What do you think?
Rate this book
Downstate
In downstate Illinois, four men convicted of sex crimes against minors share a group home where they live out their lives in the shadow of the offenses they committed. A man shows up to confront his childhood abuser--but does he want closure or retribution?
Bruce Norris's new play Downstate zeroes in on the limits of our compassion and what happens when society deems anyone beyond forgiveness.
Bruce Norris's new play Downstate zeroes in on the limits of our compassion and what happens when society deems anyone beyond forgiveness.
96 pages, Paperback
Published September 3, 2019
11 people are currently reading
167 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 27 of 27 reviews
November 18, 2022
"I fear that what gets left out of the current national conversation is any mention of . . . forgiveness. We'd prefer to luxuriate in our righteous hatred for each other right now, in a way that feels cruel and grotesque and tribal." Bruce Norris, in the play program.
I've read most of Norris' earlier plays and have always considered them to be both well written and eminently stage-worthy, and usually exhibiting a quirky humor. Best known for his Pulitzer-winning Clybourne Park, a riff on the classic drama A Raisin in the Sun, which tackled the whole issue of racism in America, Norris now strikes similarly incendiary territory in his latest play - and if there is any justice, his first Pulitzer will soon have a matching bookend. The play, which premiered in Chicago late last year, and recently opened at the National in London, concerns four pedophiles confined to a charity run group home for ex-offenders following their incarceration.
It ISN'T a pleasant play to read (or sit through, I imagine), but the best drama never makes one comfortable - this provides a multitude of well-defined characters, and (except in the case of a 'surprise' towards the end that is somewhat too well foreshadowed), never goes quite where one expects. Would love to take on the character of Fred, should there ever be a local production of it.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/15/th...
https://www.theatermania.com/off-broa...
I've read most of Norris' earlier plays and have always considered them to be both well written and eminently stage-worthy, and usually exhibiting a quirky humor. Best known for his Pulitzer-winning Clybourne Park, a riff on the classic drama A Raisin in the Sun, which tackled the whole issue of racism in America, Norris now strikes similarly incendiary territory in his latest play - and if there is any justice, his first Pulitzer will soon have a matching bookend. The play, which premiered in Chicago late last year, and recently opened at the National in London, concerns four pedophiles confined to a charity run group home for ex-offenders following their incarceration.
It ISN'T a pleasant play to read (or sit through, I imagine), but the best drama never makes one comfortable - this provides a multitude of well-defined characters, and (except in the case of a 'surprise' towards the end that is somewhat too well foreshadowed), never goes quite where one expects. Would love to take on the character of Fred, should there ever be a local production of it.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/15/th...
https://www.theatermania.com/off-broa...
January 26, 2020
Stunning.
November 16, 2025
It's a shame this isn't a better play; it deserves to be. Coming from Bruce Norris (Pulitzer Prize winner for 'Clybourne Park'), it's easy to anticipate a brave, fierce excavation of the hot-button topic of pedophilia. I was ready for Norris' unsentimental scalpel.
Alas, the play, by turns, reads as tentatively skilled, superficial / clichéd and overwrought. The moments when it's effective are certainly welcome, but they come with fleeting measure. (Even as is, the play's original production was met with controversy - backlash from The Right, along with threats to the theater. Most likely the furor came from those who didn't actually know the play, just its theme.)
We find ourselves in a group home currently housing four sex offenders (mixed races; two straight, two older and gay) who have served their prison time but cannot rejoin the human race due to their identities being on a registry.
The guys are regularly checked on by a probation officer (one of the better characters). Scenes such as those ring with research truth. ~ esp. little touches like the group learning that the boundaries of their capture have been inexplicably extended (forcing them to depend on an inferior food market).
But the actual drama feels unfocused / arbitrary (esp. the 'obligatory' powder keg explosion of a climax). What determines the arc of the proceedings is the opening introduction of a man who has (decades after the fact) come to the home to confront the man who took advantage of him when he was much younger. Not only is this character painfully overwritten (and almost impossible to play) but ultimately his appearance serves to make (and then make again, and again) the point that survivors can be damaged for life due to an isolated (and not particularly terrifying) experience.
Granted, the harm in pedophilia (as witness the Epstein files) should not be trivialized. It's not a social issue that can be easily punched through in a way that will placate audience members who don't really want to see pedophiles humanized through empathy. (As well, there's nothing here about the sexual agency of, say, teenagers.) Norris certainly took on a lot - but we don't see a satisfying amount of what was possible through illumination.
