Steppenwolf Theatre Company Blog – Chicago Theater, World-Class Ensemble

I had planned to move on to some other topic today, but as I write there is a bit of a storm brewing in our theatrical community tea-cup, over the actions of one of our city’s critics. I thought it germane to our previous thread.

This critic attended and wrote reviews of a festival of new musicals being “workshopped”. The reviews came to the attention of some of our colleagues, nationally. The result is a letter from the President of the Dramatists Guild, John Weidman, and accompanying artists, including Edward Albee, Christopher Durang, Tony Kushner, and others. For the complete letter and comments, you can find it here. (more…)

After introducing myself as Steppenwolf’s Literary Manager during a recent post-show discussion for The Unmentionables, the first question directed at me was, “What does a Literary Manager do?” For the sake of your sanity, I’ll be brief: my job entails reading the roughly 500 new scripts we receive each year and making recommendations to Ed Sobel, our Director of New Play Development, as to works and writers we ought to consider when programming our season. Today, for example, I’ll be reading a few scripts in consideration for our 2007-08 season – all before our 2006-07 season officially commences. Meanwhile, on our Downstairs Theatre, our 2005-06 season is about to end, as The Unmentionables closes this Sunday.

As a subscription series show winds down its run, two things typically happen. First, friends contact us in larger numbers in an attempt to secure seats to a performance. Second, and more importantly, we are able to take full stock of the production, having seen it from its conception (in the case of The Unmentionables, cutting the check to Bruce Norris that instigated the commissioned play) through its development and growth (initial “table readings” of successive drafts, meetings with designers, rehearsals, previews), and culminating in its birth: performances in front of our audiences over a seven-week run.

Through this blog and our post-show discussions - two-way avenues of communication in service of a medium that is traditionally a one-way conduit - you are able to take stock with us. The Unmentionables closes out our 30th anniversary season, a season dedicated to producing entirely new works. Though this was a giant leap for us - a “normal” season sees us produce between 10-12 works in our 3 performance spaces, of which roughly half is comprised of new plays - we’ve been heartened by the ways in which our audiences were willing to take this trip with us.

In our all-staff meetings, departmental meetings, even around the water cooler (in our case, a Pepsi machine we’ve desperately been trying to get switched to a Coke machine), we’ve been discussing what a slate of exclusively new plays meant to us as a theatre company. But this is a two-way sharing of information, of course, and we’d like to know how you’ve reacted to this past season of work.

Taken as a whole, what, if anything, did this season’s plays mean to you? What, to your mind, is the importance of new work (if any) in the theatre these days?

I read responses to the initial posting on the subject of our First Look Rep and critics with keen interest, and thank those of you who entered the conversation.

Some comments on this strand address precisely the significance and difference of First Look. First Look is a developmental process culminating in public performances, for which, yes, we charge admission. But we are trying to create a relationship with our audience that is not purely transactional, i.e. money in exchange for product. Instead, we are seeking to engage them in the process of making a play, an endeavor much more difficult to describe within the current model of “reviews”. First Look requires innovation and imagination from both the artists and audiences. How can we stimulate a similar sense in our critics?

Further, most theaters, including Steppenwolf, charge less money for tickets to “previews” than for tickets after opening – but they still charge. It is (or used to be) considered a breach of etiquette for critics to review a production during the preview process, rather than at opening. The entire run of First Look is much more equivalent to a preview process than the run of play. Is it possible, or reasonable, to ask critics to both perceive and report the difference? How can one communicate all of this, without inhibiting their genuine response?

One writer drew the analogy to buying tickets with investing in a company, and citing the notion that analysts hold companies to the same standards regardless of whether they are new.

I find the comparison provocative of further questions. Generally, we would invest money with a company only after doing significant research and verifying the bona fides of the analyst recommending it. (If you are like me, you get five pieces a day of spam from “analysts” urging me to invest in some company or other.) Do we do that with critics, or do we take the critic’s (or media outlet’s) word that s/he is qualified to express an expert opinion? Or do we not see critics as “experts”, but simply as citizens like ourselves who have the good fortune to have a larger mouthpiece? Do we build trust with a critic over time – e.g., we see things about which they have written, and find ourselves agreeing with them – and how seriously do we take a “betrayal” of that trust? In the democratizing days of the internet, anyone can set themselves up a web-site, say “ImATheaterCritic.com”, call themselves a critic, and issue their opinion to as many people as are willing to read it. How does this affect our notion of critics?

One last volley: the question of “critics”, as opposed to “reviewers”. Good criticism offers observations about a work, acknowledges its context, resists the temptation to fully dismiss or overly praise, and places the work of art at its center, rather than the critic. I note that Chicago is the birthplace of the “thumbs up - thumbs down” critical nomenclature, and ask does Chicago need critics or reviewers? As consumers of media, and theater-goers, what is in your best interest?

Steppenwolf’s Visiting Company Initiative provides the opportunity for other Chicago theater companies to present work in all three of our theaters. These residencies are supported by the artists and staff at Steppenwolf. In creating relationships with Visiting Companies, Steppenwolf enriches the artistic dialogue among its artists and audiences.

We are very pleased to announce our two visiting company productions for the 2006/2007 season. The first offering is a co-production between Rivendell Theatre Ensemble and Teatro Vista.  Elliott (A Soldier’s Fugue) by Quiara Alegria Hudes will perform in the Garage Theatre from November 2nd thru December 10th. The play traces the legacy of war through three generations of a Puerto Rican family, as seen through a woman’s lens. Elliot, a young marine, has returned home from Iraq with a Purple Heart, the memory of his first kill and the pain of his physical wounds.

The second offering, presented by 500 Clown, will be seen in the Upstairs Theatre. The company will be remounting two previously produced productions, 500 Clown Macbeth and 500 Clown Frankenstein. In 500 Clown Macbeth, three clowns descend upon a stage to perform Shakespeare’s Scottish Play. Infected by ambition, they compete for the role of Macbeth. In the process, the clowns destroy the text, the set, and eventually each other. In 500 Clown Frankenstein, three clowns arrive onstage to tell the story of Frankenstein. Challenging costumes, poor lighting, difficult language and an ornery table prevent them from properly telling Mary Shelley’s classic tale. The result is the creation of unexpected horror. The shows will run in repertory from June 14th thru July 29th, 2007.

We look forward to welcoming this talented and diverse group of artists to Steppenwolf!

Last weekend, Steppenwolf played host to theater professionals from around the country who were invited to attend our First Look Rep.

With representatives from a wide range, (literally from New York to California and Minnesota to Florida) we had a wonderful opportunity both to display the work of our writers, and have more informal, collegial time together. This same weekend, elsewhere in the city, the Goodman Theater was hosting its Latino Festival, and the Association for Theater in Higher Education was holding its annual conference. For several days, Chicago seemed the national hub for theater. (more…)