know that the next step is that published play in The Drama Bookshop with your name in it for the original cast. It’s a really cool privilege when it comes to mounting world premieres.

And the thing that I love most about the theatre is the element of surprise. And that every single person sitting in Theatre Row doesn’t know what’s coming. So we have all the cards. It’s kind of the best atmosphere for doing theatre, because there’s no preconceived notion. They can have no idea what’s coming. It’s fun having all the magic tricks in our back pockets and getting to slowly reveal them to the audience for the first time.

Spare Parts is described as funny but also unsettling. We all know way too much about what’s going on in the world right now and we need small pockets of humor to get through them, because what else could you possibly do? How do you navigate the tone of the show, balancing funny moments but also a discomforting reality?

That is a phenomenal question. I think the comedy lies in confronting the absurdity of the reality of it. As you learn, ‘Wait, they’re doing what now?’ You don’t know whether to laugh or cry. The comedy of it is found in the absolute batshit craziness of the education you receive over the course of the evening, and also just how these characters respond. These characters are deeply human, and that’s what’s also cool. Spare Parts feels very much like Proof to me, and the reason why I say that is Proof is about math, but it’s actually not about math, it’s about people, and relationships, and Spare Parts is very much that way. We can say that it’s about science, we can say that it’s about development, but it’s really a story about these four human beings, and in seeing how they are fielding this science, it’s a reflection of the audience members and the humanity inside themselves.

It is ultimately about character and about human beings as much or if not more than it is about science. But tonally I think that the comedy comes from watching these very real people with feet on the ground be confronted with the extraordinary circumstance of these developments and discoveries in science, and sometimes you can’t help but laugh.

What would you say that you’re most excited for in bringing this show to the stage and in front of audiences?  

I can’t wait for the stage door conversations when people ask me what about the play is real. Because that has been my favorite thing, in even just discussing the play. Even with my friends and family, I say, “And then this happens, and then this happens,” and they go, “Wait, but is that a thing?” And I’m like, “Oh, that’s a thing!” [laughs]. I think the stage door conversations are going to be really interesting. And I also think it’s one of those plays that I’m more excited for people’s conversations in the car on the way home. It raises so many questions that invites the audiences to take them home with them.

I recently saw and loved Dead Outlaw. And I think one of my favorite things about Dead Outlaw was how many questions about morality it raised. I found my wife and I driving home, talking for days and days, because it invited introspection, it invited conversation, it didn’t try and answer all the questions that it poses. It sort of leaves you with them to ponder. This whole company has been going out for drinks after each show, and talking about the play, not because we’re working on it, but because it’s raising so many questions inside of us about where we’re at as people, and a society, and I think that is definitely going to bleed into the audiences experiences on the way home. I kind of want to sneak on the subway next to people who just saw the play and hear what they have to say.

I think that’s what art should be doing right now!

It raises some big questions. This answer should in no way scare anyone from seeing the show, but there is an element of ‘When you are ultimately confronted with your mortality, we are getting closer and closer to having the option of postponing that. And at what cost? And ultimately what are you gaining? And is it worth it? And how much time are you ultimately going to be able to buy?’ And it raises these giant questions in people that I think ultimately go, ‘Oh, how much would I pay for 20 more years? 40 more years? Double my lifespan? Is that of interest to me? And if it is, what am I willing to sacrifice, and or put other people through in the name of extending my mortality?’ You dive deep! [laugh]. The characters dive deep, and therefore I think the audience is going to dive deep.