By far, the most memorable character is Dee (described as "pushing sixty, black, thin, languid"), a former stage performer who got himself into hot water with an underage cast member of a touring production of 'Peter Pan'. Near the end of the first act and the beginning of the second, Dee gets some of the best lines:
Alas, the play, by turns, reads as tentatively skilled, superficial / clichéd and overwrought. The moments when it's effective are certainly welcome, but they come with fleeting measure. (Even as is, the play's original production was met with controversy - backlash from The Right, along with threats to the theater. Most likely the furor came from those who didn't actually know the play, just its theme.)
We find ourselves in a group home currently housing four sex offenders (mixed races; two straight, two older and gay) who have served their prison time but cannot rejoin the human race due to their identities being on a registry.
The guys are regularly checked on by a probation officer (one of the better characters). Scenes such as those ring with research truth. ~ esp. little touches like the group learning that the boundaries of their capture have been inexplicably extended (forcing them to depend on an inferior food market).
But the actual drama feels unfocused / arbitrary (esp. the 'obligatory' powder keg explosion of a climax). What determines the arc of the proceedings is the opening introduction of a man who has (decades after the fact) come to the home to confront the man who took advantage of him when he was much younger. Not only is this character painfully overwritten (and almost impossible to play) but ultimately his appearance serves to make (and then make again, and again) the point that survivors can be damaged for life due to an isolated (and not particularly terrifying) experience.
Granted, the harm in pedophilia (as witness the Epstein files) should not be trivialized. It's not a social issue that can be easily punched through in a way that will placate audience members who don't really want to see pedophiles humanized through empathy. (As well, there's nothing here about the sexual agency of, say, teenagers.) Norris certainly took on a lot - but we don't see a satisfying amount of what was possible through illumination.
By far, the most memorable character is Dee (described as "pushing sixty, black, thin, languid"), a former stage performer who got himself into hot water with an underage cast member of a touring production of 'Peter Pan'. Near the end of the first act and the beginning of the second, Dee gets some of the best lines:
DEE: Remember Ronald Reagan?Unfortunately, Dee's character is minimally revved up, only to be relegated to the background. Had he been less of a novelty item and, instead, been placed firmly in the driver's seat, the play might have been not only more compelling but more enlightening.
ANDY: Um. *President* Reagan?
DEE: *Oh* I hated that man. ... Only President in American history with a face like a scrotum.
.....
DEE: Well, I don't mean to quibble with your usage, but wouldn't a *survivor* be like if ya survived a *plane crash* ~?
ANDY: No.
DEE: ~ as in, *not deceased*?
ANDY: Or survived a traumatic experience.
DEE: (beat) Well, of course you *survived* it-
ANDY: That's not true-
DEE: - not a lotta cases of death by blowjob.
July 6, 2023
یکی از سختترین تجربههای کتابخونیم تا به امروز این نمایشنامه بود.
داستان درباره چند پدوفیله که توی یک خونه با هم زندگی میکنن و یکی از قربانیها به دیدار متجاوزگرش میره. از نظر فرم، دیالوگنویسی، کشش داستانی و منطق روایی نمایشنامه کارشو خیلی خوب انجام میده و همه چی تقریبا سر جاشه.
مشکل از جایی شروع میشه که امکان خوندن چنین داستانی بدون درگیریهای اخلاقی و قضاوت کردن ممکن نیست. وقتی یه پدوفیل از کارش دفاع میکنه و به خودش حق میده مدام به این فکر میکنی که این حرف نویسندهست یا شخصیت؟ مخصوصا وقتی که خود قربانی هم وارد چرخه خشونت میشه، اون موقع آدم به فکر میفته که به کی باید حق بده. نمایش چرا نوشته شده و چه پیامی برای مخاطبش داره؟
روی موضوع خیلی حساسی دست گذاشته نویسنده و توی ارائهاش هم به هیچ عنوان مسیر سادهای رو انتخاب نکرده. و همین کار خواننده رو هم خیلی سخت میکنه.
داستان درباره چند پدوفیله که توی یک خونه با هم زندگی میکنن و یکی از قربانیها به دیدار متجاوزگرش میره. از نظر فرم، دیالوگنویسی، کشش داستانی و منطق روایی نمایشنامه کارشو خیلی خوب انجام میده و همه چی تقریبا سر جاشه.
