there won't be might be trumpets

the newly named stephen sondheim theatre (formerly henry miller's theatre) operated by roundabout theatre company, will receive an official unveiling and lighting ceremony wednesday, september 15 at 6:30 p.m.

a brief swooning in brooklyn

if you're in new york, anywhere near new york, heading to new york, or have thoughts of going to new york, see this: kneehigh theater’s adaptation of the 1945 noel coward movie brief encounter.

i was lucky enough to see encounter at american conservatory theatre in san francisco (it has since moved to st. ann’s warehouse in brooklyn, where it opened tuesday night.) that same trip west included the green day musical american idiot at berkeley rep – with green day in the audience. not a bad weekend for someone who doesn't often enjoy going to theatre.

like american idiot (and not at all like american idiot) brief encounter provided some of the most inspiring, surprising and creative moments of theatre i've experienced since sitting slack-jawed during the first 20 minutes of spring awakening.

no kidding, call right now and get tickets.

more life: the great work begins

angels returning to new york.

why i twitter #3: audition feedback

probably the most important reason to twitter is to find out how you did at your big broadway new york tryout.

until quite recently, if you were auditioning for casting director daryl eisenberg you could run out into the hall and check twitter to see how you did, 'cause eisenberg was actually tweeting her often snarky opinions about the actors auditioning for her. prior to a friday meeting with a not-very-happy actors’ equity association, the union of professional actors and stage managers, eisenberg had responded to criticism about her tweets like this:

“There is NO rule/guideline against Twitter/Facebook/MySpace/Friendster. Freedom of speech. Ever heard of it?”

after that friday meeting with aea, eisenberg responded like this:

"I apologize to the actors and professionals who put themselves on the line every time they audition and will continually strive to make the audition room an inspiring, nurturing place for creativity and talent. I look forward to working with AEA and its members on future projects, and hope to see you all in the audition room soon."

hmm.

how did others react?

composer marc shaiman (hairspray):

"When I read about it...I Googled her to get her number, called and left a message. She returned the call and I told her what I HOPE anyone else with a show to cast would, which was that I was appalled and that I would never employ a casting agency that allowed that behavior...To undercut the confidence of actors at this most vulnerable moment is not just mean, but for a casting director, rather insane. A casting director should nurture and build confidence."

casting director geoffrey soffer (ugly betty):

"I was appalled to read yesterday that a casting director has been twittering about actors' auditions with no plans to end this practice. The audition is a private meeting between an actor and a casting director, producer, writer or director. Similar to that of a therapist listening to a patient, or a lawyer counseling a client, what happens in the room should stay in the room. The behavior exhibited by this casting director does not help our profession progress..."

if you auditioned for eisenberg over the last couple of months, maybe one of these tweets was about you:

a) If we wanted to hear it a different way, don’t worry, we’ll ask

b) If you are going to sing about getting on your knees, might as well do it and crawl towards us ... right?

c) That's OK. You don't have to look at me. I'm only the Casting Director.

d) Train wreck.

e) That looooong pause was a choice?! Not just you forgetting your lines?? Poor choice, actor, poor choice.

f) Why would you do your monologue facing anywhere but the table?

g) A 20 year old singing MR CELLOPHANE.....okaaay.....

h) Chances are -- we've heard your song before. No need to set it up for us. But thanks for playing!

i) I HATE THIS SONG!!

j) Seeing #70 right now. I’m tired. My ears are bleeding

k) Holding your foot above your head IN YOUR HEADSHOT is a BAD IDEA!

l) Your skirt makes me think you’re Wiccan…

m) Who is that person in your headshot? it is def not the person standing in front of me.

and in case you were questioning who writes all the DECasting tweets:

n) Lately, there has been some questioning on who writes all the DECasting tweets...it's me! Daryl!

why i twitter #2: to learn my subtext

seriously, the next time i'm in a play, i hope i can learn what my character's subtext is by reading twitter, just like the actors in broadway's next to normal:

