The story “Our Town” is a horribly tedious early 20th century play. If it weren't for the date on the play, I would say the author were a neo-fascist that hates America and kicks puppies. As it stands though, all that is true except the “neo” part. This leads me to believe he has some sort of time machine made out of oxycontin and playdoh. Chances are that with this machine he did 9/11 with laser powers.
The main focus of the play is that deep down, all our lives are the same. Basically, this means the author harbors dreams of a uniformed worldwide despotism. It is unclear whether or no the author plans himself as the tyrant at the head of such a regime, but it should be noted that throughout the play using the stage manager as his avatar, so to speak, he frowns upon noble ideals such as keeping the American Union together. Such a dissolution of liberty in the world would essentially lead to a perpetual stagnation of art and science.
The play itself is notable among a crowd as lacking any sort of props or set aside from a few chairs. This could mean one of several things. First, the budget could have been extremely short. This would also explain why the stage manager fills in for several characters such as the man in the soda shop(or is it a drug store?). Second, it could be a glimpse of the authors planned future society. A bland, bleak landscape, with a strikingly pointless simplicity. Third, the characters could have just been really terrible mimes. Fourth, building off the third theory, “Our Town” could be a recreation of a charades game gone horribly, horribly, wrong. Looking at the set itself reminds me of the description of the Nazi work camps taught in American Studies History; uniformed(as if not mentioned enough), bleak, and hopeless.
Symbolism is a technique often used in writing in the same way every single line in Spanish poetry is: to say something without actually saying it. Such things as the(you guessed it) daily routines of characters are symbolic of the premise of the play. One small slip-up of the author(who perhaps could just be a troll; i.e. someone who says or does something obviously false to get a reaction) is that in one scene, two characters talk about a letter with “The Mind of God” as part of the address. This could be either meant to imply people are all unique and important after all, but could also be an attempt to slip up the watcher/reader of the play.
As mentioned, the author is likely a kind of fascist that hates America and kicks puppies. As explained, this play is likely a stepping stone vision for the despotism that he likely wants created. Firstly though, what are a fascism and a despotism? A fascism is a government in which a dictator rules through military power. A despotism is the same thing generally, only in a more archaic form under a different name. Fascism comes from the Latin “fasces” or “control”. A despotism is the kind of government more suited to the rule of a small city state(hence being called archaic). A despot, or tyrant, would have control over the city via military and rule as an essential king(occasionally by divine right as in Egypt, but not always). The use of the word tyrant was used most early in ancient Greece as a word for the chieftains that ruled each city. In Italy, the same thing occurred but aside from the last king Tarquin, the Latins generally had a series of wise kings. The word tyrant is hardly ever used to describe the kings of Greece, but essentially that is what they were. Between the fall of Western Rome in 476 and the American Revolution 1300 years later, several Republics would form, but an attempt at a combination would be made in two different ways. First is the constitutional monarchy such as that of Great Britain, in which a monarchs power is checked by a Parliament and a bill of rights. The second was the enlightened despotism, used by such rulers as Catherine of Russia and Frederick of Prussia.
Going down this road shows that the author possibly did not plan the world into a tyranny but see it as already being such. This is quite possible, as a quick glance at America today reveals that the rich hold all the power and the masses are mindless sheep(see: scene kids). More evidence to this is, again, the fact that he looks down upon the defense of the Union in the civil war. Perhaps, like the Italians in the 5th century AD, the author saw nothing redeeming in a powerful country being ripped to pieces and basically decided that nothing of value was to be lost if said power fell to pieces.
As for the time machine theory, there is an actual logic to the two basic building materials. Playdoh is a very dexterous material, easily changed and molded like a sort of multi-colored clay. Oxycontin is a drug that when used on the user of the machine would have a sort of mind effect that would make the user believe he was time traveling. No, that really makes no sense, but it's better than half the crap Fox tries to put up.
In conclusion, I have decided that the writer of the play is a troll, plain and simple. He threw this together knowing very well that suburban New Hampshire kids lead a very different life than those living in the actual ghettos of New York, and the deserts of Somalia. Seriously what was he thinking? Yes, each of the parties gets up every day to do a routine, but I doubt NH or NY have to deal with starvation on a mass scale, or that New Hampshire has a high risk of shootings and gang wars.

To end on a thought provoking question: How would it feel to win the lottery while tripping on acid?