مشکل از جایی شروع میشه که امکان خوندن چنین داستانی بدون درگیریهای اخلاقی و قضاوت کردن ممکن نیست. وقتی یه پدوفیل از کارش دفاع میکنه و به خودش حق میده مدام به این فکر میکنی که این حرف نویسندهست یا شخصیت؟ مخصوصا وقتی که خود قربانی هم وارد چرخه خشونت میشه، اون موقع آدم به فکر میفته که به کی باید حق بده. نمایش چرا نوشته شده و چه پیامی برای مخاطبش داره؟
روی موضوع خیلی حساسی دست گذاشته نویسنده و توی ارائهاش هم به هیچ عنوان مسیر سادهای رو انتخاب نکرده. و همین کار خواننده رو هم خیلی سخت میکنه.
May 4, 2020
Doesn't let anyone off easy, the audience included. The subject matter can't be given an easy answer of forgiveness vs. resentment, rehabilitation vs. punishment, restoration vs. revenge. Complex characters I was lucky enough to see portrayed by a brilliant cast at Steppenwolf and complex themes that left me reeling.
September 17, 2022
rating 3.9 u were close honey
honestly i read this bc there was a ‘fairview’ review that said downstate was robbed of its pulitzer - sorry to downstate, but it was not, i loved you but u were barely at the scene of the crime baby
honestly i read this bc there was a ‘fairview’ review that said downstate was robbed of its pulitzer - sorry to downstate, but it was not, i loved you but u were barely at the scene of the crime baby
May 9, 2021
this play was co-commissioned by the steppenwolf theatre in chicago & the national theatre in london - where it was on stage in the spring of 2019. the writing is excellent - but i can see why it would create controversy.
December 12, 2024
Brilliant. Theater doing its job and exposing corners of society we don’t want to see. Nauseating and smart and believably written.
January 18, 2022
Great theater disturbs often. Mission accomplished.
December 12, 2023
A man confronts his childhood sexual abuser at his group home. Read this aloud with a group of friends so it packed a serious emotional punch.
January 7, 2023
I don’t have a whole lot to say about this one…don’t really feel up to the task. A friend and theater professor recommended this play to me and given how much I loved his last recommendation (Heroes of the Fourth Turning) I rushed to read it.
The play is about a home in Illinois for pedophiles who are out of prison and have regular check-ins with their parole officer. The opening scene features one of the resident’s victims at the house, confronting his abuser with the support of his wife. The victim, Andy, wants to make his feelings known to the man who assaulted him as a child.
It goes on from there and digs into themes that I think are incredibly challenging. When the most horrible of crimes is committed, how should the criminal be treated? Should “society” treat them one way and their victims another? After they have “served their time” what kind of life are they entitled to? What amount of humanity are they entitled to? Does their level of repentance affect how these questions are answered?
The easiest thing for many is to forget about them, put them out of mind, or enact permanent judgment on them. This play wants the viewer to interrogate that.
The fact that the play does this in such an abrasive, and even comedic, way is maybe unavoidable, but when I put it down at the end I felt like the provocative impulse in Bruce Norris overshadowed the potentially redemptive aspects of the play. The depiction of the victims felt too aggressive and as somebody who blessedly has no personal touchpoint with this horrible crime, I don’t feel right weighing in much further than that.
This is not an easy play to read (ha I never go to actual performances!) but if you are have a strong resolve and are interested in the themes, I think it’s worth your time.
The play is about a home in Illinois for pedophiles who are out of prison and have regular check-ins with their parole officer. The opening scene features one of the resident’s victims at the house, confronting his abuser with the support of his wife. The victim, Andy, wants to make his feelings known to the man who assaulted him as a child.
It goes on from there and digs into themes that I think are incredibly challenging. When the most horrible of crimes is committed, how should the criminal be treated? Should “society” treat them one way and their victims another? After they have “served their time” what kind of life are they entitled to? What amount of humanity are they entitled to? Does their level of repentance affect how these questions are answered?
The easiest thing for many is to forget about them, put them out of mind, or enact permanent judgment on them. This play wants the viewer to interrogate that.
The fact that the play does this in such an abrasive, and even comedic, way is maybe unavoidable, but when I put it down at the end I felt like the provocative impulse in Bruce Norris overshadowed the potentially redemptive aspects of the play. The depiction of the victims felt too aggressive and as somebody who blessedly has no personal touchpoint with this horrible crime, I don’t feel right weighing in much further than that.
This is not an easy play to read (ha I never go to actual performances!) but if you are have a strong resolve and are interested in the themes, I think it’s worth your time.
August 19, 2024
Yeah, well, my husband loves his Golden Retriever he didn’t stick his dick in her mouth.