In early May, six weeks after opening, the production began what is by all accounts a Broadway first: over Twitter, the social networking site, an adapted version of the show began to be published in the form of short text messages, or tweets — just a line from a character at a time.

you too can read exactly what alice ripley's diana, robert spencer's dan and the rest of the n2n gang are really thinking when they're offstage, as the twitter version of next to normal was written by the play's bookwriter brian yorkey and composer tom kitt:

In the performance, Mr. Yorkey said, “we didn’t know what Dan the father was thinking when (Alice Ripley as Diana) was on the floor making sandwiches. But this is what they would say if they were tweeting, so it’s telling the story of the show but telling it from a lot of different perspectives. It was the show — but a new multiangle way of thinking of it.”

actually, i thought i knew exactly what dan the father was thinking at that moment and it honestly wasn't: “do all wives end up sprawled on the floor making sandwiches for no one?”

so, who's right?

well, the playwright, clearly. if shakespeare had twittered what hamlet is thinking during his downtime, i guess i'd probably buy it. but isn't that the white space, aren't those the gaps we're left to fill in on our own? aren't those moments best left to an audience's imagination? or an actor's?

do you want to be told what's going on at all times?

the secrets of tkts

how do i get good, cheap, last-minute tickets to a broadway show? most folks already know the answer: the tkts booth. people have been standing in line outside a canvas covered trailer in new york's duffy square since 1973, squeezing wads of cash and hoping for half-pricers to "cats," "phantom" or "les miz." now that the booth has been stunningly redesigned (and takes credit cards) victoria bailey, executive director of the theater development fund, has given the new york times some tips about workin' the booth for those cheap seats.

i think this guy likes us

an op-ed by milwaukee's own damien jaques, written a week or so ago during one of the many crests of the skylight opera theatre saga, didn't get the attention it deserved.

in it, jaques reminds us that artists, milwaukee artists, actually do actually matter:

Milwaukee and Wisconsin reached a critical mass of stage talent in the 1980s, and like nuclear fission, the energy has happily continued to spark and feed on itself for more than two decades.

Outstanding theater artists who could work anywhere, including New York, decided to settle here, sink roots, buy houses, send their children to our schools, pay taxes. We developed a reputation for being a welcoming community with good, artist-friendly stage companies that received strong box office and fund raising support. Artists were respected and even cherished here.

It should come as no surprise that these favorable conditions affected what we saw on stage. A good work environment inspires the best in people and attracts others of superior talent.

you know, i think this guy likes us.

this jaques fellow and i had a wee squabble a few years back – quite polite, nothing too serious, mind you, just a friendly tiff – over a review he'd written about a play i'd been planning to see. the play starred many of my dear, dear friends, and i was anxious to know what to say of their performances should i be forced to greet them at the stage door after the show.

this is the basic reason i read most theatre reviews: to memorize a line or two i can toss out post-performance while in the midst of hugging a sweaty ingenue. good or bad, it doesn't matter – i am a master at manipulating a review quote to make it seem perfectly appropriate, whatever the circumstances: "i thought you did so much more than posing, mary-ann!" or "goodness gary, you were better than broadway!" or my personal favorite, "oh, henry! i don't really think every quart of milk in a ten mile radius curdled when you began to sing!" and jaques' reviews were the best, a veritable fountain of stage door compliments, most of which i didn't even have to alter, except for the words i couldn't pronounce.

however, after reading this jaques' review – which contained a mere three sentence, one paragraph mention of which actors played which roles – i was stumped. jaques' article said nothing of the actor's accomplishments, nothing of the director's staging, it only listed their names (many of which i already knew, save that tall man with the beard.) that, and some cheap talk of a few pretty lights, a sharply focused gobo, some painted flats, and a pleasant curtain speech was all i got.

what was i to do?

i'll tell you what i did, i didn't go to see the play. i couldn't! instead, i sent a pissy little letter to the milwaukee journal/sentinel saying something incredibly wry, like, "after reading mr. jaques' lengthy review of "bladdy-blah-hoo-ha", i have no earthly idea if he thinks i should attend a performance of it or not. please tell mr. jaques for me, if i was interested in reading a book report on playwright applejack mc-twoshoes, i would have paid a visit to the local library." in my head, i pronounced "library" in that snotty, upper crust, british way - libry. libry. fuh-fuh. take that mr. reviewer guy, i thought.

several weeks later, i heard through a friend of a friend that jaques actually felt bad about the letter i'd sent.

