The Unknown

A quick thought on yesterday's post. Been thinking about the central questions i asked in the meat of the post:

What if we really went back to that most basic of things... desire. Let's for a moment abandon all questions of career or making a living. What if we only worked on plays we wanted to work on, went to see plays we wanted to see regardless of level of social obligation, supported and thought about and discussed the work that we actually desired?  And what if this didn't stop with artists?... What if artistic directors only programmed the number of plays they actually felt like doing that year and felt were worthy and could be executed well? What if reviewers only saw plays that interested them-- particularly as far as Broadway is concerned?  The New York Times Book Review doesn't review every book that is published by Random House, why does Ben Brantley go to every play Jeffrey Richards produces? What would happen? What would be the positives? The negatives?

Yesterday I was interviewing set designer Beowulf Borritt for American Theatre.  And he told me that he in general does at least 20 shows a year. This year, he's doing 31.  It's the only way a designer can make a living of course, unless you teach or have a few shows on Broadway paying you good royalties.  And I asked him something along the lines of how many of those shows are ones he feels strongly about or believes in. And his answer struck me as relevant to the above questions: "One a year, if I'm lucky. But you don't know going in whether it's going to end up being one of those shows."

And thus it struck me that one of the unintended consequences of the thought experiment above could be (in some quarters) an increased parochialism and conservatism in the work we do. Or at least, to more conservatively minded people, there would be less desire to do a variety of projects and thus their artistic horizons would remain somewhat limited.  I mean, I didn't know reading an early draft of MilkMilkLemonade that it was going to turn out to be one of the best plays I've ever done, or that I'd love everyone in the show. Only one part was cast at that point, which had been written for the actor playing the part, and I'd never met her.  I said yes to the project because I wanted to work, the play looked like fun, and I really wanted to get to know Josh better as an artist. Only one of those three things had to do with the quality of the project or how much I believed in it.

Comments

[Duncan]

I don't get paid for the reviewing I do, and I get to pick and choose the things I want to review, so I usually only go to things that I think sound interesting or have a reasonable expectation of being good. I guess I'm pretty lucky that way.

[99]

I think that essential state of "Who knows what we're going to get" is the key thing about theatre. In some ways, it's a feature. In others, it's a bug. But I don't think there's any particular way to avoid it.

[Tony Adams]

I think making a living and making theatre are too often confused for being one in the same.

The only time I began to truly hate theatre is when I had to rely on it for my income. I was that designer doing 25-30 shows a year in addition to other hats.

But I was thinking along the same lines yesterday.

The single most artistically liberating thing I've done in my life was learning to say no. Of course it took opening 7 shows in three weeks to learn that.