February 8, 2021
That was a rly cool play. Daring and— there isn't one character you that does not get sympathy sides portrayed by the author. The way it tackles issues but people too— and they all get some things wrong, every one of them. But there's no way to make it right either. What did Andy want? What would have satisfied him? To see Fred falling apart like he does? The support group is a narrative, outside of which people could only follow, 照葫芦画瓢-esque correctness but in the end they want vengeance, punishment. Confession, eternal condemnation. The play isn't an argument, but shows things that would be too preposterous and incorrect to say otherwise. There's no sensationalisation. Not really. Poor Fred. Poor Felix.
July 29, 2022
What timing. I was just out at dinner out a few nights back when the question came up of "are people born evil or do they become it/do evil things." I had an excruciating time articulating my thoughts because frankly, I couldn't fully lean towards either side.
This play was written from a place of sincere compassion and empathy, not necessarily for all characters involved, but for the safe ground that people should be able to talk about the characters (who are humans among us) around us. I'm always a heavy fan of thought provoking films/art and throughout the entirety of this play, my empathy and morals were tested. What a fine line that this author managed to tight walk so gracefully.
I'd recommend everyone read this play (with caution of TW's)
This play was written from a place of sincere compassion and empathy, not necessarily for all characters involved, but for the safe ground that people should be able to talk about the characters (who are humans among us) around us. I'm always a heavy fan of thought provoking films/art and throughout the entirety of this play, my empathy and morals were tested. What a fine line that this author managed to tight walk so gracefully.
I'd recommend everyone read this play (with caution of TW's)
May 14, 2023
Plays that pose those difficult questions about the grimmest sides of society, or those that don’t fit into it, are dead interesting. This one pulls it off with great grace and skill. Engaged from start to finish.
Brilliant characters, all of whom are deeply troubled for one reason or another. Fred in particular stands in the middle of the question being posed to us about how far we should go to punish those who commit atrocities.
“Please don’t hurt anyone” is electrifying. Time stood still in this moment.
Certainly not an easy read, and I imagine even less easy a watch. But crafted with such care and nuance that leaves us as uncertain as Norris must have been when creating this world.
Brilliant characters, all of whom are deeply troubled for one reason or another. Fred in particular stands in the middle of the question being posed to us about how far we should go to punish those who commit atrocities.
“Please don’t hurt anyone” is electrifying. Time stood still in this moment.
Certainly not an easy read, and I imagine even less easy a watch. But crafted with such care and nuance that leaves us as uncertain as Norris must have been when creating this world.
May 3, 2021
This play is so complex and so incredibly written. Norris explores so many important themes in a huge amount of depth, and the way he develops the characters and their relationships throughout is fantastic. I found myself entirely invested throughout because of the intricacies of the play as a whole; you have to be truly immersed or you’ll almost definitely miss a key detail of the plot. Each of the characters are explored in so much depth, and I found myself deeply questioning each of them and their actions throughout. This is a genuinely brilliant play which I massively enjoyed reading!
October 27, 2025
What is appropriate punishment? What’s one’s suffering compared to another’s?
Just so wonderfully written. Such incredibly-complex and rich characters.
You just feel bad for everyone in this story. Everyone.
“I thought you cared about me, you know?”
It’s not a constant wallow; Dee is hilarious, but of course, the humor is simply a response to all of the pain he endured and caused for others.
Thanks Dan for lending me the play!
Just so wonderfully written. Such incredibly-complex and rich characters.
You just feel bad for everyone in this story. Everyone.
“I thought you cared about me, you know?”
It’s not a constant wallow; Dee is hilarious, but of course, the humor is simply a response to all of the pain he endured and caused for others.
Thanks Dan for lending me the play!
December 22, 2021
Excellent examination of a delicate subject - play moves at a rapid rate and covers quite a bit in the day of the life. Dark, at times funny, and very real.
January 24, 2022
Hard hitting scorcher of a play with devastating characters, lotta suffering, no easy answers, but a lot of messy humanity on view.
May 30, 2023
A lot to digest in this play. Definitely a Steppenwolf-type of drama.
September 29, 2023
I genuinely don’t have words and I don’t think I will for a while.
January 4, 2024
This play tests your compassion and I love it.
February 24, 2025
very good. very to my taste.
May 28, 2025
4.5
Wish I could see the play but it was great
Wish I could see the play but it was great
August 2, 2023
i love bruce norris. his writing picks apart our hypocrisies so beautifully. i mean, writing that makes you relate to a pedophile? that’s good stuff.
Displaying 1 - 27 of 27 reviews