"he read it!?" i shouted, incredulously.

"yes, and he felt quite bad."

being the stone cold, hard-as-a-rock, iceberg man that i am, i wept. immediately i felt a walloping sense of guilt for making the man feel bad.

"really? bad? he felt bad?"

"yes." i was told. "quite bad."

oh man.

cripes.

i didn't mean to make anyone feel bad.

oh hell.

so a day or so later i called him. i called damien jaques on the telephone and we talked about that horribly written review. after giving him a heartfelt apology (that i'd memorized earlier that day from a dear abby column in jaques' own newspaper) i decided to cut to the heart of the matter. "why, jaques!?" i demanded, "why did you write such a lame, flaccid review in the first place?"

"tony," he said – trying to butter me up by using my first name, a trick he learned, no doubt, from his days slumming with the likes of clair richardson – "i didn't think it was a very good production."

ah-ha! settled, i thought! finally, i had the truth! i pounced: "why the devil didn't you put that in the review, you dunderhead!" i may not have said dunderhead.

"because i have such great respect for all those people, every one of those actors, and the director, i just...i couldn't bring myself to write in a review what i really thought about the show. so i only talked about the things i liked."

now, you might be sitting there in milwaukee, relaxing in your boxers with your cat yawning at your side, and you might be reading this delightful anecdote thinking, "well the bastard didn't seem to mind giving me a crappy review for my performance in ziggity-do-dah-day!" and you're right. he did give you a crappy review. someday we'll talk about your stale, lifeless performance in ziggity-do-dah-day, but save that for another occasion. your birthday. purim.

apparently this production (and boy, am i'm going to get mail) was just so damned horrid, jaques couldn't do it. he couldn't bring himself to write that scathing, awful review.

because he cared too much about those actors.

and you know what i thought?
i thought, "i like this guy."

a society that values profitability above all

an article from the miami herald has been popping up on facebook pages and in email blasts over the last couple of days (certainly among us artsy types.) considering the turmoil going on at the skylight right now, it's a worthy read.

Two South Florida dance companies closed recently. West Palm Beach's lively, lovely Ballet Florida filed for bankruptcy two weeks ago, and Miami-Dade's gallant Ballet Gamonet, after months of financial struggle, suspended performances in March and seems unlikely to return.

Meanwhile, American Idol host Ryan Seacrest will get $45 million to stay with the show for another three years, and Goldman Sachs made $4.3 billion in profits from April to June. Presumably, both Goldman execs and Seacrest feel like dancing, though it's doubtful the rest of us would want to watch.

These events may not seem connected, but they are. We've always been a society that values profitability and celebrity above almost all other qualities.

(hat tip valdez)

part 2: what does an artistic director do?

cescarini: "if you run out of trust, good luck."

next act theatre's david cescarini responds to the last "what the heck is it you do, anyway?" (which, for fun, can also be read "what the heck is it, you do anyway?")

david's vast 33-year theatrical career includes such highlights as casting me in my first brecht review. yes, my only brecht review. he is the producing artistic director of milwaukee's next act theatre, now in it's 20th season (whew!) and has directed over 27 shows for the company. his lovely wife was once on the lawrence welk show.

The AD and MD must work in tandem, bound by trust and driven by a strong faith in the vision. But as for earning and spending: the artistic director must be as concerned with earning as the managing director is about spending. Hence, the AD must propose a vision that is sellable and supportable overall, but also intermittently challenging. This insures forward progress, artistically, while hopefully providing a stable financial base to keep it happening. The one thing that the administrative leadership absolutely SHOULD NOT do, is go into hock to a bank to the tune of almost half a million bucks to support deficits. Some boards and administrators can be reluctant to comprehend the danger of this fiscal policy. This can lead to rather desperate action and disaster.

