[ssba]
Paul Birchall’s Got It Covered:
Paris, Suddenly Don Shirley, Deaf West at the White House, More Snark About L.A. Intimate Theater
By Paul Birchall
Tragedy in Paris
It’s been a week of hauntingly familiar trauma in the news. All of us must feel great compassion for the people of Paris following the appalling attacks that claimed 129 lives. That the targets were mostly entertainment and leisure activities — a rock concert, a Cambodian restaurant, a shopping mall, a football stadium — underscores that the attacks were deliberate aggressions against core Western values and freedoms.
After an atrocity like this happens, the press and the more tedious pundits and politicians spout recriminations and day-after-quarterbacking, demanding that we bomb the villains out of existence or cut off immigration so that the only people allowed into the country are those who look or think exactly like them.
My feelings are slightly different: Although the Paris attacks now threaten to globalize what has been a bloody regional civil war, they are part of a broader cultural war. The extremists don’t like freedoms we in the West take for granted. They burn books, manuscripts and musical instruments. They deny women education, force them to wear burqas or, if they’re from a religious minority, even allow them to be raped. They execute gay men by throwing them off of roofs. They behead scholars.
How do we in Los Angeles respond to this? By going on without fear — or at least with the awareness that fear itself should not stop us from doing what we love. Artists must continue to create art, the more provocative and more outrageous the better! And those who are not artists must go on supporting the things that give pleasure and which make all religious zealots gnash their teeth with rage. By all means, go on out to a rock concert. Eat a delicious dinner out. Spend a bit of your hard earned money on something wonderful and provocative — like a play. Be a warrior of culture.
Don Shirley, Contrarian
Don Shirley, right, with Stage Raw’s Myron Meisel
Earlier this week, Don Shirley penned a fascinating, contrarian article about the 99-seat movement in the guise of his summary of the Ovation Awards, hosted by French Stewart and Vanessa Claire Stewart, and that featured an appearance by Stage Raw editor Steven Leigh Morris as Los Angeles Stage Alliance executive director. The thrust of Shirley’s piece was a surprisingly clear-eyed analysis of the 99-seat issue, except with the opinion that it might be better for the minimum wage proposal to pass. Shirley’s take appears to be that the preponderance of small theater shows is in some way preventing the growth and inception of mid-size theater companies.
He writes, “LA theater invests too much time and energy in maintaining a system of many easy-to-ignore theatrical boutiques, and not enough time and energy in creating institutions that can engage larger numbers of Angelenos, including more diverse audiences, as well as a bigger share of the national theatrical spotlight.”
He continues, “Now Equity is trying to prod — clumsily, at times — some of LA’s smaller companies to become more professional and more prominent, while still leaving open the self-producing option for membership companies.”
We have heard this sort of argument before: Somehow the abundance of small theaters prevents the formation of mid-size theaters. I actually just don’t see the logic of it. How does the existence of one thing prevent the creation of another? The statement is a non sequitur. Regulations and rules to kill off one form of art are not the answer.
Far better is to let people create the art they want and allow the “market” to decide. I get very tired of folks trying to compare the L.A. theater scene to the New York (or even the Chicago) scene. In his piece, Shirley notes the undeniable fact that very few shows actually move from the 99-seat arena to Broadway — while it is far more common for shows to move from public regional spaces like the Taper.
As I think of it, the answer isn’t to saddle the small theaters with onerous regulations that prevent their existence in the hopes that instead of 100s of shows, we will get maybe four or five shows that pay equity wages. I think a better approach might well be to develop a robust system of government support (local, state and national) that allows nonprofit companies to develop works and then move them up and out. In London, for instance, it’s the government-backed theaters like the Royal Court where much of the most interesting and provocative stuff is born — and the Royal Court includes an 85-seat studio stage in addition to its 365-seat main stage.
Shirley also noted what he thought was a peculiarly equitable attitude on the part of hosts Vanessa and French Stewart towards the opposing factions of the 99-seat fracas, particularly when they suggested everyone “find a friend you disagree with and tip a glass.” Shirley suggested that this was due to an attitude forming that it is necessary to move beyond the 99-seat issue, which may eventually be decided by the courts. Certainly, I think that is part of it. But I prefer to think the real change in attitude is the result of the backchannel talks that is going on between Equity and the 99-seat plaintiffs, and which (perhaps mercifully), no word is leaking out.
It’s Official: Deaf West is a Cultural Juggernaut
Deaf West’s Spring Awakening at Inner-City Arts (photo by Tate Tullier)
And, almost as a counterpoint to the Shirley article, we have received news that the Broadway juggernaut that is the Deaf West production of Spring Awakening, which was launched from Inner-City Arts’ intimate Rosenthal Theater, has been invited to perform at the White House. Broadway World is reporting that the cast (along with original authors Steven Slater and Duncan Sheik, are travelling to Washington DC to perform at an assembly on Americans with disabilities and the arts. Even more amazing, the show will be streamed live on the net at the celebration on November 18th.
Well, this is rather nice news, isn’t it? And, while I do generally share Shirley’s opinion that a production like Spring Awakening is the exception, not the rule, the truth is it is still a fine example of the system working as it should. When people discuss the shows that leap from the Taper to Broadway, for instance, those too are exceptions, not rules. There are many ways for shows to reach Broadway, if Broadway is where you want to go, and my point is that we should not be hobbling at least one avenue to the land of glittering prizes. Like I was taught back when I was in Stanislovski in acting school — you should negate nothing.
In any case, congratulations to the cast of Spring Awakening! Watch them live at https://www.whitehouse.gov/live, from 1 to 4 p.m. (Pacific Time) on November 18.
A Hollywood Agent Lectures L.A.’s Intimate-Stage Actors
Meanwhile, did you catch the delightfully loathsome article on Backstage by the so-called “Secret Agent Man” on his experiences attending an intimate show in Chicago vs. attending one in Los Angeles?
So the gentleman attended a play at a small theater in Chicago and was impressed by “an authentic theatrical experience, the kind you rarely see in L.A.” How pleasantly put! He further admits that he bustled backstage, utilizing his “agent” business card to schmooze the actors. How pleased he was that no one recognized that he was a super powerful agent who could make their dreams come true! How quaint and pleasant to be taken for one of the great masses and “to interact with them on a creative level. It sure beats having to make small talk about the industry.”
He further denigrates the L.A. scene by noting, “actors here in L.A. often seem to use theater as a means to an end. Plays are considered failures if they don’t attract industry attention.” And then, “from my perspective, most of the waiver productions I attend feel like showcases, not genuine theater.”
I suppose that there is some subjective truth to statements like this, which is why folks make them, of course. But I can’t help think that it is rather rich that some agenty agent, who comes to town to cast some dog food commercial, then snarks about a L.A. play because its actors want to get cast in dog food commercials. And what should actors do when they meet a Hollywood agent, who is only allowed backstage because he’s a talent agent? Are they supposed to engage in some Kabuki-like metaphor space where you can talk about anything other than the fact you’re meeting an agent? No, really.
And if I hear one more person talk about Chicago theater versus L.A. theater, my eyes will bug like what happens when you squeeze a cabbage patch too tightly. Yes, Chicago theater is indeed wonderful. I acted in Chicago theater for three years after college — it was the highlight of my life. But if you put a great L.A. play up against a bad Chicago play, I promise you the L.A. play is better. And, yes, if you put an L.A. showcase of sitcom wannabes against something done by the Pegasus Players or at the wonderful Theater Building on Belmont — well, it is an unfair comparison to make. It’s like comparing fish to, er, ham.
