"There's not much point in aiming high if you can't hit your target. And is it really necessary for playwrights to dream up new worlds? ...The one we live in still provides durable material for theater that moves us, makes us laugh and allows us to see even a small frame of experience in a new light."
-- Charles Isherwood, April 2006
I’m not suggesting that size alone matters, obviously. But if the American theater is to remain an aesthetically robust enterprise, a vital step may be removing the invisible shackles from the imaginations of playwrights, making it natural — making it possible — for them to dream huge once again.
So... does this reflect growth on Charles Isherwood's part as a reviewer and audience member? Obviously the latter statement (in favor of writerly ambition) is preferable to the former (against writerly ambition). I wonder what Isherwood thinks of his semi-infamous 2006 Humana round-up now. Either way, it's a welcome sentiment from him... I hope it lasts.
I have noticed a change in Isherwood since he started reviewing at the Times--he seems to be getting more open-minded and his negative reviews (especially of emerging writers) less gratuitously nasty. As an aspiring playwright and lover of Big Ambitious Theater, I welcome this--sure, it's never gonna be easy, but Isherwood's new attitude makes things just slightly better.
Posted by: Marissa | June 04, 2008 at 01:45 AM