The artistic director job description is not monolithic: it is dependent upon individual strengths, personalities and relationships, company history, the internal creative pathway of an organization, budget size and many more factors. But trust is the currency that every AD relies upon, much more so than money. If you run out of money, you can find more or work with less. If you run out of trust, good luck.

Also, trust is a free-flowing commodity. It flows in all directions in a healthy environment. In a vibrant resident artistic community, trust is generated with each successful creative relationship or project, and in turn engenders work that is deeper, richer, of appreciably better quality -- which our audiences recognize. Milwaukee's a terrific theatre town because of trust.

The fiasco at an unrecognizable Skylight has trashed this most basic and essential element for artistic endeavor (or perhaps any human endeavor that's worth pursuing). Since the time that each of us fell backwards into the waiting arms of two fellow acting students, we have depended upon trust to make us better.

As an unsolicited answer, Tony, artistic directors trade in trust. And the great thing is, the more you invest and spend wisely, the better are your returns. It's kind of like accounting ... but different.

part 1: what does an artistic director do?

cammmarato: "lead the organization into the future."

i asked that question of a few, well...artistic directors. what does it mean to be you? other than the words "artistic director" either precede or follow your name in the playbill (which is pretty cool.) oh, and sometimes you get to wear a crown (even cooler.)

anne marie cammarato is in her fifth season as artistic director for the delaware theatre company. prior to that she spent four years as associate artistic director of madison repertory theatre. she also served as the associate director of theatre X and worked on the artistic staff of milwaukee repertory theater.

here's what she had to say:

The most general definition I can give for an artistic director is that they provide the vision for the company. The board and the community decide the mission...then they hire an artistic leader to provide a vision to reach that mission.

The managing director is there to manage and execute the artistic director's vision toward the mission. The two should work in tandem, as partners, to provide a healthy system of checks and balances (one oversees the art and education...if there is an education department, and the other oversees the business.) A really simplified explanation is that one raises and earns the money (the managing director) and the other one spends the money (the artistic director).

They both do this responsibly and together toward a shared mission with the board.

On a day to day level, the managing director should be busy overseeing the execution of development, marketing, front of house, finances and facility needs. The artistic director oversees the choice of programming, the hiring of artists to execute the programming, being the artistic public face and representing the organization to the community and theatre world at large, and (most importantly) creating art.

The vision of the artistic director must reflect the needs of the community (as expressed in the mission) but also has a personal signature or stamp to it. The programming should fulfill the mission but also the personal aesthetic of the artistic leader. Otherwise, it's a booking house. Or a building that has a stage in it. And that maybe puts on plays...but it's not a producing organization without someone at the top providing artistic vision.

The artistic leader is reading plays, meeting playwrights, evaluating the plays within the context of their theatre in their community. They have to have their finger on the pulse of what's happening around them in the world of creating art, in order to keep attracting new audiences.

They literally LEAD the organization into the future.

over easy please

over the summer, the milwaukee theatre community will hold a weekly breakfast to discuss art in the city, the first being this friday at 8:00 am in catalano square, just south of the broadway theatre center.

while no specific agenda has been planned, attendees are encouraged to talk about their favorite ray jivoff performance. or awards. or the skylight restructuring.

or that ray jivoff thing.

artsy schmartsy has the details.

the milwaukee theater community respondsupdated 6/5/09 – 1:20 am

i've already thrown in my two cents. here are a few more brief, edited responses to milwaukee's proposed lunt-fontanne awards: a young performer, two artistic directors, and unquestionably the grand dame of milwaukee theater.

what's interesting is even though these awards appear to be moving forward, there doesn't seem to be much concensus for that movement.

(to read an entire response, click the name.)

rose pickering – company member, milwaukee repertory theatre:

"I, too, object to the idea of theater awards and would not participate in same...

Whether you work Equity or non-Equity, at a large theater or a small, there is no way to compare any performances in any category: apples and oranges every time, and theater is not a competitive sport."

david cescarini – artistic director, next act theatre:

"An awards system would reinforce the worst type of theatre criticism: that which decides yea or nay, all or nothing, best ever, and the many other black-and-white judgments that obscure the complex and subjective nature of theatre. What a nightmare.

Next Act will take no part in whatever awards system that arises."

neil haven – milwaukee playwright, actor, musician:

"I also have misgivings about an awards ceremony in such a small theatre community, although I believe and hope that those promoting it are doing so with the best of intentions: encouraging quality theatre, and bringing annual attention in the community to the theatre scene.

It would be nice to have an annual event that was open to all so that no one would be questioning whether they deserved to be there, questioning whether they are part of the "old boys club" yet..."

jim fletcher – artistic director, bunny gumbo:

"At the heart of it, I can see very little good coming from such awards, and the very real possibility of much damage. By its very nature, an awards ceremony will bring accolades to the very few and resentment from the great masses...

I’d much rather spend $20 for a bunch of booze and to hear my friends doing bad karaoke and silly skits than sit in a dark room watching a few people getting awards."

UPDATE 6:04 p.m. – more reax from mke. (this awards topic is nothing new, and has been "out there" for over a year now. but how much of a dialogue could it have been if a prominent actress in the community like mary macdonald kerr is just now getting to speak up?)

bo johnson, actor:

"The only real reason for industry awards is their use as a marketing tool. I believe the strongest means of marketing is done by empowering the general audience with the ability to decide who wins the awards.

The first reaction of any theatre artist, after reading the last paragraph, will be, "No way would I trust the general public to know the difference between shit and shinola."

As a community, we would have to just constantly remind ourselves...these awards are arbitrary, unfairly weighted, prejudiced, popularity contests, and are no way an indicator of the best work that happens in this community. The best that we can hope for is that it prompts a percentage of the general market to go see a few more shows every season because they want to be a part of the awards process."

mary macdonald kerr – actress:

"I had heard rumors about some sort of theatre awards being started in Milwaukee, but had never been officially asked my opinion. I'm taking this recent hubbub as an opportunity to voice my opposition to the idea.

In a nutshell, I think creating theatre is an art, not a sport. I think Milwaukee has an unusually family-like community, and that awards for Best Art would detract, not add to this feeling. I'd be very supportive of an "End of the Season" gathering honoring our collective blood sweat and tears for the year. Perhaps there are "awards" honoring long careers, long lived companies, unseen contributions etc.

It's just my two cents..."

UPDATE 6/5/09, 1:20 a.m. – and there's more reax in the comments section of this post.

three boys! boys for sale!

theater awards are silly. why you would want one is a mystery to me.

this, for example, is one of the most ridiculous, embarrassing things i've ever heard of. broadway's tony voters this year have a really difficult decision when it comes to their choice for best performance by a leading actor in a musical.

here are the seven five nominees:

• gavin creel in the revival of hair,

• the not-terribly-funny but big and loud brian d’arcy james in the big and loud and almost not as funny shrek the musical,

• brooding douchebag constantine maroulis in rock of ages;

• j. robert "i'm cleaning up my wife's blood with a sponge and a bucket" spencer in next to normal;

• or the character of billy elliot in billy elliot: the musical.

the rigors of performing the role of billy elliot proved so daunting that there are three young actors performing it. not all at once, mind you. go one night and you might see david alvarez in the title role. any other night, your billy might be trent kowalik, or kiril kulish. i hear they're all tremendous. one a little more tremendous than the other two, but still. tremendous.

it's an incredibly demanding role, and a grueling 8-show a week schedule, so triple casting it is understandable. however, the show is so moving and wonderful that the tony committee or the tony administration or nathan lane and hugh jackman in a backroom somewhere decided that all three boys should not only share a role, but share a tony nomination.

so in all fairnesss, that last slot, amended, should read:

• david alvarez, trent kowalik and kiril kulish in billy elliot: the musical.

see anything screwy with that? yeah.

this is insight into what a joke all of this awards crap is. and how political it is. not that i wouldn't like to have one sitting somewhere in my apartment, on the mantle, on an end table (although, we have lots of "stuff" already – blown-glass from okinawa, dog ashes in a box, people ashes in an urn – i'd have to move something to make room for it. and even then, i'm not sure i'd like it featured so prominently. shouldn't it be something that people at a dinner party sort of notice by accident? after forty-five minutes or so? "wait... what's that? you have a tony award?" ...oh yes, well. you know. more cheeseballs?)

i'd be willing to bet that nine out of ten tony voters couldn't name all three actors playing billy elliot. and now, the tony administration (or whomever) has decided, hey! it doesn't really matter! in fact, you don't even need to see the actor perform to cast a vote for him.

a recently uncovered torture memo tony awards memo (not that different, when all is said and done) states, according to the new york times:

Tony award voters have to see only one of the three boys rotating in the title role of “Billy Elliot: The Musical” before voting on their joint nomination for leading actor in a musical.

i.e. you're not voting for an actor or a performance, you're voting for a role. shouldn't the writer then get this acting award? this is the nature of theater awards. silly. political. crap.

on a back bookshelf in the office, maybe?

(a sidenote: dear milwaukee theater community – [who for ten minutes considered giving themselves awards] – you wanna get together for a big party every year? throw a friggin' barbecue in the pickering's backyard, don't give some silly actress "a milwaukee theater award" because she needs another line for her bio. that'd be as silly as, well, nominating a character for best actor.)

why i quit show business #3

god help me.

dame judi: sod off, spencer!

dame judi dench, the first lady of british theatre, has done what every actor in the world has likely wanted to do at one time or another: fought back against a critic.

after receiving less than glowing notices for her performance in yukio mishima's madame de sade, dench sent a less than glowing letter of reply to the daily telegraph's theatre critic charles spencer.

"I've always rather admired you but now I realise you're an absolute shit," she wrote.

Referring to a stage accident which caused her to miss some performances, she added: "I'm only sorry I didn't get a chance to kick you when I fell over – maybe next time."

mr. spencer himself has since responded to the response, suggesting more actors take this tack. my letters to critics in washington d.c. and portland are now in the works.

to bea, or not to bea

"Look -- I'm 5-feet-9, I have a deep voice and I have a way with a line. What can I do about it? I can't stay home waiting for something different. I think it's a total waste of energy worrying about typecasting."

bea arthur died today, at the age of 86. bea – r.i.p. and b.w.a.c.

75 at 253 w. 125th

harlem's famed apollo theater turns 75 this year.

"there’s nothing like an audience at the apollo. they were wide awake early in the morning. they didn’t ask me what my style was, who i was, how i had evolved, where i’d come from, who influenced me, or anything. they just broke the house up."

– billie holiday

they're shutting down broadway!

from the new york times:

The city plans to close several blocks of Broadway to vehicle traffic through Times Square and Herald Square, an experiment that would turn swaths of the Great White Way into pedestrian malls and continue Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg’s effort to reduce traffic congestion in Midtown.

good idea?

hat tip: sundance

the stimulus money set aside for the national endowment for the arts – eliminated by the senate after republican whining – was eventually restored in committee and is part of the final bill president obama will sign in denver on tuesday. forty percent of the money will go directly to state arts agencies and regional arts organizations, while the remaining sixty percent will go to individual arts projects.

all thanks in no small part to new york's louise m. slaughter, wisconsin's david obey, and robert redford.

madison nixes

the madison repertory theater, madison, wisconsin's leading professional theatre company since 1987, performing five shows a year plus a new play festival, has cancelled the remainder of it's 2008-09 season.